The Travels of Marco Polo

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: The Travels of Marco Polo — Volume 1
Author: Polo, Marco, Rustichello of Pisa
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Travels of Marco Polo — Volume 1" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.

1 (OF 2) ***

[Illustration: H. Yule

_T. B. Wirgman, del. et. sc._ _Walker & Cockerell, ph. sc._]

THE TRAVELS OF
MARCO POLO

THE COMPLETE
YULE-CORDIER EDITION

Including the unabridged third edition (1903) of
Henry Yule’s annotated translation, as revised
by Henri Cordier; together with Cordier’s later
volume of notes and addenda (1920)

IN TWO VOLUMES

VOLUME I

_Containing the first volume of the 1903 edition_

DEDICATION.

TO THE MEMORY OF
SIR RODERICK I. MURCHISON, BART., K.C.B., G.C.ST.A., G.C.ST.S.,
ETC.
THE PERFECT FRIEND
WHO FIRST BROUGHT HENRY YULE AND JOHN MURRAY TOGETHER
(HE ENTERED INTO REST, OCTOBER 22ND, 1871,)
AND TO THAT OF HIS MUCH LOVED NIECE,
HARRIET ISABELLA MURCHISON,
WIFE OF KENNETH ROBERT MURCHISON, D.L., J.P.,
(SHE ENTERED INTO REST, AUGUST 9TH, 1902,)
UNDER WHOSE EVER HOSPITABLE ROOF MANY OF THE PROOF
SHEETS OF THIS EDITION WERE READ BY ME,
I DEDICATE THESE VOLUMES FROM
THE OLD MURCHISON HOME,
IN THANKFUL REMEMBRANCE OF ALL I OWE TO
THE ABIDING AFFECTION, SYMPATHY, AND EXAMPLE OF BOTH.

TARADALE, AMY FRANCES YULE.
ROSS-SHIRE, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 1902.
SCOTLAND.

* * * *
Ed è da noi sì strano,
Che quando ne ragiono
I’ non trovo nessuno,
Che l’abbia navicato,
* * * *
Le parti del Levante,
Là dove sono tante
Gemme di gran valute
E di molta salute:
E sono in quello giro
Balsamo, e ambra, e tiro,
E lo pepe, e lo legno
Aloe, ch’è sì degno,
E spigo, e cardamomo,
Giengiovo, e cennamomo;
E altre molte spezie,
Ciascuna in sua spezie,
E migliore, e più fina,
E sana in medicina.
Appresso in questo loco
Mise in assetto loco
Li tigri, e li grifoni,
Leofanti, e leoni
Cammelli, e dragomene,
Badalischi, e gene,
E pantere, e castoro,
Le formiche dell’oro,
E tanti altri animali,
Ch’io non so ben dir quali,
Che son sì divisati,
E sì dissomigliati
Di corpo e di fazione,
Di sì fera ragione,
E di sì strana taglia,
Ch’io non credo san faglia,
Ch’alcun uomo vivente
Potesse veramente
Per lingua, o per scritture
Recitar le figure
Delle bestie, e gli uccelli....

—From _Il Tesoretto di Ser Brunetto Latini_ (_circa_ MDCCLX.).
(_Florence_, 1824, pp. 83 _seqq._)

[Illustration]

Ἂνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, Μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ
Πλάγχθη . . . . . . .
Πολλῶν δ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἴδεν ἄστεα καὶ νόον ἔγνω.

_Odyssey_, I.

————“I AM BECOME A NAME;
FOR ALWAYS ROAMING WITH A HUNGRY HEART
MUCH HAVE I SEEN AND KNOWN; CITIES OF MEN,
AND MANNERS, CLIMATES, COUNCILS, GOVERNMENTS,
MYSELF NOT LEAST, BUT HONOURED OF THEM ALL.”

TENNYSON.

“_A SEDER CI PONEMMO IVI AMBODUI
VÔLTI A LEVANTE, OND’ERAVAM SALITI;
CHÈ SUOLE A RIGUARDAR GIOVARE ALTRUI._”

DANTE, _Purgatory_, IV.

[Illustration: Messer Marco Polo, with Messer Nicolo and Messer Maffeo,
returned from xxvi years’ sojourn in the Orient, is denied entrance to
the Ca’ Polo. (See _Int._ p. _4_)]

CONTENTS OF VOL. I.

page
DEDICATION iii

NOTE BY MISS YULE v

PREFACE TO THIRD EDITION vii

PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION xi

ORIGINAL PREFACE xxi

ORIGINAL DEDICATION xxv

MEMOIR OF SIR HENRY YULE BY AMY FRANCES YULE, L.A.SOC. ANT.
SCOT. xxvii

A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SIR HENRY YULE’S WRITINGS lxxv

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS lxxxiii

EXPLANATORY LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS TO VOL. I. xcvii

INTRODUCTORY NOTICES _1–144_

THE BOOK OF MARCO POLO.

NOTE BY MISS YULE.

I desire to take this opportunity of recording my grateful sense of
the unsparing labour, learning, and devotion, with which my father’s
valued friend, Professor Henri Cordier, has performed the difficult and
delicate task which I entrusted to his loyal friendship.

Apart from Professor Cordier’s very special qualifications for the
work, I feel sure that no other Editor could have been more entirely
acceptable to my father. I can give him no higher praise than to say
that he has laboured in Yule’s own spirit.

The slight Memoir which I have contributed (for which I accept all
responsibility), attempts no more than a rough sketch of my father’s
character and career, but it will, I hope, serve to recall pleasantly
his remarkable individuality to the few remaining who knew him in his
prime, whilst it may also afford some idea of the man, and his work and
environment, to those who had not that advantage.

No one can be more conscious than myself of its many shortcomings,
which I will not attempt to excuse. I can, however, honestly say that
these have not been due to negligence, but are rather the blemishes
almost inseparable from the fulfilment under the gloom of bereavement
and amidst the pressure of other duties, of a task undertaken in more
favourable circumstances.

Nevertheless, in spite of all defects, I believe this sketch to be such
a record as my father would himself have approved, and I know also that
he would have chosen my hand to write it.

In conclusion, I may note that the first edition of this work was
dedicated to that very noble lady, the Queen (then Crown Princess)
Margherita of Italy. In the second edition the Dedication was
reproduced within brackets (as also the original preface), but not
renewed. That precedent is again followed.

I have, therefore, felt at liberty to associate the present edition
of my father’s work with the Name MURCHISON, which for more than a
generation was the name most generally representative of British
Science in Foreign Lands, as of Foreign Science in Britain.

A. F. YULE.

PREFACE TO THIRD EDITION.

Little did I think, some thirty years ago, when I received a copy
of the first edition of this grand work, that I should be one day
entrusted with the difficult but glorious task of supervising the
third edition. When the first edition of the _Book of Ser Marco Polo_
reached “Far Cathay,” it created quite a stir in the small circle
of the learned foreigners, who then resided there, and became a
starting-point for many researches, of which the results have been
made use of partly in the second edition, and partly in the present.
The Archimandrite PALLADIUS and Dr. E. BRETSCHNEIDER, at Peking, ALEX.
WYLIE, at Shang-hai—friends of mine who have, alas! passed away, with
the exception of the Right Rev. Bishop G. E. MOULE, of Hang-chau, the
only survivor of this little group of hard-working scholars,—were the
first to explore the Chinese sources of information which were to yield
a rich harvest into their hands.

When I returned home from China in 1876, I was introduced to Colonel
HENRY YULE, at the India Office, by our common friend, Dr. REINHOLD
ROST, and from that time we met frequently and kept up a correspondence
which terminated only with the life of the great geographer, whose
friend I had become. A new edition of the travels of Friar Odoric
of Pordenone, our “mutual friend,” in which Yule had taken the
greatest interest, was dedicated by me to his memory. I knew that Yule
contemplated a third edition of his _Marco Polo_, and all will regret
that time was not allowed to him to complete this labour of love, to
see it published. If the duty of bringing out the new edition of _Marco
Polo_ has fallen on one who considers himself but an unworthy successor
of the first illustrious commentator, it is fair to add that the work
could not have been entrusted to a more respectful disciple. Many of
our tastes were similar; we had the same desire to seek the truth,
the same earnest wish to be exact, perhaps the same sense of humour,
and, what is necessary when writing on Marco Polo, certainly the same
love for Venice and its history. Not only am I, with the late CHARLES
SCHEFER, the founder and the editor of the _Recueil de Voyages et de
Documents pour servir à l’Histoire de la Géographie depuis le XIIIᵉ
jusqu’à la fin du XVIᵉ siècle_, but I am also the successor, at the
École des langues Orientales Vivantes, of G. PAUTHIER, whose book on
the Venetian Traveller is still valuable, so the mantle of the last two
editors fell upon my shoulders.

I therefore, gladly and thankfully, accepted Miss AMY FRANCIS YULE’S
kind proposal to undertake the editorship of the third edition of the
_Book of Ser Marco Polo_, and I wish to express here my gratitude to
her for the great honour she has thus done me.[1]

Unfortunately for his successor, Sir Henry Yule, evidently trusting
to his own good memory, left but few notes. These are contained in an
interleaved copy obligingly placed at my disposal by Miss Yule, but I
luckily found assistance from various other quarters. The following
works have proved of the greatest assistance to me:—The articles of
General HOUTUM-SCHINDLER in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_,
and the excellent books of Lord CURZON and of Major P. MOLESWORTH
SYKES on Persia, M. GRENARD’S account of DUTREUIL de RHINS’ Mission
to Central Asia, BRETSCHNEIDER’S and PALLADIUS’ remarkable papers
on Mediæval Travellers and Geography, and above all, the valuable
books of the Hon. W. W. ROCKHILL on Tibet and Rubruck, to which the
distinguished diplomatist, traveller, and scholar kindly added a list
of notes of the greatest importance to me, for which I offer him my
hearty thanks.

My thanks are also due to H.H. Prince ROLAND BONAPARTE, who kindly
gave me permission to reproduce some of the plates of his _Recueil
de Documents de l’Époque Mongole_, to M. LÉOPOLD DELISLE, the
learned Principal Librarian of the Bibliothèque Nationale, who gave
me the opportunity to study the inventory made after the death of
the Doge Marino Faliero, to the Count de SEMALLÉ, formerly French
Chargé d’Affaires at Peking, who gave me for reproduction a number
of photographs from his valuable personal collection, and last, not
least, my old friend Comm. NICOLÒ BAROZZI, who continued to lend me the
assistance which he had formerly rendered to Sir Henry Yule at Venice.

Since the last edition was published, more than twenty-five years
ago, Persia has been more thoroughly studied; new routes have been
explored in Central Asia, Karakorum has been fully described, and
Western and South-Western China have been opened up to our knowledge
in many directions. The results of these investigations form the main
features of this new edition of _Marco Polo_. I have suppressed hardly
any of Sir Henry Yule’s notes and altered but few, doing so only when
the light of recent information has proved him to be in error, but
I have supplemented them by what, I hope, will be found useful, new
information.[2]

Before I take leave of the kind reader, I wish to thank sincerely Mr.
JOHN MURRAY for the courtesy and the care he has displayed while this
edition was going through the press.

HENRI CORDIER.
PARIS, _1st of October, 1902_.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Miss Yule has written the Memoir of her father and the new
Dedication.

[2] Paragraphs which have been altered are marked thus ✛; my own
additions are placed between brackets [ ].—H. C.

[Illustration:

“=Now strike your Sailes yee jolly Mariners,
For we be come into a quiet Rode=”....

—THE FAERIE QUEENE, I. xii. 42.]

PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION.

The unexpected amount of favour bestowed on the former edition of this
Work has been a great encouragement to the Editor in preparing this
second one.

Not a few of the kind friends and correspondents who lent their aid
before have continued it to the present revision. The contributions
of Mr. A. WYLIE of Shang-hai, whether as regards the amount of labour
which they must have cost him, or the value of the result, demand
above all others a grateful record here. Nor can I omit to name again
with hearty acknowledgment Signor Comm. G. BERCHET of Venice, the Rev.
Dr. CALDWELL, Colonel (now Major-General) R. MACLAGAN, R.E., Mr. D.
HANBURY, F.R.S., Mr. EDWARD THOMAS, F.R.S. (Corresponding Member of the
Institute), and Mr. R. H. MAJOR.

But besides these old names, not a few new ones claim my thanks.

The Baron F. VON RICHTHOFEN, now President of the Geographical Society
of Berlin, a traveller who not only has trodden many hundreds of miles
in the footsteps of our Marco, but has perhaps travelled over more of
the Interior of China than Marco ever did, and who carried to that
survey high scientific accomplishments of which the Venetian had not
even a rudimentary conception, has spontaneously opened his bountiful
stores of new knowledge in my behalf. Mr. NEY ELIAS, who in 1872
traversed and mapped a line of upwards of 2000 miles through the almost
unknown tracts of Western Mongolia, from the Gate in the Great Wall at
Kalghan to the Russian frontier in the Altai, has done likewise.[1] To
the Rev. G. MOULE, of the Church Mission at Hang-chau, I owe a mass
of interesting matter regarding that once great and splendid city,
the KINSAY of our Traveller, which has enabled me, I trust, to effect
great improvement both in the Notes and in the Map, which illustrate
that subject. And to the Rev. CARSTAIRS DOUGLAS, LL.D., of the English
Presbyterian Mission at Amoy, I am scarcely less indebted. The learned
Professor BRUUN, of Odessa, whom I never have seen, and have little
likelihood of ever seeing in this world, has aided me with zeal and
cordiality like that of old friendship. To Mr. ARTHUR BURNELL, Ph.D.,
of the Madras Civil Service, I am grateful for many valuable notes
bearing on these and other geographical studies, and particularly for
his generous communication of the drawing and photograph of the ancient
Cross at St. Thomas’s Mount, long before any publication of that
subject was made on his own account. My brother officer, Major OLIVER
ST. JOHN, R.E., has favoured me with a variety of interesting remarks
regarding the Persian chapters, and has assisted me with new data, very
materially correcting the Itinerary Map in Kerman.

Mr. BLOCHMANN of the Calcutta Madrasa, Sir DOUGLAS FORSYTH, C.B.,
lately Envoy to Kashgar, M. de MAS LATRIE, the Historian of Cyprus,
Mr. ARTHUR GROTE, Mr. EUGENE SCHUYLER of the U.S. Legation at St.
Petersburg, Dr. BUSHELL and Mr. W. F. MAYERS, of H.M.’s Legation at
Peking, Mr. G. PHILLIPS of Fuchau, Madame OLGA FEDTCHENKO, the widow of
a great traveller too early lost to the world, Colonel KEATINGE, V.C.,
C.S.I., Major-General KEYES, C.B., Dr. GEORGE BIRDWOOD, Mr. BURGESS, of
Bombay, my old and valued friend Colonel W. H. GREATHED, C.B., and the
Master of Mediæval Geography, M. D’AVEZAC himself, with others besides,
have kindly lent assistance of one kind or another, several of them
spontaneously, and the rest in prompt answer to my requests.

Having always attached much importance to the matter of
illustrations,[2] I feel greatly indebted to the liberal action of Mr.
Murray in enabling me largely to increase their number in this edition.
Though many are original, we have also borrowed a good many;[3]
a proceeding which seems to me entirely unobjectionable when the
engravings are truly illustrative of the text, and not hackneyed.

I regret the augmented bulk of the volumes. There has been some
excision, but the additions visibly and palpably preponderate. The
truth is that since the completion of the first edition, just four
years ago, large additions have been made to the stock of our knowledge
bearing on the subjects of this Book; and how these additions have
continued to come in up to the last moment, may be seen in Appendix
L,[4] which has had to undergo repeated interpolation after being put
in type. KARAKORUM, for a brief space the seat of the widest empire
the world has known, has been visited; the ruins of SHANG-TU, the
“Xanadu of Cublay Khan,” have been explored; PAMIR and TANGUT have been
penetrated from side to side; the famous mountain Road of SHEN-SI has
been traversed and described; the mysterious CAINDU has been unveiled;
the publication of my lamented friend Lieutenant Garnier’s great
work on the French Exploration of Indo-China has provided a mass of
illustration of that YUN-NAN for which but the other day Marco Polo
was well-nigh the most recent authority. Nay, the last two years have
thrown a promise of light even on what seemed the wildest of Marco’s
stories, and the bones of a veritable RUC from New Zealand lie on the
table of Professor Owen’s Cabinet!

M. VIVIEN de St. MARTIN, during the interval of which we have been
speaking, has published a History of Geography. In treating of Marco
Polo, he alludes to the first edition of this work, most evidently with
no intention of disparagement, but speaks of it as merely a revision
of Marsden’s Book. The last thing I should allow myself to do would be
to apply to a Geographer, whose works I hold in so much esteem, the
disrespectful definition which the adage quoted in my former Preface[5]
gives of the _vir qui docet quod non sapit_; but I feel bound to say
that on this occasion M. Vivien de St. Martin has permitted himself to
pronounce on a matter with which he had not made himself acquainted;
for the perusal of the very first lines of the Preface (I will say
nothing of the Book) would have shown him that such a notion was
utterly unfounded.

In concluding these “forewords” I am probably taking leave of Marco
Polo,[6] the companion of many pleasant and some laborious hours,
whilst I have been contemplating with him (“_vôlti a levante_”) that
Orient in which I also had spent years not a few.

• • • • •

And as the writer lingered over this conclusion, his thoughts wandered
back in reverie to those many venerable libraries in which he had
formerly made search for mediæval copies of the Traveller’s story;
and it seemed to him as if he sate in a recess of one of these with
a manuscript before him which had never till then been examined with
any care, and which he found with delight to contain passages that
appear in no version of the Book hitherto known. It was written in
clear Gothic text, and in the Old French tongue of the early 14th
century. Was it possible that he had lighted on the long-lost original
of Ramusio’s Version? No; it proved to be different. Instead of the
tedious story of the northern wars, which occupies much of our Fourth
Book, there were passages occurring in the later history of Ser Marco,
some years after his release from the Genoese captivity. They appeared
to contain strange anachronisms certainly; but we have often had
occasion to remark on puzzles in the chronology of Marco’s story![7]
And in some respects they tended to justify our intimated suspicion
that he was a man of deeper feelings and wider sympathies than the book
of Rusticiano had allowed to appear.[8] Perhaps this time the Traveller
had found an amanuensis whose faculties had not been stiffened by
fifteen years of Malapaga?[9] One of the most important passages ran
thus:—

_“Si se partist de |Venisse| et chevaucha aux parties d’occident.
Et demoura mainz jours es contrées de |Provence| et de |France| et
puys fist passaige aux Ysles de la tremontaingne et s’en retourna
par |la Magne|, si comme vous orrez cy-après. Et fist-il escripre
son voiage atout les devisements les contrées; mes de la France
n’y parloit mie grantment pour ce que maintes genz la scevent
apertement. Et pour ce en lairons atant, et commencerons d’autres
choses, assavoir, de |BRETAINGNE LA GRANT|._

=Cy devyse dou roiaume de Bretaingne la grant.=

_“Et sachiés que quand l’en se part de |Calés|, et l’en nage |XX|
ou |XXX| milles à trop grant mesaise, si treuve l’en une grandisme
Ysle qui s’appelle |Bretaingne la Grant|. Elle est à une grant royne
et n’en fait treuage à nulluy. Et ensevelissent lor mors, et ont
monnoye de chartres et d’or et d’argent, et ardent pierres noyres,
et vivent de marchandises et d’ars, et ont toutes choses de vivre
en grant habondance mais non pas à bon marchié. Et c’est une Ysle
de trop grant richesce, et li marinier de celle partie dient que
c’est li plus riches royaumes qui soit ou monde, et qu’il y a li
mieudre marinier dou monde et li mieudre coursier et li mieudre
chevalier (ains ne chevauchent mais lonc com François). Ausi ont-il
trop bons homes d’armes et vaillans durement (bien que maint n’y
ait), et les dames et damoseles bonnes et loialles, et belles com
lys souef florant. Et quoi vous en diroie-je? Il y a citez et
chasteau assez, et tant de marchéanz et si riches qui font venir
tant d’avoir-de-poiz et de toute espece de marchandise qu’il n’est
hons qui la verité en sceust dire. Font venir |d’Ynde| et d’autres
parties coton a grant planté, et font venir soye de |Manzi| et de
|Bangala|, et font venir laine des ysles de la Mer Occeane et de
toutes parties. Et si labourent maintz bouquerans et touailles et
autres draps de coton et de laine et de soye. Encores sachiés que
ont vaines d’acier assez, et si en labourent trop soubtivement de
tous hernois de chevalier, et de toutes choses besoignables à ost;
ce sont espées et glaive et esperon et heaume et haches, et toute
espèce d’arteillerie et de coutelerie, et en font grant gaaigne
et grant marchandise. Et en font si grant habondance que tout li
mondes en y puet avoir et à bon marchié._

=Encores cy devise dou dyt roiaume, et de ce qu’en dist Messires
Marcs.=

_“Et sachiés que tient icelle Royne la seigneurie de l’|Ynde
majeure| et de |Mutfili| et de |Bangala|, et d’une moitié de
|Mien|. Et moult est saige et noble dame et pourvéans, si que
est elle amée de chascun. Et avoit jadis mari; et depuys qu’il
mourut bien |XIV| ans avoit; adonc la royne sa fame l’ama tant que
oncques puis ne se voult marier a nullui, pour l’amour le prince
son baron, ançois moult maine quoye vie. Et tient son royaume ausi
bien ou miex que oncques le tindrent li roy si aioul. Mes ores en
ce royaume li roy n’ont guieres pooir, ains la poissance commence
a trespasser à la menue gent. Et distrent aucun marinier de celes
parties à |Monseignour Marc| que hui-et-le jour li royaumes soit
auques abastardi come je vous diroy. Car bien est voirs que
ci-arrières estoit ciz pueple de |Bretaingne la Grant| bonne et
granz et loialle gent qui servoit Diex moult volontiers selonc lor
usaige; et tuit li labour qu’il labouroient et portoient a vendre
estoient honnestement labouré, et dou greigneur vaillance, et
chose pardurable; et se vendoient à jouste pris sanz barguignier.
En tant que se aucuns labours portoit l’estanpille |Bretaingne
la Grant| c’estoit regardei com pleges de bonne estoffe. Mes
orendroit li labours n’est mie tousjourz si bons; et quand l’en
achate pour un quintal pesant de toiles de coton, adonc, par trop
souvent, si treuve l’en de chascun |C| pois de coton, bien |XXX|
ou |XL| pois de plastre de gifs, ou de blanc d’Espaigne, ou de
choses semblables. Et se l’en achate de cammeloz ou de tireteinne
ou d’autre dras de laine, cist ne durent mie, ains sont plain
d’empoise, ou de glu et de balieures._

_“Et bien qu’il est voirs que chascuns hons egalement doit de son
cors servir son seigneur ou sa commune, pour aler en ost en tens
de besoingne; et bien que trestuit li autre royaume d’occident
tieingnent ce pour ordenance, ciz pueple de |Bretaingne la
Grant| n’en veult nullement, ains si dient: ‘Veez-là: n’avons
nous pas la |Manche| pour fossé de nostre pourpris, et pourquoy
nous penerons-nous pour nous faire homes d’armes, en lessiant
nos gaaignes et nos soulaz? Cela lairons aus soudaiers.’ Or li
preudhome entre eulx moult scevent bien com tiex paroles sont
nyaises; mes si ont paour de lour en dire la verité pour ce que
cuident desplaire as bourjois et à la menue gent._

_“Ore vous lairons à conter de ceste matière et retournerons à
parler de la Loy des genz de |Bretaingne la Grant|._

=Cy devise des diverses créances de la gent Bretaingne la Grant et
de ce qu’en cuidoit Messires Marcs.=

_“Il est voirs que li pueples est Crestiens, mes non pour le
plus selonc la foy de l’Apostoille Rommain, ains tiennent le en
mautalent assez. Seulement il y en a aucun qui sont féoil du
dit Apostoille et encore plus forment que li nostre prudhome de
|Venisse|. Car quand dit li Papes: ‘Telle ou telle chose est
noyre,’ toute ladite gent si en jure: ‘Noyre est com poivre.’ Et
puis se dira li Papes de la dite chose: ‘Elle est blanche,’ si
en jurera toute ladite gent: ‘Il est voirs qu’elle est blanche;
blanche est com noifs.’ Et dist |Messires Marc Pol|: ‘Nous n’avons
nullement tant de foy à |Venyse|, ne li prudhome de |Florence| non
plus, com l’en puet savoir bien apertement dou livre Monseignour
|Dantès Aldiguiere|, que j’ay congneu a |Padoe| le meisme an que
Messires |Thibault de Cepoy| à |Venisse| estoit.[13] Mes c’est
joustement ce que j’ay veu autre foiz près le Grant |Bacsi| qui est
com li Papes des Ydres.’_

_“Encore y a une autre manière de gent; ce sont de celz qui
s’appellent filsoufes;[14] et si il disent: ‘S’il y a Diex n’en
scavons nul, mes il est voirs qu’il est une certeinne courance
des choses laquex court devers le bien.’ Et fist |Messires Marcs|:
‘Encore la créance des |Bacsi| qui dysent que n’y a ne Diex Eternel
ne Juge des homes, ains il est une certeinne chose laquex s’appelle
|Kerma|.’[15]_

_“Une autre foiz avint que disoit un des filsoufes à |Monseignour
Marc|: ‘Diex n’existe mie jeusqu’ores, ainçois il se fait
desorendroit.’ Et fist encore |Messires Marcs|: ‘Veez-là, une autre
foiz la créance des ydres, car dient que li seuz Diex est icil
hons qui par force de ses vertuz et de son savoir tant pourchace
que d’home il se face Diex presentement. Et li Tartar l’appelent
|Borcan|. Tiex Diex |Sagamoni Borcan| estoit, dou quel parle li
livres Maistre |Rusticien|.’[16]_

_“Encore ont une autre manière de filsoufes, et dient-il: ‘Il n’est
mie ne Diex ne |Kerma| ne courance vers le bien, ne Providence,
ne Créerres, ne Sauvours, ne sainteté ne pechiés ne conscience de
pechié, ne proyère ne response à proyère, il n’est nulle riens fors
que trop minime grain ou paillettes qui ont à nom |atosmes|, et
de tiex grains devient chose qui vive, et chose qui vive devient
une certeinne creature qui demoure au rivaige de la Mer: et ceste
creature devient poissons, et poissons devient lezars, et lezars
devient blayriaus, et blayriaus devient gat-maimons, et gat-maimons
devient hons sauvaiges qui menjue char d’homes, et hons sauvaiges
devient hons crestien.’_

_“Et dist |Messires Marc|: ‘Encore une foiz, biaus sires, li
|Bacsi| de |Tebet| et de |Kescemir| et li prestre de |Seilan|, qui
si dient que l’arme vivant doie trespasser par tous cez changes de
vestemens; si com se treuve escript ou livre |Maistre Rusticien|
que |Sagamoni Borcan| mourut iiij vint et iiij foiz et tousjourz
resuscita, et à chascune foiz d’une diverse manière de beste, et
à la derreniere foyz mourut hons et devint diex, selonc ce qu’il
dient.’[17] Et fist encore |Messires Marc|: ‘A moy pert-il trop
estrange chose se juesques à toutes les créances des ydolastres
deust dechéoir ceste grantz et saige nation. Ainsi peuent jouer
Misire li filsoufe atout lour propre perte, mes à l’ore quand tiex
fantaisies se respanderont es joenes bacheliers et parmy la menue
gent, celz averont pour toute Loy =manducemus et bibamus, cras
enim moriemur=; et trop isnellement l’en raccomencera la descente
de l’eschiele, et d’home crestien deviendra hons sauvaiges, et
d’home sauvaige gat-maimons, et de gat-maimon blayriaus.’ Et fist
encores |Messires Marc|: ‘Maintes contrées et provinces et ysles
et citéz je |Marc Pol| ay veues et de maintes genz de maintes
manières ay les condicionz congneues, et je croy bien que il est
plus assez dedens l’univers que ce que li nostre prestre n’y
songent. Et puet bien estre, biaus sires, que li mondes n’a estés
creés à tous poinz com nous creiens, ains d’une sorte encore
plus merveillouse. Mes cil n’amenuise nullement nostre pensée de
Diex et de sa majesté, ains la fait greingnour. Et contrée n’ay
veue ou Dame Diex ne manifeste apertement les granz euvres de sa
tout-poissante saigesse; gent n’ay congneue esquiex ne se fait
sentir li fardels de pechié, et la besoingne de Phisicien des
maladies de l’arme tiex com est nostre Seignours Ihesus Crist, Beni
soyt son Non. Pensez doncques à cel qu’a dit uns de ses Apostres:
=Nolite esse prudentes apud vosmet ipsos=; et uns autres: =Quoniam
multi pseudo-prophetae exierint=; et uns autres: =Quod venient in
novissimis diebus illusores ... dicentes, Ubi est promissio?= et
encores aus parolles que dist li Signours meismes: =Vide ergo ne
lumen quod in te est tenebrae sint=._

=Commant Messires Marcs se partist de l’ysle de Bretaingne et de la
proyère que fist=.

_“Et pourquoy vous en feroie-je lonc conte? Si print nef |Messires
Marcs| et se partist en nageant vers la terre ferme. Or |Messires
Marc Pol| moult ama cel roiaume de |Bretaingne la grant| pour son
viex renon et s’ancienne franchise, et pour sa saige et bonne Royne
(que Diex gart), et pour les mainz homes de vaillance et bons
chaceours et les maintes bonnes et honnestes dames qui y estoient.
Et sachiés tout voirement que en estant delez le bort la nef, et
en esgardant aus roches blanches que l’en par dariere-li lessoit,
|Messires Marc| prieoit Diex, et disoit-il: ‘Ha Sires Diex ay merci
de cestuy vieix et noble royaume; fay-en pardurable forteresse de
liberté et de joustice, et garde-le de tout meschief de dedens et
de dehors; donne à sa gent droit esprit pour ne pas Diex guerroyer
de ses dons, ne de richesce ne de savoir; et conforte-les fermement
en ta foy’ ...”_

A loud _Amen_ seemed to peal from without, and the awakened reader
started to his feet. And lo! it was the thunder of the winter-storm
crashing among the many-tinted crags of Monte Pellegrino,—with the wind
raging as it knows how to rage here in sight of the Isles of Æolus,
and the rain dashing on the glass as ruthlessly as it well could have
done, if, instead of Æolic Isles and many-tinted crags, the window had
fronted a dearer shore beneath a northern sky, and looked across the
grey Firth to the rain-blurred outline of the Lomond Hills.

But I end, saying to Messer Marco’s prayer, Amen.

PALERMO, _31st December, 1874_.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] It would be ingratitude if this Preface contained no acknowledgment
of the medals awarded to the writer, mainly for this work, by the
Royal Geographical Society, and by the Geographical Society of
Italy, the former under the Presidence of Sir Henry Rawlinson,
the latter under that of the Commendatore C. Negri. Strongly as
I feel the too generous appreciation of these labours implied
in such awards, I confess to have been yet more deeply touched
and gratified by practical evidence of the approval of the two
distinguished Travellers mentioned above; as shown by Baron von
Richthofen in his spontaneous proposal to publish a German version
of the book under his own immediate supervision (a project in
abeyance, owing to circumstances beyond his or my control); by Mr.
Ney Elias in the fact of his having carried these ponderous volumes
with him on his solitary journey across the Mongolian wilds!

[2] I am grateful to Mr. de Khanikoff for his especial recognition of
these in a kindly review of the first edition in the _Academy_.

[3] Especially from Lieutenant Garnier’s book, mentioned further on;
the only existing source of illustration for many chapters of Polo.

[4] [Merged into the notes of the present edition.—H. C.]

[5] See page xxix.

[6] Writing in Italy, perhaps I ought to write, according to too
prevalent modern Italian custom, _Polo Marco_. I have already
_seen_, and in the work of a writer of reputation, the Alexandrian
geographer styled _Tolomeo Claudio_! and if this preposterous
fashion should continue to spread, we shall in time have _Tasso
Torquato_, _Jonson Ben_, Africa explored by _Park Mungo_, Asia
conquered by _Lane Tamer_, Copperfield David by _Dickens Charles_,
Homer Englished by _Pope Alexander_, and the Roman history done
into French from the original of _Live Tite_!

[7] Introduction p. _24_, and _passim_ in the notes.

[8] _Ibid._, p. _112_.

[9] See Introduction, pp. _51_, _57_.

[10] See Title of present volumes.

[11] Which quite agrees with the story of the document quoted at p.
_77_ of Introduction.

[12] Vol. i. p. 64, and p. 67.

[13] _I.e._ 1306; see Introduction, pp. _68–69_.

[14] The form which Marco gives to this word was probably a
reminiscence of the Oriental corruption _failsúf_. It recalls to
my mind a Hindu who was very fond of the word, and especially of
applying it to certain of his fellow-servants. But as he used it,
_bara failsúf_,—“great philosopher”—meant exactly the same as the
modern slang “_Artful Dodger_”!

[15] See for the explanation of _Karma_, “the power that controls the
universe,” in the doctrine of atheistic Buddhism, Hardy’s _Eastern
Monachism_, p. 5.

[16] Vol. ii. p. 316 (see also i. 348).

[17] Vol. ii. pp. 318–319.

ORIGINAL PREFACE.

The amount of appropriate material, and of acquaintance with the
mediæval geography of some parts of Asia, which was acquired during the
compilation of a work of kindred character for the Hakluyt Society,[1]
could hardly fail to suggest as a fresh labour in the same field
the preparation of a new English edition of Marco Polo. Indeed one
kindly critic (in the _Examiner_) laid it upon the writer as a duty to
undertake that task.

Though at least one respectable English edition has appeared since
Marsden’s,[2] the latter has continued to be the standard edition, and
maintains not only its reputation but its market value. It is indeed
the work of a sagacious, learned, and right-minded man, which can never
be spoken of otherwise than with respect. But since Marsden published
his quarto (1818) vast stores of new knowledge have become available
in elucidation both of the contents of Marco Polo’s book and of its
literary history. The works of writers such as Klaproth, Abel Rémusat,
D’Avezac, Reinaud, Quatremère, Julien, I. J. Schmidt, Gildemeister,
Ritter, Hammer-Purgstall, Erdmann, D’Ohsson, Defrémery, Elliot,
Erskine, and many more, which throw light directly or incidentally
on Marco Polo, have, for the most part, appeared since then. Nor, as
regards the literary history of the book, were any just views possible
at a time when what may be called the _Fontal_ MSS. (in French) were
unpublished and unexamined.

Besides the works which have thus occasionally or incidentally
thrown light upon the Traveller’s book, various editions of the book
itself have since Marsden’s time been published in foreign countries,
accompanied by comments of more or less value. All have contributed
something to the illustration of the book or its history; the last and
most learned of the editors, M. Pauthier, has so contributed in large
measure. I had occasion some years ago[3] to speak freely my opinion
of the merits and demerits of M. Pauthier’s work; and to the latter at
least I have no desire to recur here.

Another of his critics, a much more accomplished as well as more
favourable one,[4] seems to intimate the opinion that there would
scarcely be room in future for new commentaries. Something of the
kind was said of Marsden’s at the time of its publication. I imagine,
however, that whilst our libraries endure the _Iliad_ will continue
to find new translators, and Marco Polo—though one hopes not so
plentifully—new editors.

The justification of the book’s existence must however be looked
for, and it is hoped may be found, in the book itself, and not in
the Preface. The work claims to be judged as a whole, but it may be
allowable, in these days of scanty leisure, to indicate below a few
instances of what is believed to be new matter in an edition of Marco
Polo; by which however it is by no means intended that all such matter
is claimed by the editor as his own.[5]

From the commencement of the work it was felt that the task was
one which no man, though he were far better equipped and much more
conveniently situated than the present writer, could satisfactorily
accomplish from his own resources, and help was sought on special
points wherever it seemed likely to be found. In scarcely any quarter
was the application made in vain. Some who have aided most materially
are indeed very old and valued friends; but to many others who have
done the same the applicant was unknown; and some of these again, with
whom the editor began correspondence on this subject as a stranger, he
is happy to think that he may now call friends.

To none am I more indebted than to the Comm. GUGLIELMO BERCHET, of
Venice, for his ample, accurate, and generous assistance in furnishing
me with Venetian documents, and in many other ways. Especial thanks
are also due to Dr. WILLIAM LOCKHART, who has supplied the materials
for some of the most valuable illustrations; to Lieutenant FRANCIS
GARNIER, of the French Navy, the gallant and accomplished leader
(after the death of Captain Doudart de la Grée) of the memorable
expedition up the Mekong to Yun-nan; to the Rev. Dr. CALDWELL, of
the S. P. G. Mission in Tinnevelly, for copious and valuable notes
on Southern India; to my friends Colonel ROBERT MACLAGAN, R.E., Sir
ARTHUR PHAYRE, and Colonel HENRY MAN, for very valuable notes and
other aid; to Professor A. SCHIEFNER, of St. Petersburg, for his
courteous communication of very interesting illustrations not otherwise
accessible; to Major-General ALEXANDER CUNNINGHAM, of my own corps, for
several valuable letters; to my friends Dr. THOMAS OLDHAM, Director
of the Geological Survey of India, Mr. DANIEL HANBURY, F.R.S., Mr.
EDWARD THOMAS, Mr. JAMES FERGUSSON, F.R.S., Sir BARTLE FRERE, and Dr.
HUGH CLEGHORN, for constant interest in the work and readiness to
assist its progress; to Mr. A. WYLIE, the learned Agent of the B. and
F. Bible Society at Shang-hai, for valuable help; to the Hon. G. P.
MARSH, U.S. Minister at the Court of Italy, for untiring kindness in
the communication of his ample stores of knowledge, and of books. I
have also to express my obligations to Comm. NICOLÒ BAROZZI, Director
of the City Museum at Venice, and to Professor A. S. MINOTTO, of the
same city; to Professor ARMINIUS VÁMBÉRY, the eminent traveller;
to Professor FLÜCKIGER of Bern; to the Rev. H. A. JAESCHKE, of the
Moravian Mission in British Tibet; to Colonel LEWIS PELLY, British
Resident in the Persian Gulf; to Pandit MANPHUL, C.S.I. (for a most
interesting communication on Badakhshan); to my brother officer,
Major T. G. MONTGOMERIE, R.E., of the Indian Trigonometrical Survey;
to Commendatore NEGRI the indefatigable President of the Italian
Geographical Society; to Dr. ZOTENBERG, of the Great Paris Library, and
to M. CH. MAUNOIR, Secretary-General of the Société de Géographie; to
Professor HENRY GIGLIOLI, at Florence; to my old friend Major-General
ALBERT FYTCHE, Chief Commissioner of British Burma; to Dr. ROST and
Dr. FORBES-WATSON, of the India Office Library and Museum; to Mr.
R. H. MAJOR, and Mr. R. K. DOUGLAS, of the British Museum; to Mr.
N. B. DENNYS, of Hong-kong; and to Mr. C. GARDNER, of the Consular
Establishment in China. There are not a few others to whom my thanks
are equally due; but it is feared that the number of names already
mentioned may seem ridiculous, compared with the result, to those who
do not appreciate from how many quarters the facts needful for a work
which in its course intersects so many fields required to be collected,
one by one. I must not, however, omit acknowledgments to the present
Earl of DERBY for his courteous permission, when at the head of the
Foreign Office, to inspect Mr. Abbott’s valuable unpublished Report
upon some of the Interior Provinces of Persia; and to Mr. T. T. COOPER,
one of the most adventurous travellers of modern times, for leave to
quote some passages from his unpublished diary.

PALERMO, _31st December, 1870_.

[_Original Dedication._]

TO
HER ROYAL HIGHNESS,
MARGHERITA,
_Princess of Piedmont_,
THIS ENDEAVOUR TO ILLUSTRATE THE LIFE AND WORK
OF A RENOWNED ITALIAN
IS
BY HER ROYAL HIGHNESS’S GRACIOUS PERMISSION
=Dedicated=
WITH THE DEEPEST RESPECT
BY
H. YULE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Cathay and The Way Thither, being a Collection of Minor Medieval
Notices of China_. London, 1866. The necessities of the case have
required the repetition in the present work of the substance of
some notes already printed (but hardly published) in the other.

[2] Viz. Mr. Hugh Murray’s. I mean no disrespect to Mr. T. Wright’s
edition, but it is, and professes to be, scarcely other than a
reproduction of Marsden’s, with abridgment of his notes.

[3] In the _Quarterly Review_ for July, 1868.

[4] M. Nicolas Khanikoff.

[5] In the Preliminary Notices will be found new matter on the Personal
and Family History of the Traveller, illustrated by Documents; and
a more elaborate attempt than I have seen elsewhere to classify and
account for the different texts of the work, and to trace their
mutual relation.

As regards geographical elucidations, I may point to the
explanation of the name _Gheluchelan_ (i. p. 58), to the discussion
of the route from Kerman to Hormuz, and the identification of the
sites of Old Hormuz, of _Cobinan_ and _Dogana_, the establishment
of the position and continued existence of _Keshm_, the note on
_Pein_ and _Charchan_, on _Gog_ and _Magog_, on the geography of
the route from _Sindafu_ to _Carajan_, on _Anin_ and _Coloman_, on
_Mutafili_, _Cail_, and _Ely_.

As regards historical illustrations, I would cite the notes
regarding the Queens _Bolgana_ and _Cocachin_, on the _Karaunahs_,
etc., on the title of King of _Bengal_ applied to the K. of Burma,
and those bearing upon the Malay and Abyssinian chronologies.

In the interpretation of outlandish phrases, I may refer to the
notes on _Ondanique_, _Nono_, _Barguerlac_, _Argon_, _Sensin_,
_Keshican_, _Toscaol_, _Bularguchi_, _Gat-paul_, etc.

Among miscellaneous elucidations, to the disquisition on the _Arbre
Sol_ or _Sec_ in vol. i., and to that on Mediæval Military Engines
in vol. ii.

In a variety of cases it has been necessary to refer to Eastern
languages for pertinent elucidations or etymologies. The editor
would, however, be sorry to fall under the ban of the mediæval
adage:

“_Vir qui docet quod non sapit Definitur Bestia!_”

and may as well reprint here what was written in the Preface to
_Cathay_:

“I am painfully sensible that in regard to many subjects dealt
with in the following pages, nothing can make up for the want of
genuine Oriental learning. A fair familiarity with Hindustani for
many years, and some reminiscences of elementary Persian, have been
useful in their degree; but it is probable that they may sometimes
also have led me astray, as such slender lights are apt to do.”

[Illustration]

TO
HENRY YULE.

Until you raised dead monarchs from the mould
And built again the domes of Xanadu,
I lay in evil case, and never knew
The glamour of that ancient story told
By good Ser Marco in his prison-hold.
But now I sit upon a throne and view
The Orient at my feet, and take of you
And Marco tribute from the realms of old.

If I am joyous, deem me not o’er bold;
If I am grateful, deem me not untrue;
For you have given me beauties to behold,
Delight to win, and fancies to pursue,
Fairer than all the jewelry and gold
Of Kublaï on his throne in Cambalu.

E. C. BABER.

_20th July, 1884._

MEMOIR OF SIR HENRY YULE.

Henry Yule was the youngest son of Major William Yule, by his first
wife, Elizabeth Paterson, and was born at Inveresk, in Midlothian, on
1st May, 1820. He was named after an _aunt_ who, like Miss Ferrier’s
immortal heroine, owned a man’s name.

On his father’s side he came of a hardy agricultural stock,[1] improved
by a graft from that highly-cultured tree, Rose of Kilravock.[2]
Through his mother, a somewhat prosaic person herself, he inherited
strains from Huguenot and Highland ancestry. There were recognisable
traces of all these elements in Henry Yule, and as was well said
by one of his oldest friends: “He was one of those curious racial
compounds one finds on the east side of Scotland, in whom the hard
Teutonic grit is sweetened by the artistic spirit of the more genial
Celt.”[3] His father, an officer of the Bengal army (born 1764, died
1839), was a man of cultivated tastes and enlightened mind, a good
Persian and Arabic scholar, and possessed of much miscellaneous
Oriental learning. During the latter years of his career in India, he
served successively as Assistant Resident at the (then independent)
courts of Lucknow[4] and Delhi. In the latter office his chief was the
noble Ouchterlony. William Yule, together with his younger brother
Udny,[5] returned home in 1806. “A recollection of their voyage was
that they hailed an outward bound ship, somewhere off the Cape, through
the trumpet: ‘What news?’ Answer: ‘The King’s mad, and Humfrey’s beat
Mendoza’ (two celebrated prize-fighters and often matched). ‘Nothing
more?’ ‘Yes, Bonapart_y_’s made his _Mother_ King of Holland!’

“Before his retirement, William Yule was offered the
Lieut.-Governorship of St. Helena. Two of the detailed privileges
of the office were residence at Longwood (afterwards the house of
Napoleon), and the use of a certain number of the Company’s slaves.
Major Yule, who was a strong supporter of the anti-slavery cause
till its triumph in 1834, often recalled both of these offers with
amusement.”[6]

William Yule was a man of generous chivalrous nature, who took large
views of life, apt to be unfairly stigmatised as Radical in the narrow
Tory reaction that prevailed in Scotland during the early years of the
19th century.[7] Devoid of literary ambition, he wrote much for his
private pleasure, and his knowledge and library (rich in Persian and
Arabic MSS.) were always placed freely at the service of his friends
and correspondents, some of whom, such as Major C. Stewart and Mr.
William Erskine, were more given to publication than himself. He never
travelled without a little 8vo MS. of Hafiz, which often lay under his
pillow. Major Yule’s only printed work was a lithographed edition of
the _Apothegms_ of ’Ali, the son of Abu Talib, in the Arabic, with an
old Persian version and an English translation interpolated by himself.
“This was privately issued in 1832, when the Duchesse d’Angoulême was
living at Edinburgh, and the little work was inscribed to her, with
whom an accident of neighbourhood and her kindness to the Major’s
youngest child had brought him into relations of goodwill.”[8]

Henry Yule’s childhood was mainly spent at Inveresk. He used to say
that his earliest recollection was sitting with the little cousin,
who long after became his wife, on the doorstep of her father’s house
in George Street, Edinburgh (now the Northern Club), listening to the
performance of a passing piper. There was another episode which he
recalled with humorous satisfaction. Fired by his father’s tales of
the jungle, Yule (then about six years old) proceeded to improvise an
elephant pit in the back garden, only too successfully, for soon, with
mingled terror and delight, he saw his uncle John[9] fall headlong
into the snare. He lost his mother before he was eight, and almost his
only remembrance of her was the circumstance of her having given him
a little lantern to light him home on winter nights from his first
school. On Sundays it was the Major’s custom to lend his children,
as a picture-book, a folio Arabic translation of the Four Gospels,
printed at Rome in 1591, which contained excellent illustrations from
Italian originals.[10] Of the pictures in this volume Yule seems never
to have tired. The last page bore a MS. note in Latin to the effect
that the volume had been read in the Chaldæan Desert by _Georgius
Strachanus_, _Milnensis_, _Scotus_, who long remained unidentified, not
to say mythical, in Yule’s mind. But George Strachan never passed from
his memory, and having ultimately run him to earth, Yule, sixty years
later, published the results in an interesting article.[11]

Two or three years after his wife’s death, Major Yule removed to
Edinburgh, and established himself in Regent’s Terrace, on the face
of the Calton Hill.[12] This continued to be Yule’s home until his
father’s death, shortly before he went to India. “Here he learned to
love the wide scenes of sea and land spread out around that hill—a
love he never lost, at home or far away. And long years after, with
beautiful Sicilian hills before him and a lovely sea, he writes words
of fond recollection of the bleak Fife hills, and the grey Firth of
Forth.”[13]

Yule now followed his elder brother, Robert, to the famous High School,
and in the summer holidays the two made expeditions to the West
Highlands, the Lakes of Cumberland, and elsewhere. Major Yule chose his
boys to have every reasonable indulgence and advantage, and when the
British Association, in 1834, held its first Edinburgh meeting, Henry
received a member’s ticket. So, too, when the passing of the Reform
Bill was celebrated in the same year by a great banquet, at which Lord
Grey and other prominent politicians were present, Henry was sent to
the dinner, probably the youngest guest there.[14]

At this time the intention was that Henry should go to Cambridge (where
his name was, indeed, entered), and after taking his degree study for
the Bar. With this view he was, in 1833, sent to Waith, near Ripon, to
be coached by the Rev. H. P. Hamilton, author of a well-known treatise,
_On Conic Sections_, and afterwards Dean of Salisbury. At his tutor’s
hospitable rectory Yule met many notabilities of the day. One of them
was Professor Sedgwick.

There was rumoured at this time the discovery of the first known (?)
fossil monkey, but its tail was missing. “Depend upon it, Daniel
O’Conell’s got hold of it!” said ‘Adam’ briskly.[15] Yule was very
happy with Mr. Hamilton and his kind wife, but on his tutor’s removal
to Cambridge other arrangements became necessary, and in 1835 he was
transferred to the care of the Rev. James Challis, rector of Papworth
St. Everard, a place which “had little to recommend it except a
dulness which made reading almost a necessity.”[16] Mr. Challis had at
this time two other resident pupils, who both, in most diverse ways,
attained distinction in the Church. These were John Mason Neale, the
future eminent ecclesiologist and founder of the devoted Anglican
Sisterhood of St. Margaret, and Harvey Goodwin, long afterwards the
studious and large-minded Bishop of Carlisle. With the latter, Yule
remained on terms of cordial friendship to the end of his life. Looking
back through more than fifty years to these boyish days, Bishop Goodwin
wrote that Yule then “showed much more liking for Greek plays and for
German than for mathematics, though he had considerable geometrical
ingenuity.”[17] On one occasion, having solved a problem that puzzled
Goodwin, Yule thus discriminated the attainments of the three pupils:
“The difference between you and me is this: You like it and can’t do
it; I don’t like it and can do it. Neale neither likes it nor can do
it.” Not bad criticism for a boy of fifteen.[18]

On Mr. Challis being appointed Plumerian Professor at Cambridge, in the
spring of 1836, Yule had to leave him, owing to want of room at the
Observatory, and he became for a time, a most dreary time, he said, a
student at University College, London.

By this time Yule had made up his mind that not London and the Law,
but India and the Army should be his choice, and accordingly in Feb.
1837 he joined the East India Company’s Military College at Addiscombe.
From Addiscombe he passed out, in December 1838, at the head of the
cadets of his term (taking the prize sword[19]), and having been duly
appointed to the Bengal Engineers, proceeded early in 1839 to the
Headquarters of the Royal Engineers at Chatham, where, according to
custom, he was enrolled as a “local and temporary Ensign.” For such
was then the invidious designation at Chatham of the young Engineer
officers of the Indian army, who ranked as full lieutenants in their
own Service, from the time of leaving Addiscombe.[20] Yule once
audaciously tackled the formidable Pasley on this very grievance. The
venerable Director, after a minute’s pondering, replied: “Well, I don’t
remember what the reason was, but I have _no_ doubt (_staccato_) it ...
was ... a very ... _good_ reason.”[21]

“When Yule appeared among us at Chatham in 1839,” said his friend
Collinson, “he at once took a prominent place in our little Society by
his slightly advanced age [he was then 18½], but more by his strong
character.... His earlier education ... gave him a better classical
knowledge than most of us possessed; then he had the reserve and
self-possession characteristic of his race; but though he took small
part in the games and other recreations of our time, his knowledge,
his native humour, and his good comradeship, and especially his strong
sense of right and wrong, made him both admired and respected.... Yule
was not a scientific engineer, though he had a good general knowledge
of the different branches of his profession; his natural capacity lay
rather in varied knowledge, combined with a strong understanding and
an excellent memory, and also a peculiar power as a draughtsman, which
proved of great value in after life.... Those were nearly the last
days of the old _régime_, of the orthodox double sap and cylindrical
pontoons, when Pasley’s genius had been leading to new ideas, and when
Lintorn Simmons’ power, G. Leach’s energy, W. Jervois’ skill, and
R. Tylden’s talent were developing under the wise example of Henry
Harness.”[22]

In the Royal Engineer mess of those days (the present anteroom), the
portrait of Henry Yule now faces that of his first chief, Sir Henry
Harness. General Collinson said that the pictures appeared to eye each
other as if the subjects were continuing one of those friendly disputes
in which they so often engaged.[23]

It was in this room that Yule, Becher, Collinson, and other young
R.E.’s, profiting by the temporary absence of the austere Colonel
Pasley, acted some plays, including _Pizarro_. Yule bore the humble
part of one of the Peruvian Mob in this performance, of which he has
left a droll account.[24]

On the completion of his year at Chatham, Yule prepared to sail for
India, but first went to take leave of his relative, General White. An
accident prolonged his stay, and before he left he had proposed to and
been refused by his cousin Annie. This occurrence, his first check,
seems to have cast rather a gloom over his start for India. He went
by the then newly-opened Overland Route, visiting Portugal, stopping
at Gibraltar to see his cousin, Major (afterwards General) Patrick
Yule, R.E.[25] He was under orders “to stop at Aden (then recently
acquired), to report on the water supply, and to deliver a set of
meteorological and magnetic instruments for starting an observatory
there. The overland journey then really meant so; tramping across the
desert to Suez with camels and Arabs, a proceeding not conducive to the
preservation of delicate instruments; and on arriving at Aden he found
that the intended observer was dead, the observatory not commenced, and
the instruments all broken. There was thus nothing left for him but to
go on at once” to Calcutta,[26] where he arrived at the end of 1840.

His first service lay in the then wild Khasia Hills, whither he was
detached for the purpose of devising means for the transport of the
local coal to the plains. In spite of the depressing character of
the climate (Cherrapunjee boasts the highest rainfall on record),
Yule thoroughly enjoyed himself, and always looked back with special
pleasure on the time he spent here. He was unsuccessful in the object
of his mission, the obstacles to cheap transport offered by the dense
forests and mighty precipices proving insurmountable, but he gathered
a wealth of interesting observations on the country and people, a
very primitive Mongolian race, which he subsequently embodied in two
excellent and most interesting papers (the first he ever published).[27]

In the following year, 1842, Yule was transferred to the irrigation
canals of the north-west with head-quarters at Kurnaul. Here he had
for chief Captain (afterwards General Sir William) Baker, who became
his dearest and most steadfast friend. Early in 1843 Yule had his
first experience of field service. The death without heir of the
Khytul Rajah, followed by the refusal of his family to surrender the
place to the native troops sent to receive it, obliged Government to
send a larger force against it, and the canal officers were ordered
to join this. Yule was detailed to serve under Captain Robert Napier
(afterwards F.-M. Lord Napier of Magdala). Their immediate duty was to
mark out the route for a night march of the troops, barring access to
all side roads, and neither officer having then had any experience of
war, they performed the duty “with all the elaborate care of novices.”
Suddenly there was an alarm, a light detected, and a night attack
awaited, when the danger resolved itself into Clerk Sahib’s _khansamah_
with welcome hot coffee![28] Their hopes were disappointed, there
was no fighting, and the Fort of Khytul was found deserted by the
enemy. It “was a strange scene of confusion—all the paraphernalia and
accumulation of odds and ends of a wealthy native family lying about
and inviting loot. I remember one beautiful crutch-stick of ebony with
two rams’ heads in jade. I took it and sent it in to the political
authority, intending to buy it when sold. There was a sale, but my
stick never appeared. Somebody had a more developed taste in jade....
Amid the general rummage that was going on, an officer of British
Infantry had been put over a part of the palace supposed to contain
treasure, and they—officers and all—were helping themselves. Henry
Lawrence was one of the politicals under George Clerk. When the news of
this affair came to him I was present. It was in a white marble loggia
in the palace, where was a white marble chair or throne on a basement.
Lawrence was sitting on this throne in great excitement. He wore an
Afghan _choga_, a sort of dressing-gown garment, and this, and his thin
locks, and thin beard were streaming in the wind. He always dwells in
my memory as a sort of pythoness on her tripod under the afflatus.”[29]

During his Indian service, Yule had renewed and continued by letters
his suit to Miss White, and persistency prevailing at last, he soon
after the conclusion of the Khytul affair applied for leave to go home
to be married. He sailed from Bombay in May, 1843, and in September of
the same year was married, at Bath, to the gifted and large-hearted
woman who, to the end, remained the strongest and happiest influence in
his life.[30]

Yule sailed for India with his wife in November 1843. The next two
years were employed chiefly in irrigation work, and do not call
for special note. They were very happy years, except in the one
circumstance that the climate having seriously affected his wife’s
health, and she having been brought to death’s door, partly by illness,
but still more by the drastic medical treatment of those days, she was
imperatively ordered back to England by the doctors, who forbade her
return to India.

Having seen her on board ship, Yule returned to duty on the canals.
The close of that year, December, 1845, brought some variety to his
work, as the outbreak of the first Sikh War called nearly all the
canal officers into the field. “They went up to the front by long
marches, passing through no stations, and quite unable to obtain any
news of what had occurred, though on the 21st December the guns of
Ferozshah were distinctly heard in their camp at Pehoa, at a distance
of 115 miles south-east from the field, and some days later they came
successively on the fields of Moodkee and of Ferozshah itself, with
all the recent traces of battle. When the party of irrigation officers
reached head-quarters, the arrangements for attacking the Sikh army
in its entrenchments at Sobraon were beginning (though suspended till
weeks later for the arrival of the tardy siege guns), and the opposed
forces were lying in sight of each other.”[31]

Yule’s share in this campaign was limited to the sufficiently arduous
task of bridging the Sutlej for the advance of the British army. It is
characteristic of the man that for this reason he always abstained
from wearing his medal for the Sutlej campaign.

His elder brother, Robert Yule, then in the 16th Lancers, took part in
that magnificent charge of his regiment at the battle of Aliwal (Jan.
28, 1846) which the Great Duke is said to have pronounced unsurpassed
in history. From particulars gleaned from his brother and others
present in the action, Henry Yule prepared a spirited sketch of the
episode, which was afterwards published as a coloured lithograph by
M‘Lean (Haymarket).

At the close of the war, Yule succeeded his friend Strachey as
Executive Engineer of the northern division of the Ganges Canal, with
his head-quarters at Roorkee, “the division which, being nearest the
hills and crossed by intermittent torrents of great breadth and great
volume when in flood, includes the most important and interesting
engineering works.”[32]

At Roorkee were the extensive engineering workshops connected with the
canal. Yule soon became so accustomed to the din as to be undisturbed
by the noise, but the unpunctuality and carelessness of the native
workmen sorely tried his patience, of which Nature had endowed him with
but a small reserve. Vexed with himself for letting temper so often get
the better of him, Yule’s conscientious mind devised a characteristic
remedy. Each time that he lost his temper, he transferred a fine of
two rupees (then about five shillings) from his right to his left
pocket. When about to leave Roorkee, he devoted this accumulation of
self-imposed fines to the erection of a sun-dial, to teach the natives
the value of time. The late Sir James Caird, who told this legend of
Roorkee as he heard it there in 1880, used to add, with a humorous
twinkle of his kindly eyes, “It was a _very_ handsome dial.”[33]

From September, 1845, to March, 1847, Yule was much occupied
intermittently, in addition to his professional work, by service on a
Committee appointed by Government “to investigate the causes of the
unhealthiness which has existed at Kurnal, and other portions of the
country along the line of the Delhi Canal,” and further, to report
“whether an injurious effect on the health of the people of the Doab
is, or is not, likely to be produced by the contemplated Ganges Canal.”

“A very elaborate investigation was made by the Committee, directed
principally to ascertaining what relation subsisted between certain
physical conditions of the different districts, and the liability of
their inhabitants to miasmatic fevers.” The principal conclusion of the
Committee was, “that in the extensive epidemic of 1843, when Kurnaul
suffered so seriously ... the greater part of the evils observed had
not been the necessary and unavoidable results of canal irrigation,
but were due to interference with the natural drainage of the country,
to the saturation of stiff and retentive soils, and to natural
disadvantages of site, enhanced by excess of moisture. As regarded
the Ganges Canal, they were of opinion that, with due attention to
drainage, improvement rather than injury to the general health might
be expected to follow the introduction of canal irrigation.”[34] In an
unpublished note written about 1889, Yule records his ultimate opinion
as follows: “At this day, and after the large experience afforded by
the Ganges Canal, I feel sure that a verdict so favourable to the
sanitary results of canal irrigation would not be given.” Still the
fact remains that the Ganges Canal has been the source of unspeakable
blessings to an immense population.

The Second Sikh War saw Yule again with the army in the field,
and on 13th Jan. 1849, he was present at the dismal ‘Victory’ of
Chillianwallah, of which his most vivid recollection seemed to be the
sudden apparition of Henry Lawrence, fresh from London, but still clad
in the legendary Afghan cloak.

On the conclusion of the Punjab campaign, Yule, whose health had
suffered, took furlough and went home to his wife. For the next three
years they resided chiefly in Scotland, though paying occasional visits
to the Continent, and about 1850 Yule bought a house in Edinburgh.
There he wrote “The African Squadron vindicated” (a pamphlet which was
afterwards re-published in French), translated Schiller’s _Kampf mit
dem Drachen_ into English verse, delivered Lectures on Fortification at
the, now long defunct, Scottish Naval and Military Academy, wrote on
Tibet for his friend Blackwood’s Magazine, attended the 1850 Edinburgh
Meeting of the British Association, wrote his excellent lines, “On
the Loss of the _Birkenhead_,” and commenced his first serious study
of Marco Polo (by whose wondrous tale, however, he had already been
captivated as a boy in his father’s library—in Marsden’s edition
probably). But the most noteworthy literary result of these happy
years was that really fascinating volume, entitled _Fortification for
Officers of the Army and Students of Military History_, a work that has
remained unique of its kind. This was published by Blackwood in 1851,
and seven years later received the honour of (unauthorised) translation
into French. Yule also occupied himself a good deal at this time with
the practice of photography, a pursuit to which he never after reverted.

In the spring of 1852, Yule made an interesting little
semi-professional tour in company with a brother officer, his
accomplished friend, Major R. B. Smith. Beginning with Kelso, “the
only one of the Teviotdale Abbeys which I had not as yet seen,” they
made their way leisurely through the north of England, examining
with impartial care abbeys and cathedrals, factories, brick-yards,
foundries, timber-yards, docks, and railway works. On this occasion
Yule, contrary to his custom, kept a journal, and a few excerpts may be
given here, as affording some notion of his casual talk to those who
did not know him.

At Berwick-on-Tweed he notes the old ramparts of the town: “These,
erected in Elizabeth’s time, are interesting as being, I believe, the
only existing sample in England of the bastioned system of the 16th
century.... The outline of the works seems perfect enough, though both
earth and stone work are in great disrepair. The bastions are large
with obtuse angles, square orillons, and double flanks originally
casemated, and most of them crowned with cavaliers.” On the way to
Durham, “much amused by the discussions of two passengers, one a
smooth-spoken, semi-clerical looking person; the other a brusque
well-to-do attorney with a Northumbrian burr. Subject, among others,
Protection. The Attorney all for ‘cheap bread’— ‘You wouldn’t rob the
poor man of his loaf,’ and so forth. ‘You must go with the _stgheam_,
sir, you must go with the stgheam.’ ‘I never did, Mr. Thompson, and I
never will,’ said the other in an oily manner, singularly inconsistent
with the sentiment.” At Durham they dined with a dignitary of the
Church, and Yule was roasted by being placed with his back to an
enormous fire. “Coals are cheap at Durham,” he notes feelingly, adding,
“The party we found as heavy as any Edinburgh one. Smith, indeed,
evidently has had little experience of really stupid Edinburgh parties,
for he had never met with anything approaching to this before.” (Happy
Smith!) But thanks to the kindness and hospitality of the astronomer,
Mr. Chevalier, and his gifted daughter, they had a delightful visit
to beautiful Durham, and came away full of admiration for the (then
newly established) University, and its grand _locale_. They went on
to stay with an uncle by marriage of Yule’s, in Yorkshire. At dinner
he was asked by his host to explain Foucault’s pendulum experiment.
“I endeavoured to explain it somewhat, I hope, to the satisfaction of
his doubts, but not at all to that of Mr. G. M., who most resolutely
declined to take in _any_ elucidation, coming at last to the conclusion
that he entirely differed with me as to what North meant, and that
it was useless to argue until we could agree about that!” They
went next to Leeds, to visit Kirkstall Abbey, “a mediæval fossil,
curiously embedded among the squalid brickwork and chimney stalks of
a manufacturing suburb. Having established ourselves at the hotel, we
went to deliver a letter to Mr. Hope, the official assignee, a very
handsome, aristocratic-looking gentleman, who seemed as much out of
place at Leeds as the Abbey.” At Leeds they visited the flax mills
of Messrs. Marshall, “a firm noted for the conscientious care they
take of their workpeople.... We mounted on the roof of the building,
which is covered with grass, and formerly was actually grazed by a
few sheep, until the repeated inconvenience of their tumbling through
the glass domes put a stop to this.” They next visited some tile and
brickworks on land belonging to a friend. “The owner of the tile works,
a well-to-do burgher, and the apparent model of a West Riding Radical,
received us in rather a dubious way: ‘There are a many people has
come and brought introductions, and looked at all my works, and then
gone and set up for themselves close by. Now des you mean to say that
you be really come all the way from Beng_u_l?’ ‘Yes, indeed we have,
and we are going all the way back again, though we didn’t exactly
come from there to look at your brickworks.’ ‘Then you’re not in the
brick-making line, are you?’ ‘Why we’ve had a good deal to do with
making bricks, and may have again; but we’ll engage that if we set up
for ourselves, it shall be ten thousand miles from you.’ This seemed in
some degree to set his mind at rest....”

“A dismal day, with occasional showers, prevented our seeing Sheffield
to advantage. On the whole, however, it is more cheerful and has more
of a country-town look than Leeds—a place utterly without beauty of
aspect. At Leeds you have vast barrack-like factories, with their usual
suburbs of squalid rows of brick cottages, and everywhere the tall
spiracles of the steam, which seems the pervading power of the place.
Everything there is machinery—the machine is the intelligent agent, it
would seem, the man its slave, standing by to tend it and pick up a
broken thread now and then. At Sheffield ... you might go through most
of the streets without knowing anything of the kind was going on. And
steam here, instead of being a ruler, is a drudge, turning a grindstone
or rolling out a bar of steel, but all the accuracy and skill of hand
is the Man’s. And consequently there was, we thought, a healthier
aspect about the men engaged. None of the Rodgers remain who founded
the firm in my father’s time. I saw some pairs of his scissors in the
show-room still kept under the name of _Persian_ scissors.”[35]

From Sheffield Yule and his friend proceeded to Boston, “where there
is the most exquisite church tower I have ever seen,” and thence to
Lincoln, Peterborough, and Ely, ending their tour at Cambridge, where
Yule spent a few delightful days.

In the autumn the great Duke of Wellington died, and Yule witnessed the
historic pageant of his funeral. His furlough was now nearly expired,
and early in December he again embarked for India, leaving his wife
and only child, of a few weeks old, behind him. Some verses dated
“Christmas Day near the Equator,” show how much he felt the separation.

Shortly after his return to Bengal, Yule received orders to proceed
to Aracan, and to examine and report upon the passes between Aracan
and Burma, as also to improve communications and select suitable
sites for fortified posts to hold the same. These orders came to Yule
quite unexpectedly late one Saturday evening, but he completed all
preparations and started at daybreak on the following Monday, 24th Jan.
1853.

From Calcutta to Khyook Phyoo, Yule proceeded by steamer, and thence
up the river in the _Tickler_ gunboat to Krenggyuen. “Our course lay
through a wilderness of wooded islands (50 to 200 feet high) and bays,
sailing when we could, anchoring when neither wind nor tide served
... slow progress up the river. More and more like the creeks and
lagoons of the Niger or a Guiana river rather than anything I looked
for in India. The densest tree jungle covers the shore down into the
water. For miles no sign of human habitation, but now and then at
rare intervals one sees a patch of hillside rudely cleared, with the
bare stems of the burnt trees still standing.... Sometimes, too, a
dark tunnel-like creek runs back beneath the thick vault of jungle,
and from it silently steals out a slim canoe, manned by two or three
wild-looking Mugs or Kyens (people of the Hills), driving it rapidly
along with their short paddles held vertically, exactly like those of
the Red men on the American rivers.”

At the military post of Bokhyong, near Krenggyuen, he notes (5th Feb.)
that “Captain Munro, the adjutant, can scarcely believe that I was
present at the Duke of Wellington’s funeral, of which he read but a
few days ago in the newspapers, and here am I, one of the spectators,
a guest in this wild spot among the mountains—2½ months since I left
England.”

Yule’s journal of his arduous wanderings in these border wilds is
full of interest, but want of space forbids further quotation. From
a note on the fly-leaf it appears that from the time of quitting the
gun-boat at Krenggyuen to his arrival at Toungoop he covered about 240
miles on foot, and that under immense difficulties, even as to food.
He commemorated his tribulations in some cheery humorous verse, but
ultimately fell seriously ill of the local fever, aided doubtless by
previous exposure and privation. His servants successively fell ill,
some died and others had to be sent back, food supplies failed, and
the route through those dense forests was uncertain; yet under all
difficulties he seems never to have grumbled or lost heart. And when
things were nearly at the worst, Yule restored the spirits of his
local escort by improvising a wappenshaw, with a Sheffield gardener’s
knife, which he happened to have with him, for prize! When at last Yule
emerged from the wilds and on 25th March marched into Prome, he was
taken for his own ghost! “Found Fraser (of the Engineers) in a rambling
phoongyee house, just under the great gilt pagoda. I went up to him
announcing myself, and his astonishment was so great that he would
scarcely shake hands!” It was on this occasion at Prome that Yule first
met his future chief Captain Phayre—“a very young-looking man—very
cordial,” a description no less applicable to General Sir Arthur Phayre
at the age of seventy!

After some further wanderings, Yule embarked at Sandong, and returned
by water, touching at Kyook Phyoo and Akyab, to Calcutta, which he
reached on 1st May—his birthday.

The next four months were spent in hard work at Calcutta. In August,
Yule received orders to proceed to Singapore, and embarked on the 29th.
His duty was to report on the defences of the Straits Settlements, with
a view to their improvement. Yule’s recommendations were sanctioned by
Government, but his journal bears witness to the prevalence then, as
since, of the penny-wise-pound-foolish system in our administration. On
all sides he was met by difficulties in obtaining sites for batteries,
etc., for which heavy compensation was demanded, when by the exercise
of reasonable foresight, the same might have been secured earlier at a
nominal price.

Yule’s journal contains a very bright and pleasing picture of
Singapore, where he found that the majority of the European population
“were evidently, from their tongues, from benorth the Tweed, a
circumstance which seems to be true of four-fifths of the Singaporeans.
Indeed, if I taught geography, I should be inclined to class Edinburgh,
Glasgow, Dundee, and Singapore together as the four chief towns of
Scotland.”

Work on the defences kept Yule in Singapore and its neighbourhood until
the end of November, when he embarked for Bengal. On his return to
Calcutta, Yule was appointed Deputy Consulting Engineer for Railways
at Head-quarters. In this post he had for chief his old friend Baker,
who had in 1851 been appointed by the Governor-General, Lord Dalhousie,
Consulting Engineer for Railways to Government. The office owed its
existence to the recently initiated great experiment of railway
construction under Government guarantee.

The subject was new to Yule, “and therefore called for hard and anxious
labour. He, however, turned his strong sense and unbiased view to the
general question of railway communication in India, with the result
that he became a vigorous supporter of the idea of narrow gauge and
cheap lines in the parts of that country outside of the main trunk
lines of traffic.”[36]

The influence of Yule, and that of his intimate friends and ultimate
successors in office, Colonels R. Strachey and Dickens, led to the
adoption of the narrow (metre) gauge over a great part of India. Of
this matter more will be said further on; it is sufficient at this
stage to note that it was occupying Yule’s thoughts, and that he had
already taken up the position in this question that he thereafter
maintained through life. The office of Consulting Engineer to
Government for Railways ultimately developed into the great Department
of Public Works.

As related by Yule, whilst Baker “held this appointment, Lord Dalhousie
was in the habit of making use of his advice in a great variety of
matters connected with Public Works projects and questions, but which
had nothing to do with guaranteed railways, there being at that time no
officer attached to the Government of India, whose proper duty it was
to deal with such questions. In August, 1854, the Government of India
sent home to the Court of Directors a despatch and a series of minutes
by the Governor-General and his Council, in which the constitution of
the Public Works Department as a separate branch of administration,
both in the local governments and the government of India itself, was
urged on a detailed plan.”

In this communication Lord Dalhousie stated his desire to appoint Major
Baker to the projected office of Secretary for the Department of Public
Works. In the spring of 1855 these recommendations were carried out by
the creation of the Department, with Baker as Secretary and Yule as
Under Secretary for Public Works.

Meanwhile Yule’s services were called to a very different field, but
without his vacating his new appointment, which he was allowed to
retain. Not long after the conclusion of the second Burmese War, the
King of Burma sent a friendly mission to the Governor-General, and
in 1855 a return Embassy was despatched to the Court of Ava, under
Colonel Arthur Phayre, with Henry Yule as Secretary, an appointment
the latter owed as much to Lord Dalhousie’s personal wish as to
Phayre’s good-will. The result of this employment was Yule’s first
geographical book, a large volume entitled _Mission to the Court of Ava
in 1855_, originally printed in India, but subsequently re-issued in
an embellished form at home (see over leaf). To the end of his life,
Yule looked back to this “social progress up the Irawady, with its many
quaint and pleasant memories, as to a bright and joyous holiday.”[37]
It was a delight to him to work under Phayre, whose noble and lovable
character he had already learned to appreciate two years before in
Pegu. Then, too, Yule has spoken of the intense relief it was to escape
from the monotonous scenery and depressing conditions of official
life in Bengal (Resort to Simla was the exception, not the rule, in
these days!) to the cheerfulness and unconstraint of Burma, with its
fine landscapes and merry-hearted population. “It was such a relief
to find natives who would laugh at a joke,” he once remarked in the
writer’s presence to the lamented E. C. Baber, who replied that he had
experienced exactly the same sense of relief in passing from India to
China.

Yule’s work on Burma was largely illustrated by his own sketches. One
of these represents the King’s reception of the Embassy, and another,
the King on his throne. The originals were executed by Yule’s ready
pencil, surreptitiously within his cocked hat, during the audience.

From the latter sketch Yule had a small oil-painting executed under his
direction by a German artist, then resident in Calcutta, which he gave
to Lord Dalhousie.[38]

The Government of India marked their approval of the Embassy by an
unusual concession. Each of the members of the mission received a
souvenir of the expedition. To Yule was given a very beautiful and
elaborately chased small bowl, of nearly pure gold, bearing the signs
of the Zodiac in relief.[39]

On his return to Calcutta, Yule threw himself heart and soul into the
work of his new appointment in the Public Works Department. The nature
of his work, the novelty and variety of the projects and problems
with which this new branch of the service had to deal, brought Yule
into constant, and eventually very intimate association with Lord
Dalhousie, whom he accompanied on some of his tours of inspection.
The two men thoroughly appreciated each other, and, from first to
last, Yule experienced the greatest kindness from Lord Dalhousie. In
this intimacy, no doubt the fact of being what French soldiers call
_pays_ added something to the warmth of their mutual regard: their
forefathers came from the same _airt_, and neither was unmindful of the
circumstance. It is much to be regretted that Yule preserved no sketch
of Lord Dalhousie, nor written record of his intercourse with him, but
the following lines show some part of what he thought:

“At this time [1849] there appears upon the scene that vigorous and
masterful spirit, whose arrival to take up the government of India had
been greeted by events so inauspicious. No doubt from the beginning the
Governor-General was desirous to let it be understood that although new
to India he was, and meant to be, master; ... Lord Dalhousie was by no
means averse to frank dissent, provided _in the manner_ it was never
forgotten that he was Governor-General. Like his great predecessor Lord
Wellesley, he was jealous of all familiarity and resented it.... The
general sentiment of those who worked under that ἄναξ ανδρῶν was one of
strong and admiring affection ... and we doubt if a Governor-General
ever embarked on the Hoogly amid deeper feeling than attended him who,
shattered by sorrow and physical suffering, but erect and undaunted,
quitted Calcutta on the 6th March 1856.”[40]

His successor was Lord Canning, whose confidence in Yule and personal
regard for him became as marked as his predecessor’s.

In the autumn of 1856, Yule took leave and came home. Much of his
time while in England was occupied with making arrangements for the
production of an improved edition of his book on Burma, which so
far had been a mere government report. These were completed to his
satisfaction, and on the eve of returning to India, he wrote to his
publishers[41] that the correction of the proof sheets and general
supervision of the publication had been undertaken by his friend the
Rev. W. D. Maclagan, formerly an officer of the Madras army (and now
Archbishop of York).

Whilst in England, Yule had renewed his intimacy with his old friend
Colonel Robert Napier, then also on furlough, a visitor whose kindly
sympathetic presence always brought special pleasure also to Yule’s
wife and child. One result of this intercourse was that the friends
decided to return together to India. Accordingly they sailed from
Marseilles towards the end of April, and at Aden were met by the
astounding news of the outbreak of the Mutiny.

On his arrival in Calcutta Yule, who retained his appointment of Under
Secretary to Government, found his work indefinitely increased. Every
available officer was called into the field, and Yule’s principal
centre of activity was shifted to the great fortress of Allahabad,
forming the principal base of operations against the rebels. Not only
had he to strengthen or create defences at Allahabad and elsewhere,
but on Yule devolved the principal burden of improvising accommodation
for the European troops then pouring into India, which ultimately
meant providing for an army of 100,000 men. His task was made the
more difficult by the long-standing chronic friction, then and long
after, existing between the officers of the Queen’s and the Company’s
services. But in a far more important matter he was always fortunate.
As he subsequently recorded in a Note for Government: “Through all
consciousness of mistakes and shortcomings, I have felt that I had the
confidence of those whom I served, a feeling which has lightened many a
weight.”

It was at Allahabad that Yule, in the intervals of more serious work,
put the last touches to his Burma book. The preface of the English
edition is dated, “Fortress of Allahabad, Oct. 3, 1857,” and contains
a passage instinct with the emotions of the time. After recalling
the “joyous holiday” on the Irawady, he goes on: “But for ourselves,
standing here on the margin of these rivers, which a few weeks ago were
red with the blood of our murdered brothers and sisters, and straining
the ear to catch the echo of our avenging artillery, it is difficult to
turn the mind to what seem dreams of past days of peace and security;
and memory itself grows dim in the attempt to repass the gulf which
the last few months has interposed between the present and the time to
which this narrative refers.”[42]

When he wrote these lines, the first relief had just taken place, and
the second defence of Lucknow was beginning. The end of the month saw
Sir Colin Campbell’s advance to the second—the real—relief of Lucknow.
Of Sir Colin, Yule wrote and spoke with warm regard: “Sir Colin was
delightful, and when in a good humour and at his best, always reminded
me very much, both in manner and talk, of the General (_i.e._ General
White, his wife’s father). The voice was just the same and the quiet
gentle manner, with its underlying keen dry humour. But then if you did
happen to offend Sir Colin, it was like treading on crackers, which was
not our General’s way.”

When Lucknow had been relieved, besieged, reduced, and finally
remodelled by the grand Roads and Demolitions Scheme of his friend
Napier, the latter came down to Allahabad, and he and Yule sought
diversion in playing quoits and skittles, the only occasion on which
either of them is known to have evinced any liking for games.

Before this time Yule had succeeded his friend Baker as _de facto_
Secretary to Government for Public Works, and on Baker’s retirement
in 1858, Yule was formally appointed his successor.[43] Baker and
Yule had, throughout their association, worked in perfect unison,
and the very differences in their characters enhanced the value of
their co-operation; the special qualities of each friend mutually
strengthened and completed each other. Yule’s was by far the more
original and creative mind, Baker’s the more precise and, at least in
a professional sense, the more highly-trained organ. In chivalrous
sense of honour, devotion to duty, and natural generosity, the men
stood equal; but while Yule was by nature impatient and irritable, and
liable, until long past middle age, to occasional sudden bursts of
uncontrollable anger, generally followed by periods of black depression
and almost absolute silence,[44] Baker was the very reverse. Partly by
natural temperament, but also certainly by severe self-discipline, his
manner was invincibly placid and his temper imperturbable.[45] Yet none
was more tenacious in maintaining whatever he judged right.

Baker, whilst large-minded in great matters, was extremely conventional
in small ones, and Yule must sometimes have tried his feelings
in this respect. The particulars of one such tragic occurrence
have survived. Yule, who was colour-blind,[46] and in early life
whimsically obstinate in maintaining his own view of colours, had
selected some cloth for trousers undeterred by his tailor’s timid
remonstrance of “Not _quite_ your usual taste, sir.” The result was
that the Under-Secretary to Government startled official Calcutta by
appearing in brilliant claret-coloured raiment. Baker remonstrated:
“Claret-colour! Nonsense, my trousers are silver grey,” said Yule, and
entirely declined to be convinced. “I think I _did_ convince him at
last,” said Baker with some pride, when long after telling the story to
the present writer. “And _then_ he gave them up?” “Oh, no,” said Sir
William ruefully, “he wore those claret-coloured trousers to the very
end.” That episode probably belonged to the Dalhousie period.

When Yule resumed work in the Secretariat at Calcutta at the close of
the Mutiny, the inevitable arrears of work were enormous. This may be
the proper place to notice more fully his action with respect to the
choice of gauge for Indian railways already adverted to in brief. As
we have seen, his own convictions led to the adoption of the metre
gauge over a great part of India. This policy had great disadvantages
not at first foreseen, and has since been greatly modified. In
justice to Yule, however, it should be remembered that the conditions
and requirements of India have largely altered, alike through the
extraordinary growth of the Indian export, especially the grain, trade,
and the development of new necessities for Imperial defence. These new
features, however, did but accentuate defects inherent in the system,
but which only prolonged practical experience made fully apparent.

At the outset the supporters of the narrow gauge seemed to have the
stronger position, as they were able to show that the cost was much
less, the rails employed being only about ⅔rds the weight of those
required by the broad gauge, and many other subsidiary expenses also
proportionally less. On the other hand, as time passed and practical
experience was gained, its opponents were able to make an even stronger
case against the narrow gauge. The initial expenses were undoubtedly
less, but the durability was also less. Thus much of the original
saving was lost in the greater cost of maintenance, whilst the small
carrying capacity of the rolling stock and loss of time and labour in
shifting goods at every break of gauge, were further serious causes of
waste, which the internal commercial development of India daily made
more apparent. Strategic needs also were clamant against the dangers
of the narrow gauge in any general scheme of Indian defence. Yule’s
connection with the Public Works Department had long ceased ere the
question of the gauges reached its most acute stage, but his interest
and indirect participation in the conflict survived. In this matter
a certain parental tenderness for a scheme which he had helped to
originate, combined with his warm friendship for some of the principal
supporters of the narrow gauge, seem to have influenced his views
more than he himself was aware. Certainly his judgment in this matter
was not impartial, although, as always in his case, it was absolutely
sincere and not consciously biased.

In reference to Yule’s services in the period following the Mutiny,
Lord Canning’s subsequent Minute of 1862 may here be fitly quoted. In
this the Governor-General writes: “I have long ago recorded my opinion
of the value of his services in 1858 and 1859, when with a crippled
and overtaxed staff of Engineer officers, many of them young and
inexperienced, the G.-G. had to provide rapidly for the accommodation
of a vast English army, often in districts hitherto little known, and
in which the authority of the Government was barely established, and
always under circumstances of difficulty and urgency. I desire to
repeat that the Queen’s army in India was then greatly indebted to
Lieut.-Colonel Yule’s judgment, earnestness, and ability; and this to
an extent very imperfectly understood by many of the officers who held
commands in that army.

“Of the manner in which the more usual duties of his office have
been discharged it is unnecessary for me to speak. It is, I believe,
known and appreciated as well by the Home Government as by the
Governor-General in Council.”

In the spring of 1859 Yule felt the urgent need of a rest, and took
the, at that time, most unusual step of coming home on three months’
leave, which as the voyage then occupied a month each way, left him
only one month at home. He was accompanied by his elder brother George,
who had not been out of India for thirty years. The visit home of the
two brothers was as bright and pleasant as it was brief, but does not
call for further notice.

In 1860, Yule’s health having again suffered, he took short leave to
Java. His journal of this tour is very interesting, but space does
not admit of quotation here. He embodied some of the results of his
observations in a lecture he delivered on his return to Calcutta.

During these latter years of his service in India, Yule owed much
happiness to the appreciative friendship of Lord Canning and the ready
sympathy of Lady Canning. If he shared their tours in an official
capacity, the intercourse was much more than official. The noble
character of Lady Canning won from Yule such wholehearted chivalrous
devotion as, probably, he felt for no other friend save, perhaps in
after days, Sir Bartle Frere. And when her health failed, it was to
Yule’s special care that Lord Canning entrusted his wife during a tour
in the Hills. Lady Canning was known to be very homesick, and one day
as the party came in sight of some ilexes (the evergreen oak), Yule
sought to cheer her by calling out pleasantly: “Look, Lady Canning!
There are _oaks_!” “No, no, Yule, _not_ oaks,” cried Sir C. B. “They
are (solemnly) IBEXES.” “No, _not_ Ibexes, Sir C., you mean SILEXES,”
cried Capt. ——, the A.D.C.; Lady Canning and Yule the while almost
choking with laughter.

On another and later occasion, when the Governor-General’s camp was
peculiarly dull and stagnant, every one yawning and grumbling, Yule
effected a temporary diversion by pretending to tap the telegraph
wires, and circulating through camp, what purported to be, the usual
telegraphic abstract of news brought to Bombay by the latest English
mail. The news was of the most astounding character, with just enough
air of probability, in minor details, to pass muster with a dull
reader. The effect was all he could wish—or rather more—and there was
a general flutter in the camp. Of course the Governor-General and one
or two others were in the secret, and mightily relished the diversion.
But this pleasant and cheering intercourse was drawing to its mournful
close. On her way back from Darjeeling, in November, 1861, Lady Canning
(not then in Yule’s care) was unavoidably exposed to the malaria of a
specially unhealthy season. A few days’ illness followed, and on 18th
November, 1861, she passed calmly to

“That remaining rest where night and tears are o’er.”[47]

It was to Yule that Lord Canning turned in the first anguish of his
loss, and on this faithful friend devolved the sad privilege of
preparing her last resting-place. This may be told in the touching
words of Lord Canning’s letter to his only sister, written on the day
of Lady Canning’s burial, in the private garden at Barrackpoor[48]:—

“The funeral is over, and my own darling lies buried in a spot which
I am sure she would have chosen of all others.... From the grave can
be seen the embanked walk leading from the house to the river’s edge,
which she made as a landing-place three years ago, and from within 3
or 4 paces of the grave there is a glimpse of the terrace-garden and
its balustrades, which she made near the house, and of the part of
the grounds with which she most occupied herself.... I left Calcutta
yesterday ... and on arriving here, went to look at the precise spot
chosen for the grave. I could see by the clear full moon ... that it
was exactly right. Yule was there superintending the workmen, and
before daylight this morning a solid masonry vault had been completely
finished.

“Bowie [Military Secretary] and Yule have done all this for me. It
has all been settled since my poor darling died. She liked Yule.
They used to discuss together her projects of improvement for this
place, architecture, gardening, the Cawnpore monument, etc., and they
generally agreed. He knew her tastes well....”

The coffin, brought on a gun-carriage from Calcutta, “was carried by
twelve soldiers of the 6th Regiment (Queen’s), the A.D.C.’s bearing
the pall. There were no hired men or ordinary funeral attendants of
any kind at any part of the ceremony, and no lookers-on.... Yule was
the only person not of the household staff. Had others who had asked”
to attend “been allowed to do so, the numbers would have been far too
large.

“On coming near the end of the terrace walk I saw that the turf
between the walk and the grave, and for several yards all round the
grave, was strewed thick with palm branches and bright fresh-gathered
flowers—quite a thick carpet. It was a little matter, but so exactly
what she would have thought of.”[49]

And, therefore, Yule thought of this for her! He also recorded the
scene two days later in some graceful and touching lines, privately
printed, from which the following may be quoted:

“When night lowered black, and the circling shroud
Of storm rolled near, and stout hearts learned dismay;
Not Hers! To her tried Lord a Light and Stay
Even in the Earthquake and the palpable cloud
Of those dark months; and when a fickle crowd
Panted for blood and pelted wrath and scorn
On him she loved, her courage never stooped:
But when the clouds were driven, and the day
Poured Hope and glorious Sunshine, she who had borne,
The night with such strong Heart, withered and drooped,
Our queenly lily, and smiling passed away.
Now! let no fouling touch profane her clay,
Nor odious pomps and funeral tinsels mar
Our grief. But from our England’s cannon car
Let England’s soldiers bear her to the tomb
Prepared by loving hands. Before her bier
Scatter victorious palms; let Rose’s bloom
Carpet its passage....”

Yule’s deep sympathy in this time of sorrow strengthened the friendship
Lord Canning had long felt for him, and when the time approached for
the Governor-General to vacate his high office, he invited Yule, who
was very weary of India, to accompany him home, where his influence
would secure Yule congenial employment. Yule’s weariness of India at
this time was extreme. Moreover, after serving under such leaders as
Lord Dalhousie and Lord Canning, and winning their full confidence and
friendship, it was almost repugnant to him to begin afresh with new
men and probably new measures, with which he might not be in accord.
Indeed, some little clouds were already visible on the horizon. In
these circumstances, it is not surprising that Yule, under an impulse
of lassitude and impatience, when accepting Lord Canning’s offer,
also ‘burnt his boats’ by sending in his resignation of the service.
This decision Yule took against the earnest advice of his anxious and
devoted wife, and for a time the results justified all her misgivings.
She knew well, from past experience, how soon Yule wearied in the
absence of compulsory employment. And in the event of the life in
England not suiting him, for even Lord Canning’s good-will might
not secure perfectly congenial employment for his talents, she knew
well that his health and spirits would be seriously affected. She,
therefore, with affectionate solicitude, urged that he should adopt the
course previously followed by his friend Baker, that is, come home on
furlough, and only send in his resignation after he saw clearly what
his prospects of home employment were, and what he himself wished in
the matter.

Lord Canning and Yule left Calcutta late in March, 1862; at Malta
they parted never to meet again in this world. Lord Canning proceeded
to England, and Yule joined his wife and child in Rome. Only a few
weeks later, at Florence, came as a thunderclap the announcement of
Lord Canning’s unexpected death in London, on 17th June. Well does
the present writer remember the day that fatal news came, and Yule’s
deep anguish, not assuredly for the loss of his prospects, but for
the loss of a most noble and magnanimous friend, a statesman whose
true greatness was, both then and since, most imperfectly realised by
the country for which he had worn himself out.[50] Shortly after Yule
went to England,[51] where he was cordially received by Lord Canning’s
representatives, who gave him a touching remembrance of his lost
friend, in the shape of the silver travelling candlesticks, which had
habitually stood on Lord Canning’s writing-table.[52] But his offer to
write Lord Canning’s _Life_ had no result, as the relatives, following
the then recent example of the Hastings family, in the case of another
great Governor-General, refused to revive discussion by the publication
of any Memoir.

Nor did Yule find any suitable opening for employment in England, so
after two or three months spent in visiting old friends, he rejoined
his family in the Black Forest, where he sought occupation in renewing
his knowledge of German. But it must be confessed that his mood both
then and for long after was neither happy nor wholesome. The winter
of 1862 was spent somewhat listlessly, partly in Germany and partly
at the Hôtel des Bergues, Geneva, where his old acquaintance Colonel
Tronchin was hospitably ready to open all doors. The picturesque figure
of John Ruskin also flits across the scene at this time. But Yule was
unoccupied and restless, and could neither enjoy Mr. Ruskin’s criticism
of his sketches nor the kindly hospitality of his Genevan hosts. Early
in 1863 he made another fruitless visit to London, where he remained
four or five months, but found no opening. Though unproductive of work,
this year brought Yule official recognition of his services in the
shape of the C.B., for which Lord Canning had long before recommended
him.[53]

On rejoining his wife and child at Mornex in Savoy, Yule found the
health of the former seriously impaired. During his absence, the kind
and able English Doctor at Geneva had felt obliged to inform Mrs. Yule
that she was suffering from disease of the heart, and that her life
might end suddenly at any moment. Unwilling to add to Yule’s anxieties,
she made all necessary arrangements, but did not communicate this
intelligence until he had done all he wished and returned, when she
broke it to him very gently. Up to this year Mrs. Yule, though not
strong and often ailing, had not allowed herself to be considered an
invalid, but from this date doctor’s orders left her no choice in the
matter.[54]

About this time, Yule took in hand the first of his studies of mediæval
travellers. His translation of the _Travels of Friar Jordanus_ was
probably commenced earlier; it was completed during the leisurely
journey by carriage between Chambéry and Turin, and the Dedication
to Sir Bartle Frere written during a brief halt at Genoa, from which
place it is dated. Travelling slowly and pleasantly by _vetturino_
along the Riviera di Levante, the family came to Spezzia, then little
more than a quiet village. A chance encounter with agreeable residents
disposed Yule favourably towards the place, and a few days later he
opened negotiations for land to build a house! Most fortunately for
himself and all concerned these fell through, and the family continued
their journey to Tuscany, and settled for the winter in a long rambling
house, with pleasant garden, at Pisa, where Yule was able to continue
with advantage his researches into mediæval travel in the East. He paid
frequent visits to Florence, where he had many pleasant acquaintances,
not least among them Charles Lever (“Harry Lorrequer”), with whom
acquaintance ripened into warm and enduring friendship. At Florence he
also made the acquaintance of the celebrated Marchese Gino Capponi, and
of many other Italian men of letters. To this winter of 1863–64 belongs
also the commencement of a lasting friendship with the illustrious
Italian historian, Villari, at that time holding an appointment at
Pisa. Another agreeable acquaintance, though less intimate, was formed
with John Ball, the well-known President of the Alpine Club, then
resident at Pisa, and with many others, among whom the name of a very
cultivated German scholar, H. Meyer, specially recurs to memory.

In the spring of 1864, Yule took a spacious and delightful old villa,
situated in the highest part of the Bagni di Lucca,[55] and commanding
lovely views over the surrounding chestnut-clad hills and winding river.

Here he wrote much of what ultimately took form in _Cathay and
the Way Thither_. It was this summer, too, that Yule commenced his
investigations among the Venetian archives, and also visited the
province of Friuli in pursuit of materials for the history of one
of his old travellers, the _Beato Odorico_. At Verona—then still
Austrian—he had the amusing experience of being arrested for sketching
too near the fortifications. However, his captors had all the usual
Austrian _bonhomie_ and courtesy, and Yule experienced no real
inconvenience. He was much more disturbed when, a day or two later, the
old mother of one of his Venetian acquaintances insisted on embracing
him on account of his supposed likeness to Garibaldi!

As winter approached, a warmer climate became necessary for Mrs. Yule,
and the family proceeded to Sicily, landing at Messina in October,
1864. From this point, Yule made a very interesting excursion to the
then little known group of the Lipari Islands, in the company of that
eminent geologist, the late Robert Mallet, F.R.S., a most agreeable
companion.

On Martinmas Day, the Yules reached the beautiful capital of Sicily,
Palermo, which, though they knew it not, was to be their home—a very
happy one—for nearly eleven years.

During the ensuing winter and spring, Yule continued the preparation
of _Cathay_, but his appetite for work not being satisfied by this,
he, when in London in 1865, volunteered to make an Index to the third
decade of the _Journal of the Royal Geographical Society_, in exchange
for a set of such volumes as he did not possess. That was long before
any Index Society existed; but Yule had special and very strong views
of his own as to what an Index should be, and he spared no labour
to realise his ideal.[56] This proved a heavier task than he had
anticipated, and he got very weary before the Index was completed.

In the spring of 1866, _Cathay and the Way Thither_ appeared, and
at once took the high place which it has ever since retained. In the
autumn of the same year Yule’s attention was momentarily turned in a
very different direction by a local insurrection, followed by severe
reprisals, and the bombardment of Palermo by the Italian Fleet. His
sick wife was for some time under rifle as well as shell fire; but
cheerfully remarking that “every bullet has its billet,” she remained
perfectly serene and undisturbed. It was the year of the last war with
Austria, and also of the suppression of the Monastic Orders in Sicily;
two events which probably helped to produce the outbreak, of which Yule
contributed an account to _The Times_, and subsequently a more detailed
one to the _Quarterly Review_.[57]

Yule had no more predilection for the Monastic Orders than most of
his countrymen, but his sense of justice was shocked by the cruel
incidence of the measure in many cases, and also by the harshness with
which both it and the punishment of suspected insurgents was carried
out. Cholera was prevalent in Italy that year, but Sicily, which had
maintained stringent quarantine, entirely escaped until large bodies
of troops were landed to quell the insurrection, when a devastating
epidemic immediately ensued, and re-appeared in 1867. In after years,
when serving on the Army Sanitary Committee at the India Office, Yule
more than once quoted this experience as indicating that quarantine
restrictions may, in some cases, have more value than British medical
authority is usually willing to admit.

In 1867, on his return from London, Yule commenced systematic work on
his long projected new edition of the _Travels of Marco Polo_. It was
apparently in this year that the scheme first took definite form, but
it had long been latent in his mind. The Public Libraries of Palermo
afforded him much good material, whilst occasional visits to the
Libraries of Venice, Florence, Paris, and London, opened other sources.
But his most important channel of supply came from his very extensive
private correspondence, extending to nearly all parts of Europe
and many centres in Asia. His work brought him many new and valued
friends, indeed too many to mention, but amongst whom, as belonging
specially to this period, three honoured names must be recalled here:
Commendatore (afterwards Baron) CRISTOFORO NEGRI, the large-hearted
Founder and First President of the Geographical Society of Italy,
from whom Yule received his first public recognition as a geographer,
Commendatore GUGLIELMO BERCHET (affectionately nicknamed _il Bello e
Buono_), ever generous in learned help, who became a most dear and
honoured friend, and the Hon. GEORGE P. MARSH, U.S. Envoy to the Court
of Italy, a man, both as scholar and friend, unequalled in his nation,
perhaps almost unique anywhere.

Those who only knew Yule in later years, may like some account of
his daily life at this time. It was his custom to rise fairly early;
in summer he sometimes went to bathe in the sea,[58] or for a walk
before breakfast; more usually he would write until breakfast, which
he preferred to have alone. After breakfast he looked through his
notebooks, and before ten o’clock was usually walking rapidly to the
library where his work lay. He would work there until two or three
o’clock, when he returned home, read the _Times_, answered letters,
received or paid visits, and then resumed work on his book, which he
often continued long after the rest of the household were sleeping. Of
course his family saw but little of him under these circumstances, but
when he had got a chapter of _Marco_ into shape, or struck out some
new discovery of interest, he would carry it to his wife to read. She
always took great interest in his work, and he had great faith in her
literary instinct as a sound as well as sympathetic critic.

The first fruits of Yule’s Polo studies took the form of a review of
Pauthier’s edition of _Marco Polo_, contributed to the _Quarterly
Review_ in 1868.

In 1870 the great work itself appeared, and received prompt generous
recognition by the grant of the very beautiful gold medal of the
Geographical Society of Italy,[59] followed in 1872 by the award of
the Founder’s Medal of the Royal Geographical Society, while the
Geographical and Asiatic Societies of Paris, the Geographical Societies
of Italy and Berlin, the Academy of Bologna, and other learned bodies,
enrolled him as an Honorary Member.

Reverting to 1869, we may note that Yule, when passing through Paris
early in the spring, became acquainted, through his friend M. Charles
Maunoir, with the admirable work of exploration lately performed by
Lieut. Francis Garnier of the French Navy. It was a time of much
political excitement in France, the eve of the famous _Plébiscite_,
and the importance of Garnier’s work was not then recognised by his
countrymen. Yule saw its value, and on arrival in London went straight
to Sir Roderick Murchison, laid the facts before him, and suggested
that no other traveller of the year had so good a claim to one of the
two gold medals of the R.G.S. as this French naval Lieutenant. Sir
Roderick was propitious, and accordingly in May the Patron’s medal
was assigned to Garnier, who was touchingly grateful to Yule; whilst
the French Minister of Marine marked his appreciation of Yule’s good
offices by presenting him with the magnificent volumes commemorating
the expedition.[60]

Yule was in Paris in 1871, immediately after the suppression of the
Commune, and his letters gave interesting accounts of the extraordinary
state of affairs then prevailing. In August, he served as President of
the Geographical Section of the British Association at its Edinburgh
meeting.

On his return to Palermo, he devoted himself specially to the
geography of the Oxus region, and the result appeared next year in his
introduction and notes to Wood’s _Journey_. Soon after his return to
Palermo, he became greatly interested in the plans, about which he was
consulted, of an English church, the gift to the English community of
two of its oldest members, Messrs Ingham and Whitaker. Yule’s share in
the enterprise gradually expanded, until he became a sort of volunteer
clerk of the works, to the great benefit of his health, as this
occupation during the next three years, whilst adding to his interests,
also kept him longer in the open air than would otherwise have been the
case. It was a real misfortune to Yule (and one of which he was himself
at times conscious) that he had no taste for any out-of-door pursuits,
neither for any form of natural science, nor for gardening, nor for
any kind of sport nor games. Nor did he willingly ride.[61] He was
always restless away from his books. There can be no doubt that want of
sufficient air and exercise, reacting on an impaired liver, had much
to do with Yule’s unsatisfactory state of health and frequent extreme
depression. There was no lack of agreeable and intelligent society
at Palermo (society that the present writer recalls with cordial
regard), to which every winter brought pleasant temporary additions,
both English and foreign, the best of whom generally sought Yule’s
acquaintance. Old friends too were not wanting; many found their way to
Palermo, and when such came, he was willing to show them hospitality
and to take them excursions, and occasionally enjoyed these. But though
the beautiful city and surrounding country were full of charm and
interest, Yule was too much pre-occupied by his own special engrossing
pursuits ever really to get the good of his surroundings, of which
indeed he often seemed only half conscious.

By this time Yule had obtained, without ever having sought it, a
distinct and, in some respects, quite unique position in geographical
science. Although his _Essay on the Geography of the Oxus Region_
(1872) received comparatively little public attention at home, it had
yet made its mark once for all,[62] and from this time, if not earlier,
Yule’s high authority in all questions of Central Asian geography was
generally recognised. He had long ere this, almost unconsciously,
laid the broad foundations of that “Yule method,” of which Baron von
Richthofen has written so eloquently, declaring that not only in his
own land, “but also in the literatures of France, Italy, Germany,
and other countries, the powerful stimulating influence of the Yule
method is visible.”[63] More than one writer has indeed boldly compared
Central Asia before Yule to Central Africa before Livingstone!

Yule had wrought from sheer love of the work and without expectation
of public recognition, and it was therefore a great surprise as well
as gratification to him, to find that the demand for his _Marco Polo_
was such as to justify the appearance of a second edition only a few
years after the first. The preparation of this enlarged edition, with
much other miscellaneous work (see subjoined bibliography), and the
superintendence of the building of the church already named, kept him
fully occupied for the next three years.

Amongst the parerga and miscellaneous occupations of Yule’s leisure
hours in the period 1869–74, may be mentioned an interesting
correspondence with Professor W. W. Skeat on the subject of _William of
Palerne_ and Sicilian examples of the Werwolf; the skilful analysis and
exposure of Klaproth’s false geography;[64] the purchase and despatch
of Sicilian seeds and young trees for use in the Punjab, at the request
of the Indian Forestry Department; translations (prepared for friends)
of tracts on the cultivation of Sumach and the collection of Manna as
practised in Sicily; also a number of small services rendered to the
South Kensington Museum, at the request of the late Sir Henry Cole.
These latter included obtaining Italian and Sicilian bibliographic
contributions to the Science and Art Department’s _Catalogue of Books
on Art_, selecting architectural subjects to be photographed;[65]
negotiating the purchase of the original drawings illustrative of
Padre B. Gravina’s great work on the Cathedral of Monreale; and
superintending the execution of a copy in mosaic of the large mosaic
picture (in the Norman Palatine Chapel, Palermo,) of the Entry of our
Lord into Jerusalem.

In the spring of 1875, just after the publication of the second
edition of _Marco Polo_, Yule had to mourn the loss of his noble wife.
He was absent from Sicily at the time, but returned a few hours after
her death on 30th April. She had suffered for many years from a severe
form of heart disease, but her end was perfect peace. She was laid to
rest, amid touching tokens of both public and private sympathy, in the
beautiful camposanto on Monte Pellegrino. What her loss was to Yule
only his oldest and closest friends were in a position to realise.
Long years of suffering had impaired neither the soundness of her
judgment nor the sweetness, and even gaiety, of her happy, unselfish
disposition. And in spirit, as even in appearance, she retained to the
very last much of the radiance of her youth. Nor were her intellectual
gifts less remarkable. Few who had once conversed with her ever forgot
her, and certainly no one who had once known her intimately ever ceased
to love her.[66]

Shortly after this calamity, Yule removed to London, and on the
retirement of his old friend, Sir William Baker, from the India Council
early that autumn, Lord Salisbury at once selected him for the vacant
seat. Nothing would ever have made him a party-man, but he always
followed Lord Salisbury with conviction, and worked under him with
steady confidence.

In 1877 Yule married, as his second wife, the daughter of an old
friend,[67] a very amiable woman twenty years his junior, who made
him very happy until her untimely death in 1881. From the time of his
joining the India Council, his duties at the India Office of course
occupied a great part of his time, but he also continued to do an
immense amount of miscellaneous literary work, as may be seen by
reference to the subjoined bibliography, (itself probably incomplete).
In Council he invariably “showed his strong determination to endeavour
to deal with questions on their own merits and not only by custom and
precedent.”[68] Amongst subjects in which he took a strong line of his
own in the discussions of the Council, may be specially instanced his
action in the matter of the cotton duties (in which he defended native
Indian manufactures as against hostile Manchester interests); the
Vernacular Press Act, the necessity for which he fully recognised; and
the retention of Kandahar, for which he recorded his vote in a strong
minute. In all these three cases, which are typical of many others,
his opinion was overruled, but having been carefully and deliberately
formed, it remained unaffected by defeat.

In all matters connected with Central Asian affairs, Yule’s opinion
always carried great weight; some of his most competent colleagues
indeed preferred his authority in this field to that of even Sir Henry
Rawlinson, possibly for the reason given by Sir M. Grant Duff, who has
epigrammatically described the latter as good in Council but dangerous
in counsel.[69]

Yule’s courageous independence and habit of looking at all public
questions by the simple light of what appeared to him right, yet
without fads or doctrinairism, earned for him the respect of the
successive Secretaries of State under whom he served, and the warm
regard and confidence of his other colleagues. The value attached to
his services in Council was sufficiently shown by the fact that when
the period of ten years (for which members are usually appointed),
was about to expire, Lord Hartington (now Duke of Devonshire), caused
Yule’s appointment to be renewed for life, under a special Act of
Parliament passed for this purpose in 1885.

His work as a member of the Army Sanitary Committee, brought him into
communication with Miss Florence Nightingale, a privilege which he
greatly valued and enjoyed, though he used to say: “She is worse than a
Royal Commission to answer, and, in the most gracious charming manner
possible, immediately finds out all I don’t know!” Indeed his devotion
to the “Lady-in-Chief” was scarcely less complete than Kinglake’s.

In 1880, Yule was appointed to the Board of Visitors of the Government
Indian Engineering College at Cooper’s Hill, a post which added to his
sphere of interests without materially increasing his work. In 1882, he
was much gratified by being named an Honorary Fellow of the Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland, more especially as it was to fill one of the
two vacancies created by the deaths of Thomas Carlyle and Dean Stanley.

Yule had been President of the Hakluyt Society from 1877, and in
1885 was elected President also of the Royal Asiatic Society. He
would probably also have been President of the Royal Geographical
Society, but for an untoward incident. Mention has already been made
of his constant determination to judge all questions by the simple
touchstone of what he believed to be right, irrespective of personal
considerations. It was in pursuance of these principles that, at the
cost of great pain to himself and some misrepresentation, he in 1878
sundered his long connection with the Royal Geographical Society,
by resigning his seat on their Council, solely in consequence of
their adoption of what he considered a wrong policy. This severance
occurred just when it was intended to propose him as President. Some
years later, at the personal request of the late Lord Aberdare, a
President in all respects worthy of the best traditions of that great
Society, Yule consented to rejoin the Council, which he re-entered as a
Vice-President.

In 1883, the University of Edinburgh celebrated its Tercentenary, when
Yule was selected as one of the recipients of the honorary degree
of LL.D. His letters from Edinburgh, on this occasion, give a very
pleasant and amusing account of the festivity and of the celebrities
he met. Nor did he omit to chronicle the envious glances cast, as he
alleged, by some British men of science on the splendours of foreign
Academic attire, on the yellow robes of the Sorbonne, and the Palms
of the Institute of France! Pasteur was, he wrote, the one most
enthusiastically acclaimed of all who received degrees.

I think it was about the same time that M. Renan was in England, and
called upon Sir Henry Maine, Yule, and others at the India Office.
On meeting just after, the colleagues compared notes as to their
distinguished but unwieldy visitor. “It seems that _le style n’est
pas l’homme même_ in _this_ instance,” quoth “Ancient Law” to
“Marco Polo.” And here it may be remarked that Yule so completely
identified himself with his favourite traveller that he frequently
signed contributions to the public press as MARCUS PAULUS VENETUS or
M.P.V. His more intimate friends also gave him the same _sobriquet_,
and once, when calling on his old friend, Dr. John Brown (the beloved
chronicler of _Rab and his Friends_), he was introduced by Dr. John to
some lion-hunting American visitors as “our Marco Polo.” The visitors
evidently took the statement in a literal sense, and scrutinised Yule
closely.[70]

In 1886 Yule published his delightful _Anglo-Indian Glossary_, with the
whimsical but felicitous sub-title of _Hobson-Jobson_ (the name given
by the rank and file of the British Army in India to the religious
festival in celebration of Hassan and Husaïn).

This _Glossary_ was an abiding interest to both Yule and the present
writer. Contributions of illustrative quotations came from most diverse
and unexpected sources, and the arrival of each new word or happy
quotation was quite an event, and gave such pleasure to the recipients
as can only be fully understood by those who have shared in such
pursuits. The volume was dedicated in affecting terms to his elder
brother, Sir George Yule, who, unhappily, did not survive to see it
completed.

In July 1885, the two brothers had taken the last of many happy
journeys together, proceeding to Cornwall and the Scilly Isles. A few
months later, on 13th January 1886, the end came suddenly to the elder,
from the effects of an accident at his own door.[71]

It may be doubted if Yule ever really got over the shock of this
loss, though he went on with his work as usual, and served that year
as a Royal Commissioner on the occasion of the Indian and Colonial
Exhibition of 1886.

From 1878, when an accidental chill laid the foundations of an
exhausting, though happily quite painless, malady, Yule’s strength
had gradually failed, although for several years longer his general
health and energies still appeared unimpaired to a casual observer.
The condition of public affairs also, in some degree, affected his
health injuriously. The general trend of political events from 1880 to
1886 caused him deep anxiety and distress, and his righteous wrath at
what he considered the betrayal of his country’s honour in the cases of
Frere, of Gordon, and of Ireland, found strong, and, in a noble sense,
passionate expression in both prose and verse. He was never in any
sense a party man, but he often called himself “one of Mr. Gladstone’s
converts,” _i.e._ one whom Gladstonian methods had compelled to break
with liberal tradition and prepossessions.

Nothing better expresses Yule’s feeling in the period referred to
than the following letter, written in reference to the R. E. Gordon
Memorial,[72] but of much wider application: “Will you allow me an inch
or two of space to say to my brother officers, ‘Have nothing to do with
the proposed Gordon Memorial.’

“That glorious memory is in no danger of perishing and needs no
memorial. Sackcloth and silence are what it suggests to those who
have guided the action of England; and Englishmen must bear the
responsibility for that action and share its shame. It is too early for
atoning memorials; nor is it possible for those who take part in them
to dissociate themselves from a repulsive hypocrisy.

“Let every one who would fain bestow something in honour of the great
victim, do, in silence, some act of help to our soldiers or their
families, or to others who are poor and suffering.

“In later days our survivors or successors may look back with softened
sorrow and pride to the part which men of our corps have played in
these passing events, and Charles Gordon far in the front of all; and
then they may set up our little tablets, or what not—not to preserve
the memory of our heroes, but to maintain the integrity of our own
record of the illustrious dead.”

Happily Yule lived to see the beginning of better times for his
country. One of the first indications of that national awakening was
the right spirit in which the public, for the most part, received Lord
Wolseley’s stirring appeal at the close of 1888, and Yule was so much
struck by the parallelism between Lord Wolseley’s warning and some
words of his own contained in the pseudo-Polo fragment (see above, end
of Preface), that he sent Lord Wolseley the very last copy of the 1875
edition of _Marco Polo_, with a vigorous expression of his sentiments.

That was probably Yule’s last utterance on a public question. The sands
of life were now running low, and in the spring of 1889, he felt it
right to resign his seat on the India Council, to which he had been
appointed for life. On this occasion Lord Cross, then Secretary of
State for India, successfully urged his acceptance of the K.C.S.I.,
which Yule had refused several years before.

In the House of Lords, Viscount Cross subsequently referred to his
resignation in the following terms. He said: “A vacancy on the Council
had unfortunately occurred through the resignation from ill-health of
Sir Henry Yule, whose presence on the Council had been of enormous
advantage to the natives of the country. A man of more kindly
disposition, thorough intelligence, high-minded, upright, honourable
character, he believed did not exist; and he would like to bear
testimony to the estimation in which he was held, and to the services
which he had rendered in the office he had so long filled.”[73]

This year the Hakluyt Society published the concluding volume of Yule’s
last work of importance, the _Diary of Sir William Hedges_. He had for
several years been collecting materials for a full memoir of his great
predecessor in the domain of historical geography, the illustrious
Rennell.[74] This work was well advanced as to preliminaries, but was
not sufficiently developed for early publication at the time of Yule’s
death, and ere it could be completed its place had been taken by a
later enterprise.

During the summer of 1889, Yule occupied much of his leisure by
collecting and revising for re-issue many of his miscellaneous
writings. Although not able to do much at a time, this desultory work
kept him occupied and interested, and gave him much pleasure during
many months. It was, however, never completed. Yule went to the seaside
for a few weeks in the early summer, and subsequently many pleasant
days were spent by him among the Surrey hills, as the guest of his old
friends Sir Joseph and Lady Hooker. Of their constant and unwearied
kindness, he always spoke with most affectionate gratitude. That
autumn he took a great dislike to the English climate; he hankered
after sunshine, and formed many plans, eager though indefinite, for
wintering at Cintra, a place whose perfect beauty had fascinated him
in early youth. But increasing weakness made a journey to Portugal,
or even the South of France, an alternative of which he also spoke,
very inexpedient, if not absolutely impracticable. Moreover, he
would certainly have missed abroad the many friends and multifarious
interests which still surrounded him at home. He continued to take
drives, and occasionally called on friends, up to the end of November,
and it was not until the middle of December that increasing weakness
obliged him to take to his bed. He was still, however, able to enjoy
seeing his friends—some to the very end, and he had a constant stream
of visitors, mostly old friends, but also a few newer ones, who were
scarcely less welcome. He also kept up his correspondence to the last,
three attached brother R.E.’s, General Collinson, General Maclagan, and
Major W. Broadfoot, taking it in turn with the present writer to act as
his amanuensis.

On Friday, 27th December, Yule received a telegram from Paris,
announcing his nomination that day as Corresponding Member of the
Institute of France (Académie des Inscriptions), one of the few
distinctions of any kind of which it can still be said that it has at
no time lost any of its exalted dignity.

An honour of a different kind that came about the same time, and was
scarcely less prized by him, was a very beautiful letter of farewell
and benediction from Miss Florence Nightingale,[75] which he kept
under his pillow and read many times. On the 28th, he dictated to the
present writer his acknowledgment, also by telegraph, of the great
honour done him by the Institute. The message was in the following
words: “Reddo gratias, Illustrissimi Domini, ob honores tanto nimios
quanto immeritos! Mihi robora deficiunt, vita collabitur, accipiatis
voluntatem pro facto. Cum corde pleno et gratissimo moriturus vos,
Illustrissimi Domini, saluto. YULE.”

Sunday, 29th December, was a day of the most dense black fog, and he
felt its oppression, but was much cheered by a visit from his ever
faithful friend, Collinson, who, with his usual unselfishness, came to
him that day at very great personal inconvenience.

On Monday, 30th December, the day was clearer, and Henry Yule awoke
much refreshed, and in a peculiarly happy and even cheerful frame
of mind. He said he felt so comfortable. He spoke of his intended
book, and bade his daughter write about the inevitable delay to his
publisher: “Go and write to John Murray,” were indeed his last words to
her. During the morning he saw some friends and relations, but as noon
approached his strength flagged, and after a period of unconsciousness,
he passed peacefully away in the presence of his daughter and of an
old friend, who had come from Edinburgh to see him, but arrived too
late for recognition. Almost at the same time that Yule fell asleep,
his “stately message,”[76] was being read under the great Dome in
Paris. Some two hours after Yule had passed away, F.-M. Lord Napier
of Magdala, called on an errand of friendship, and at his desire
was admitted to see the last of his early friend. When Lord Napier
came out, he said to the present writer, in his own reflective way:
“He looks as if he had just settled to some great work.” With these
suggestive words of the great soldier, who was so soon, alas, to follow
his old friend to the work of another world, this sketch may fitly
close.

• • • • •

The following excellent verses (of unknown authorship) on Yule’s death,
subsequently appeared in the _Academy_:[77]

“‘Moriturus vos saluto’
Breathes his last the dying scholar—
Tireless student, brilliant writer;
He ‘salutes his age’ and journeys
To the Undiscovered Country.
There await him with warm welcome
All the heroes of old Story—
The Venetians, the Cà Polo,
Marco, Nicolo, Maffeo,
Odoric of Pordenone,
Ibn Batuta, Marignolli,
Benedict de Goës—‘Seeking
Lost Cathay and finding Heaven.’
Many more whose lives he cherished
With the piety of learning;
Fading records, buried pages,
Failing lights and fires forgotten,
By his energy recovered,
By his eloquence re-kindled.
‘Moriturus vos saluto’
Breathes his last the dying scholar,
And the far off ages answer:
_Immortales te salutant_. D. M.”

The same idea had been previously embodied, in very felicitous
language, by the late General Sir William Lockhart, in a letter which
that noble soldier addressed to the present writer a few days after
Yule’s death. And Yule himself would have taken pleasure in the idea of
those meetings with his old travellers, which seemed so certain to his
surviving friends.[78]

He rests in the old cemetery at Tunbridge Wells, with his second wife,
as he had directed. A great gathering of friends attended the first
part of the burial service which was held in London on 3rd January,
1890. Amongst those present were witnesses of every stage of his
career, from his boyish days at the High School of Edinburgh downwards.
His daughter, of course, was there, led by the faithful, peerless
friend who was so soon to follow him into the Undiscovered Country.[79]
She and his youngest nephew, with two cousins and a few old friends,
followed his remains over the snow to the graveside. The epitaph
subsequently inscribed on the tomb was penned by Yule himself, but is
by no means representative of his powers in a kind of composition in
which he had so often excelled in the service of others. As a composer
of epitaphs and other monumental inscriptions few of our time have
surpassed, if any have equalled him, in his best efforts.

SIR GEORGE UDNY YULE, C.B., K.C.S.I.[80]

George Udny Yule, born at Inveresk in 1813, passed through Haileybury
into the Bengal Civil Service, which he entered at the age of 18 years.
For twenty-five years his work lay in Eastern Bengal. He gradually
became known to the Government for his activity and good sense, but
won a far wider reputation as a mighty hunter, alike with hog-spear
and double barrel. By 1856 the roll of his slain tigers exceeded four
hundred, some of them of special fame; after that he continued slaying
his tigers, but ceased to count them. For some years he and a few
friends used annually to visit the plains of the Brahmaputra, near the
Garrow Hills—an entirely virgin country then, and swarming with large
game. Yule used to describe his once seeing seven rhinoceroses at once
on the great plain, besides herds of wild buffalo and deer of several
kinds. One of the party started the theory that Noah’s Ark had been
shipwrecked there! In those days George Yule was the only man to whom
the Maharajah of Nepaul, Sir Jung Bahadur, conceded leave to shoot
within his frontier.

Yule was first called from his useful obscurity in 1856. The year
before, the Sonthals in insurrection disturbed the long unbroken
peace of the Delta. These were a numerous non-Aryan, uncivilised,
but industrious race, driven wild by local mismanagement, and the
oppressions of Hindoo usurers acting through the regulation courts.
After the suppression of their rising, Yule was selected by Sir F.
Halliday, who knew his man, to be Commissioner of the Bhagulpoor
Division, containing some six million souls, and embracing the hill
country of the Sonthals. He obtained sanction to a code for the latter,
which removed these people entirely from the Court system, and its
tribe of leeches, and abolished all intermediaries between the Sahib
and the Sonthal peasant. Through these measures, and his personal
influence, aided by picked assistants, he was able to effect, with
extraordinary rapidity, not only their entire pacification, but such
a beneficial change in their material condition, that they have risen
from a state of barbarous penury to comparative prosperity and comfort.

George Yule was thus engaged when the Mutiny broke out, and it soon
made itself felt in the districts under him. To its suppression within
his limits, he addressed himself with characteristic vigour. Thoroughly
trusted by every class—by his Government, by those under him, by
planters and by Zemindars—he organised a little force, comprising a
small detachment of the 5th Regiment, a party of British sailors,
mounted volunteers from the districts, etc., and of this he became
practically the captain. Elephants were collected from all quarters to
spare the legs of his infantry and sailors; while dog-carts were turned
into limbers for the small three-pounders of the seamen. And with this
little army George Yule scoured the Trans-Gangetic districts, leading
it against bodies of the Mutineers, routing them upon more than one
occasion, and out-manœuvring them by his astonishing marches, till
he succeeded in driving them across the Nepaul frontier. No part of
Bengal was at any time in such danger, and nowhere was the danger more
speedily and completely averted.

After this Yule served for two or three years as Chief Commissioner
of Oudh, where in 1862 he married Miss Pemberton, the daughter of a
very able father, and the niece of Sir Donald MacLeod, of honoured
and beloved memory. Then for four or five years he was Resident at
Hyderabad, where he won the enduring friendship of Sir Salar Jung.
“Everywhere he showed the same characteristic firm but benignant
justice. Everywhere he gained the lasting attachment of all with whom
he had intimate dealings—except tigers and scoundrels.”

Many years later, indignant at the then apparently supine attitude
of the British Government in the matter of the Abyssinian captives,
George Yule wrote a letter (necessarily published without his name,
as he was then on the Governor-General’s Council), to the editor of
an influential Indian paper, proposing a private expedition should
be organised for their delivery from King Theodore, and inviting the
editor (Dr. George Smith) to open a list of subscriptions in his paper
for this purpose, to which Yule offered to contribute £2000 by way of
beginning. Although impracticable in itself, it is probable that, as in
other cases, the existence of such a project may have helped to force
the Government into action. The particulars of the above incident were
printed by Dr. Smith in his _Memoir of the Rev. John Wilson_, but are
given here from memory.

From Hyderabad he was promoted in 1867 to the Governor-General’s
Council, but his health broke down under the sedentary life, and he
retired and came home in 1869.

After some years of country life in Scotland, where he bought a small
property, he settled near his brother in London, where he was a
principal instrument in enabling Sir George Birdwood to establish the
celebration of Primrose Day (for he also was “one of Mr. Gladstone’s
converts”). Sir George Yule never sought ‘London Society’ or public
employment, but in 1877 he was offered and refused the post of
Financial Adviser to the Khedive under the Dual control. When his
feelings were stirred he made useful contributions to the public press,
which, after his escape from official trammels, were always signed.
The very last of these (_St. James Gazette_, 24th February 1885) was
a spirited protest against the snub administered by the late Lord
Derby, as Secretary of State, to the Colonies, when they had generously
offered assistance in the Soudan campaign. He lived a quiet, happy, and
useful life in London, where he was the friend and unwearied helper of
all who needed help. He found his chief interests in books and flowers,
and in giving others pleasure. Of rare unselfishness and sweet nature,
single in mind and motive, fearing God and knowing no other fear, he
was regarded by a large number of people with admiring affection. He
met his death by a fall on the frosty pavement at his door, in the very
act of doing a kindness. An interesting sketch of Sir George Yule’s
Indian career, by one who knew him thoroughly, is to be found in Sir
Edward Braddon’s _Thirty Years of Shikar_. An account of his share in
the origin of Primrose Day appeared in the _St. James’ Gazette_ during
1891.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] There is a vague tradition that these Yules descend from the same
stock as the Scandinavian family of the same name, which gave
Denmark several men of note, including the great naval hero Niels
Juel. The portraits of these old Danes offer a certain resemblance
of type to those of their Scots namesakes, and Henry Yule liked
to play with the idea, much in the same way that he took humorous
pleasure in his reputed descent from Michael Scott, the Wizard!
(This tradition was more historical, however, and stood thus:
Yule’s great grandmother was a Scott of Ancrum, and the Scotts of
Ancrum had established their descent from Sir Michael Scott of
Balwearie, reputed to be the Wizard.) Be their origin what it may,
Yule’s forefathers had been already settled on the Border hills
for many generations, when in the time of James VI. they migrated
to the lower lands of East Lothian, where in the following reign
they held the old fortalice of Fentoun Tower of Nisbet of Dirleton.
When Charles II. empowered his Lord Lyon to issue certificates of
arms (in place of the Lyon records removed and lost at sea by the
Cromwellian Government), these Yules were among those who took out
confirmation of arms, and the original document is still in the
possession of the head of the family.

Though Yules of sorts are still to be found in Scotland, the
present writer is the only member of the Fentoun Tower family now
left in the country, and of the few remaining out of it most are to
be found in the Army List.

[2] The literary taste which marked William Yule probably came to him
from his grandfather, the Rev. James Rose, Episcopal Minister of
Udny, in Aberdeenshire. James Rose, a non-jurant (_i.e._ one who
refused to acknowledge allegiance to the Hanoverian King), was
a man of devout, large, and tolerant mind, as shown by writings
still extant. His father, John Rose, was the younger son of the
14th Hugh of Kilravock. He married Margaret Udny of Udny, and
was induced by her to sell his pleasant Ross-shire property
and invest the proceeds in her own bleak Buchan. When George
Yule (about 1759) brought home Elizabeth Rose as his wife, the
popular feeling against the Episcopal Church was so strong and
bitter in Lothian, that all the men of the family—themselves
Presbyterians—accompanied Mrs. Yule as a bodyguard on the occasion
of her first attendance at the Episcopal place of worship. Years
after, when dissensions had arisen in the Church of Scotland,
Elizabeth Yule succoured and protected some of the dissident
Presbyterian ministers from their persecutors.

[3] General Collinson in _Royal Engineers’ Journal_, 1st Feb. 1890. The
gifted author of this excellent sketch himself passed away on 22nd
April 1902.

[4] The grave thoughtful face of William Yule was conspicuous in the
picture of a Durbar (by an Italian artist, but _not_ Zoffany),
which long hung on the walls of the Nawab’s palace at Lucknow. This
picture disappeared during the Mutiny of 1857.

[5] Colonel Udny Yule, C.B. “When he joined, his usual _nomen_ and
_cognomen_ puzzled the staff-sergeant at Fort-William, and after
much boggling on the cadet parade, the name was called out _Whirly
Wheel_, which produced no reply, till some one at a venture
shouted, ‘sick in hospital.’” (_Athenæum_, 24th Sept. 1881.) The
ship which took Udny Yule to India was burnt at sea. After keeping
himself afloat for several hours in the water, he was rescued by a
passing ship and taken back to the Mauritius, whence, having lost
everything but his cadetship, he made a fresh start for India,
where he and William for many years had a common purse. Colonel
Udny Yule commanded a brigade at the Siege of Cornelis (1811),
which gave us Java, and afterwards acted as Resident under Sir
Stamford Raffles. Forty-five years after the retrocession of Java,
Henry Yule found the memory of his uncle still cherished there.

[6] Article on the Oriental Section of the British Museum Library in
_Athenæum_, 24th Sept. 1881. Major Yule’s Oriental Library was
presented by his sons to the British Museum a few years after his
death.

[7] It may be amusing to note that he was considered an almost
dangerous person because he read the _Scotsman_ newspaper!

[8] _Athenæum_, 24th Sept. 1881. A gold chain given by the last
Dauphiness is in the writer’s possession.

[9] Dr. John Yule (b. 176–, d. 1827), a kindly old _savant_. He was one
of the earliest corresponding members of the Society of Antiquaries
of Scotland, and the author of some botanical tracts.

[10] According to Brunet, by Lucas Pennis after Antonio Tempesta.

[11] _Concerning some little-known Travellers in the East_. ASIATIC
QUARTERLY, vol. v. (1888).

[12] William Yule died in 1839, and rests with his parents, brothers,
and many others of his kindred, in the ruined chancel of the
ancient Norman Church of St. Andrew, at Gulane, which had been
granted to the Yule family as a place of burial by the Nisbets
of Dirleton, in remembrance of the old kindly feeling subsisting
for generations between them and their tacksmen in Fentoun
Tower. Though few know its history, a fragrant memorial of this
wise and kindly scholar is still conspicuous in Edinburgh. The
magnificent wall-flower that has, for seventy summers, been a
glory of the Castle rock, was originally all sown by the patient
hand of Major Yule, the self-sowing of each subsequent year, of
course, increasing the extent of bloom. Lest the extraordinarily
severe spring of 1895 should have killed off much of the old
stock, another (but much more limited) sowing on the northern
face of the rock was in that year made by his grand-daughter, the
present writer, with the sanction and active personal help of
the lamented General (then Colonel) Andrew Wauchope of Niddrie
Marischal. In Scotland, where the memory of this noble soldier is
so greatly revered, some may like to know this little fact. May the
wall-flower of the Castle rock long flourish a fragrant memorial of
two faithful soldiers and true-hearted Scots.

[13] Obituary notice of Yule, by Gen. R. Maclagan, R.E. _Proceedings,
R. G. S._ 1890.

[14] This was the famous “Grey Dinner,” of which The Shepherd made grim
fun in the _Noctes_.

[15] Probably the specimen from South America, of which an account was
published in 1833.

[16] Rawnsley, _Memoir of Harvey Goodwin, Bishop of Carlisle_.

[17] Biog. Sketch of Yule, by C. Trotter, _Proceedings, R.S.E._ vol.
xvii.

[18] Biog. Sketch of Yule, by C. Trotter, _Proceedings, R.S.E._ vol.
xvii.

[19] After leaving the army, Yule always used this sword when wearing
uniform.

[20] The Engineer cadets remained at Addiscombe a term (= 6 months)
longer than the Artillery cadets, and as the latter were ordinarily
gazetted full lieutenants six months after passing out, unfair
seniority was obviated by the Engineers receiving the same rank on
passing out of Addiscombe.

[21] Yule, in _Memoir of General Becher_.

[22] Collinson’s _Memoir of Yule_ in _R. E. Journal_.

[23] The picture was subscribed for by his brother officers in the
corps, and painted in 1880 by T. B. Wirgman. It was exhibited at
the Royal Academy in 1881. A reproduction of the artist’s etching
from it forms the frontispiece of this volume.

[24] In _Memoir of Gen. John Becher_.

[25] General Patrick Yule (b. 1795, d. 1873) was a thorough soldier,
with the repute of being a rigid disciplinarian. He was a man of
distinguished presence, and great charm of manner to those whom he
liked, which were by no means all. The present writer holds him in
affectionate remembrance, and owes to early correspondence with
him much of the information embodied in preceding notes. He served
on the Canadian Boundary Commission of 1817, and on the Commission
of National Defence of 1859, was prominent in the Ordnance Survey,
and successively Commanding R.E. in Malta and Scotland. He was
Engineer to Sir C. Fellows’ Expedition, which gave the nation the
Lycian Marbles, and while Commanding R.E. in Edinburgh, was largely
instrumental in rescuing St. Margaret’s Chapel in the Castle
from desecration and oblivion. He was a thorough Scot, and never
willingly tolerated the designation N.B. on even a letter. He had
cultivated tastes, and under a somewhat austere exterior he had a
most tender heart. When already past sixty, he made a singularly
happy marriage to a truly good woman, who thoroughly appreciated
him. He was the author of several Memoirs on professional subjects.
He rests in St. Andrew’s, Gulane.

[26] Collinson’s _Memoir of Yule_.

[27] Notes on the Iron of the Khasia Hills and Notes on the Khasia
Hills and People, both in Journal of the R. Asiatic Society of
Bengal, vols. xi. and xiii.

[28] Mr. (afterwards Sir) George Clerk, Political Officer with the
expedition. Was twice Governor of Bombay and once Governor of
the Cape: “A diplomatist of the true English stamp—undaunted in
difficulties and resolute to maintain the honour of his country.”
(Sir H. B. Edwardes, _Life of Henry Lawrence_, i. 267). He died in
1889.

[29] Note by Yule, communicated by him to Mr. R. B. Smith and printed
by the latter in _Life of Lord Lawrence_.

[30] And when nearing his own end, it was to her that his thoughts
turned most constantly.

[31] Yule and Maclagan’s _Memoir of Sir W. Baker_.

[32] Maclagan’s _Memoir of Yule, P.R.G.S._, Feb. 1890.

[33] On hearing this, Yule said to him, “Your story is quite correct
except in one particular; you understated the _amount_ of the fine.”

[34] Yule and Maclagan’s _Memoir of Baker_.

[35] It would appear that Major Yule had presented the Rodgers with
some specimens of Indian scissors, probably as suggestions in
developing that field of export. Scissors of elaborate design,
usually damascened or gilt, used to form a most important item in
every set of Oriental writing implements. Even long after adhesive
envelopes had become common in European Turkey, their use was
considered over familiar, if not actually disrespectful, for formal
letters, and there was a particular traditional knack in cutting
and folding the special envelope for each missive, which was
included in the instruction given by every competent _Khoja_ as the
present writer well remembers in the quiet years that ended with
the disasters of 1877.

[36] Collinson’s _Memoir of Yule, Royal Engineer Journal_.

[37] Extract from Preface to _Ava_, edition of 1858.

[38] The present whereabouts of this picture is unknown to the writer.
It was lent to Yule in 1889 by Lord Dalhousie’s surviving daughter
(for whom he had strong regard and much sympathy), and was returned
to her early in 1890, but is not named in the catalogue of Lady
Susan’s effects, sold at Edinburgh in 1898 after her death. At
that sale the present writer had the satisfaction of securing for
reverent preservation the watch used throughout his career by the
great Marquess.

[39] Now in the writer’s possession. It was for many years on
exhibition in the Edinburgh and South Kensington Museums.

[40] Article by Yule on Lord Lawrence, _Quarterly Review_ for April,
1883.

[41] Messrs. Smith & Elder.

[42] Preface to _Narrative of a Mission to the Court of Ava_. Before
these words were written, Yule had had the sorrow of losing his
elder brother Robert, who had fallen in action before Delhi (19th
June, 1857), whilst in command of his regiment, the 9th Lancers.
Robert Abercromby Yule (born 1817) was a very noble character and
a fine soldier. He had served with distinction in the campaigns in
Afghanistan and the Sikh Wars, and was the author of an excellent
brief treatise on Cavalry Tactics. He had a ready pencil and
a happy turn for graceful verse. In prose his charming little
allegorical tale for children, entitled _The White Rhododendron_,
is as pure and graceful as the flower whose name it bears. Like
both his brothers, he was at once chivalrous and devout, modest,
impulsive, and impetuous. No officer was more beloved by his men
than Robert Yule, and when some one met them carrying back his
covered body from the field and enquired of the sergeant: “Who
have you got there?” the reply was: “Colonel Yule, and better have
lost half the regiment, sir.” It was in the chivalrous effort to
extricate some exposed guns that he fell. Some one told afterwards
that when asked to go to the rescue, he turned in the saddle,
looked back wistfully on his regiment, well knowing the cost of
such an enterprise, then gave the order to advance and charge. “No
stone marks the spot where Yule went down, but no stone is needed
to commemorate his valour” (Archibald Forbes, in _Daily News_,
8th Feb. 1876). At the time of his death Colonel R. A. Yule had
been recommended for the C.B. His eldest son, Colonel J. H. Yule,
C.B., distinguished himself in several recent campaigns (on the
Burma-Chinese frontier, in Tirah, and South Africa).

[43] Baker went home in November, 1857, but did not retire until the
following year.

[44] Nothing was more worthy of respect in Yule’s fine character
than the energy and success with which he mastered his natural
temperament in the last ten years of his life, when few would have
guessed his original fiery disposition.

[45] Not without cause did Sir J. P. Grant officially record that “to
his imperturbable temper the Government of India owed much.”

[46] Yule’s colour-blindness was one of the cases in which Dalton,
the original investigator of this optical defect, took special
interest. At a later date (1859) he sent Yule, through Professor
Wilson, skeins of coloured silks to name. Yule’s elder brother
Robert had the same peculiarity of sight, and it was also present
in two earlier and two later generations of their mother’s
family—making five generations in all. But in no case did it pass
from parent to child, always passing in these examples, by a sort
of Knight’s move, from uncle to nephew. Another peculiarity of
Yule’s more difficult to describe was the instinctive association
of certain architectural forms or images with the days of the
week. He once, and once only (in 1843), met another person, a
lady who was a perfect stranger, with the same peculiarity. About
1878–79 he contributed some notes on this obscure subject to
one of the newspapers, in connection with the researches of Mr.
Francis Galton, on Visualisation, but the particulars are not now
accessible.

[47] From Yule’s verses on her grave.

[48] Lord Canning to Lady Clanricarde: Letter dated Barrackpoor, 19th
Nov. 1861, 7 A.M., printed in _Two Noble Lives_, by A. J. C. Hare,
and here reproduced by Mr. Hare’s permission.

[49] Lord Canning’s letter to Lady Clanricarde. He gave to Yule Lady
Canning’s own silver drinking-cup, which she had constantly used.
It is carefully treasured, with other Canning and Dalhousie relics,
by the present writer.

[50] Many years later Yule wrote of Lord Canning as follows: “He had
his defects, no doubt. He had not at first that entire grasp of
the situation that was wanted at such a time of crisis. But there
is a virtue which in these days seems unknown to Parliamentary
statesmen in England—Magnanimity. Lord Canning was an English
statesman, and he was surpassingly magnanimous. There is another
virtue which in Holy Writ is taken as the type and sum of all
righteousness—Justice—and he was eminently just. The misuse
of special powers granted early in the Mutiny called for Lord
Canning’s interference, and the consequence was a flood of savage
abuse; the violence and bitterness of which it is now hard to
realise.” (_Quarterly Review_, April, 1883, p. 306.)

[51] During the next ten years Yule continued to visit London annually
for two or three months in the spring or early summer.

[52] Now in the writer’s possession. They appear in the well-known
portrait of Lord Canning reading a despatch.

[53] Lord Canning’s recommendation had been mislaid, and the India
Office was disposed to ignore it. It was Lord Canning’s old friend
and Eton chum, Lord Granville, who obtained this tardy justice for
Yule, instigated thereto by that most faithful friend, Sir Roderick
Murchison.

[54] I cannot let the mention of this time of lonely sickness and
trial pass without recording here my deep gratitude to our dear
and honoured friend, John Ruskin. As my dear mother stood on the
threshold between life and death at Mornex that sad spring, he
was untiring in all kindly offices of friendship. It was her old
friend, Principal A. J. Scott (then eminent, now forgotten), who
sent him to call. He came to see us daily when possible, sometimes
bringing MSS. of Rossetti and others to read aloud (and who could
equal his reading?), and when she was too ill for this, or himself
absent, he would send not only books and flowers to brighten the
bare rooms of the hillside inn (then very primitive), but his own
best treasures of Turner and W. Hunt, drawings and illuminated
missals. It was an anxious solace; and though most gratefully
enjoyed, these treasures were never long retained.

[55] Villa Mansi, nearly opposite the old Ducal Palace. With its
private chapel, it formed three sides of a small _place_ or court.

[56] He also at all times spared no pains to enforce that ideal on
other index-makers, who were not always grateful for his sound
doctrine!

[57] He saw a good deal of the outbreak when taking small comforts to a
friend, the Commandant of the Military School, who was captured and
imprisoned by the insurgents.

[58] After 1869 he discontinued sea-bathing.

[59] This was Yule’s first geographical honour, but he had been elected
into the Athenæum Club, under “Rule II.,” in January, 1867.

[60] Garnier took a distinguished part in the Defence of Paris in
1870–71, after which he resumed his naval service in the East,
where he was killed in action. His last letter to Yule contained
the simple announcement “_J’ai pris Hanoï_” a modest terseness of
statement worthy of the best naval traditions.

[61] One year the present writer, at her mother’s desire, induced him
to take walks of 10 to 12 miles with her, but interesting and
lovely as the scenery was, he soon wearied for his writing-table
(even bringing his work with him), and thus little permanent good
was effected. And it was just the same afterwards in Scotland,
where an old Highland gillie, describing his experience of the Yule
brothers, said: “I was liking to take out Sir George, for _he_
takes the time to enjoy the hills, but (plaintively), the Kornel is
no good, for he’s just as restless as a water-wagtail!” If there
be any _mal de l’écritoire_ corresponding to _mal du pays_, Yule
certainly had it.

[62] The Russian Government in 1873 paid the same work the very
practical compliment of circulating it largely amongst their
officers in Central Asia.

[63] “Auch in den Literaturen von Frankreich, Italien, Deutschland und
andere Ländern ist der mächtig treibende Einfluss der Yuleschen
Methode, welche wissenschaftliche Grundlichkeit mit anmuthender
Form verbindet, bemerkbar.” (_Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für
Erdkunde zu Berlin_, Band XVII. No. 2.)

[64] This subject is too lengthy for more than cursory allusion here,
but the patient analytic skill and keen venatic instinct with
which Yule not only proved the forgery of the alleged _Travels of
Georg Ludwig von ——_ (that had been already established by Lord
Strangford, whose last effort it was, and Sir Henry Rawlinson),
but step by step traced it home to the arch-culprit Klaproth, was
nothing less than masterly.

[65] This is probably the origin of the odd misstatement as to Yule
occupying himself at Palermo with photography, made in the
delightful _Reminiscences_ of the late Colonel Balcarres Ramsay.
Yule never attempted photography after 1852.

[66] She was a woman of fine intellect and wide reading; a skilful
musician, who also sang well, and a good amateur artist in the
style of Aug. Delacroix (of whom she was a favourite pupil). Of
French and Italian she had a thorough and literary mastery, and
how well she knew her own language is shown by the sound and pure
English of a story she published in early life, under the pseudonym
of Max Lyle (_Fair Oaks, or The Experiences of Arnold Osborne,
M.D._, 2 vols., 1856). My mother was partly of Highland descent on
both sides, and many of her fine qualities were very characteristic
of that race. Before her marriage she took an active part in many
good works, and herself originated the useful School for the Blind
at Bath, in a room which she hired with her pocket-money, where she
and her friend Miss Elwin taught such of the blind poor as they
could gather together.

In the tablet which he erected to her memory in the family
burial-place of St. Andrew’s, Gulane, her husband described her
thus:—“A woman singular in endowments, in suffering, and in faith;
to whom to live was Christ, to die was gain.”

[67] Mary Wilhelmina, daughter of F. Skipwith, Esq., B.C.S.

[68] Collinson’s _Memoir of Yule_.

[69] See _Notes from a Diary_, 1888–91.

[70] The identification was not limited to Yule, for when travelling
in Russia many years ago, the present writer was introduced by an
absent-minded Russian _savant_ to his colleagues as _Mademoiselle
Marco Paulovna_!

[71] See Note on Sir George Yule’s career at the end of this Memoir.

[72] Addressed to the Editor, _Royal Engineers’ Journal_, who did not,
however, publish it.

[73] Debate of 27th August, 1889, as reported in _The Times_ of 28th
August.

[74] Yule had published a brief but very interesting Memoir of Major
Rennell in the _R. E. Journal_ in 1881. He was extremely proud of
the circumstance that Rennell’s surviving grand-daughter presented
to him a beautiful wax medallion portrait of the great geographer.
This wonderfully life-like presentment was bequeathed by Yule to
his friend Sir Joseph Hooker, who presented it to the Royal Society.

[75] Knowing his veneration for that noble lady, I had written to tell
her of his condition, and to ask her to give him this last pleasure
of a few words. The response was such as few but herself could
write. This letter was not to be found after my father’s death,
and I can only conjecture that it must either have been given away
by himself (which is most improbable), or was appropriated by some
unauthorised outsider.

[76] So Sir M. E. Grant Duff well calls it.

[77] _Academy_, 19th March, 1890.

[78] He was much pleased, I remember, by a letter he once received from
a kindly Franciscan friar, who wrote: “You may rest assured that
the Beato Odorico will not forget all you have done for him.”

[79] F.-M. Lord Napier of Magdala, died 14th January, 1890.

[80] This notice includes the greater part of an article written by my
father, and published in the _St. James’ Gazette_ of 18th January,
1886, but I have added other details from personal recollection and
other sources.—A. F. Y.

A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SIR HENRY YULE’S WRITINGS

COMPILED BY H. CORDIER AND A. F. YULE[1]

1842 Notes on the Iron of the Kasia Hills. (_Jour. Asiatic Soc.
Bengal_, XI. Part II. July–Dec. 1842, pp. 853–857.)

Reprinted in _Proceedings of the Museum of Economic Geology_, 1852.

1844 Notes on the Kasia Hills and People. By Lieut. H. Yule. (_Jour.
Asiatic Soc. Bengal_, XII. Part II. July–Dec. 1844, pp. 612–631.)

1846 A Canal Act of the Emperor Akbar, with some notes and remarks on
the History of the Western Jumna Canals. By Lieut. Yule. (_Jour.
Asiatic Society Bengal_, XV. 1846, pp. 213–223.)

1850 The African Squadron vindicated. By Lieut. H. Yule. Second
Edition. London, J. Ridgway, 1850, 8vo, pp. 41.

Had several editions. Reprinted in the Colonial Magazine of March,
1850.

——— L’Escadre Africaine vengée. Par le lieutenant H. Yule. Traduit du
_Colonial Magazine_ de Mars, 1850. (_Revue Coloniale_, Mai, 1850.)

1851 Fortification for Officers of the Army and Students of Military
History, with Illustrations and Notes. By Lieut. H. Yule,
Blackwood, MDCCCLI. 8vo, pp. xxii.–210. (There had been a previous
edition privately printed.)

——— La Fortification mise à la portée des Officiers de l’Armée et des
personnes qui se livrent à l’étude de l’histoire militaire (avec
Atlas). Par H. Yule. Traduit de l’Anglais par M. Sapia, Chef de
Bataillon d’Artillerie de Marine et M. Masselin, Capitaine du
Génie. Paris, J. Corréard, 1858, 8vo, pp. iii.–263, and Atlas.

1851 The Loss of the _Birkenhead_ (Verses). (_Edinburgh Courant_, Dec.
1851.)

Republished in Henley’s _Lyra Heroica_, a Book of Verse for Boys.
London, D. Nutt, 1890.

1852 Tibet. (_Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine_, 1852.)

1856 Narrative of Major Phayre’s Mission to the Court of Ava, with
Notices of the Country, Government, and People. Compiled by Capt.
H. Yule. Printed for submission to the Government of India.
Calcutta, J. Thomas, ... 1856, 4to, pp. xxix. + 1 f. n. ch. p. l.
er. + pp. 315 + pp. cxiv. + pp. iv. and pp. 70.

The last pp. iv.–70 contain: Notes on the Geological features of
the banks of the River Irawadee and on the Country north of the
Amarapoora, by Thomas Oldham ... Calcutta, 1856.

——— A Narrative of the Mission sent by the Governor-General of India
to the Court of Ava in 1855, with Notices of the Country,
Government, and People. By Capt. H. Yule. With Numerous
Illustrations. London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1858, 4to.

1857 On the Geography of Burma and its Tributary States, in
illustration of a New Map of those Regions. (_Journal, R.G.S._,
XXVII. 1857, pp. 54–108.)

——— Notes on the Geography of Burma, in illustration of a Map of that
Country. (_Proceedings R.G.S._, vol. i. 1857, pp. 269–273.)

1857 An Account of the Ancient Buddhist Remains at Pagân on the
Iráwadi. By Capt. H. Yule. (_Jour. Asiatic Society, Bengal_, XXVI.
1857, pp. 1–51.)

1861 A few notes on Antiquities near Jubbulpoor. By Lieut.-Col. H.
Yule. (_Journal Asiatic Society, Bengal_, XXX. 1861, pp. 211–215.)

——— Memorandum on the Countries between Thibet, Yunân, and Burmah.
By the Very Rev. Thomine D’Mazure (_sic_), communicated by
Lieut.-Col. A. P. Phayre (with notes and a comment by Lieut.-Col.
H. Yule). With a Map of the N. E. Frontier, prepared in the Office
of the Surveyor-Gen. of India, Calcutta, Aug. 1861. (_Jour.
Asiatic Soc. Bengal_, XXX. 1861, pp. 367–383.)

1862 Notes of a brief Visit to some of the Indian Remains in Java. By
Lieut.-Col. H. Yule. (_Jour. Asiatic Society, Bengal_, XXXI. 1862,
pp. 16–31.)

——— Sketches of Java. A Lecture delivered at the Meeting of the
Bethune Society, Calcutta, 13th Feb. 1862.

——— Fragments of Unprofessional Papers gathered from an Engineer’s
portfolio after twenty-three years of service. Calcutta, 1862.

Ten copies printed for private circulation.

1863 _Mirabilia descripta_. The Wonders of the East. By Friar Jordanus,
of the Order of Preachers and Bishop of Columbum in India the
Greater (_circa_ 1330). Translated from the Latin original, as
published at Paris in 1839, in the _Recueil de Voyages et de
Mémoires_, of the Society of Geography, with the addition of a
Commentary, by Col. H. Yule, London.

Printed for the Hakluyt Society, M.DCCC.LXIII, 8vo, p.
iv.–xvii.–68.

——— Report on the Passes between Arakan and Burma [written in 1853].
(_Papers on Indian Civil Engineering_, vol. i. Roorkee.)

1866 Notices of Cathay. (_Proceedings, R.G.S._, X. 1866, pp. 270–278.)

——— Cathay and the Way Thither, being a Collection of Mediæval
Notices of China. Translated and Edited by Col. H. Yule. With a
Preliminary Essay on the Intercourse between China and the Western
Nations previous to the Discovery of the Cape route. London,
printed for the Hakluyt Society. M.DCCC.LXVI. 2 vols. 8vo.

1866 The Insurrection at Palermo. (_Times_, 29th Sep., 1866.)

——— Lake People. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2042, 15th Dec. 1866, p. 804.)

Letter dated Palermo, 3rd Dec. 1866.

1867 General Index to the third ten Volumes of the Journal of the Royal
Geographical Society. Compiled by Col. H. Yule. London, John
Murray, M.DCCCLXVII, 8vo, pp. 228.

——— A Week’s Republic at Palermo. (_Quarterly Review_, Jan. 1867.)

——— On the Cultivation of Sumach (_Rhus coriaria_), in the Vicinity of
Colli, near Palermo. By Prof. Inzenga. Translated by Col. H. Yule.
Communicated by Dr. Cleghorn. _From the Trans. Bot. Society_, vol.
ix., 1867–68, ppt. 8vo, p. 15.

Original first published in the _Annali di Agricoltura Siciliana,
redatti per l’Istituzione del Principe di Castelnuovo_. Palermo,
1852.

1868 Marco Polo and his Recent Editors. (_Quarterly Review_, vol. 125,
July and Oct. 1868, pp. 133 and 166.)

1870 An Endeavour to Elucidate Rashiduddin’s Geographical Notices of
India. (_Journal R. Asiatic Society_, N.S. iv. 1870, pp. 340–356.)

——— Some Account of the Senbyú Pagoda at Mengún, near the Burmese
Capital, in a Memorandum by Capt. E. H. Sladen, Political Agent at
Mandalé; with Remarks on the Subject, by Col. H. Yule. (_Ibid._
pp. 406–429.)

——— Notes on Analogies of Manners between the Indo-Chinese and the
Races of the Malay Archipelago. (_Report Fortieth Meeting British
Association, Liverpool_, Sept. 1870, p. 178.)

1871 The Book of Ser Marco Polo, the Venetian, Concerning the
Kingdoms and Marvels of the East. Newly translated and edited
with notes. By Col. H. Yule. In two volumes. With Maps and other
Illustrations. London, John Murray, 1871, 2 vols. 8vo.

——— The Book of Ser Marco Polo, the Venetian, concerning the Kingdoms
and Marvels of the East. Newly translated and edited, with Notes,
Maps, and other Illustrations. By Col. H. Yule. Second edition.
London, John Murray, 1875, 2 vols. 8vo.

1871 Address by Col. H. Yule (_Report Forty-First Meeting British
Association, Edinburgh_, Aug. 1871, pp. 162–174.)

1872 A Journey to the Source of the River Oxus. By Captain John Wood,
Indian Navy. New edition, edited by his Son. With an Essay on the
Geography of the Valley of the Oxus. By Col. H. Yule. With maps.
London, John Murray, 1872. In–8, pp. xc.–280.

——— Papers connected with the Upper Oxus Regions. (_Journal_, xlii.
1872, pp. 438–481.)

——— Letter [on Yule’s edition of Wood’s _Oxus_]. (_Ocean Highways_,
Feb. 1874, p. 475.)

Palermo, 9th Jan. 1874.

1873 Letter [about the route of M. Polo through Southern Kerman].
(_Ocean Highways_, March, 1873, p. 385.)

Palermo, 11th Jan. 1873.

——— On Northern Sumatra and especially Achin. (_Ocean Highways_, Aug.
1873, pp. 177–183.)

——— Notes on Hwen Thsang’s Account of the Principalities of
Tokharistan, in which some previous Geographical Identifications
are reconsidered. (_Jour. Royal Asiatic Society_, N.S. vi. 1873,
pp. 92–120 and p. 278.)

1874 Francis Garnier (In Memoriam). (_Ocean Highways_, pp. 487–491.)
March, 1874.

——— Remarks on Mr. Phillips’s Paper [_Notices of Southern Mangi_].
(_Journal_, XLIV. 1874, pp. 103–112.)

Palermo, 22nd Feb. 1874.

——— [Sir Frederic Goldsmid’s] “Telegraph and Travel.” (_Geographical
Magazine_, April, 1874, p. 34; Oct. 1874, pp. 300–303.)

——— Geographical Notes on the Basins of the Oxus and the Zarafshán. By
the late Alexis Fedchenko. (_Geog. Mag._, May, 1874, pp. 46–54.)

——— [Mr. Ashton Dilke on the Valley of the Ili.] (_Geog. Mag._, June,
1874, p. 123.) Palermo, 16th May, 1874.

——— The _Atlas Sinensis_ and other Sinensiana. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st
July, 1847, pp. 147–148.)

——— Letter [on Belasaghun]. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st July, 1874, p. 167;
_Ibid._ 1st Sept. 1874, p. 254.)

Palermo, 17th June, 1874; 8th Aug. 1874.

1874 Bala Sagun and Karakorum. By Eugene Schuyler. With note by Col.
Yule. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st Dec. 1874, p. 389.)

——— M. Khanikoff’s Identifications of Names in Clavijo. (_Ibid._ pp.
389–390.)

1875 Notes [to the translation by Eugene Schuyler of Palladius’s
version of _The Journey of the Chinese Traveller, Chang Fe-hui_].
(_Geog. Mag._, 1st Jan. 1875, pp. 7–11.)

——— Some Unscientific Notes on the History of Plants. (_Geog. Mag._,
1st Feb. 1875, pp. 49–51.)

——— Trade Routes to Western China. (_Geog. Mag._, April, 1875, pp.
97–101.)

——— Garden of Transmigrated Souls [Friar Odoric]. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st
May, 1875, pp. 137–138.)

——— A Glance at the Results of the Expedition to Hissar. By Herr P.
Lerch. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st Nov. 1875, pp. 334–339.)

——— Kathay or Cathay. (_Johnson’s American Cyclopædia_.)

——— Achín. (_Encycl. Brit._ 9th edition, 1875, I. pp. 95–97.)

——— Afghânistân. (_Ibid._ pp. 227–241.)

——— Andaman Islands. (_Ibid._ II. 1875, pp. 11–13.)

——— India [Ancient]. (Map No. 31, 1874, in _An Atlas of Ancient
Geography, edited by William Smith and George Grove_. London, John
Murray, 1875.)

1876 Mongolia, the Tangut Country, and the Solitudes of Northern Tibet,
being a Narrative of Three Years’ Travel in Eastern High Asia.
By Lieut.-Col. N. Prejevalsky, of the Russian Staff Corps; Mem.
of the Imp. Russ. Geog. Soc. Translated by E. Delmar Morgan,
F.R.G.S. With Introduction and Notes by Col. H. Yule. With Maps
and Illustrations. London, Sampson Low, 1876, 8vo.

——— _Tibet_ ... Edited by C. R. Markham. Notice of. (_Times_, 1876,
——?)

——— Eastern Persia. Letter. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2559, 11th Nov.
1876.)

——— Review of _H. Howorth’s History of the Mongols_, Part I. (_The
_Athenæum, No. 2560, 18th Nov. 1876, pp. 654–656.) Correspondence.
(_Ibid._ No. 2561, 25th Nov. 1876.)

——— Review of _T. E. Gordon’s Roof of the World_. (_The Academy_, 15th
July, 1876, pp. 49–50.)

1876 Cambodia. (_Encycl. Brit._ IV. 1876, pp. 723–726.)

1877 Champa. (_Geog. Mag._, 1st March, 1877, pp. 66–67.)

Article written for the _Encycl. Brit._ 9th edition, but omitted
for reasons which the writer did not clearly understand.

——— _Quid, si Mundus evolvatur?_ (_Spectator_, 24th March, 1877.)

Written in 1875.—Signed MARCUS PAULUS VENETUS.

——— On Louis de Backer’s _L’Extrême-Orient au Moyen-Age_. (_The
Athenæum_, No. 2598, 11th Aug. 1877, pp. 174–175.)

——— On P. Dabry de Thiersant’s _Catholicisme en Chine_. (_The
Athenæum_, No. 2599, 18th Aug. 1877, pp. 209–210.)

——— Review of _Thomas de Quincey, His Life and Writings. By H. A.
Page_. (_Times_, 27th Aug. 1877.)

——— Companions of Faust. Letter on the Claims of P. Castaldi.
(_Times_, Sept. 1877.)

1878 The late Col. T. G. Montgomerie, R.E. (Bengal). (_R. E. Journal_,
April, 1878.) 8vo, pp. 8.

——— Mr. Henry M. Stanley and the Royal Geographical Society; being
the Record of a Protest. By Col. H. Yule and H. M. Hyndman B.A.,
F.R.G.S. London: Bickers and Son, 1878, 8vo, pp. 48.

——— Review of _Burma, Past and Present; with Personal Reminiscences of
the Country_. By Lieut.-Gen. Albert Fytche. (_The Athenæum_, No.
2634, 20th April, 1878, pp. 499–500.)

——— Kayal. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2634, 20th April, 1878, p. 515.)

Letter dated April, 1878.

——— Missions in Southern India. (Letter to _Pall Mall Gazette_, 20th
June, 1878.)

——— Mr. Stanley and his Letters of 1875. (Letter to _Pall Mall
Gazette_, 30th Jan. 1878.)

——— Review of _Richthofen’s China_, Bd. I. (_The Academy_, 13th April,
1878, pp. 315–316.)

——— [A foreshadowing of the Phonograph.] (_The Athenæum_, No. 2636,
4th May, 1878.)

1879 A Memorial of the Life and Services of Maj.-Gen. W. W. H.
Greathed, C.B., Royal Engineers (Bengal), (1826–1878). Compiled
by a Friend and Brother Officer. London, printed for private
circulation, 1879, 8vo, pp. 57.

——— Review of _Gaur: its Ruins and Inscriptions_. By John Henry
Ravenshaw. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2672, 11th Jan. 1879, pp. 42–44.)

——— Wellington College. (Letter to _Pall Mall Gazette_, 14th April,
1879.)

——— Dr. Holub’s Travels. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2710, 4th Oct. 1879,
pp. 436–437.)

——— Letter to Comm. Berchet, dated 2nd Dec. 1878. (_Archivio Veneto_
XVII. 1879, pp. 360–362.)

Regarding some documents discovered by the Ab. Cav. V. Zanetti.

——— Gaur. (_Encyclop. Brit._ X. 1879, pp. 112–116.)

——— Ghazni. (_Ibid._ pp. 559–562.)

——— Gilgit. (_Ibid._ pp. 596–599.)

——— Singular Coincidences. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2719, 6th Dec. 1879.)

1880 [Brief Obituary Notice of] General W. C. Macleod. (_Pall Mall
Gazette_, 10th April, 1880.)

——— [Obituary Notice of] Gen. W. C. Macleod. (_Proc. R. Geog. Soc._,
June, 1880.)

——— An Ode in Brown Pig. Suggested by reading Mr. Lang’s _Ballades
in Blue China_. [Signed MARCUS PAULUS VENETUS.] (_St. James’
Gazette_, 17th July, 1880.)

——— Notes on Analogies of Manners between the Indo-Chinese Races
and the Races of the Indian Archipelago. By Col. Yule (_Journ.
Anthrop. Inst. of Great Britain and Ireland_, vol. ix., 1880, pp.
290–301.)

——— Sketches of Asia in the Thirteenth Century and of Marco Polo’s
Travels, delivered at Royal Engineer Institute, 18th Nov. 1880.

[This Lecture, with slight modification, was also delivered on
other occasions both before and after. Doubtful if ever fully
reported.]

——— Dr. Holub’s Collections. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2724, 10th Jan.
1880.)

——— Prof. Max Müller’s Paper at the Royal Asiatic Society. (_The
Athenæum_, No. 2731, 28th Feb. 1880, p. 285.)

——— The Temple of Buddha Gaya. (Review of _Dr. Rajendralála Mitra’s
Buddha Gaya_.) (_Sat. Rev._, 27th March, 1870.)

——— Mr. Gladstone and Count Karolyi. (Letter to _The Examiner_, 22nd
May, 1880, signed TRISTRAM SHANDY.)

——— Stupa of Barhut. [Review of Cunningham’s work.] (_Sat. Rev._, 5th
June, 1880.)

——— From Africa: Southampton, Fifth October, 1880.

[Verses to Sir Bartle Frere.] (_Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine_,
Nov. 1880.)

——— Review of _H. Howorth’s History of the Mongols_, Part II. (_The
Athenæum_, No. 2762, 2nd Oct. 1880, pp. 425–427.)

——— _Verboten ist_, a Rhineland Rhapsody. (Printed for private
circulation only.)

——— Hindú-Kúsh. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XI. 1880, pp. 837–839.)

——— The River of Golden Sand, the Narrative of a Journey through China
and Eastern Tibet to Burmah, With Illustrations and ten Maps from
Original Surveys. By Capt. W. Gill, Royal Engineers. With an
Introductory Essay. By Col. H. Yule, London, John Murray, ...
1880, 2 vols. 8vo, pp. 95–420, 11–453.

——— The River of Golden Sand: Being the Narrative of a Journey through
China and Eastern Tibet to Burmah. By the late Capt. W. Gill, R.E.
Condensed by Edward Colborne Baber, Chinese Secretary to H.M.’s
Legation at Peking. Edited, with a Memoir and Introductory Essay,
by Col. H. Yule. With Portrait, Map, and Woodcuts. London, John
Murray, 1883, 8vo., pp. 141–332.

——— Memoir of Captain W. Gill, R.E., and Introductory Essay as
prefixed to the New Edition of the “River of Golden Sand.” By Col.
H. Yule. London, John Murray, ... 1884, 8vo. [Paged 19–141.]

1881 [Notice on William Yule] in Persian Manuscripts in the British
Museum. By Sir F. J. Goldsmid.

(_The Athenæum_, No. 2813, 24th Sept. 1881, pp. 401–403.)

——— Il Beato Odorico di Pordenone, ed i suoi Viaggi: Cenni dettati dal
Col. Enrico Yule, quando s’inaugurava in Pordenone il Busto di
Odorico il giorno, 23° Settembre, MDCCCLXXXI, 8vo. pp. 8.

——— Hwen T’sang. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XII. 1881, pp. 418–419.)

——— Ibn Batuta. (_Ibid._ pp. 607–609.)

——— Kâfiristân. (_Ibid._ XIII. 1881, pp. 820–823.)

——— Major James Rennell, F.R.S., of the Bengal Engineers. [Reprinted
from the _Royal Engineers’ Journal_], 8vo., pp. 16.

(Dated 7th Dec. 1881.)

1881 Notice of Sir William E. Baker. (_St. James’ Gazette_, 27th Dec.
1881.)

——— Parallels [Matthew Arnold and de Barros]. (_The Athenæum_, No.
2790, 16th April, 1881, pp. 536.)

1882 Memoir of Gen. Sir William Erskine Baker, K.C.B., Royal Engineers
(Bengal). Compiled by two old friends, brother officers and
pupils. London. Printed for private circulation, 1882, 8vo., pp.
67.

By H. Y[ule] and R. M. [Gen. R. Maclagan].

——— Etymological Notes. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2837, 11th March, 1882;
No. 2840, 1st April, 1882, p. 413.)

——— Lhása. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XIV. 1882, pp. 496–503.)

——— _Wadono_. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2846, 13th May, 1882, p. 602.)

——— Dr. John Brown. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2847, 20th May, 1882, pp.
635–636.)

——— A Manuscript of Marco Polo. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2851, 17th June,
1882, pp. 765–766.)

[About Baron Nordenskiöld’s Facsimile Edition.]

——— Review of _Ancient India as described by Ktesias the Knidian_,
etc. By J. W. M’Crindle. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2860, 19th Aug.
1882, pp. 237–238.)

——— The Silver Coinage of Thibet. (Review of Terrien de Lacouperie’s
Paper.) (_The Academy_, 19th Aug. 1882, pp 140–141.)

——— Review of _The Indian Balhara and the Arabian Intercourse with
India_. By Edward Thomas. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2866, 30th Sept.
1882, pp. 428–429.)

——— The Expedition of Professor Palmer, Capt. Gill, and Lieut.
Charrington. (Letter in _The Times_, 16th Oct. 1882.)

——— Obituary Notice of Dr. Arthur Burnell. (_Times_, 20th Oct. 1882.)

——— Capt. William Gill, R.E. [Notice of]. (_The Times_, 31st Oct.
1882.)

See _supra_, first col. of this page.

——— Notes on the Oldest Records of the Sea Route to China from Western
Asia. By Col. Yule. _Proc. of the Royal Geographical Society, and
Monthly Record of Geography_, Nov. No. 1882, 8vo.

_Proceedings_, N.S. IV. 1882, pp. 649–660. Read at the
Geographical Section, Brit. Assoc., Southampton Meeting, augmented
and revised by the author.

1883 Lord Lawrence. [Review of _Life of Lord Lawrence_. By R. Bosworth
Smith.] (_Quarterly Review_, vol. 155, April, 1883, pp. 289–326.)

——— Review of _Across Chrysé_. By A. R. Colquhoun. (_The Athenæum_,
No. 2900, 26th May, 1883, pp. 663–665.)

——— La Terra del Fuoco e Carlo Darwin. (Extract from Letter published
by the _Fanfulla_, Rome 2nd June, 1883.)

——— How was the Trireme rowed? (_The Academy_, 6th Oct. 1883, p. 237.)

——— _Across Chrysé_. (_The Athenæum_, No. 2922, 27th Oct. 1883.)

——— Political Fellowship in the India Council. (Letter in _The Times_,
15th Dec. 1883.) [Heading was not Yule’s.]

——— Maldive Islands. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XV. 1883, pp. 327–332.)

——— Mandeville. (_Ibid._ pp. 473–475.)

1884 A Sketch of the Career of Gen. John Reid Becher, C.B., Royal
Engineers (Bengal). By an old friend and brother officer. Printed
for private circulation, 1884, 8vo, pp. 40.

——— Ruc Quills. (_The Academy_, No. 620, 22nd March, 1884, pp.
204–205.) Reprinted in present ed. of Marco Polo, vol. ii. p. 596.

——— Lord Canning. (Letter in _The Times_, 2nd April, 1884.)

——— Sir Bartle Frere [Letter respecting Memorial of]. (_St. James’
Gazette_, 27th July, 1884.)

——— Odoric. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XVIII. 1884, pp. 728–729.)

——— Ormus. (_Ibid._ pp. 856–858.)

1885 Memorials of Gen. Sir Edward Harris Greathed, K.C.B. Compiled by
the late Lieut.-Gen. Alex. Cunningham Robertson, C.B. Printed for
private circulation. (With a prefatory notice of the compiler.)
London, Harrison & Sons, ... 1885, 8vo, pp. 95.

The Prefatory Notice of Gen. A. C. Robertson is by H. Yule, June,
1885, p. iii.–viii.

——— Anglo-Indianisms. (Letter in the _St. James’ Gazette_, 30th July,
1885.)

——— Obituary Notice of Col. Grant Allan, Madras Army. (_From the Army
and Navy Gazette_, 22nd Aug. 1885.)

——— Shameless Advertisements. (Letter in _The Times_, 28th Oct. 1885.)

1886 Marco Polo. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XIX. 1885, pp. 404–409.)

——— Prester John. (_Ibid._ pp. 714–718.)

——— Brief Notice of Sir Edward Clive Bayley. Pages ix.–xiv. [Prefixed
to _The History of India as told by its own Historians: Gujarat_.
By the late Sir Edward Clive Bayley.] London, Allen, 1886, 8vo.

——— Sir George Udny Yule. In Memoriam (_St. James’ Gazette_, 18th Jan.
1886.)

——— Cacothanasia. [Political Verse, Signed Μηνιν ἈΕΙΔΕ.] (_St. James’
Gazette_, 1st Feb. 1886.)

——— William Kay, D.D. [Notice of]. (Letter to _The Guardian_, 3rd Feb.
1886.)

——— Col. George Thomson, C.B., R.E. (_Royal Engineers’ Journal_, 1886.)

——— Col. George Thomson, C.B. [Note]. (_St. James’ Gazette_, 16th Feb.
1886.)

——— Hidden Virtues [A Satire on W. E. Gladstone]. (Letter to the _St.
James’ Gazette_, 21st March, 1886. Signed M. P. V.)

——— Burma, Past and Present. (_Quart. Rev._ vol. 162, Jan. and April,
1886, pp. 210–238.)

——— Errors of Facts, in two well-known Pictures.

(_The Athenæum_, No. 3059, 12th June, 1886, p. 788.)

——— [Obituary Notice of] Lieut.-Gen. Sir Arthur Phayre, C.B.,
K.C.S.I., G.C.M.G. (_Proc. R.G.S._, N.S. 1886, VIII. pp. 103–112.)

——— “Lines suggested by a Portrait in the Millais Exhibition.”

Privately printed and (though never published) widely circulated.
These powerful verses on Gladstone are those several times
referred to by Sir Mountstuart Grant Duff, in his published
Diaries.

——— Introductory Remarks on _The Rock-Cut Caves and Statues of
Bamian_. By Capt. the Hon. M. G. Talbot. (_Journ. R. As. Soc._
N.S. XVIII. 1886, pp. 323–329.)

——— Opening Address. (_Ibid._ pp. i.–v.)

——— Opening Address. (_Ibid._ xix. pp. i.–iii.)

——— Hobson-Jobsoniana. By H. Yule (_Asiatic Quarterly Review_, vol. i.
1886, pp. 119–140.)

——— HOBSON-JOBSON: Being a Glossary of Anglo-Indian Colloquial Words
and Phrases, and of Kindred Terms; etymological, historical,
geographical, and discursive. By Col. H. Yule, and the late Arthur
Coke Burnell, Ph.D., C.I.E., author of “The Elements of South
Indian Palaeography,” etc., London, John Murray, 1886. (All rights
reserved), 8vo, p. xliii.–870. Preface, etc.

A new edition is in preparation under the editorship of Mr.
William Crooke (1902).

1886 John Bunyan. (Letter in _St. James’ Gazette_, _circa_ 31st Dec.
1886. Signed M. P. V.)

——— Rennell. (_Encyclop. Brit._ XX. 1886, pp. 398–401.)

——— Rubruquis (_Ibid._ XXI. 1886, pp. 46–47.)

1887 Lieut.-Gen. W. A. Crommelen, C.B., R.E. (_Royal Engineers’
Journal_, 1887.)

——— [Obituary Notice] Col. Sir J. U. Bateman Champain. (_Times_, 2nd
Feb. 1887).

——— “Pulping Public Records.” (_Notes and Queries_, 19th March, 1887.)

——— A Filial Remonstrance (Political Verses). Signed M. P. V. (_St.
James’ Gazette_, 8th Aug. 1887.)

——— Memoir of Major-Gen. J. T. Boileau, R.E., F.R.S. By C. R. Low,
I.N., F.R.G.S. With a Preface by Col. H. Yule, C.B., London,
Allen, 1887.

——— The Diary of William Hedges, Esq. (afterwards Sir William Hedges),
during his Agency in Bengal; as well as on his voyage out and
return overland (1681–1687). Transcribed for the Press, with
Introductory Notes, etc., by R. Barlow, Esq., and illustrated by
copious extracts from unpublished records, etc., by Col. H. Yule.
Pub. for Hakluyt Society. London, 1887–1889, 3 vols. 8vo.

1888 Concerning some little known Travellers in the East. (_Asiatic
Quarterly Review_, V. 1888, pp. 312–335.)

No. I.—George Strachan.

——— Concerning some little known Travellers in the East. (_Asiatic
Quarterly Review_, VI. 1888, pp. 382–398.)

No. II.—William, Earl of Denbigh; Sir Henry Skipwith; and others.

——— Notes on the St. James’s of the 6th Jan. [A Budget of
Miscellaneous interesting criticism.] (Letter to _St. James’
Gazette_, 9th Jan. 1888.)

——— Deflections of the Nile. (Letter in _The Times_, 15th Oct. 1888.)

——— The History of the Pitt Diamond, being an excerpt from Documentary
Contributions to a Biography of Thomas Pitt, prepared for issue
[in Hedges’ Diary] by the Hakluyt Society. London, 1888, 8vo. pp.
23.

Fifty Copies printed for private circulation.

1889 The Remains of Pagan. By H. Yule. (_Trübner’s Record_, 3rd ser.
vol. i. pt. i. 1889, p. 2.)

To introduce notes by Dr. E Forchammer.

——— A Coincident Idiom. By H. Yule. (_Trübner’s Record_, 3rd ser. vol.
i. pt. iii. pp. 84–85.)

——— The Indian Congress [a Disclaimer]. (Letter to _The Times_, 1st
Jan. 1889.)

——— Arrowsmith, the Friend of Thomas Poole. (Letter in _The Academy_,
9th Feb. 1889, p. 96.)

BIOGRAPHIES OF SIR HENRY YULE.

——— Colonel Sir Henry Yule, K.C.S.I., C.B., LL.D., R.E. By General
Robert Maclagan, R.E. (_Proceed. Roy. Geog. Soc._ XII. 1890, pp.
108–113.)

——— Colonel Sir Henry Yule, K.C.S.I., C.B., LL.D., R.E., etc. (With a
Portrait). By E. Delmar Morgan. (_Scottish Geographical Magazine_,
VI. 1890, pp. 93–98.) Contains a very good Bibliography.

——— Col. Sir H. Yule, R.E., C.B., K.C.S.I., by Maj.-Gen. T. B.
Collinson, R.E., _Royal Engineers’ Journal_, March, 1890. [This is
the best of the Notices of Yule which appeared at the time of his
death.]

——— Sir Henry Yule, K.C.S.I, C.B., LL.D., R.E., by E. H. Giglioli.
Roma, 1890, ppt. 8vo, pp. 8.

Estratto dal _Bollettino della Società Geografica Italiana_,
Marzo, 1890.

——— Sir Henry Yule. By J. S. C[otton]. (_The Academy_, 11th Jan. 1890,
No. 923, pp. 26–27.)

——— Sir Henry Yule. (_The Athenæum_, No. 3245, 4th Jan. 1900, p. 17;
No. 3246, 11th Jan. p. 53; No. 3247, 18th Jan. p. 88.)

——— _In Memoriam_. Sir Henry Yule. By D. M. (_The Academy_, 29th
March, 1890, p. 222.)

See end of _Memoir_ in present work.

——— Le Colonel Sir Henry Yule. Par M. Henri Cordier. Extrait du
_Journal Asiatique_. Paris, Imprimerie nationale, MDCCCXC, in–8,
pp. 26.

——— The same, _Bulletin de la Société de Géographie_. Par M. Henri
Cordier. 1890, 8vo, pp. 4.

Meeting 17th Jan. 1890.

1889 Baron F. von Richthofen. (_Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für
Erdkunde zu Berlin_, xvii. 2.)

——— Colonel Sir Henry Yule, R.E., C.B., K.C.S.I. Memoir by General R.
Maclagan, _Journ. R. Asiatic Society_, 1890.

——— Memoir of Colonel Sir Henry Yule, R.E., C.B., K.C.S.I., LL.D.,
etc. By Coutts Trotter. (_Proceedings of the Royal Society of
Edinburgh_, 1891. p. xliii. to p. lvi.)

1889 Sir Henry Yule (1820–1889). By Coutts Trotter. (_Dict. of National
Biography_, lxiii. pp. 405–407.)

1903 Memoir of Colonel Sir Henry Yule, R.E., C.B., K.C.S.I., Corr.
Inst. France, by his daughter, Amy Frances Yule, L.A. Soc. Ant.
Scot., etc. Written for third edition of Yule’s Marco Polo.
Reprinted for private circulation only.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This list is based on the excellent preliminary List compiled by E.
Delmar Morgan, published in the _Scottish Geographical Magazine_,
vol. vi., pp. 97–98, but the present compilers have much more than
doubled the number of entries. It is, however, known to be still
incomplete, and any one able to add to the list, will greatly
oblige the compilers by sending additions to the Publisher.—A. F. Y.

SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS.

MARCO POLO AND HIS BOOK.

INTRODUCTORY NOTICES.

PAGE
I. OBSCURITIES IN THE HISTORY OF HIS LIFE AND BOOK. RAMUSIO’S
STATEMENTS _1_

§ 1. Obscurities, etc. 2. Ramusio his earliest Biographer;
his Account of Polo. 3. He vindicates Polo’s Geography. 4.
Compares him with Columbus. 5. Recounts a Tradition of the
Traveller’s Return to Venice. 6. Recounts Marco’s Capture
by the Genoese. 7. His statements about Marco’s liberation
and marriage. 8. His account of the Family Polo and its
termination.

II. SKETCH OF THE STATE OF THE EAST AT THE TIME OF THE JOURNEYS OF
THE POLO FAMILY _8_

§ 9. State of the Levant. 10. The various Mongol Sovereignties
in Asia and Eastern Europe. 11. China. 12. India and
Indo-China.

III. THE POLO FAMILY. PERSONAL HISTORY OF THE TRAVELLERS TILL THEIR
FINAL RETURN FROM THE EAST _13_

§ 13. Alleged origin of the Polos. 14. Claims to Nobility. 15.
The Elder Marco Polo. 16. Nicolo and Maffeo Polo commence
their Travels. 17. Their intercourse with Kúblái Kaan. 18.
Their return home, and Marco’s appearance on the scene. 19.
Second Journey of the Polo Brothers, accompanied by Marco.
(See App. L. 1.) 20. Marco’s Employment by Kúblái Kaan; and
his Journeys. 21. Circumstances of the departure of the Polos
from the Kaan’s Court. 22. They pass by Persia to Venice.
Their relations there.

IV. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE MANSION OF THE POLO FAMILY AT S.
GIOVANNI GRISOSTOMO _26_

§ 23. Probable period of their establishment at S. Giovanni
Grisostomo. 24. Relics of the Casa Polo in the Corte
Sabbionera. 24_a_. Recent corroboration as to traditional
site of the Casa Polo.

V. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE WAR-GALLEYS OF THE MEDITERRANEAN
STATES IN THE MIDDLE AGES _31_

§ 25. Arrangement of the Rowers in Mediæval Galleys; a separate
Oar to every Man. 26. Change of System in 16th Century.
27. Some details of 13th-Century Galleys. 28. Fighting
Arrangements. 29. Crew of a Galley and Staff of a Fleet. 30.
Music and miscellaneous particulars.

VI. THE JEALOUSIES AND NAVAL WARS OF VENICE AND GENOA. LAMBA
DORIA’S EXPEDITION TO THE ADRIATIC; BATTLE OF CURZOLA; AND
IMPRISONMENT OF MARCO POLO BY THE GENOESE _41_

§ 31. Growing Jealousies and Outbreaks between the Republics.
32. Battle in Bay of Ayas in 1294. 33. Lamba Doria’s
Expedition to the Adriatic. 34. The Fleets come in sight of
each other at Curzola. 35. The Venetians defeated, and Marco
Polo a Prisoner. 36. Marco Polo in Prison dictates his Book
to Rusticiano of Pisa. Release of Venetian Prisoners. 37.
Grounds on which the story of Marco Polo’s capture at Curzola
rests.

VII. RUSTICIANO OR RUSTICHELLO OF PISA, MARCO POLO’S
FELLOW-PRISONER AT GENOA, THE SCRIBE WHO WROTE DOWN THE
TRAVELS _55_

§ 38. Rusticiano, perhaps a Prisoner from Meloria. 39. A Person
known from other sources. 40. Character of his Romance
Compilations. 41. Identity of the Romance Compiler with
Polo’s Fellow-Prisoner. 42. Further particulars regarding
Rusticiano.

VIII. NOTICES OF MARCO POLO’S HISTORY AFTER THE TERMINATION OF HIS
IMPRISONMENT AT GENOA _64_

§ 43. Death of Marco’s Father before 1300. Will of his Brother
Maffeo. 44. Documentary Notices of Polo at this time. The
Sobriquet of _Milione_. 45. Polo’s relations with Thibault
de Cepoy. 46. His Marriage, and his Daughters. Marco as
a Merchant. 47. His Last Will; and Death. 48. Place of
Sepulture. Professed Portraits of Polo. 49. Further History
of the Polo Family. 49 _bis_. Reliques of Marco Polo.

IX. MARCO POLO’S BOOK; AND THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH IT WAS FIRST
WRITTEN _80_

§ 50. General Statement of what the Book contains. 51. Language
of the original Work. 52. Old French Text of the Société de
Géographie. 53. Conclusive proof that the Old French Text is
the source of all the others. 54. Greatly diffused employment
of French in that age.

X. VARIOUS TYPES OF TEXT OF MARCO POLO’S BOOK _90_

§ 55. Four Principal Types of Text. _First_, that of the
Geographic or Oldest French. 56. _Second_, the Remodelled
French Text; followed by Pauthier. 57. The Bern MS. and two
others form a sub-class of this type. 58. _Third_, Friar
Pipino’s Latin. 59. The Latin of Grynæus, a Translation at
Fifth Hand. 60. _Fourth_, Ramusio’s Italian. 61. Injudicious
Tamperings in Ramusio. 62. Genuine Statements peculiar to
Ramusio. 63. Hypothesis of the Sources of the Ramusian
Version. 64. Summary in regard to Text of Polo. 65. Notice of
a curious Irish Version.

XI. SOME ESTIMATE OF THE CHARACTER OF POLO AND HIS BOOK _104_

§ 66. Grounds of Polo’s Pre-eminence among Mediæval Travellers.
67. His true claims to glory. 68. His personal attributes
seen but dimly. 69. Absence of scientific notions. 70. Map
constructed on Polo’s data. 71. Singular omissions of Polo in
regard to China; historical inaccuracies. 72. Was Polo’s Book
materially affected by the Scribe Rusticiano? 73. Marco’s
reading embraced the Alexandrian Romances. Examples. 74.
Injustice long done to Polo. Singular Modern Example.

XII. CONTEMPORARY RECOGNITION OF POLO AND HIS BOOK _116_

§ 75. How far was there diffusion of his Book in his own day?
76. Contemporary References to Polo. T. de Cepoy; Pipino;
Jacopo d’Acqui; Giov. Villani. 77. Pietro d’Abano; Jean
le Long of Ypres. 78. Curious borrowings from Polo in the
Romance of Bauduin de Sebourc. 78 _bis._ Chaucer and Marco
Polo.

XIII. NATURE OF POLO’S INFLUENCE ON GEOGRAPHICAL KNOWLEDGE _129_

§ 79. Tardy operation, and causes thereof. 80. General
characteristics of Mediæval Cosmography. 81. Roger Bacon
as a Geographer. 82. Arab Geography. 83. Marino Sanudo
the Elder. 84. The Catalan Map of 1375, the most complete
mediæval embodiment of Polo’s Geography. 85. Fra Mauro’s
Map. Confusions in Cartography of the 16th Century from
the endeavour to combine new and old information. 86.
Gradual disappearance of Polo’s nomenclature. 87. Alleged
introduction of Block-printed Books into Europe by Marco Polo
in connexion with the fiction of the invention of Printing
by Castaldi of Feltre. 88. Frequent opportunities for such
introduction in the Age following Polo’s.

XIV. EXPLANATIONS REGARDING THE BASIS ADOPTED FOR THE PRESENT
TRANSLATION _141_

§ 89. Texts followed by Marsden and by Pauthier. 90. Eclectic
Formation of the English Text of this Translation. 91. Mode
of rendering Proper Names.

THE BOOK OF MARCO POLO.

PROLOGUE.

CHAP. PAGE
PRELIMINARY ADDRESS OF RUSTICIANO OF PISA 1

I.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS POLO SET FORTH FROM CONSTANTINOPLE TO
TRAVERSE THE WORLD 2

NOTES.—1. _Chronology._ 2. “_The Great Sea._” _The Port of
Soldaia._

II.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS WENT ON BEYOND SOLDAIA 4

NOTES.—1. _Site and Ruins of Sarai._ 2. _City of Bolghar._
3. _Alau Lord of the Levant (i.e. |Hulaku|)._ 4.
_Ucaca on the Volga._ 5. _River Tigeri._

III.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS, AFTER CROSSING A DESERT, CAME TO
THE CITY OF BOCARA, AND FELL IN WITH CERTAIN ENVOYS THERE 9

NOTES.—1. “_Bocara a City of Persia._” 2. _The Great Kaan’s
Envoys._

IV.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS TOOK THE ENVOYS’ COUNSEL, AND WENT
TO THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN 11

V.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS ARRIVED AT THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN 11

VI.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN ASKED ALL ABOUT THE MANNERS OF THE
CHRISTIANS, AND PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE POPE OF ROME 12

NOTE.—_Apostoille._ _The name |Tartar|._

VII.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN SENT THE TWO BROTHERS AS HIS ENVOYS
TO THE POPE 13

NOTES.—1. _The Great Kaan’s Letter._ 2. _The Seven Arts._
3. _Religious Indifference of the Mongol Princes._

VIII.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN GAVE THEM A TABLET OF GOLD, BEARING
HIS ORDERS IN THEIR BEHALF 15

NOTES.—1. _The Tablet._ 2. _The Port of Ayas._

IX.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS CAME TO THE CITY OF ACRE; AND THENCE
TO VENICE 17

NOTES.—1. _Names of the deceased Pope and of the Legate._
2. _Negropont._ 3. _Mark’s age._

X.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS AGAIN DEPARTED FROM VENICE, ON THEIR
WAY BACK TO THE GREAT KAAN, AND TOOK WITH THEM MARK, THE
SON OF MESSER NICOLO 19

NOTE.—_Oil from the Holy Sepulchre._

XI.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS SET OUT FROM ACRE, AND MARK ALONG
WITH THEM 20

NOTE.—_Pope Gregory X. and his Election._

XII.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS PRESENTED THEMSELVES BEFORE THE NEW
POPE 22

NOTES.—1. _William of Tripoli._ 2. _Powers conceded to
Missionary Friars._ 3. _Bundúḳdár and his Invasion of
Armenia; his character._ 4. _The Templars in Cilician
Armenia._

XIII.—HOW MESSER NICOLO AND MESSER MAFFEO POLO, ACCOMPANIED
BY MARK, TRAVELLED TO THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN 25

NOTE.—_The City of Kemenfu, Summer Residence of Kúblái._

XIV.—HOW MESSER NICOLO AND MESSER MAFFEO POLO AND MARCO
PRESENTED THEMSELVES BEFORE THE GREAT KAAN 26

NOTES.—1. _Verbal._ 2. “_Vostre Homme._”

XV.—HOW THE LORD SENT MARK ON AN EMBASSY OF HIS 27

NOTES.—1. _The four Characters learned by Marco, what?_
2. _Ramusio’s addition._ 3. _Nature of Marco’s
employment._

XVI.—HOW MARK RETURNED FROM THE MISSION WHEREON HE HAD BEEN
SENT 30

XVII.—HOW MESSER NICOLO, MESSER MAFFEO, AND MESSER MARCO,
ASKED LEAVE OF THE GREAT KAAN TO GO THEIR WAY 31

NOTES.—1. _Risks to Foreigners on a change of Sovereign._
2. _The Lady Bolgana._ 3. _Passage from Ramusio._

XVIII.—HOW THE TWO BROTHERS AND MESSER MARCO TOOK LEAVE OF THE
GREAT KAAN, AND RETURNED TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY 34

NOTES.—1. _Mongol Royal Messengers._ 2. _Mongol
communication with the King of England._ 3. _Mediæval
Ships of China._ 4. _Passage from China to Sumatra._
5. _Mortality among the party._ 6. _The Lady Cocachin
in Persian History._ 7. _Death of the Kaan._ 8. _The
Princess of Manzi._

BOOK FIRST.

_Account of Regions Visited or heard of on the Journey from the
Lesser Armenia to the Court of the Great Kaan at Chandu._

CHAP. PAGE
I.—HERE THE BOOK BEGINS; AND FIRST IT SPEAKS OF THE LESSER
HERMENIA 41

NOTES.—1. _Little Armenia._ 2. _Meaning of_ Chasteaux. 3.
_Sickliness of Cilician Coast._ 4. _The phrase |“fra
terre.”|_

II.—CONCERNING THE PROVINCE OF TURCOMANIA 43

NOTES.—1. _Brutality of the people._ 2. _Application of
name |Turcomania|. Turcoman Hordes._

III.—DESCRIPTION OF THE GREATER HERMENIA 45

NOTES.—1. _Erzingan._ Buckrams, _what were they?_ 2.
_Erzrum._ 3. _Baiburt._ 4. _Ararat._ 5. _Oil wells of
Baku._

IV.—OF GEORGIANIA AND THE KINGS THEREOF 50

NOTES.—1. _Georgian Kings._ 2. _The Georgians._ 3. _The
Iron Gates and Wall of Alexander._ 4. _Box forests._
5. _Goshawks._ 6. _Fish Miracle._ 7. _Sea of Ghel
or Ghelan._ _Names ending in |-án|._ 8. _Names of the
Caspian, and navigation thereon._ 9. _Fish in the
Caspian._

V.—OF THE KINGDOM OF MAUSUL 60

NOTES.—1. _Atabeks of Mosul._ 2. _Nestorian and Jacobite
Christians._ 3. _Mosolins._ 4. _The Kurds._ 5. _Mush
and Mardin._

VI.—OF THE GREAT CITY OF BAUDAS, AND HOW IT WAS TAKEN 63

NOTES.—1. _Baudas, or Baghdad._ 2. _Island of Kish._ 3.
_Basra._ 4. _Baldachins and other silk textures;
Animal patterns._ 5, 6. _Hulákú’s Expedition._ 7.
_The Death of the Khalíf Mosta’sim._ 8. _Froissart._

VII.—HOW THE CALIF OF BAUDAS TOOK COUNSEL TO SLAY ALL THE
CHRISTIANS IN HIS LAND 68

NOTES.—1. _Chronology._ 2. “_Ses |Regisles| et ses
|Casses|._”

VIII.—HOW THE CHRISTIANS WERE IN GREAT DISMAY BECAUSE OF WHAT
THE CALIF HAD SAID 70

NOTE.—_The word “|cralantur|.”_

IX.—HOW THE ONE-EYED COBLER WAS DESIRED TO PRAY FOR THE
CHRISTIANS 71

X.—HOW THE PRAYER OF THE ONE-EYED COBLER CAUSED THE MOUNTAIN
TO MOVE 72

NOTE.—_The Mountain Miracle._

XI.—OF THE NOBLE CITY OF TAURIS 74

NOTES.—1. _Tabriz._ 2. _Cremesor._ 3. _Traffic at Tabriz._
4. _The_ Torizi. 5. _Character of City and People._

XII.—OF THE MONASTERY OF SAINT BARSAMO ON THE BORDERS OF
TAURIS 77

NOTE.—_The Monastery of Barsauma._

XIII.—OF THE GREAT COUNTRY OF PERSIA; WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF
THE THREE KINGS 78

NOTES.—1. _Kala’ Atishparastán._ 2. _The Three Kings._

XIV.—HOW THE THREE KINGS RETURNED TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY 79

NOTES.—1. _The three mystic Gifts._ 2. _The Worshipped
Fire._ 3. _Sávah and Ávah. The Legend in Mas’udi.
Embellishments of the Story of the Magi._

XV.—OF THE EIGHT KINGDOMS OF PERSIA, AND HOW THEY ARE NAMED 83

NOTES.—1. _The Eight Kingdoms._ 2. _Export of Horses, and
Prices._ 3. _Persian Brigands._ 4. _Persian wine._

XVI.—CONCERNING THE GREAT CITY OF YASDI 88

NOTES.—1. _Yezd._ 2. _Yezd to Kerman. The Woods spoken of._

XVII.—CONCERNING THE KINGDOM OF KERMAN 90

NOTES.—1. _City and Province of Kerman._ 2. _Turquoises._
3. _|Ondanique| or Indian Steel._ 4. _Manufactures of
Kerman._ 5. _Falcons._

XVIII.—OF THE CITY OF CAMADI AND ITS RUINS; ALSO TOUCHING THE
CARAUNA ROBBERS 97

NOTES.—1. _Products of the warmer plains._ 2. _Humped oxen
and fat-tailed sheep._ 3. Scarani. 4. _The Karaunahs
and Nigudarian Bands._ 5. _Canosalmi._

XIX.—OF THE DESCENT TO THE CITY OF HORMOS 107

NOTES.—1. _Site of Old Hormuz and Geography of the route
from Kerman to Hormuz._ 2. _Dates and Fish Diet._ 3.
_Stitched Vessels. “|One rudder|,” why noticed as
peculiar._ 4. _Great heat at Hormuz._ 5. _The Simúm._
6. _History of Hormuz, and Polo’s Ruomedan Acomat._
7. _Second Route between Hormuz and Kerman._

XX.—OF THE WEARISOME AND DESERT ROAD THAT HAS NOW TO BE
TRAVELLED 123

NOTES.—1. _Kerman to Kúbenán._ 2. _Desert of Lút._ 3.
_Subterraneous Canals._

XXI.—CONCERNING THE CITY OF COBINAN AND THE THINGS THAT ARE
MADE THERE 125

NOTES.—1. _Kuh-Banán._ 2. _Production of Tútíá._

XXII.—OF A CERTAIN DESERT THAT CONTINUES FOR EIGHT DAYS’ JOURNEY 127

NOTES.—1. _Deserts of Khorasan._ 2. _The |Arbre Sol| or
|Arbre Sec|._

XXIII.—CONCERNING THE OLD MAN OF THE MOUNTAIN 139

NOTE.—_The Assassins, Hashíshîn, or Muláhidah._

XXIV.—HOW THE OLD MAN USED TO TRAIN HIS ASSASSINS 142

NOTES.—1. _The story widely spread. Notable murders by the
Sectaries._ 2. _Their different branches._

XXV.—HOW THE OLD MAN CAME BY HIS END 145

NOTE.—_History of the apparent Destruction of the Sect by
Hulákú; its survival to the present time. Castles of
Alamut and Girdkuh._

XXVI.—CONCERNING THE CITY OF SAPURGAN 149

NOTE.—_Shibrgân, and the route followed. Dried Melons._

XXVII.—OF THE CITY OF BALC 151

NOTES.—1. _Balkh._ 2. _Country meant by |Dogana|._ 3.
_Lions in the Oxus Valley._

XXVIII.—OF TAICAN, AND THE MOUNTAINS OF SALT. ALSO OF THE
PROVINCE OF CASEM 153

NOTES.—1. _Talikan._ 2. _Mines of Rock-salt._ 3.
_Ethnological characteristics._ 4. _Kishm._ 5.
_Porcupines._ 6. _Cave dwellings._ 7. _Old and New
Capitals of Badakhshan._

XXIX.—OF THE PROVINCE OF BADASHAN 157

NOTES.—1. _Dialects of Badakhshan. Alexandrian lineage of
the Princes._ 2. _Badakhshan and the Balas Ruby._ 3.
_Azure Mines._ 4. _Horses of Badakhshan._ 5. _Naked
Barley._ 6. _Wild sheep._ 7. _Scenery of Badakhshan._
8. _Repeated devastation of the Country from War._ 9.
_Amplitude of feminine garments._

XXX.—OF THE PROVINCE OF PASHAI 164

NOTE.—_On the country intended by this name._

XXXI.—OF THE PROVINCE OF KESHIMUR 166

NOTES.—1. _Kashmir language._ 2. _Kashmir Conjurers._ (See
App. L. 2.) 3. _Importance of Kashmir in History
of Buddhism._ 4. _Character of the People._ 5.
_Vicissitudes of Buddhism in Kashmir._ 6. _Buddhist
practice as to slaughter of animals._ 7. _Coral._

XXXII.—OF THE GREAT RIVER OF BADASHAN; AND PLAIN OF PAMIER 170

NOTES.—1. _The Upper Oxus and Wakhan. The title_ Nono. (See
App. L. 3.) 2. _The Plateau of Pamir._ (See App. L. 4
and 5.) _The Great Wild Sheep. Fire at great
altitudes._ 3. _Bolor._

XXXIII.—OF THE KINGDOM OF CASCAR 180

NOTE.—_Kashgar._

XXXIV.—OF THE GREAT CITY OF SAMARCAN 183

NOTES.—1. _Christians in Samarkand._ 2. _Chagatai’s
relation to Kúblái mis-stated._ 3. _The Miracle of
the Stone._

XXXV.—OF THE PROVINCE OF YARCAN 187

NOTE.—_Yarkand. Goître prevalent there._

XXXVI.—OF A PROVINCE CALLED COTAN 188

NOTES.—1. _Government._ 2. “_Adoration of Mahommet._”
3. _Khotan._

XXXVII.—OF THE PROVINCE OF PEIN 191

NOTES.—1. _Position of Pein_ (App. L. 6.) 2. _The_ Yu _or
Jade._ 3. _Temporary marriages._

XXXVIII.—OF THE PROVINCE OF CHARCHAN 194

NOTE.—_Position of Charchan and Lop._

XXXIX.—OF THE CITY OF LOP, AND THE GREAT DESERT 196

NOTES.—1. _Geographical discrepancy._ 2. _Superstitions
as to Deserts: their wide diffusion. The Sound of
Drums on certain sandy acclivities._ 3. _Sha-chau to
Lob-nor._

XL.—CONCERNING THE GREAT PROVINCE OF TANGUT 203

NOTES.—1. _Tangut._ 2. _Buddhism encountered here._ 3.
_Kalmak superstition, the “|Heaven’s Ram|.”_ 4.
_Chinese customs described here._ 5. _Mongol disposal
of the Dead._ 6. _Superstitious practice of avoiding
to carry out the dead by the house-door; its wide
diffusion._

XLI.—OF THE PROVINCE OF CAMUL 209

NOTES.—1. _Kamul._ 2. _Character of the people._ 3.
_Shameless custom._ 4. _Parallel._

XLII.—OF THE PROVINCE OF CHINGINTALAS 212

NOTES.—1. _The Country intended._ 2. _Ondanique._ 3.
_Asbestos Mountain._ 4. _The four elements._ 5 and 6.
_The Story of the Salamander. Asbestos fabrics._

XLIII.—OF THE PROVINCE OF SUKCHUR 217

NOTES.—1. _Explanatory._ 2. _The City of Suhchau._ 3.
_Rhubarb country._ 4. _Poisonous pasture._

XLIV.—OF THE CITY OF CAMPICHU 219

NOTES.—1. _The City of Kanchau._ 2. _Recumbent Buddhas._ 3.
_Buddhist Days of Special Worship._ 4. _Matrimonial
Customs._ 5. _Textual._

XLV.—OF THE CITY OF ETZINA 223

NOTES.—1. _Position of Yetsina._ 2. _Textual._ 3. _The Wild
Ass of Mongolia._

XLVI.—OF THE CITY OF CARACORON 226

NOTES.—1. _Karakorum._ 2. _Tartar._ 3. _Chorcha._
4. _Prester John._

XLVII.—OF CHINGHIS, AND HOW HE BECAME THE FIRST KAAN OF THE
TARTARS 238

NOTES.—1. _Chronology._ 2. _Relations between Chinghiz and
Aung Khan, the Prester John of Polo._

XLVIII.—HOW CHINGHIS MUSTERED HIS PEOPLE TO MARCH AGAINST PRESTER
JOHN 240

XLIX.—HOW PRESTER JOHN MARCHED TO MEET CHINGHIS 241

NOTES.—1. _Plain of Tanduc._ 2. _Divination by Twigs and
Arrows._

L.—THE BATTLE BETWEEN CHINGHIS KAAN AND PRESTER JOHN. DEATH OF
CHINGHIS 244

NOTE.—_Real circumstances and date of the Death of
Chinghiz._

LI.—OF THOSE WHO DID REIGN AFTER CHINGHIS KAAN, AND OF THE
CUSTOMS OF THE TARTARS 245

NOTES.—1. _Origin of the |Cambuscan| of Chaucer._ 2.
_Historical Errors._ 3. _The Place of Sepulture of
Chinghiz._ 4. _Barbarous Funeral Superstition._

LII.—CONCERNING THE CUSTOMS OF THE TARTARS 251

NOTES.—1. _Tartar Huts._ 2. _Tartar Waggons._ 3. _Pharaoh’s
Rat._ 4. _Chastity of the Women._ 5. _Polygamy and
Marriage Customs._

LIII.—CONCERNING THE GOD OF THE TARTARS 256

NOTES.—1. _The old Tartar idols._ 2. _Kumiz._

LIV.—CONCERNING THE TARTAR CUSTOMS OF WAR 260

NOTES.—1. _Tartar Arms._ 2. _The Decimal Division of their
Troops._ 3. _Textual._ 4. _Blood-drinking._ 5.
_|Kurút|, or Tartar Curd._ 6. _The Mongol military
rapidity and terrorism._ 7. _Corruption of their
Nomade simplicity._

LV.—CONCERNING THE ADMINISTERING OF JUSTICE AMONG THE TARTARS 266

NOTES.—1. _The Cudgel._ 2. _Punishment of Theft._ 3.
_Marriage of the Dead._ 4. _Textual._

LVI.—SUNDRY PARTICULARS ON THE PLAIN BEYOND CARACORON 269

NOTES.—1. _Textual._ 2. _Bargu, the Mecrit, the Reindeer,
and Chase of Water-fowl._ 3. _The bird |Barguerlac|,
the Syrrhaptes._ 4. _Gerfalcons._

LVII.—OF THE KINGDOM OF ERGUIUL, AND PROVINCE OF SINJU 274

NOTES.—1. _Erguiul._ 2. _Siningfu._ 3. _The Yak._ 4. _The
Musk Deer._ 5. _Reeves’s Pheasant._

LVIII.—OF THE KINGDOM OF EGRIGAIA 281

NOTES.—1. _Egrigaia._ 2. _Calachan._ 3. _White Camels, and
Camlets: Siclatoun._

LIX.—CONCERNING THE PROVINCE OF TENDUC, AND THE DESCENDANTS
OF PRESTER JOHN 284

LX.—CONCERNING THE KAAN’S PALACE OF CHAGANNOR 296

NOTES.—1. _Palace._ 2. _The word |Sesnes|._ 3. _Chagan-nor._
4. _The five species of Crane described by Polo._ 5.
_The word |Cator|._

LXI.—OF THE CITY OF CHANDU, AND THE KAAN’S PALACE THERE 298

NOTES.—1. _Two Roads._ 2. _Chandu, properly Shangtu._
3. _Leopards._ 4. _The Bamboo Palace. Uses of the
Bamboo._ 5. _Kúblái’s Annual Migration to Shangtu._
6. _The White Horses. The Oirad Tribe._ 7. _The
Mare’s Milk Festival._ 8. _Weather Conjuring._ 9.
_Ascription of Cannibalism to Tibetans, etc._ 10.
_The term |Bacsi|._ 11. _Magical Feats ascribed to
the Lamas._ 12. _Lamas._ 13. _Vast extent of Lama
Convents._ 14. _Married Lamas._ 15. _Bran._ 16.
_Patarins._ 17. _The Ascetics called |Sensin|._ 18.
_Textual._ 19. _Tao-sze Idols._

BOOK SECOND.

PART I.

CHAP. PAGE
I.—OF CUBLAY KAAN, THE GREAT KAAN NOW REIGNING, AND OF HIS
GREAT PUISSANCE 331

NOTE.—_Eulogies of Kúblái._

II.—CONCERNING THE REVOLT OF NAYAN, WHO WAS UNCLE TO THE GREAT
KAAN CUBLAY 332

NOTES.—1. _Chronology._ 2. _Kúblái’s Age._ 3. _His Wars._
4. _Nayan and his true relationship to Kúblái._

III.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN MARCHED AGAINST NAYAN 335

NOTE.—_Addition from Ramusio._

IV.—OF THE BATTLE THAT THE GREAT KAAN FOUGHT WITH NAYAN 336

NOTES.—1. _The word |Bretesche|._ 2. _Explanatory._ 3. _The
Nakkára._ 4. _Parallel Passages._ 5. _Verbal._ 6.
_The Story of Nayan._ (See App. L. 7.)

V.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSED NAYAN TO BE PUT TO DEATH 343

NOTES.—1. _The Shedding of Royal blood avoided._ 2.
_Chorcha, Kaoli, Barskul, Sikintinju._ 3. _Jews in
China._

VI.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN WENT BACK TO THE CITY OF CAMBALUC 348

NOTE.—_Passage from Ramusio respecting the Kaan’s views of
Religion. Remarks._

VII.—HOW THE KAAN REWARDED THE VALOUR OF HIS CAPTAINS 350

NOTES.—1. _Parallel from Sanang Setzen._ 2. _The Golden
Honorary Tablets or_ Paizah _of the Mongols._ 3.
_Umbrellas._ 4. _The Gerfalcon Tablets._

VIII.—CONCERNING THE PERSON OF THE GREAT KAAN 356

NOTES.—1. _Colour of his Eyes._ 2. _His Wives._ 3. _The
Kungurat Tribe. Competitive Examination in Beauty._

IX.—CONCERNING THE GREAT KAAN’S SONS 359

NOTES.—1. _Kúblái’s intended Heir._ 2. _His other Sons._

X.—CONCERNING THE PALACE OF THE GREAT KAAN 362

NOTES.—1. _Palace Wall._ 2. _The word |Tarcasci|._ 3.
_Towers._ 4. _Arsenals of the Palace._ 5. _The
Gates._ 6. _Various Readings._ 7. _Barracks._
8. _Wide diffusion of the kind of Palace here
described._ 9. _Parallel description._ 10. _“Divine”
Park._ 11. _Modern account of the Lake, etc._
12. “Roze de l’açur.” 13. _The Green Mount._ 14.
_Textual._ 15. _Bridge._

XI.—CONCERNING THE CITY OF CAMBALUC 374

NOTES.—1. _Chronology, etc., of Peking._ 2. _The City
Wall._ 3. _Changes in the Extent of the City._ 4.
_Its ground plan._ 5. _Aspect._ 6. _Public Towers._
7. _Addition from Ramusio._

XII.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN MAINTAINS A GUARD OF TWELVE THOUSAND
HORSE, WHICH ARE CALLED KESHICAN 379

NOTE.—_The term |Quescican|._

XIII.—THE FASHION OF THE GREAT KAAN’S TABLE AT HIS HIGH FEASTS 381

NOTES.—1. _Order of the Tables._ 2. _The word |Vernique|._
3. _The Buffet of Liquors._ 4. _The superstition of
the Threshold._ 5. _Chinese Etiquettes._ 6. _Jugglers
at the Banquet._

XIV.—CONCERNING THE GREAT FEAST HELD BY THE GRAND KAAN EVERY YEAR
ON HIS BIRTHDAY 386

NOTES.—1. _The Chinese Year._ 2. “_Beaten Gold._” 3.
_Textual. Festal changes of costume._ 4. _Festivals._

XV.—OF THE GREAT FESTIVAL WHICH THE KAAN HOLDS ON NEW YEAR’S
DAY 390

NOTES.—1. _The White Month._ 2. _Mystic value of the number
9._ 3. _Elephants at Peking._ 4. _Adoration of
Tablets. K’o-tow._

XVI.—CONCERNING THE TWELVE THOUSAND BARONS WHO RECEIVE ROBES OF
CLOTH OF GOLD FROM THE EMPEROR ON THE GREAT FESTIVALS,
THIRTEEN CHANGES A-PIECE 394

NOTES.—1. _Textual._ 2. _The words |Camut| and |Borgal|._
3. _Tame Lions._

XVII.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN ENJOINETH HIS PEOPLE TO SUPPLY HIM WITH
GAME 396

NOTE.—_Parallel Passage._

XVIII.—OF THE LIONS AND LEOPARDS AND WOLVES THAT THE KAAN KEEPS
FOR THE CHASE 397

NOTES.—1. _The Cheeta or Hunting Leopard._ 2. _Lynxes._ 3.
_The Tiger, termed |Lion| by Polo._ 4. _The Búrgút
Eagle._

XIX.—CONCERNING THE TWO BROTHERS WHO HAVE CHARGE OF THE KAAN’S
HOUNDS 400

NOTE.—_The Masters of the Hounds, and their title._

XX.—HOW THE EMPEROR GOES ON A HUNTING EXPEDITION 402

NOTES.—1. _Direction of the Tour._ 2. _Hawking
Establishments._ 3. _The word |Tosḳáúl|._ 4. _The word
|Bularguchi|._ 5. _Kúblái’s Litter._ 6. _Kachar Modun._
7. _The Kaan’s Great Tents._ 8. _The Sable and
Ermine._ 9. _Pétis de la Croix._

XXI.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN, ON RETURNING FROM HIS HUNTING
EXPEDITION, HOLDS A GREAT COURT AND ENTERTAINMENT 410

NOTE.—_This chapter peculiar to the 2nd Type of MSS._

XXII.—CONCERNING THE CITY OF CAMBALUC, AND ITS GREAT TRAFFIC AND
POPULATION 412

NOTES.—1. _Suburbs of Peking._ 2. _The word |Fondaco|._

XXIII.—[CONCERNING THE OPPRESSIONS OF ACHMATH THE BAILO, AND THE
PLOT THAT WAS FORMED AGAINST HIM] 415

NOTES.—1. _Chapter peculiar to Ramusio._ 2. _Kúblái’s
Administration. The Rise of Ahmad._ 3. _The term
|Bailo|._ 4. _The Conspiracy against Ahmad as related
by Gaubil from the Chinese._ 5. _Marco’s presence and
upright conduct commemorated in the Chinese Annals.
The Kaan’s prejudice against Mahomedans._

XXIV.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSETH THE BARK OF TREES, MADE INTO
SOMETHING LIKE PAPER, TO PASS FOR MONEY OVER ALL HIS COUNTRY 423

NOTE.—_Chinese Paper Currency._

XXV.—CONCERNING THE TWELVE BARONS WHO ARE SET OVER ALL THE
AFFAIRS OF THE GREAT KAAN 430

NOTE.—_The Ministers of the Mongol Dynasty. The term
|Sing|._

XXVI.—HOW THE KAAN’S POSTS AND RUNNERS ARE SPED THROUGH MANY
LANDS AND PROVINCES 433

NOTES.—1. _Textual._ 2. _The word |Yam|._ 3. _Government
Hostelries._ 4. _Digression from Ramusio._ 5. _Posts
Extraordinary._ 6. _Discipline of the Posts._ 7.
_Antiquity of Posts in China, etc._

XXVII.—HOW THE EMPEROR BESTOWS HELP ON HIS PEOPLE, WHEN THEY ARE
AFFLICTED WITH DEARTH OR MURRAIN 439

NOTE.—_Kúblái’s remissions, and justice._

XXVIII.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSES TREES TO BE PLANTED BY THE
HIGHWAYS 440

NOTE.—_Kúblái’s Avenues._

XXIX.—CONCERNING THE RICE-WINE DRUNK BY THE PEOPLE OF CATHAY 441

NOTE.—_Rice-wine._

XXX.—CONCERNING THE BLACK STONES THAT ARE DUG IN CATHAY, AND ARE
BURNT FOR FUEL 442

NOTE.—_Distribution and Consumption of Coal in China._

XXXI.—HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSES STORES OF CORN TO BE MADE, TO
HELP HIS PEOPLE WITHAL IN TIME OF DEARTH 443

NOTE.—_The Chinese Public Granaries._

XXXII.—OF THE CHARITY OF THE EMPEROR TO THE POOR 444

NOTE.—_Buddhist influence, and Chinese Charities._

XXXIII.—[CONCERNING THE ASTROLOGERS IN THE CITY OF CAMBALUC] 446

NOTES.—1. _The word |Tacuin|.—_The Chinese Almanacs. The
Observatory._ 2. _The Chinese and Mongol Cycle._

XXXIV.—[CONCERNING THE RELIGION OF THE CATHAYANS; THEIR VIEWS AS
TO THE SOUL; AND THEIR CUSTOMS] 456

NOTES.—1. _Textual._ 2. _Do._ 3. _Exceptions to the general
charge of Irreligion brought against the Chinese._
4. _Politeness._ 5. _Filial Piety._ 6. _Pocket
Spitoons._

EXPLANATORY LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS TO VOLUME I.

INSERTED PLATES AND MAPS.

_To face
page_
_Title_ PORTRAIT of Sir HENRY YULE. From the Painting by Mr. T. B.
Wirgman, in the Royal Engineers’ Mess House at Chatham.

iv. Illuminated Title, with Medallion representing the POLOS
ARRIVING AT VENICE after 26 years’ absence, and being refused
admittance to the Family Mansion; as related by Ramusio, p.
_4_ of Introductory Essay. Drawn by Signor QUINTO CENNI, No.
7 Via Solferino, Milan; from a Design by the Editor.

_1._ DOORWAY of the HOUSE of MARCO POLO in the Corte Sabbionera at
Venice (see p. _27_). Woodcut from a drawing by Signor L.
ROSSO, Venice.

_26._ _Corte del Milione_, Venice.

_28._ _Malibran Theatre_, Venice.

_30._ Entrance to the Corte del Milione, Venice. From photographs
taken for the present editor, by Signor NAYA.

_42._ Figures from St. Sabba’s, sent to Venice. From a photograph of
Signor NAYA.

_50._ Church of SAN MATTEO, at Genoa.

_62._ _Palazzo di S. Giorgio_, at Genoa.

_68._ _Miracle of S. Lorenzo_. From the Painting by V. CARPACCIO.

_70._ FACSIMILE of the WILL of MARCO POLO, preserved in St. Mark’s
Library. Lithographed from a photograph specially taken by
Bertani at Venice.

_74._ Pavement in front of S. Lorenzo.

_76._ Mosaic Portrait of Marco Polo, at Genoa.

_78._ The Pseudo Marco Polo at Canton.

_80._ Porcelain Incense-Burner, from the Louvre.

_82._ Temple of 500 Genii, at Canton, after a drawing by FÉLIX
RÉGAMEY.

_108._ Probable view of MARCO POLO’S OWN GEOGRAPHY: a Map of the
World, formed as far as possible from the Traveller’s own
data. Drawn by the Editor.

_134._ Part of the _Catalan Map_ of 1375.

• • • • •

1. Marco Polo’s Itineraries, No. I. WESTERN ASIA. This includes
also “Sketch showing the chief Monarchies of Asia, in the
latter part of the 13th century.”

4. Map illustrating the geographical position of the CITY of SARAI.

4. Plan of part of the remains of the same city. Reduced from a
Russian plan published by _M. Grigorieff_.

29 Reduced FACSIMILE of the BUDDHIST INSCRIPTION of the Mongol
& 30. Era, on the Archway at KIU-YONG KWAN in the Pass of Nan-k’au,
north-west of Peking, showing the characters in use under the
Mongol Dynasty. Photogravure from the _Recueil des documents
de l’Époque Mongole_, by H.H. Prince ROLAND BONAPARTE. _See
an Article by_ Mr. Wylie _in the J. R. A. S. for 1870, p. 14._

41. Plan of AYAS, the Laias of Polo. _From an Admiralty Chart_.

41. Plan of position of DILÁWAR, the supposed site of the Dilavar
of Polo. _Ext. from a Survey by Lt.-Col. D. G. Robinson, R.E._

114. Marco Polo’s Itineraries, No. II. Routes between KERMAN and
HORMUZ.

178. Marco Polo’s Itineraries, No. III. Regions on and near the
UPPER OXUS.

305. Heading, in the old Chinese seal-character, of an INSCRIPTION
on a Memorial raised by Kúblái Kaan to a Buddhist
Ecclesiastic, in the vicinity of his summer-palace at SHANGTU
in Mongolia. Reduced from a facsimile obtained on the spot by
_Dr. S. W. Bushell_, 1872, and by him lent to the Editor.

319. The CHO-KHANG. The grand Temple of Buddha at _Lhasa_, from _The
Journey to Lhasa_, by SARAT CHANDRA DAS, by kind permission
of the Royal Geographical Society.

352. “_Table d’Or de Commandement_;” the PAÏZA of the MONGOLS, from
a specimen found in Siberia. _Reduced to one-half the scale
of the original, from an engraving in a paper by_ I. J.
Schmidt _in the_ Bulletin de la Classe Historico-Philologique
de l’Acad. Imp. des Sciences, St.-Pétersbourg, tom. iv. No. 9.

355. Second Example of a Mongol Païza with superscription in the
Uighúr character, found near the Dnieper River, 1845. From
_Trans. of the Oriental Section, Imp. Soc. of Archæology_
of St. Petersburg, vol. v. The Inscription on this runs:
“_By the strength of Eternal Heaven, and thanks to Its Great
Power, the Man who obeys not the order of Abdullah shall be
guilty, shall die._”

376. Plan of PEKING as it is, and as it was about A.D. 1290.

426. BANK-NOTE of the MING Dynasty, on one-half the scale of the
original. Reduced from a genuine note in the possession of
the British Museum. Was brought back from Peking after the
siege of the Legations in 1900.

448. Mongol “Compendium Instrument.”

450. Mongol Armillary Sphere.

452. Observatory Terrace.

454. Observatory Instruments of the Jesuits. All these from
photographs kindly lent to the present Editor by Count de
Semallé.

_last Marco Polo’s Itineraries. No. IV. EASTERN ASIA. This includes
page_ also Sketch Map of the Ruins of SHANGTU, after Dr. BUSHELL;
and Enlarged Sketch of the Passage of the Hwang-ho or
Karamoran on the road to Si-ngan fu (see vol. ii. pp. 25–27)
from the data of _Baron von Richthofen_.

WOODCUTS PRINTED WITH THE TEXT.

INTRODUCTORY NOTICES.

_Page_
x. A MEDIÆVAL SHIP.

xxvi. COAT OF ARMS of Sir HENRY YULE.

_7._ ARMS of the POLO family, according to Priuli.

_8._ ARMS of the POLO family, according to Marco Barbaro. (See p. 7,
note.)

_13._ Autograph of HETHUM or HAYTON I. King of (Cilician) Armenia;
copied from _Codice Diplomatico del Sacro Militare Ordine
Gerosolemitano_, I. 135. The signature is attached to a
French document without date, granting the King’s Daughter
“Damoiselle Femie” (Euphemia) in marriage to Sire Julian,
son of the Lady of Sayete (Sidon). The words run: _Thagávor
Haiwetz_ (“Rex Armenorum”), followed by the King’s cypher or
monogram; but the initial letter is absent, probably worn off
the original document.

_18._ The PIAZZETTA at VENICE in the 14th century. From a portion of
the Frontispiece Miniature of the MS. of Marco Polo in the
Bodleian. (Borrowed from the _National Miscellany_, published
by J. H. Parker, Oxford, for 1853–55; and see _Street’s Brick
and Marble_, etc., 1855, pp. 150–151.) [See vol. ii. p. 529.]

_29._ Three extracts from MAPS of VENICE, showing the site of the CA’
POLO at three different periods, (1) From the great woodcut
Map or View of Venice, dated 1500, and commonly called Albert
Dürer’s. (2) From a Plan by Cav. Ludovico Ughi, 1729. (3)
From the Modern Official Plan of the City.

_34._ Diagram of arrangement of oars in galleys.

_35._ Extract from a fresco by SPINELLO ARETINI, in the Municipal
Palace at SIENA, representing a GALLEY-FIGHT (perhaps
imaginary) between the Venetians and the fleet of the Emperor
Frederick Barbarossa, and illustrating the arrangements
of mediæval galleys. Drawn from a very dim and imperfect
photograph, after personal study of the original, by the
Editor.

_37._ Extract from a picture by DOMENICO TINTORETTO in the Ducal
Palace at Venice, representing the same GALLEY-FIGHT. After
an engraving in the _Theatrum Venetum_.

_49._ MARCO POLO’S GALLEY going into action at CURZOLA. Drawn by
Signor Q. CENNI, from a design by the Editor.

_50._ Map to illustrate the SEA-FIGHT at CURZOLA, where Marco Polo
was taken prisoner.

_57._ SEAL of the PISAN PRISONERS in Genoa, after the battle of
Meloria (1284). From _Manni, Osservazioni Storiche sopra
Sigilli Antichi_, tom. xii. Engraved by T. ADENEY.

_75._ The Convent and CHURCH of S. LORENZO, the burial-place of Marco
Polo, as it existed in the 15th century. From the Map of 1500
(see above). Engraved by the same.

_78._ Arms of the TREVISAN family, according to Priuli.

_120._ TAILED STAR near the Antarctic, as Marco Polo drew it for
Pietro d’Abano. From the _Conciliator_ of Pietro d’Abano.

PROLOGUE.

_Page_
3. Remains of the Castle of SOLDAIA or Sudák. After _Dubois de
Montpereux, Voyage autour du Caucase_, Atlas, 3d s. Pl. 64.

7. Ruins of BOLGHAR. After _Demidoff, Voyage dans la Russie
Méridionale_, Pl. 75.

15. The GREAT KAAN delivering a GOLDEN TABLET to the two elder
Polos. From a miniature in the _Livre des Merveilles du
Monde_ (Fr. 2810) in the Library at Paris, fol. 3 verso.

16. Castle of AYAS. After _Langlois, Voyage en Cilicie._

18. Plan of ACRE as it was when lost (A.D. 1291). Reduced and
translated from the contemporary plan in the _Secreta
Fidelium Crucis_ of Marino Sanudo the Elder, engraved in
_Bongars, Gesta Dei per Francos_, vol. ii.

21. Portrait of Pope GREGORY X. After _J. B. de Cavaleriis
Pontificum Romanorum Effigies_, etc. Romæ, 1580.

37. Ancient CHINESE WAR VESSEL. From the Chinese Encyclopædia
called _San-Thsai-Thou-Hoei_, in the Paris Library.

BOOK FIRST.

_Page_
42. Coin of King HETUM I. and Queen ISABEL of Cilician Armenia.
From an original in the British Museum. Engraved by ADENEY.

48. Castle of BAIBURT. After _Texier, L’Arménie_, Pl. 3.

51. Mediæval GEORGIAN FORTRESS. From a drawing by Padre CRISTOFORO
DI CASTELLI of the Theatine Mission, made in 1634, and now in
the Communal Library at Palermo. The name of the place has
been eaten away, and I have not yet been able to ascertain it.

55. View of DERBEND. After a cut from a drawing by M. Moynet in the
_Tour du Monde_, vol. i.

61. Coin of BADRUDDÍN LOLO of Mosul (A.H. 620). After _Marsden’s
Numismata Orientalia_, No. 164. By ADENEY.

76. GHÁZÁN Khan’s Mosque at TABRIZ. Borrowed from _Fergusson’s
History of Architecture._

95. KASHMIR SCARF with animals, etc. After photograph from the
scarf in the Indian Museum.

100. Humped Oxen from the Assyrian Sculptures at Kouyunjik. From
_Rawlinson’s Ancient Monarchies._

102. Portrait of a Hazára. From a Photograph, kindly taken for the
purpose, by M.-Gen. _C. P. Keyes_, C.B., Commanding the
Panjáb Frontier Force.

116– Illustrations of the use of the DOUBLE RUDDER in the Middle
118. Ages. 7 figures, viz., No. 1, The Navicella of Giotto in
the Porch of St. Peter’s. From _Eastlake’s H. of Painting_;
Nos. 2 and 3, from _Pertz, Scriptores_, tom. xviii. after
a Genoese Chronicle; No. 4, Sketch from fresco of Spinello
Aretini at Siena; No. 5, Seal of Port of Winchelsea, from
_Sussex Archæological Collections_, vol. i. 1848; No. 6,
Sculpture on Leaning Tower at Pisa, after _Jal, Archéologie
Navale_; No. 7, from the Monument of Peter Martyr, the
persecutor of the Lombard _Patarini_, in the Church of St.
Eustorgius at Milan, after _Le Tombe ed i Monumenti Illustri
d’Italia_, Mil. 1822–23.

134. The _ARBRE SEC_, and _ARBRES DU SOLEIL ET DE LA LUNE_. From
a miniature in the Prose Romance of Alexander, in the Brit.
Museum MS. called the _Shrewsbury Book_ (Reg. xv. e. 6).

137. The CHINÁR or Oriental Plane, viz., that called the Tree of
Godfrey of Boulogne at Buyukdéré, near Constantinople.
Borrowed from _Le Monde Végétal_ of Figuier.

147. Portrait of H. H. AGHA KHÁN MEHELÁTI, late representative of
the OLD MAN of the MOUNTAIN. From a photograph by Messrs.
SHEPHERD and BOURNE.

159. Ancient SILVER PATERA of debased Greek Art, formerly in the
possession of the Princes of BADAKHSHAN, now in the India
Museum.

167. Ancient BUDDHIST Temple at Pandrethan in KÁSHMIR. Borrowed from
_Fergusson’s History of Architecture_.

176. Horns of the _OVIS POLI_, or Great Sheep of Pamir. Drawn by
the Editor from the specimen belonging to the Royal Asiatic
Society.

177. Figure of the _OVIS POLI_ or Great Sheep of Pamir. From a
drawing by Mr. Severtsof in a Russian publication.

180. Head of a native of KASHGAR. After Verchaguine. From the _Tour
du Monde_.

181. View of KASHGAR. From _Mr. R. Shaw’s Tartary_.

184. View of SAMARKAND. From a Sketch by Mr. D. IVANOFF, engraved
in a Russian Illustrated Paper (kindly sent by Mr. I. to the
editor).

221. Colossal Figure; BUDDHA entering NIRVANA. Sketched by the
Editor at Pagán in Burma.

222. Great LAMA MONASTERY, viz., that at Jehol. After _Staunton’s
Narrative of Lord Macartney’s Embassy_.

224. The _Kyang_, or WILD ASS of Mongolia. After a plate by Wolf in
the _Journal of the Royal Zoological Society_.

229. The Situation of Karákorum.

230. Entrance to the Erdeni Tso, Great Temple. From MARCEL MONNIER’S
_Tour d’Asie_, by kind permission of M. PLON.

244. Death of Chinghiz Khan. From a Miniature in the _Livre des
Merveilles_.

253. Dressing up a Tent, from MARCEL MONNIER’S _Tour d’Asie_, by
kind permission of M. PLON.

255. Mediæval TARTAR HUTS and WAGGONS. Drawn by Sig. QUINTO CENNI,
on a design compiled by the Editor from the descriptions of
mediæval and later travellers.

258. Tartar IDOLS and KUMIS Churn. Drawn by the Editor after data in
_Pallas_ and _Zaleski_ (_Vie des Steppes Kirghiz_).

273. The _SYRRHAPTES PALLASII; Bargherlac_ of Marco Polo. From a
plate by Wolf in the _Ibis_ for April, 1860.

280. REEVES’S PHEASANT. After an engraving in _Wood’s Illustrated
Natural History_.

293. The RAMPART of GOG and MAGOG. From a photograph of the Great
Wall of China. Borrowed from _Dr. Rennie’s Peking and the
Pekingese_.

307. A PAVILION at Yuen-Ming-Yuen, to illustrate the probable style
of Kúblái Kaan’s Summer Palace. Borrowed from _Michie’s
Siberian Overland Route_.

317. CHINESE CONJURING Extraordinary. Extracted from an engraving in
_Edward Melton’s Zeldzaame Reizen_, etc. Amsterdam, 1702.

320. A MONASTERY of LAMAS. Borrowed from the _Tour du Monde_.

326. A TIBETAN BACSI. Sketched from the life by the Editor.

BOOK SECOND.—PART FIRST.

_Page_
340. NAKKARAS. From a Chinese original in the _Lois des Empereurs
Mandchous_ (_Thai-Thsing-Hoei-Tien-Thou_), in the Paris
Library.

341. NAKKARAS. After one of the illustrations in Blochmann’s edition
of the _Ain-i-Akbari_.

352. Seljukian Coin, with the LION and the SUN (A.H. 640). After
_Marsden’s Numismata Orientalia_, No. 98. Engraved by ADENEY.

355. Sculptured GERFALCON from the Gate of Iconium. Copied from
_Hammer’s Falknerklee_.

357. Portrait of the Great KAAN KÚBLÁI. From a Chinese engraving in
the Encyclopædia called _San Thsai-Thou-Hoei_; in the Paris
Library.

367. Ideal Plan of the Ancient Palaces of the Mongol Emperors at
Khanbaligh, according to Dr. Bretschneider.

369. Palace at Khan-baligh. From the _Livre des Merveilles_.

369. The WINTER PALACE at PEKING. Borrowed from _Fergusson’s History
of Architecture_.

371. View of the “GREEN MOUNT.” From a photograph kindly lent to the
present Editor by Count de SEMALLÉ.

373. The _Yüan ch’eng_. From a photograph kindly lent to the present
Editor by Count de SEMALLÉ.

376. South GATE of the “IMPERIAL CITY” at Peking. From an original
sketch belonging to the late _Dr. W. Lockhart_.

399. The BÚRGÚT EAGLE. After _Atkinson’s Oriental and Western
Siberia_.

409. The TENTS of the EMPEROR K’ien-lung. From a drawing in the
_Staunton Collection_ in the British Museum.

413. Plain of CAMBALUC; the City in the distance; from the hills
on the north-west. From a photograph. Borrowed from _Dr.
Rennie’s Peking_.

458. The Great TEMPLE OF HEAVEN at Peking. From _Michie’s Siberian
Overland Route_.

463. MARBLE ARCHWAY erected under the MONGOL DYNASTY at Kiu-Yong
Kwan in the Nan-k’au Pass, N.W. of Peking. From a photograph
in the possession of the present Editor.

[Illustration: Doorway of the House of Marco Polo in the Corte
Sabbionera, at Venice.]

MARCO POLO AND HIS BOOK.

INTRODUCTORY NOTICES.

I. OBSCURITIES IN THE HISTORY OF HIS LIFE AND BOOK.
RAMUSIO’S STATEMENTS.

[Sidenote: Obscurities of Polo’s Book, and personal History.]

1. With all the intrinsic interest of Marco Polo’s Book it may perhaps
be doubted if it would have continued to exercise such fascination on
many minds through successive generations were it not for the difficult
questions which it suggests. It is a great book of puzzles, whilst our
confidence in the man’s veracity is such that we feel certain every
puzzle has a solution.

And such difficulties have not attached merely to the identification
of places, the interpretation of outlandish terms, or the illustration
of obscure customs; for strange entanglements have perplexed also the
chief circumstances of the Traveller’s life and authorship. The time
of the dictation of his Book and of the execution of his Last Will
have been almost the only undisputed epochs in his biography. The year
of his birth has been contested, and the date of his death has not
been recorded; the critical occasion of his capture by the Genoese, to
which we seem to owe the happy fact that he did not go down mute to
the tomb of his fathers, has been made the subject of chronological
difficulties; there are in the various texts of his story variations
hard to account for; the very tongue in which it was written down
has furnished a question, solved only in our own age, and in a most
unexpected manner.

[Sidenote: Ramusio, his earliest biographer. His account of Polo.]

2. The first person who attempted to gather and string the facts of
Marco Polo’s personal history was his countryman, the celebrated John
Baptist Ramusio. His essay abounds in what we now know to be errors of
detail, but, prepared as it was when traditions of the Traveller were
still rife in Venice, a genuine thread runs through it which could
never have been spun in later days, and its presentation seems to me an
essential element in any full discourse upon the subject.

Ramusio’s preface to the Book of Marco Polo, which opens the second
volume of his famous Collection of Voyages and Travels, and is
addressed to his learned friend Jerome Fracastoro, after referring to
some of the most noted geographers of antiquity, proceeds:[1]—

“Of all that I have named, Ptolemy, as the latest, possessed
the greatest extent of knowledge. Thus, towards the North, his
knowledge carries him beyond the Caspian, and he is aware of its
being shut in all round like a lake,—a fact which was unknown
in the days of Strabo and Pliny, though the Romans were already
lords of the world. But though his knowledge extends so far, a
tract of 15 degrees beyond that sea he can describe only as Terra
Incognita; and towards the South he is fain to apply the same
character to all beyond the Equinoxial. In these unknown regions,
as regards the South, the first to make discoveries have been the
Portuguese captains of our own age; but as regards the North and
North-East the discoverer was the Magnifico Messer Marco Polo, an
honoured nobleman of Venice, nearly 300 years since, as may be
read more fully in his own Book. And in truth it makes one marvel
to consider the immense extent of the journeys made, first by the
Father and Uncle of the said Messer Marco, when they proceeded
continually towards the East-North-East, all the way to the Court
of the Great Can and the Emperor of the Tartars; and afterwards
again by the three of them when, on their return homeward, they
traversed the Eastern and Indian Seas. Nor is that all, for one
marvels also how the aforesaid gentleman was able to give such an
orderly description of all that he had seen; seeing that such an
accomplishment was possessed by very few in his day, and he had
had a large part of his nurture among those uncultivated Tartars,
without any regular training in the art of composition. His Book
indeed, owing to the endless errors and inaccuracies that had
crept into it, had come for many years to be regarded as fabulous;
and the opinion prevailed that the names of cities and provinces
contained therein were all fictitious and imaginary, without any
ground in fact, or were (I might rather say) mere dreams.

[Sidenote: Ramusio vindicates Polo’s Geography.]

3. “Howbeit, during the last hundred years, persons acquainted
with Persia have begun to recognise the existence of Cathay. The
voyages of the Portuguese also towards the North-East, beyond
the Golden Chersonese, have brought to knowledge many cities and
provinces of India, and many islands likewise, with those very
names which our Author applies to them; and again, on reaching
the Land of China, they have ascertained from the people of that
region (as we are told by Sign. John de Barros, a Portuguese
gentleman, in his Geography) that Canton, one of the chief cities
of that kingdom, is in 30⅔° of latitude, with the coast running
N.E. and S.W.; that after a distance of 275 leagues the said coast
turns towards the N.W.; and that there are three provinces along
the sea-board, Mangi, Zanton, and Quinzai, the last of which is
the principal city and the King’s Residence, standing in 46° of
latitude. And proceeding yet further the coast attains to 50°.[2]
Seeing then how many particulars are in our day becoming known of
that part of the world concerning which Messer Marco has written,
I have deemed it reasonable to publish his book, with the aid of
several copies written (as I judge) more than 200 years ago, in a
perfectly accurate form, and one vastly more faithful than that in
which it has been heretofore read. And thus the world shall not
lose the fruit that may be gathered from so much diligence and
industry expended upon so honourable a branch of knowledge.”

4. Ramusio, then, after a brief apologetic parallel of the marvels
related by Polo with those related by the Ancients and by the modern
discoverers in the West, such as Columbus and Cortes, proceeds:—

[Sidenote: Ramusio compares Polo with Columbus.]

“And often in my own mind, comparing the land explorations of these
our Venetian gentlemen with the sea explorations of the aforesaid
Signor Don Christopher, I have asked myself which of the two were
really the more marvellous. And if patriotic prejudice delude me
not, methinks good reason might be adduced for setting the land
journey above the sea voyage. Consider only what a height of
courage was needed to undertake and carry through so difficult an
enterprise, over a route of such desperate length and hardship,
whereon it was sometimes necessary to carry food for the supply
of man and beast, not for days only but for months together.
Columbus, on the other hand, going by sea, readily carried with
him all necessary provision; and after a voyage of some 30 or 40
days was conveyed by the wind whither he desired to go, whilst the
Venetians again took a whole year’s time to pass all those great
deserts and mighty rivers. Indeed that the difficulty of travelling
to Cathay was so much greater than that of reaching the New World,
and the route so much longer and more perilous, may be gathered
from the fact that, since those gentlemen twice made this journey,
no one from Europe has dared to repeat it,[3] whereas in the very
year following the discovery of the Western Indies many ships
immediately retraced the voyage thither, and up to the present day
continue to do so, habitually and in countless numbers. Indeed
those regions are now so well known, and so thronged by commerce,
that the traffic between Italy, Spain, and England is not greater.”

[Sidenote: Recounts a tradition of the travellers’ return to Venice.]

5. Ramusio goes on to explain the light regarding the first part or
prologue of Marco Polo’s book that he had derived from a recent piece
of luck which had made him partially acquainted with the geography
of Abulfeda, and to make a running commentary on the whole of the
preliminary narrative until the final return of the travellers to
Venice:—

“And when they got thither the same fate befel them as befel
Ulysses, who, when he returned, after his twenty years’ wanderings,
to his native Ithaca, was recognized by nobody. Thus also those
three gentlemen who had been so many years absent from their
native city were recognized by none of their kinsfolk, who were
under the firm belief that they had all been dead for many a year
past, as indeed had been reported. Through the long duration and
the hardships of their journeys, and through the many worries and
anxieties that they had undergone, they were quite changed in
aspect, and had got a certain indescribable smack of the Tartar
both in air and accent, having indeed all but forgotten their
Venetian tongue. Their clothes too were coarse and shabby, and of
a Tartar cut. They proceeded on their arrival to their house in
this city in the confine of St. John Chrysostom, where you may
see it to this day. The house, which was in those days a very
lofty and handsome palazzo, is now known by the name of the _Corte
del Millioni_ for a reason that I will tell you presently. Going
thither they found it occupied by some of their relatives, and
they had the greatest difficulty in making the latter understand
who they should be. For these good people, seeing them to be in
countenance so unlike what they used to be, and in dress so shabby,
flatly refused to believe that they were those very gentlemen of
the Ca’ Polo whom they had been looking upon for ever so many years
as among the dead.[4] So these three gentlemen,—this is a story I
have often heard when I was a youngster from the illustrious Messer
GASPARO MALPIERO, a gentleman of very great age, and a Senator
of eminent virtue and integrity, whose house was on the Canal of
Santa Marina, exactly at the corner over the mouth of the Rio di S.
Giovanni Chrisostomo, and just midway among the buildings of the
aforesaid Corte del Millioni, and he said he had heard the story
from his own father and grandfather, and from other old men among
the neighbours,—the three gentlemen, I say, devised a scheme by
which they should at once bring about their recognition by their
relatives, and secure the honourable notice of the whole city; and
this was it:—

“They invited a number of their kindred to an entertainment, which
they took care to have prepared with great state and splendour
in that house of theirs; and when the hour arrived for sitting
down to table they came forth of their chamber all three clothed
in crimson satin, fashioned in long robes reaching to the ground
such as people in those days wore within doors. And when water
for the hands had been served, and the guests were set, they took
off those robes and put on others of crimson damask, whilst the
first suits were by their orders cut up and divided among the
servants. Then after partaking of some of the dishes they went
out again and came back in robes of crimson velvet, and when
they had again taken their seats, the second suits were divided
as before. When dinner was over they did the like with the robes
of velvet, after they had put on dresses of the ordinary fashion
worn by the rest of the company.[5] These proceedings caused much
wonder and amazement among the guests. But when the cloth had
been drawn, and all the servants had been ordered to retire from
the dining hall, Messer Marco, as the youngest of the three, rose
from table, and, going into another chamber, brought forth the
three shabby dresses of coarse stuff which they had worn when
they first arrived. Straightway they took sharp knives and began
to rip up some of the seams and welts, and to take out of them
jewels of the greatest value in vast quantities, such as rubies,
sapphires, carbuncles, diamonds and emeralds, which had all been
stitched up in those dresses in so artful a fashion that nobody
could have suspected the fact. For when they took leave of the
Great Can they had changed all the wealth that he had bestowed
upon them into this mass of rubies, emeralds, and other jewels,
being well aware of the impossibility of carrying with them so
great an amount in gold over a journey of such extreme length
and difficulty. Now this exhibition of such a huge treasure of
jewels and precious stones, all tumbled out upon the table, threw
the guests into fresh amazement, insomuch that they seemed quite
bewildered and dumbfounded. And now they recognized that in spite
of all former doubts these were in truth those honoured and worthy
gentlemen of the Ca’ Polo that they claimed to be; and so all paid
them the greatest honour and reverence. And when the story got
wind in Venice, straightway the whole city, gentle and simple,
flocked to the house to embrace them, and to make much of them,
with every conceivable demonstration of affection and respect.
On Messer Maffio, who was the eldest, they conferred the honours
of an office that was of great dignity in those days; whilst the
young men came daily to visit and converse with the ever polite and
gracious Messer Marco, and to ask him questions about Cathay and
the Great Can, all which he answered with such kindly courtesy that
every man felt himself in a manner his debtor. And as it happened
that in the story, which he was constantly called on to repeat, of
the magnificence of the Great Can, he would speak of his revenues
as amounting to ten or fifteen _millions_ of gold; and in like
manner, when recounting other instances of great wealth in those
parts, would always make use of the term _millions_, so they gave
him the nickname of MESSER MARCO MILLIONI: a thing which I have
noted also in the Public Books of this Republic where mention
is made of him.[6] The Court of his House, too, at S. Giovanni
Chrisostomo, has always from that time been popularly known as the
Court of the Millioni.

[Sidenote: Recounts Marco’s capture by the Genoese.]

6. “Not many months after the arrival of the travellers at Venice,
news came that LAMPA DORIA, Captain of the Genoese Fleet, had
advanced with 70 galleys to the Island of Curzola, upon which
orders were issued by the Prince of the Most Illustrious Signory
for the arming of 90 galleys with all the expedition possible, and
Messer Marco Polo for his valour was put in charge of one of these.
So he with the others, under the command of the Most Illustrious
MESSER ANDREA DANDOLO, Procurator of St. Mark’s, as Captain
General, a very brave and worthy gentleman, set out in search of
the Genoese Fleet. They fought on the September feast of Our Lady,
and, as is the common hazard of war, our fleet was beaten, and Polo
was made prisoner. For, having pressed on in the vanguard of the
attack, and fighting with high and worthy courage in defence of his
country and his kindred, he did not receive due support, and being
wounded, he was taken, along with Dandolo, and immediately put in
irons and sent to Genoa.

“When his rare qualities and marvellous travels became known
there, the whole city gathered to see him and to speak with him,
and he was no longer entreated as a prisoner but as a dear friend
and honoured gentleman. Indeed they showed him such honour and
affection that at all hours of the day he was visited by the
noblest gentlemen of the city, and was continually receiving
presents of every useful kind. Messer Marco finding himself in
this position, and witnessing the general eagerness to hear all
about Cathay and the Great Can, which indeed compelled him daily to
repeat his story till he was weary, was advised to put the matter
in writing. So having found means to get a letter written to his
father here at Venice, in which he desired the latter to send the
notes and memoranda which he had brought home with him, after the
receipt of these, and assisted by a Genoese gentleman, who was a
great friend of his, and who took great delight in learning about
the various regions of the world, and used on that account to spend
many hours daily in the prison with him, he wrote this present book
(to please him) in the Latin tongue.

“To this day the Genoese for the most part write what they have to
write in that language, for there is no possibility of expressing
their natural dialect with the pen.[7] Thus then it came to pass
that the Book was put forth at first by Messer Marco in Latin; but
as many copies were taken, and as it was rendered into our vulgar
tongue, all Italy became filled with it, so much was this story
desired and run after.

[Sidenote: Ramusio’s account of Marco’s liberation and marriage.]

7. “The captivity of Messer Marco greatly disturbed the minds
of Messer Maffio and his father Messer Nicolo. They had decided,
whilst still on their travels, that Marco should marry as soon as
they should get to Venice; but now they found themselves in this
unlucky pass, with so much wealth and nobody to inherit it. Fearing
that Marco’s imprisonment might endure for many years, or, worse
still, that he might not live to quit it (for many assured them
that numbers of Venetian prisoners had been kept in Genoa a score
of years before obtaining liberty); seeing too no prospect of being
able to ransom him,—a thing which they had attempted often and
by various channels,—they took counsel together, and came to the
conclusion that Messer Nicolo, who, old as he was, was still hale
and vigorous, should take to himself a new wife. This he did; and
at the end of four years he found himself the father of three sons,
Stefano, Maffio, and Giovanni. Not many years after, Messer Marco
aforesaid, through the great favour that he had acquired in the
eyes of the first gentlemen of Genoa, and indeed of the whole city,
was discharged from prison and set free. Returning home he found
that his father had in the meantime had those three other sons.
Instead of taking this amiss, wise and discreet man that he was,
he agreed also to take a wife of his own. He did so accordingly,
but he never had any son, only two girls, one called Moreta and the
other Fantina.

“When at a later date his father died, like a good and dutiful son
he caused to be erected for him a tomb of very honourable kind for
those days, being a great sarcophagus cut from the solid stone,
which to this day may be seen under the portico before the Church
of S. Lorenzo in this city, on the right hand as you enter, with
an inscription denoting it to be the tomb of Messer Nicolo Polo of
the contrada of S. Gio. Chrisostomo. The arms of his family consist
of a _Bend_ with three birds on it, and the colours, according to
certain books of old histories in which you see all the coats of
the gentlemen of this city emblazoned, are the field _azure_, the
bend _argent_, and the three birds _sable_. These last are birds of
that kind vulgarly termed _Pole_,[8] or, as the Latins call them,
_Gracculi_.

[Sidenote: Ramusio’s account of the Family Polo and its
termination.]

8. “As regards the after duration of this noble and worthy family,
I find that Messer Andrea Polo of San Felice had three sons,
the first of whom was Messer Marco, the second Maffio, the third
Nicolo. The two last were those who went to Constantinople first,
and afterwards to Cathay, as has been seen. Messer Marco the elder
being dead, the wife of Messer Nicolo who had been left at home
with child, gave birth to a son, to whom she gave the name of Marco
in memory of the deceased, and this is the Author of our Book. Of
the brothers who were born from his father’s second marriage, viz.
Stephen, John, and Matthew, I do not find that any of them had
children, except Matthew. He had five sons and one daughter called
Maria; and she, after the death of her brothers without offspring,
inherited in 1417 all the property of her father and her brothers.
She was honourably married to Messer AZZO TREVISANO of the parish
of Santo Stazio in this city, and from her sprung the fortunate
and honoured stock of the Illustrious Messer DOMENICO TREVISANO,
Procurator of St. Mark’s, and valorous Captain General of the Sea
Forces of the Republic, whose virtue and singular good qualities
are represented with augmentation in the person of the Most
Illustrious Prince Ser MARC’ANTONIO TREVISANO, his son.[9]

“Such has been the history of this noble family of the Ca’ Polo,
which lasted as we see till the year of our Redemption 1417, in
which year died childless Marco Polo, the last of the five sons of
Maffeo, and so it came to an end. Such be the chances and changes
of human affairs!”

[Illustration: Arms of the Ca’ Polo.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The Preface is dated Venice, 7th July, 1553. Fracastorius died
in the same year, and Ramusio erected a statue of him at Padua.
Ramusio himself died in July, 1557.

[2] The Geography of De Barros, from which this is quoted, has never
been printed. I can find nothing corresponding to this passage in
the Decades.

[3] A grievous error of Ramusio’s.

[4] See the decorated title-page of this volume for an attempt to
realise the scene.

[5] At first sight this fantastic tradition seems to have little
verisimilitude; but when we regard it in the light of genuine
Mongol custom, such as is quoted from Rubruquis, at p. 389 of
this volume, we shall be disposed to look on the whole story with
respect.

[6] This curious statement is confirmed by a passage in the records of
the Great Council, which, on a late visit to Venice, I was enabled
to extract, through an obliging communication from Professor
Minotto. (See below, p. _67_.)

[7] This rather preposterous skit at the Genoese dialect naturally
excites a remonstrance from the Abate Spotorno. (_Storia Letteraria
della Liguria_, II. 217.)

[8] _Jackdaws_, I believe, in spite of some doubt from the imbecility
of ordinary dictionaries in such matters.

They are under this name made the object of a similitude by Dante
(surely a most unhappy one) in reference to the resplendent spirits
flitting on the celestial stairs in the sphere of Saturn:—

“E come per lo natural costume
_Le Pole_ insieme, al cominciar del giorno,
Si muovono a scaldar le fredde piume:
Poi altre vanno vià senza ritorno,
Altre rivolgon sè, onde son mosse,
Ed altre roteando fan soggiorno.”—_Parad._ XXI. 34.

There is some difference among authorities as to the details of
the Polo blazon. According to a MS. concerning the genealogies of
Venetian families written by Marco Barbaro in 1566, and of which
there is a copy in the Museo Civico, the field is _gules_, the bend
_or_. And this I have followed in the cut. But a note by S. Stefani
of Venice, with which I have been favoured since the cut was made,
informs me that a fine 15th-century MS. in his possession gives the
field as _argent_, with no _bend_, and the three birds _sable_ with
beaks _gules_, disposed thus ∵.

[Illustration: Arms of the Polo[A]]

[A] [This coat of arms is reproduced from the Genealogies of
Priuli, Archivio di Stato, Venice.—H. C.]

[9] Marco Antonio Trevisano was elected Doge, 4th June, 1553, but died
on the 31st of May following. We do not here notice Ramusio’s
numerous errors, which will be corrected in the sequel. [See p.
78.]

II. SKETCH OF THE STATE OF THE EAST AT THE TIME OF THE
JOURNEYS OF THE POLO FAMILY.

9. The story of the travels of the Polo family opens in 1260.

[Sidenote: State of the Levant.]

Christendom had recovered from the alarm into which it had been
thrown some 18 years before when the Tartar cataclysm had threatened
to engulph it. The Tartars themselves were already becoming an object
of curiosity rather than of fear, and soon became an object of hope,
as a possible help against the old Mahomedan foe. The frail Latin
throne in Constantinople was still standing, but tottering to its fall.
The successors of the Crusaders still held the Coast of Syria from
Antioch to Jaffa, though a deadlier brood of enemies than they had yet
encountered was now coming to maturity in the Dynasty of the Mamelukes,
which had one foot firmly planted in Cairo, the other in Damascus.
The jealousies of the commercial republics of Italy were daily waxing
greater. The position of Genoese trade on the coasts of the Aegean was
greatly depressed, through the predominance which Venice had acquired
there by her part in the expulsion of the Greek Emperors, and which won
for the Doge the lofty style of Lord of Three-Eighths of the Empire
of Romania. But Genoa was biding her time for an early revenge, and
year by year her naval strength and skill were increasing. Both these
republics held possessions and establishments in the ports of Syria,
which were often the scene of sanguinary conflicts between their
citizens. Alexandria was still largely frequented in the intervals of
war as the great emporium of Indian wares, but the facilities afforded
by the Mongol conquerors who now held the whole tract from the Persian
Gulf to the shores of the Caspian and of the Black Sea, or nearly so,
were beginning to give a great advantage to the caravan routes which
debouched at the ports of Cilician Armenia in the Mediterranean and
at Trebizond on the Euxine. Tana (or Azov) had not as yet become the
outlet of a similar traffic; the Venetians had apparently frequented to
some extent the coast of the Crimea for local trade, but their rivals
appear to have been in great measure excluded from this commerce, and
the Genoese establishments which so long flourished on that coast, are
first heard of some years after a Greek dynasty was again in possession
of Constantinople.[1]

[Sidenote: The various Mongol Sovereignties in Asia and Eastern Europe.]

10. In Asia and Eastern Europe scarcely a dog might bark without
Mongol leave, from the borders of Poland and the Gulf of Scanderoon
to the Amur and the Yellow Sea. The vast empire which Chinghiz had
conquered still owned a nominally supreme head in the Great Kaan,[2]
but practically it was splitting up into several great monarchies under
the descendants of the four sons of Chinghiz, Juji, Chaghatai, Okkodai,
and Tuli; and wars on a vast scale were already brewing between them.
Hulaku, third son of Tuli, and brother of two Great Kaans, Mangku
and Kúblái, had become practically independent as ruler of Persia,
Babylonia, Mesopotamia, and Armenia, though he and his sons, and his
sons’ sons, continued to stamp the name of the Great Kaan upon their
coins, and to use the Chinese seals of state which he bestowed upon
them. The Seljukian Sultans of Iconium, whose dominion bore the proud
title of Rúm (Rome), were now but the struggling bondsmen of the
Ilkhans. The Armenian Hayton in his Cilician Kingdom had pledged a
more frank allegiance to the Tartar, the enemy of his Moslem enemies.

Barka, son of Juji, the first ruling prince of the House of Chinghiz to
turn Mahomedan, reigned on the steppes of the Volga, where a standing
camp, which eventually became a great city under the name of Sarai, had
been established by his brother and predecessor Batu.

The House of Chaghatai had settled upon the pastures of the Ili and the
valley of the Jaxartes, and ruled the wealthy cities of Sogdiana.

Kaidu, the grandson of Okkodai who had been the successor of Chinghiz
in the Kaanship, refused to acknowledge the transfer of the supreme
authority to the House of Tuli, and was through the long life of Kúblái
a thorn in his side, perpetually keeping his north-western frontier in
alarm. His immediate authority was exercised over some part of what we
should now call Eastern Turkestan and Southern Central Siberia; whilst
his hordes of horsemen, force of character, and close neighbourhood
brought the Khans of Chaghatai under his influence, and they generally
acted in concert with him.

The chief throne of the Mongol Empire had just been ascended by Kúblái,
the most able of its occupants after the Founder. Before the death of
his brother and predecessor Mangku, who died in 1259 before an obscure
fortress of Western China, it had been intended to remove the seat
of government from Kara Korum on the northern verge of the Mongolian
Desert to the more populous regions that had been conquered in the
further East, and this step, which in the end converted the Mongol Kaan
into a Chinese Emperor,[3] was carried out by Kúblái.

[Sidenote: China.]

11. For about three centuries the Northern provinces of China had been
detached from native rule, and subject to foreign dynasties; first
to the _Khitan_, a people from the basin of the Sungari River, and
supposed (but doubtfully) to have been akin to the Tunguses, whose rule
subsisted for 200 years, and originated the name of KHITAI, Khata, or
CATHAY, by which for nearly 1000 years China has been known to the
nations of Inner Asia, and to those whose acquaintance with it was
got by that channel.[4] The Khitan, whose dynasty is known in Chinese
history as the _Liao_ or “Iron,” had been displaced in 1123 by the
Chúrchés or Niu-chen, another race of Eastern Tartary, of the same
blood as the modern Manchus, whose Emperors in their brief period of
prosperity were known by the Chinese name of Tai-_Kin_, by the Mongol
name of the _Altun_ Kaans, both signifying “Golden.” Already in the
lifetime of Chinghiz himself the northern Provinces of China Proper,
including their capital, known as Chung-tu or Yen-King, now Peking, had
been wrenched from them, and the conquest of the dynasty was completed
by Chinghiz’s successor Okkodai in 1234.

Southern China still remained in the hands of the native dynasty of
the Sung, who had their capital at the great city now well known as
Hang-chau fu. Their dominion was still substantially untouched, but its
subjugation was a task to which Kúblái before many years turned his
attention, and which became the most prominent event of his reign.

[Sidenote: India, and Indo-China.]

12. In India the most powerful sovereign was the Sultan of Delhi,
Nassir-uddin Mahmud of the Turki House of Iltitmish;[5] but, though both
Sind and Bengal acknowledged his supremacy, no part of Peninsular India
had yet been invaded, and throughout the long period of our Traveller’s
residence in the East the Kings of Delhi had their hands too full,
owing to the incessant incursions of the Mongols across the Indus, to
venture on extensive campaigning in the south. Hence the Dravidian
Kingdoms of Southern India were as yet untouched by foreign conquest,
and the accumulated gold of ages lay in their temples and treasuries,
an easy prey for the coming invader.

In the Indo-Chinese Peninsula and the Eastern Islands a variety of
kingdoms and dynasties were expanding and contracting, of which we
have at best but dim and shifting glimpses. That they were advanced
in wealth and art, far beyond what the present state of those
regions would suggest, is attested by vast and magnificent remains of
Architecture, nearly all dating, so far as dates can be ascertained,
from the 12th to the 14th centuries (that epoch during which an
architectural afflatus seems to have descended on the human race),
and which are found at intervals over both the Indo-Chinese continent
and the Islands, as at Pagán in Burma, at Ayuthia in Siam, at Angkor
in Kamboja, at Borobodor and Brambánan in Java. All these remains are
deeply marked by Hindu influence, and, at the same time, by strong
peculiarities, both generic and individual.

[Illustration: Autograph of Hayton, King of Armenia, _circa_ A.D. 1243.

“... =e por so qui cestes lettres soient fermes e establis ci avuns
escrit l’escrit de notre main vermoil e sayelé de notre ceau
pendant=....”]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] See Heyd, _Le Colonie Commerciali degli Italiani_, etc., passim.

[2] We endeavour to preserve throughout the book the distinction
that was made in the age of the Mongol Empire between _Khán_ and
_Ḳaán_ (خان and قآان, as written by Arabic and Persian authors).
The former may be rendered _Lord_, and was applied generally to
Tartar chiefs whether sovereign or not; it has since become in
Persia, and especially in Afghanistan, a sort of “Esq.,” and in
India is now a common affix in the names of (Musulman) Hindustanis
of all classes; in Turkey alone it has been reserved for the
Sultan. _Ḳaán_, again, appears to be a form of _Kháḳán_, the
Χαγάνος of the Byzantine historians, and was the peculiar title
of the supreme sovereign of the Mongols; the Mongol princes of
Persia, Chaghatai, etc., were entitled only to the former affix
(Khán), though _Ḳaán_ and _Ḳhaḳán_ are sometimes applied to them
in adulation. Polo always writes _Kaan_ as applied to the Great
Khan, and does not, I think, use _Khan_ in any form, styling the
subordinate princes by their name only, as _Argon_, _Alau_, etc.
_Ilkhan_ was a special title assumed by Huláku and his successors
in Persia; it is said to be compounded from a word _Il_, signifying
tribe or nation. The relation between _Khán_ and _Khaḳán_ seems to
be probably that the latter signifies “_Khán of Kháns_,” Lord of
Lords. Chinghiz, it is said, did not take the higher title; it was
first assumed by his son Okkodai. But there are doubts about this.
(See _Quatremère’s Rashid_, pp. 10 _seqq._ and _Pavet de
Courteille, Dict. Turk-Oriental._) The tendency of swelling titles
is always to degenerate, and when the value of Khan had sunk, a new
form, _Khán-khánán_, was devised at the Court of Delhi, and applied
to one of the high officers of state.

[Mr. Rockhill writes (_Rubruck_, p. 108, note): “The title _Khan_,
though of very great antiquity, was only used by the Turks after
A.D. 560, at which time the use of the word _Khatun_ came in use
for the wives of the Khan, who himself was termed _Ilkhan_. The
older title of _Shan-yü_ did not, however, completely disappear
among them, for Albiruni says that in his time the chief of the
Ghuz Turks, or Turkomans, still bore the title of _Jenuyeh_, which
Sir Henry Rawlinson (_Proc. R. G. S._, v. 15) takes to be the same
word as that transcribed _Shan-yü_ by the Chinese (see _Ch’ien
Han shu_, Bk. 94, and _Chou shu_, Bk. 50, 2). Although the word
_Khakhan_ occurs in Menander’s account of the embassy of Zemarchus,
the earliest mention I have found of it in a Western writer is in
the _Chronicon_ of Albericus Trium Fontium, where (571), under
the year 1239, he uses it in the form _Cacanus_”—Cf. _Terrien de
Lacouperie, Khan, Khakan, and other Tartar Titles_. Lond., Dec.
1888.—H. C.]

[3] “China is a sea that salts all the rivers that flow into it.”—_P.
Parrenin_ in _Lett. Édif._ XXIV. 58.

[4] _E.g._ the Russians still call it Khitai. The pair of names,
_Khitai_ and _Machin_, or Cathay and China, is analogous to the
other pair, _Seres_ and _Sinae_. _Seres_ was the name of the great
nation in the far East as known by land, _Sinae_ as known by sea;
and they were often supposed to be diverse, just as Cathay and
China were afterwards.

[5] There has been much doubt about the true form of this name.
_Iltitmish_ is that sanctioned by Mr. Blochmann (see _Proc. As.
Soc. Bengal_, 1870, p. 181).

III. THE POLO FAMILY. PERSONAL HISTORY OF THE TRAVELLERS
DOWN TO THEIR FINAL RETURN FROM THE EAST.

[Sidenote: Alleged origin of the Polos.]

13. In days when History and Genealogy were allowed to draw largely
on the imagination for the _origines_ of states and families, it
was set down by one Venetian Antiquary that among the companions of
King Venetus, or of Prince Antenor of Troy, when they settled on the
northern shores of the Adriatic, there was one LUCIUS POLUS, who became
the progenitor of our Traveller’s Family;[1] whilst another deduces it
from PAOLO the first Doge[2] (Paulus Lucas Anafestus of Heraclea, A.D.
696).

More trustworthy traditions, recorded among the Family Histories of
Venice, but still no more it is believed than traditions, represent the
Family of Polo as having come from Sebenico in Dalmatia, in the 11th
century.[3] Before the end of the century they had taken seats in the
Great Council of the Republic; for the name of Domenico Polo is said to
be subscribed to a grant of 1094, that of Pietro Polo to an act of the
time of the Doge Domenico Michiele in 1122, and that of a Domenico Polo
to an acquittance granted by the Doge Domenico Morosini and his Council
in 1153.[4]

The ascertained genealogy of the Traveller, however, begins only with
his grandfather, who lived in the early part of the 13th century.

Two branches of the Polo Family were then recognized, distinguished by
the _confini_ or Parishes in which they lived, as Polo of S. Geremia,
and Polo of S. Felice. ANDREA POLO of S. Felice was the father of three
sons, MARCO, NICOLO, and MAFFEO. And Nicolo was the Father of our Marco.

[Sidenote: Claims to be styled noble.]

14. Till quite recently it had never been precisely ascertained whether
the immediate family of our Traveller belonged to the _Nobles_ of
Venice properly so called, who had seats in the Great Council and were
enrolled in the Libro d’Oro. Ramusio indeed styles our Marco _Nobile_
and _Magnifico_, and Rusticiano, the actual scribe of the Traveller’s
recollections, calls him “_sajes et noble citaiens de Venece_,”
but Ramusio’s accuracy and Rusticiano’s precision were scarcely to
be depended on. Very recently, however, since the subject has been
discussed with accomplished students of the Venice Archives, proofs
have been found establishing Marco’s personal claim to nobility,
inasmuch as both in judicial decisions and in official resolutions of
the Great Council, he is designated _Nobilis Vir_, a formula which
would never have been used in such documents (I am assured) had he not
been technically noble.[5]

[Sidenote: Marco the Elder.]

15. Of the three sons of Andrea Polo of S. Felice, Marco seems to have
been the eldest, and Maffeo the youngest.[6] They were all engaged
in commerce, and apparently in a partnership, which to some extent
held good even when the two younger had been many years absent in
the Far East.[7] Marco seems to have been established for a time at
Constantinople,[8] and also to have had a house (no doubt of business)
at Soldaia, in the Crimea, where his son and daughter, Nicolo and
Maroca by name, were living in 1280. This year is the date of the Elder
Marco’s Will, executed at Venice, and when he was “weighed down by
bodily ailment.” Whether he survived for any length of time we do not
know.

[Sidenote: Nicolo and Maffeo commence their travels.]

16. Nicolo Polo, the second of the Brothers, had two legitimate sons,
MARCO, the Author of our Book, born in 1254,[9] and MAFFEO, of whose
place in the family we shall have a few words to say presently. The
story opens, as we have said, in 1260, when we find the two brothers,
Nicolo and Maffeo the Elder, at Constantinople. How long they had been
absent from Venice we are not distinctly told. Nicolo had left his wife
there behind him; Maffeo apparently was a bachelor. In the year named
they started on a trading venture to the Crimea, whence a succession
of openings and chances, recounted in the Introductory chapters of
Marco’s work, carried them far north along the Volga, and thence first
to Bokhara, and then to the Court of the Great Kaan Kúblái in the Far
East, on or within the borders of CATHAY. That a great and civilized
country so called existed in the extremity of Asia had already been
reported in Europe by the Friars Plano Carpini (1246) and William
Rubruquis (1253), who had not indeed reached its frontiers, but had
met with its people at the Court of the Great Kaan in Mongolia; whilst
the latter of the two with characteristic acumen had seen that they
were identical with the Seres of classic fame.

[Sidenote: Their intercourse with Kúblái Kaan.]

17. Kúblái had never before fallen in with European gentlemen. He was
delighted with these Venetians, listened with strong interest to all
that they had to tell him of the Latin world, and determined to send
them back as his ambassadors to the Pope, accompanied by an officer
of his own Court. His letters to the Pope, as the Polos represent
them, were mainly to desire the despatch of a large body of educated
missionaries to convert his people to Christianity. It is not likely
that religious motives influenced Kúblái in this, but he probably
desired religious aid in softening and civilizing his rude kinsmen of
the Steppes, and judged, from what he saw in the Venetians and heard
from them, that Europe could afford such aid of a higher quality than
the degenerate Oriental Christians with whom he was familiar, or the
Tibetan Lamas on whom his patronage eventually devolved when Rome so
deplorably failed to meet his advances.

[Sidenote: Their return home, and Marco’s appearance on the scene.]

18. The Brothers arrived at Acre in April,[10] 1269, and found that
no Pope existed, for Clement IV. was dead the year before, and no new
election had taken place. So they went home to Venice to see how things
stood there after their absence of so many years.

The wife of Nicolo was no longer among the living, but he found his son
Marco a fine lad of fifteen.

The best and most authentic MSS. tell us no more than this. But
one class of copies, consisting of the Latin version made by our
Traveller’s contemporary, Francesco Pipino, and of the numerous
editions based indirectly upon it, represents that Nicolo had left
Venice when Marco was as yet unborn, and consequently had never seen
him till his return from the East in 1269.[11]

We have mentioned that Nicolo Polo had another legitimate son, by name
Maffeo, and him we infer to have been younger than Marco, because he
is named last (_Marcus et Matheus_) in the Testament of their uncle
Marco the Elder. We do not know if they were by the same mother. They
could not have been so if we are right in supposing Maffeo to have been
the younger, and if Pipino’s version of the history be genuine. If
however we reject the latter, as I incline to do, no ground remains for
supposing that Nicolo went to the East much before we find him there
viz., in 1260, and Maffeo may have been born of the same mother during
the interval between 1254 and 1260. If on the other hand Pipino’s
version be held to, we must suppose that Maffeo (who is named by his
uncle in 1280, during his father’s second absence in the East) was born
of a marriage contracted during Nicolo’s residence at home after his
first journey, a residence which lasted from 1269 to 1271.[12]

[Illustration: The Piazzetta at Venice. (From the Bodleian MS. of
Polo.)]

[Sidenote: Second Journey of the Polo Brothers, accompanied by Marco.]

19. The Papal interregnum was the longest known, at least since the
dark ages. Those two years passed, and yet the Cardinals at Viterbo
had come to no agreement. The brothers were unwilling to let the Great
Kaan think them faithless, and perhaps they hankered after the virgin
field of speculation that they had discovered; so they started again
for the East, taking young Mark with them. At Acre they took counsel
with an eminent churchman, TEDALDO (or Tebaldo) VISCONTI, Archdeacon
of Liège, whom the Book represents to have been Legate in Syria, and
who in any case was a personage of much gravity and influence. From him
they got letters to authenticate the causes of the miscarriage of their
mission, and started for the further East. But they were still at the
port of Ayas on the Gulf of Scanderoon, which was then becoming one of
the chief points of arrival and departure for the inland trade of Asia,
when they were overtaken by the news that a Pope was at last elected,
and that the choice had fallen upon their friend Archdeacon Tedaldo.
They immediately returned to Acre, and at last were able to execute the
Kaan’s commission, and to obtain a reply. But instead of the hundred
able teachers of science and religion whom Kúblái is said to have asked
for, the new Pope, Gregory X., could supply but two Dominicans; and
these lost heart and drew back when they had barely taken the first
step of the journey.

Judging from certain indications we conceive it probable that the three
Venetians, whose second start from Acre took place about November
1271, proceeded by Ayas and Sivas, and then by Mardin, Mosul, and
Baghdad, to Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, with the view of
going on by sea, but that some obstacle arose which compelled them to
abandon this project and turn north again from Hormuz.[13] They then
traversed successively Kerman and Khorasan, Balkh and Badakhshan,
whence they ascended the Panja or upper Oxus to the Plateau of Pamir, a
route not known to have been since followed by any European traveller
except Benedict Goës, till the spirited expedition of Lieutenant John
Wood of the Indian Navy in 1838.[14] Crossing the Pamir highlands the
travellers descended upon Kashgar, whence they proceeded by Yarkand and
Khotan, and the vicinity of Lake Lob, and eventually across the Great
Gobi Desert to Tangut, the name then applied by Mongols and Persians
to territory at the extreme North-west of China, both within and
without the Wall. Skirting the northern frontier of China they at last
reached the presence of the Kaan, who was at his usual summer retreat
at Kai-ping fu, near the base of the Khingan Mountains, and nearly 100
miles north of the Great Wall at Kalgan. If there be no mistake in
the time (three years and a half) ascribed to this journey in all the
existing texts, the travellers did not reach the Court till about May
of 1275.[15]

[Sidenote: Marco’s employment by Kúblái Kaan; and his journeys.]

20. Kúblái received the Venetians with great cordiality, and took
kindly to young Mark, who must have been by this time one-and-twenty.
The _Joenne Bacheler_, as the story calls him, applied himself to
the acquisition of the languages and written characters in chief use
among the multifarious nationalities included in the Kaan’s Court
and administration; and Kúblái after a time, seeing his discretion
and ability, began to employ him in the public service. M. Pauthier
has found a record in the Chinese Annals of the Mongol Dynasty,
which states that in the year 1277, a certain POLO was nominated a
second-class commissioner or agent attached to the Privy Council,
a passage which we are happy to believe to refer to our young
traveller.[16]

His first mission apparently was that which carried him through the
provinces of Shan-si, Shen-si, and Sze-ch’wan, and the wild country on
the East of Tibet, to the remote province of Yun-nan, called by the
Mongols Karájàng, and which had been partially conquered by an army
under Kúblái himself in 1253, before his accession to the throne.[17]
Mark, during his stay at court, had observed the Kaan’s delight in
hearing of strange countries, their marvels, manners, and oddities,
and had heard his Majesty’s frank expressions of disgust at the
stupidity of his commissioners when they could speak of nothing but
the official business on which they had been sent. Profiting by these
observations, he took care to store his memory or his note-books with
all curious facts that were likely to interest Kúblái, and related them
with vivacity on his return to Court. This first journey, which led
him through a region which is still very nearly a _terra incognita_,
and in which there existed and still exists, among the deep valleys of
the Great Rivers flowing down from Eastern Tibet, and in the rugged
mountain ranges bordering Yun-nan and Kwei-chau, a vast Ethnological
Garden, as it were, of tribes of various race and in every stage of
uncivilisation, afforded him an acquaintance with many strange products
and eccentric traits of manners, wherewith to delight the Emperor.

Mark rose rapidly in favour, and often served Kúblái again on distant
missions, as well as in domestic administration, but we gather few
details as to his employments. At one time we know that he held for
three years the government of the great city of Yang-chau, though we
need not try to magnify this office, as some commentators have done,
into the viceroyalty of one of the great provinces of the Empire; on
another occasion we find him with his uncle Maffeo, passing a year at
Kan-chau in Tangut; again, it would appear, visiting Kara Korum, the
old capital of the Kaans in Mongolia; on another occasion in Champa
or Southern Cochin China; and again, or perhaps as a part of the last
expedition, on a mission to the Indian Seas, when he appears to have
visited several of the southern states of India. We are not informed
whether his father and uncle shared in such employments;[18] and the
story of their services rendered to the Kaan in promoting the capture
of the city of Siang-yang, by the construction of powerful engines of
attack, is too much perplexed by difficulties of chronology to be cited
with confidence. Anyhow they were gathering wealth, and after years of
exile they began to dread what might follow old Kúblái’s death, and
longed to carry their gear and their own grey heads safe home to the
Lagoons. The aged Emperor growled refusal to all their hints, and but
for a happy chance we should have lost our mediæval Herodotus.

[Sidenote: Circumstances of the Departure of the Polos from the Kaan’s
Court.]

21. Arghún Khan of Persia, Kúblái’s great-nephew, had in 1286 lost his
favourite wife the Khatun Bulughán; and, mourning her sorely, took
steps to fulfil her dying injunction that her place should be filled
only by a lady of her own kin, the Mongol Tribe of Bayaut. Ambassadors
were despatched to the Court of Kaan-baligh to seek such a bride. The
message was courteously received, and the choice fell on the lady
Kokáchin, a maiden of 17, “_moult bele dame et avenant_.” The overland
road from Peking to Tabriz was not only of portentous length for such
a tender charge, but was imperilled by war, so the envoys desired to
return by sea. Tartars in general were strangers to all navigation; and
the envoys, much taken with the Venetians, and eager to profit by their
experience, especially as Marco had just then returned from his Indian
mission, begged the Kaan as a favour to send the three _Firinghis_
in their company. He consented with reluctance, but, having done so,
fitted the party out nobly for the voyage, charging the Polos with
friendly messages for the potentates of Europe, including the King of
England. They appear to have sailed from the port of Zayton (as the
Westerns called T’swan-chau or Chin-cheu in Fo-kien) in the beginning
of 1292. It was an ill-starred voyage, involving long detentions on
the coast of Sumatra, and in the South of India, to which, however,
we are indebted for some of the best chapters in the book; and two
years or upwards passed before they arrived at their destination in
Persia.[19] The three hardy Venetians survived all perils, and so did
the lady, who had come to look on them with filial regard; but two of
the three envoys, and a vast proportion of the suite, had perished by
the way.[20] Arghún Khan too had been dead even before they quitted
China;[21] his brother Kaikhátú reigned in his stead; and his son
Gházán succeeded to the lady’s hand. We are told by one who knew both
the princes well that Arghún was one of the handsomest men of his time,
whilst Gházán was, among all his host, one of the most insignificant in
appearance. But in other respects the lady’s change was for the better.
Gházán had some of the highest qualities of a soldier, a legislator and
a king, adorned by many and varied accomplishments; though his reign
was too short for the full development of his fame.

[Sidenote: They pass by Persia to Venice. Their relations there.]

22. The princess, whose enjoyment of her royalty was brief, wept as she
took leave of the kindly and noble Venetians. They went on to Tabriz,
and after a long halt there proceeded homewards, reaching Venice,
according to all the texts some time in 1295.[22]

We have related Ramusio’s interesting tradition, like a bit out of the
Arabian Nights, of the reception that the Travellers met with from
their relations, and of the means that they took to establish their
position with those relations, and with Venetian society.[23] Of the
relations, Marco the Elder had probably been long dead;[24] Maffeo
the brother of our Marco was alive, and we hear also of a cousin
(_consanguineus_) Felice Polo, and his wife Fiordelisa, without being
able to fix their precise position in the family. We know also that
Nicolo, who died before the end of the century, left behind him two
illegitimate sons, Stefano and Zannino. It is not unlikely that these
were born from some connection entered into during the long residence
of the Polos in Cathay, though naturally their presence in the
travelling company is not commemorated in Marco’s Prologue.[25]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Zurla_, I. 42, quoting a MS. entitled _Petrus Ciera S. R. E. Card,
de Origine Venetorum et de Civitate Venetiarum_. Cicogna says he
could not find this MS. as it had been carried to England; and then
breaks into a diatribe against foreigners who purchase and carry
away such treasures, “not to make a serious study of them, but
for mere vain-glory ... or in order to write books contradicting
the very MSS. that they have bought, and with that dishonesty and
untruth which are so notorious!” (IV. 227.)

[2] _Campidoglio Veneto_ of Cappellari (MS. in St. Mark’s Lib.),
quoting “the Venetian Annals of Giulio Faroldi.”

[3] The _Genealogies_ of Marco Barbaro specify 1033 as the year of the
migration to Venice; on what authority does not appear (MS. copy in
_Museo Civico_ at Venice).

[4] _Cappellari_, u.s., and _Barbaro_. In the same century we find
(1125, 1195) indications of Polos at Torcello, and of others (1160)
at Equileo, and (1179, 1206) Lido Maggiore; in 1154 a Marco Polo of
Rialto. Contemporary with these is a family of Polos (1139, 1183,
1193, 1201) at Chioggia (_Documents and Lists of Documents from
various Archives at_ Venice).

[5] See Appendix C, Nos. 4, 5, and 16. It was supposed that an
autograph of Marco as member of the Great Council had been
discovered, but this proves to be a mistake, as will be explained
further on (see p. _74_, note). In those days the demarcation
between Patrician and non-Patrician at Venice, where all classes
shared in commerce, all were (generally speaking) of one race, and
where there were neither castles, domains, nor trains of horsemen,
formed no wide gulf. Still it is interesting to establish the
verity of the old tradition of Marco’s technical nobility.

[6] Marco’s seniority rests only on the assertion of Ramusio, who also
calls Maffeo older than Nicolo. But in Marco the Elder’s Will these
two are always (3 times) specified as “_Nicolaus et Matheus_.”

[7] This seems implied in the Elder Marco’s Will (1280): “_Item
de bonis quæ me habere contingunt_ de fraternâ Compagniâ _a
suprascriptis Nicolao et Matheo Paulo_,” etc.

[8] In his Will he terms himself “Ego Marcus Polo quondam de
Constantinopoli.”

[9] There is no real ground for doubt as to this. All the extant MSS.
agree in making Marco fifteen years old when his father returned to
Venice in 1269.

[10] Baldelli and Lazari say that the Bern MS. specifies 30th April;
but this is a mistake.

[11] Pipino’s version runs: “Invenit Dominus Nicolaus Paulus uxorem
suam esse defunctam, quae in recessu suo fuit praegnans.
Invenitque filium, Marcum nomine, qui jam annos xv. habebat
aetatis, qui post discessum ipsius de Venetiis natus fuerat de
uxore sua praefatâ.” To this Ramusio adds the further particular
that the mother died in giving birth to Mark.

The interpolation is older even than Pipino’s version, for we find
in the rude Latin published by the Société de Géographie “quam cum
Venetiis primo recessit praegnantem dimiserat.” But the statement
is certainly an _interpolation_, for it does not exist in any of
the older texts; nor have we any good reason for believing that
it was an _authorised_ interpolation. I suspect it to have been
introduced to harmonise with an erroneous date for the commencement
of the travels of the two brothers.

Lazari prints: “Messer Nicolò trovò che la sua donna era morta, e
n’era rimasto un fanciullo di _dodici_ anni per nome Marco, _che
il padre non avea veduto mai, perchè non era ancor nato quando
egli partì_.” These words have no equivalent in the French Texts,
but are taken from one of the Italian MSS. in the Magliabecchian
Library, and are I suspect also interpolated. The _dodici_ is pure
error (see p. 21 _infra_).

[12] The last view is in substance, I find, suggested by Cicogna (ii.
389).

The matter is of some interest, because in the Will of the
younger Maffeo, which is extant, he makes a bequest to his uncle
(_Avunculus_) Jordan Trevisan. This seems an indication that
his mother’s name may have been Trevisan. The same Maffeo had a
daughter _Fiordelisa_. And Marco the Elder, in his Will (1280),
appoints as his executors, during the absence of his brothers,
the same Jordan Trevisan and his own sister-in-law _Fiordelisa_
(“Jordanum Trivisanum de confinio S. Antonini: et Flordelisam
cognatam meam”). Hence I conjecture that this _cognata Fiordelisa_
(Trevisan?) was the wife of the absent Nicolo, and the mother of
Maffeo. In that case of course Maffeo and Marco were the sons
of different mothers. With reference to the above suggestion of
Nicolo’s second marriage in 1269 there is a curious variation in
a fragmentary Venetian Polo in the Barberini Library at Rome.
It runs, in the passage corresponding to the latter part of ch.
ix. of Prologue: “i qual do fratelli steteno do anni in Veniezia
aspettando la elletion de nuovo Papa, _nel qual tempo Mess. Nicolo
si tolse moier et si la lasò graveda._” I believe, however, that it
is only a careless misrendering of Pipino’s statement about Marco’s
birth.

[13] [Major Sykes, in his remarkable book on _Persia_, ch. xxiii. pp.
262–263, does not share Sir Henry Yule’s opinion regarding this
itinerary, and he writes:

“To return to our travellers, who started on their second great
journey in 1271, Sir Henry Yule, in his introduction,[A] makes
them travel _viâ_ Sivas to Mosul and Baghdád, and thence by sea
to Hormuz, and this is the itinerary shown on his sketch map.
This view I am unwilling to accept for more than one reason. In
the first place, if, with Colonel Yule, we suppose that Ser Marco
visited Baghdád, is it not unlikely that he should term the River
Volga the Tigris,[B] and yet leave the river of Baghdád nameless?
It may be urged that Marco believed the legend of the reappearance
of the Volga in Kurdistán, but yet, if the text be read with care
and the character of the traveller be taken into account, this
error is scarcely explicable in any other way, than that he was
never there.

“Again, he gives no description of the striking buildings of
Baudas, as he terms it, but this is nothing to the inaccuracy of
his supposed onward journey. To quote the text, ‘A very great river
flows through the city, ... and merchants descend some eighteen days
from Baudas, and then come to a certain city called Kisi,[C] where
they enter the Sea of India.’ Surely Marco, had he travelled down
the Persian Gulf, would never have given this description of the
route, which is so untrue as to point to the conclusion that it was
vague information given by some merchant whom he met in the course
of his wanderings.

“Finally, apart from the fact that Baghdád, since its fall, was
rather off the main caravan route, Marco so evidently travels east
from Yezd and thence south to Hormuz, that unless his journey
be described backwards, which is highly improbable, it is only
possible to arrive at one conclusion, namely, that the Venetians
entered Persia near Tabriz, and travelled to Sultania, Kashán, and
Yezd. Thence they proceeded to Kermán and Hormuz, where, probably
fearing the sea voyage, owing to the manifest unseaworthiness of
the ships, which he describes as ‘wretched affairs,’ the Khorasán
route was finally adopted. Hormuz, in this case, was not visited
again until the return from China, when it seems probable that
the same route was retraced to Tabriz, where their charge, the
Lady Kokachin, ‘moult bele dame et avenant,’ was married to Gházan
Khán, the son of her fiancé Arghun. It remains to add that Sir
Henry Yule may have finally accepted this view in part, as in the
plate showing _Probable View of Marco Polo’s own Geography_,[D] the
itinerary is not shown as running to Baghdád.”

I may be allowed to answer that when Marco Polo _started_ for the
East, Baghdád was not rather off the main caravan route. The fall
of Baghdád was not immediately followed by its decay, and we have
proof of its prosperity at the beginning of the 14th century.
Tauris had not yet the importance it had reached when the Polos
visited it on their _return_ journey. We have the will of the
Venetian Pietro Viglioni, dated from Tauris, 10th December, 1264
(_Archiv. Veneto_, xxvi. 161–165), which shows that he was but
a pioneer. It was only under Arghún Khan (1284–1291) that Tauris
became the great market for foreign, especially Genoese, merchants,
as Marco Polo remarks on his return journey; with Gházán and the
new city built by that prince, Tauris reached a very high degree
of prosperity, and was then really the chief emporium on the route
from Europe to Persia and the far East. Sir Henry Yule had not
changed his views, and if in the plate showing _Probable View of
Marco Polo’s own Geography_, the itinerary is not shown as running
to Baghdád, it is mere neglect on the part of the
draughtsman.—H. C.]

[A] Page 19.

[B] _Vide Yule_, vol. i. p. 5. It is noticeable that John of Pian
de Carpine, who travelled 1245 to 1247, names it correctly.

[C] The modern name is Keis, an island lying off Linga.

[D] Vol. i. p. 110 (Introduction).

[14] It is stated by Neumann that this most estimable traveller once
intended to have devoted a special work to the elucidation of
Marco’s chapters on the Oxus Provinces, and it is much to be
regretted that this intention was never fulfilled. Pamir has been
explored more extensively and deliberately, whilst this book was
going through the press, by Colonel Gordon, and other officers,
detached from Sir Douglas Forsyth’s Mission. [We have made use
of the information given by these officers and by more recent
travellers.—H. C.]

[15] Half a year earlier, if we suppose the three years and a half to
count from Venice rather than Acre. But at that season (November)
Kúblái would not have been at Kai-ping fu (otherwise Shang-tu).

[16] _Pauthier_, p. ix., and p. 361.

[17] That this was Marco’s first mission is positively stated in the
Ramusian edition; and though this may be only an editor’s gloss
it seems well-founded. The French texts say only that the Great
Kaan, “l’envoia en un message en une terre ou bien avoit vj. mois
de chemin.” The traveller’s actual Itinerary affords to Vochan
(Yung-ch’ang), on the frontier of Burma, 147 days’ journey, which
with halts might well be reckoned six months in round estimate.
And we are enabled by various circumstances to fix the date of
the Yun-nan journey between 1277 and 1280. The former limit is
determined by Polo’s account of the battle with the Burmese, near
Vochan, which took place according to the Chinese Annals in 1277.
The latter is fixed by his mention of Kúblái’s son, Mangalai, as
governing at Kenjanfu (Si-ngan fu), a prince who died in 1280. (See
vol. ii. pp. 24, 31, also 64, 80.)

[18] Excepting in the doubtful case of Kan-chau, where one reading
says that the three Polos were there on business of their own not
necessary to mention, and another, that only Maffeo and Marco were
there, “_en légation_.”

[19] Persian history seems to fix the arrival of the lady Kokáchin
in the North of Persia to the winter of 1293–1294. The voyage to
Sumatra occupied three months (vol. i. p. 34); they were five
months detained there (ii. 292); and the remainder of the voyage
extended to eighteen more (i. 35),—twenty-six months in all.

The data are too slight for unexceptional precision, but the
following adjustment will fairly meet the facts. Say that they
sailed from Fo-kien in January 1292. In April they would be in
Sumatra, and find the S.W. Monsoon too near to admit of their
crossing the Bay of Bengal. They remain in port till September
(five months), and then proceed, touching (perhaps) at Ceylon, at
Kayal, and at several ports of Western India. In one of these,
_e.g._ Kayal or Tana, they pass the S.W. Monsoon of 1293, and then
proceed to the Gulf. They reach Hormuz in the winter, and the camp
of the Persian Prince Gházán, the son of Arghún, in March,
twenty-six months from their departure.

I have been unable to trace Hammer’s authority (not Wassáf I find),
which perhaps gives the precise date of the Lady’s arrival in
Persia (see _infra_, p. 38). From his narrative, however (_Gesch.
der Ilchane_, ii. 20), March 1294 is perhaps too late a date.
But the five months’ stoppage in Sumatra _must_ have been in the
S.W. Monsoon; and if the arrival in Persia is put earlier, Polo’s
numbers can scarcely be held to. Or, the eighteen months mentioned
at vol. i. p. 35, must _include_ the five months’ stoppage. We may
then suppose that they reached Hormuz about November 1293, and
Gházán’s camp a month or two later. [20] The French text which
forms the _basis_ of my translation says that, excluding mariners,
there were 600 souls, out of whom only 8 survived. The older MS.
which I quote as G. T., makes the number 18, a fact that I had
overlooked till the sheets were printed off.

[21] Died 12th March, 1291.

[22] All dates are found so corrupt that even in this one I do not feel
absolute confidence. Marco in dictating the book is aware that
Gházán had attained the throne of Persia (see vol. i. p. 36, and
ii. pp. 50 and 477), an event which did not occur till October,
1295. The date assigned to it, however, by Marco (ii. 477) is 1294,
or the year _before_ that assigned to the return home.

The travellers may have stopped some time at Constantinople on
their way, or even may have visited the northern shores of the
Black Sea; otherwise, indeed, how did Marco acquire his knowledge
of that Sea (ii. 486–488) and of events in Kipchak (ii. 496
_seqq._)? If 1296 was the date of return, moreover, the
six-and-twenty years assigned in the preamble as the period of
Marco’s absence (p. 2) would be nearer accuracy. For he left Venice
in the spring or summer of 1271.

[23] Marco Barbaro, in his account of the Polo family, tells what seems
to be the same tradition in a different and more mythical version:—

“From ear to ear the story has past till it reached mine, that
when the three Kinsmen arrived at their home they were dressed in
the most shabby and sordid manner, insomuch that the wife of one
of them gave away to a beggar that came to the door one of those
garments of his, all torn, patched, and dirty as it was. The next
day he asked his wife for that mantle of his, in order to put away
the jewels that were sewn up in it; but she told him she had given
it away to a poor man, whom she did not know. Now, the stratagem he
employed to recover it was this. He went to the Bridge of Rialto,
and stood there turning a wheel, to no apparent purpose, but as if
he were a madman, and to all those who crowded round to see what
prank was this, and asked him why he did it, he answered: ‘He’ll
come if God pleases.’ So after two or three days he recognised his
old coat on the back of one of those who came to stare at his mad
proceedings, and got it back again. Then, indeed, he was judged to
be quite the reverse of a madman! And from those jewels he built
in the contrada of S. Giovanni Grisostomo a very fine palace for
those days; and the family got among the vulgar the name of the
_Ca’ Million_, because the report was that they had jewels to the
value of a million of ducats; and the palace has kept that name to
the present day—_viz._, 1566.” (_Genealogies_, MS. copy in _Museo
Civico_; quoted also by _Baldelli Boni, Vita_, p. xxxi.)

[24] The Will of the Elder Marco, to which we have several times
referred, is dated at Rialto 5th August, 1280.

The testator describes himself as formerly of Constantinople, but
now dwelling in the confine of S. Severo.

His brothers _Nicolo_ and _Maffeo_, if at Venice, are to be his
sole trustees and executors, but in case of their continued
absence he nominates _Jordano Trevisano_, and his sister-in-law
_Fiordelisa_ of the confine of S. Severo.

The proper tithe to be paid. All his clothes and furniture to be
sold, and from the proceeds his funeral to be defrayed, and the
balance to purchase masses for his soul at the discretion of his
trustees.

Particulars of money due to him from his partnership with Donato
Grasso, now of Justinople (Capo d’Istria), 1200 _lire_ in all.
(Fifty-two lire due by said partnership to Angelo di Tumba of S.
Severo.)

The above money bequeathed to his son _Nicolo_, living at
_Soldachia_, or failing him, to his beloved brothers _Nicolo_ and
_Maffeo_. Failing them, to the sons of his said brothers (_sic_)
_Marco_ and _Maffeo_. Failing them, to be spent for the good of his
soul at the discretion of his trustees.

To his son Nicolo he bequeaths a silver-wrought girdle of vermilion
silk, two silver spoons, a silver cup without cover (or saucer?
_sine cembalo_), his desk, two pairs of sheets, a velvet quilt, a
counterpane, a feather-bed—all on the same conditions as above, and
to remain with the trustees till his son returns to Venice.

Meanwhile the trustees are to invest the money at his son’s risk
and benefit, but only here in Venice (_investiant seu investire,
faciant_).

From the proceeds to come in from his partnership with his brothers
Nicolo and Maffeo, he bequeaths 200 lire to his daughter Maroca.

From same source 100 lire to his natural son Antony.

Has in his desk (_capsella_) two hyperperae (Byzantine gold coins),
and three golden florins, which he bequeaths to the sister-in-law
_Fiordelisa_.

Gives freedom to all his slaves and handmaidens.

Leaves his house in Soldachia to the Minor Friars of that place,
reserving life-occupancy to his son Nicolo and daughter Maroca.

The rest of his goods to his son Nicolo.

[25] The terms in which the younger Maffeo mentions these half-brothers
in his Will (1300) seem to indicate that they were still young.

IV. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE MANSION OF THE POLO FAMILY
AT VENICE.

[Sidenote: Probable period of their establishment at S. Giovanni
Grisostomo.]

23. We have seen that Ramusio places the scene of the story recently
alluded to at the mansion in the parish of S. Giovanni Grisostomo,
the court of which was known in his time as the Corte del Millioni;
and indeed he speaks of the Travellers as at once on their arrival
resorting to that mansion as their family residence. Ramusio’s details
have so often proved erroneous that I should not be surprised if this
also should be a mistake. At least we find (so far as I can learn) no
previous intimation that the family were connected with that locality.
The grandfather Andrea is styled of _San Felice_. The will of Maffeo
Polo the younger, made in 1300, which we shall give hereafter in
abstract, appears to be the first document that connects the family
with S. Giovanni Grisostomo. It indeed styles the testator’s father
“the late Nicolo Paulo of the confine of St. John Chrysostom,” but that
only shows what is not disputed, that the Travellers after their return
from the East settled in this locality. And the same will appears
to indicate a surviving connexion with S. Felice, for the priests
and clerks who drew it up and witness it are all of the church of S.
Felice, and it is to the parson of S. Felice and his successor that
Maffeo bequeaths an annuity to procure their prayers for the souls
of his father, his mother, and himself, though after the successor
the annuity is to pass on the same condition to the senior priest of
S. Giovanni Grisostomo. Marco Polo the Elder is in his will described
as of _S. Severo_, as is also his sister-in-law Fiordelisa, and the
document contains no reference to S. Giovanni. On the whole therefore
it seems probable that the Palazzo in the latter parish was purchased
by the Travellers after their return from the East.[1]

[Illustration: Corte del Milione, Venice.]

[Sidenote: Relic of the Casa Polo in the Corte Sabbionera.]

24. The Court which was known in the 16th century as the Corte del
Millioni has been generally understood to be that now known as the
Corte Sabbionera, and here is still pointed out a relic of Marco Polo’s
mansion. [Indeed it is called now (1899) _Corte del Milione_; see p.
_30_.—H. C.]

M. Pauthier’s edition is embellished with a good engraving which
purports to represent the House of Marco Polo. But he has been misled.
His engraving in fact exhibits, at least as the prominent feature, an
embellished representation of a small house which exists on the _west
side_ of the Sabbionera, and which had at one time perhaps that pointed
style of architecture which his engraving shows, though its present
decoration is paltry and unreal. But it is on the _north side_ of the
Court, and on the foundations now occupied by the Malibran theatre,
that Venetian tradition and the investigations of Venetian antiquaries
concur in indicating the site of the Casa Polo. At the end of the
16th century a great fire destroyed the Palazzo,[2] and under the
description of “an old mansion ruined from the foundation” it passed
into the hands of one Stefano Vecchia, who sold it in 1678 to Giovanni
Carlo Grimani. He built on the site of the ruins a theatre which was
in its day one of the largest in Italy, and was called the Theatre
of S. Giovanni Grisostomo; afterwards the _Teatro Emeronitio_. When
modernized in our own day the proprietors gave it the name of Malibran,
in honour of that famous singer, and this it still bears.[3]

[In 1881, the year of the Venice International Geographical Congress, a
Tablet was put up on the Theatre with the following inscription:—

QVI FURONO LE CASE
DI
MARCO POLO
CHE VIAGGIÒ LE PIÙ LONTANE REGIONI DELL’ASIA
E LE DESCRISSE

PER DECRETO DEL COMUNE
MDCCCLXXXI].

There is still to be seen on the north side of the Court an arched
doorway in Italo-Byzantine style, richly sculptured with scrolls,
disks, and symbolical animals, and on the wall above the doorway is a
cross similarly ornamented.[4] The style and the decorations are those
which were usual in Venice in the 13th century. The arch opens into a
passage from which a similar doorway at the other end, also retaining
some scantier relics of decoration, leads to the entrance of the
Malibran Theatre. Over the archway in the Corte Sabbionera the building
rises into a kind of tower. This, as well as the sculptured arches and
cross, Signor Casoni, who gave a good deal of consideration to the
subject, believed to be a relic of the old Polo House. But the tower
(which Pauthier’s view does show) is now entirely modernized.[5]

[Illustration: Malibran Theatre, Venice.]

[Illustration: The site of the CA’ POLO.

Fig. A. From the Dürer Map. A.D. 1500.
Fig. B. From Map by Ludovico Ughi. A.D. 1729 Scale 1 to 2500.
Fig. C. From Recent Map. Scale 1 to 1315.]

Other remains of Byzantine sculpture, which are probably fragments of
the decoration of the same mansion, are found imbedded in the walls of
neighbouring houses.[6] It is impossible to determine anything further
as to the form or extent of the house of the time of the Polos, but
some slight idea of its appearance about the year 1500 may be seen
in the extract (fig. A) which we give from the famous pictorial map
of Venice attributed erroneously to Albert Dürer. The state of the
buildings in the last century is shown in (fig. B) an extract from the
fine Map of Ughi; and their present condition in one (fig. C) reduced
from the Modern Official Map of the Municipality.

[Coming from the Church of S. G. Grisostomo to enter the calle del
Teatro on the left and the passage (_Sottoportico_) leading to the
_Corte del Milione_, one has in front of him a building with a door of
the epoch of the Renaissance; it was the office of the _provveditori_
of silk; on the architrave are engraved the words:

PROVISORES SERICI

and below, above the door, is the Tablet which] in the year 1827 the
Abate Zenier caused to be put up with this inscription:—

AEDES PROXIMA THALIAE CVLTVI MODO ADDICTA
MARCI POLO P. V. ITINERVM FAMA PRAECLARI
JAM HABITATIO FVIT.

[Sidenote: Recent corroboration as to the traditional site of the Casa
Polo.]

24_a_. I believe that of late years some doubts have been thrown on
the tradition of the site indicated as that of the Casa Polo, though
I am not aware of the grounds of such doubts. But a document recently
discovered at Venice by Comm. Barozzi, one of a series relating to the
testamentary estate of Marco Polo, goes far to confirm the tradition.
This is the copy of a technical definition of two pieces of house
property adjoining the property of Marco Polo and his brother Stephen,
which were sold to Marco Polo by his wife Donata[7] in June 1321.
Though the definition is not decisive, from the rarity of topographical
references and absence of points of the compass, the description of
Donata’s tenements as standing on the Rio (presumably that of S.
Giovanni Grisostomo) on one side, opening by certain porticoes and
stairs on the other to the Court and common alley leading to the Church
of S. Giovanni Grisostomo, and abutting in two places on the CA’ POLO,
the property of her husband and Stefano, will apply perfectly to a
building occupying the western portion of the area on which now stands
the Theatre, and perhaps forming the western side of a Court of which
Casa Polo formed the other three sides.[8]

[Illustration: Entrance to the Corte del Milione, Venice.]

We know nothing more of Polo till we find him appearing a year or two
later in rapid succession as the Captain of a Venetian Galley, as a
prisoner of war, and as an author.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Marco Barbaro’s story related at p. _25_ speaks of the Ca’ Million
as _built_ by the travellers.

From a list of parchments existing in the archives of the _Casa di
Ricovero_, or Great Poor House, at Venice, Comm. Berchet obtained
the following indication:—

“_No. 94. Marco Galetti invests_ Marco Polo _S. of_ Nicolo
_with the ownership of his possessions_ (beni) _in_ S. Giovanni
Grisostomo; _10 September, 1319; drawn up by the Notary Nicolo,
priest of S. Canciano._”

This document would perhaps have thrown light on the matter, but
unfortunately recent search by several parties has failed to
trace it. [The document has been discovered since: see vol. ii.,
_Calendar_, No. 6.—H. C.]

[2] ——“Sua casa che era posta nel confin di S. Giovanni Chrisostomo,
_che hor fà l’anno s’abbrugiò totalmente_, con gran danno di
molti.” (_Doglioní, Hist. Venetiana_, Ven. 1598, pp. 161–162.)

“1596. 7 _Nov. Senato_ (Arsenal ... ix c. 159 t).

“Essendo conveniente usar qualche ricognizione a quelli della
maestranza dell’Arsenal nostro, che prontamente sono concorsi all’
incendio occorso ultimamente a S. Zuane Grizostomo nelli stabeli
detti di CA’ MILION dove per la relazion fatta nell collegio nostro
dalli patroni di esso Arsenal hanno nell’estinguere il foco
prestato ogni buon servitio....”—(Comm. by Cav. Cecchetti through
Comm. Berchet.)

[3] See a paper by G. C. (the Engineer Giovanni Casoni) in _Teatro
Emeronitio Almanacco per l’Anno 1835_.

[4] This Cross is engraved by Mr. Ruskin in vol. ii. of the _Stones of
Venice_: see p. 139, and Pl. xi. Fig. 4.

[5] Casoni’s only doubt was whether the _Corte del Millioni_ was what
is now the Sabbionera, or the interior area of the theatre. The
latter seems most probable.

One Illustration of this volume, p. 1, shows the archway in the
Corte Sabbionera, and also the decorations of the soffit.

[6] See _Ruskin_, iii. 320.

[7] Comm. Barozzi writes: “Among us, contracts between husband and wife
are and were very common, and recognized by law. The wife sells to
the husband property not included in dowry, or that she may have
inherited, just as any third person might.”

[8] See Appendix C, No. 16.

V. DIGRESSION CONCERNING THE WAR-GALLEYS OF THE
MEDITERRANEAN STATES IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

[Sidenote: Arrangement of the Rowers in Mediæval Galleys: a separate
oar to every man.]

25. And before entering on this new phase of the Traveller’s biography
it may not be without interest that we say something regarding the
equipment of those galleys which are so prominent in the mediæval
history of the Mediterranean.[1]

Eschewing that “Serbonian Bog, where armies whole have sunk” of Books
and Commentators, the theory of the classification of the Biremes and
Triremes of the Ancients, we can at least assert on secure grounds
that in _mediæval_ armament, up to the middle of the 16th century or
thereabouts, the characteristic distinction of galleys of different
calibres, so far as such differences existed, was based _on the number
of rowers that sat on one bench pulling each his separate oar, but
through one_ portella _or rowlock-port_.[2] And to the classes of
galleys so distinguished the Italians, of the later Middle Age at
least, did certainly apply, rightly or wrongly, the classical terms of
_Bireme_, _Trireme_, and _Quinquereme_, in the sense of galleys having
two men and two oars to a bench, three men and three oars to a bench,
and five men and five oars to a bench.[3]

That this was the mediæval arrangement is very certain from the details
afforded by Marino Sanudo the Elder, confirmed by later writers and by
works of art. Previous to 1290, Sanudo tells us, almost all the galleys
that went to the Levant had but two oars and men to a bench; but as it
had been found that three oars and men to a bench could be employed
with great advantage, after that date nearly all galleys adopted this
arrangement, which was called _ai Terzaruoli_.[4]

Moreover experiments made by the Venetians in 1316 had shown that four
rowers to a bench could be employed still more advantageously. And
where the galleys could be used on inland waters, and could be made
more bulky, Sanudo would even recommend five to a bench, or have gangs
of rowers on two decks with either three or four men to the bench on
each deck.

[Sidenote: Change of System in the 16th century.]

26. This system of grouping the oars, and putting only one man to an
oar, continued down to the 16th century, during the first half of which
came in the more modern system of using great oars, equally spaced,
and requiring from four to seven men each to ply them, in the manner
which endured till late in the last century, when galleys became
altogether obsolete. Captain Pantero Pantera, the author of a work
on Naval Tactics (1616), says he had heard, from veterans who had
commanded galleys equipped in the antiquated fashion, that _three_ men
to a bench, with separate oars, answered better than three men to one
great oar, but four men to one great oar (he says) were certainly more
efficient than four men with separate oars. The new-fashioned great
oars, he tells us, were styled _Remi di Scaloccio_, the old grouped
oars _Remi a Zenzile_,—terms the etymology of which I cannot explain.[5]

It may be doubted whether the four-banked and five-banked galleys,
of which Marino Sanudo speaks, really then came into practical use.
A great five-banked galley on this system, built in 1529 in the
Venice Arsenal by Vettor Fausto, was the subject of so much talk and
excitement, that it must evidently have been something quite new and
unheard of.[6] So late as 1567 indeed the King of Spain built at
Barcelona a galley of thirty-six benches to the side, and seven men
to the bench, with a separate oar to each in the old fashion. But it
proved a failure.[7]

Down to the introduction of the great oars the usual system appears to
have been three oars to a bench for the larger galleys, and two oars
for lighter ones. The _fuste_ or lighter galleys of the Venetians, even
to about the middle of the 16th century, had their oars in pairs from
the stern to the mast, and single oars only from the mast forward.[8]

[Sidenote: Some details of the 13th century Galleys.]

27. Returning then to the three-banked and two-banked galleys of the
latter part of the 13th century, the number of benches on each side
seems to have run from twenty-five to twenty-eight, at least as I
interpret Sanudo’s calculations. The 100-oared vessels often mentioned
(_e.g._ by _Muntaner_, p. 419) were probably two-banked vessels with
twenty-five benches to a side.

[Illustration]

The galleys were very narrow, only 15½ feet in beam.[9] But to give
room for the play of the oars and the passage of the fighting-men, &c.,
this width was largely augmented by an _opera-morta_, or outrigger
deck, projecting much beyond the ship’s sides and supported by timber
brackets.[10] I do not find it stated how great this projection was in
the mediæval galleys, but in those of the 17th century it was _on each
side_ as much as ²⁄₉ths of the true beam. And if it was as great in the
13th-century galleys the total width between the false gunnels would be
about 22¼ feet.

In the centre line of the deck ran, the whole length of the vessel, a
raised gangway called the _corsia_, for passage clear of the oars.

The benches were arranged as in this diagram. The part of the
bench next the gunnel was at right angles to it, but the other
two-thirds of the bench were thrown forward obliquely. _a_, _b_, _c_,
indicate the position of the three rowers. The shortest oar _a_ was
called _Terlicchio_, the middle one _b Posticcio_, the long oar _c
Piamero_.[11]

I do not find any information as to how the oars worked on the gunnels.
The Siena fresco (see p. _35_) appears to show them attached by loops
and pins, which is the usual practice in boats of the Mediterranean
now. In the cut from D. Tintoretto (p. _37_) the groups of oars
protrude through regular ports in the bulwarks, but this probably
represents the use of a later day. In any case the oars of each bench
must have worked in very close proximity. Sanudo states the length of
the galleys of his time (1300–1320) as 117 feet. This was doubtless
length of _keel_, for that is specified (“_da ruoda a ruoda_”) in
other Venetian measurements, but the whole oar space could scarcely
have been so much, and with twenty-eight benches to a side there
could not have been more than 4 feet gunnel-space to each bench. And
as one of the objects of the grouping of the oars was to allow room
between the benches for the action of cross-bowmen, &c., it is plain
that the rowlock space for the three oars must have been very much
compressed.[12]

[Illustration: Galley-Fight, from a Mediæval Fresco at Siena. (See p.
_36_.)]

The rowers were divided into three classes, with graduated pay.
The highest class, who pulled the poop or stroke oars, were called
_Portolati_; those at the bow, called _Prodieri_, formed the second
class.[13]

Some elucidation of the arrangements that we have tried to describe
will be found in our cuts. That at p. _35_ is from a drawing, by the
aid of a very imperfect photograph, of part of one of the frescoes
of Spinello Aretini in the Municipal Palace at Siena, representing a
victory of the Venetians over the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa’s fleet,
commanded by his son Otho, in 1176; but no doubt the galleys, &c., are
of the artist’s own age, the middle of the 14th century.[14] In this
we see plainly the projecting _opera-morta_, and the rowers sitting two
to a bench, each with his oar, for these are two-banked. We can also
discern the Latin rudder on the quarter. (See this volume, p. 119.) In
a picture in the Uffizj, at Florence, of about the same date, by Pietro
Laurato (it is in the corridor near the entrance), may be seen a small
figure of a galley with the oars also very distinctly coupled.[15]
Casoni has engraved, after Cristoforo Canale, a pictorial plan of a
Venetian trireme of the 16th century, which shows the arrangement of
the oars in _triplets_ very plainly.

The following cut has been sketched from an engraving of a picture by
Domenico Tintoretto in the Doge’s palace, representing, I believe,
the same action (real or imaginary) as Spinello’s fresco, but with
the costume and construction of a later date. It shows, however, very
plainly, the projecting _opera-morta_ and the arrangement of the oars
in fours, issuing through row-ports in high bulwarks.

[Illustration: Part of a Sea Fight, after Dom. Tintoretto.]

[Sidenote: Fighting Arrangements.]

28. Midships in the mediæval galley a castle was erected, of the width
of the ship, and some 20 feet in length; its platform being elevated
sufficiently to allow of free passage under it and over the benches.
At the bow was the battery, consisting of mangonels (see vol. ii. p.
161 _seqq._) and great cross-bows with winding gear,[16] whilst there
were shot-ports[17] for smaller cross-bows along the gunnels in the
intervals between the benches. Some of the larger galleys had openings
to admit horses at the stern, which were closed and caulked for the
voyage, being under water when the vessel was at sea.[18]

It seems to have been a very usual piece of tactics, in attacking as
well as in awaiting attack, to connect a large number of galleys by
hawsers, and sometimes also to link the oars together, so as to render
it difficult for the enemy to break the line or run aboard. We find
this practised by the Genoese on the defensive at the battle of Ayas
(_infra_, p. _43_), and it is constantly resorted to by the Catalans in
the battles described by Ramon de Muntaner.[19]

Sanudo says the toil of rowing in the galleys was excessive, almost
unendurable. Yet it seems to have been performed by freely-enlisted
men, and therefore it was probably less severe than that of the
great-oared galleys of more recent times, which it was found
impracticable to work by free enlistment, or otherwise than by slaves
under the most cruel driving.[20] I am not well enough read to say
that war-galleys were never rowed by slaves in the Middle Ages, but
the only doubtful allusion to such a class that I have met with is
in one passage of Muntaner, where he says, describing the Neapolitan
and Catalan fleets drawing together for action, that the gangs
of the galleys had to toil _like_ “forçats” (p. 313). Indeed, as
regards Venice at least, convict rowers are stated to have been first
introduced in 1549, previous to which the gangs were of _galeotti
assoldati_.[21]

[Sidenote: Crew of a Galley and Staff of a Fleet.]

29. We have already mentioned that Sanudo requires for his three-banked
galley a ship’s company of 250 men. They are distributed as follows:—

_Comito_ or Master 1
Quartermasters 8
Carpenters 2
Caulkers 2
In charge of stores and arms 4
Orderlies 2
Cook 1
Arblasteers 50
Rowers 180
———
250[22]

This does not include the _Sopracomito_, or Gentleman-Commander, who
was expected to be _valens homo et probus_, a soldier and a gentleman,
fit to be consulted on occasion by the captain-general. In the Venetian
fleet he was generally a noble.[23]

The aggregate pay of such a crew, not including the sopracomito,
amounted monthly to 60 _lire de’ grossi_, or 600 florins, equivalent
to 280_l._ at modern gold value; and the cost for a year to nearly
3160_l._, exclusive of the victualling of the vessel and the pay of
the gentleman-commander. The build or purchase of a galley complete is
estimated by the same author at 15,000 florins, or 7012_l._

We see that war cost a good deal in money even then.

Besides the ship’s own complement Sanudo gives an estimate for
the general staff of a fleet of 60 galleys. This consists of a
captain-general, two (vice) admirals, and the following:—

6 _Probi homines_, or gentlemen of character, forming a council to
the Captain-General;
4 Commissaries of Stores;
2 Commissaries over the Arms;
3 Physicians;
3 Surgeons;
5 Master Engineers and Carpenters;
15 Master Smiths;
12 Master Fletchers;
5 Cuirass men and Helmet-makers;
15 Oar-makers and Shaft-makers;
10 Stone cutters for stone shot;
10 Master Arblast-makers;
20 Musicians;
20 Orderlies, &c.

[Sidenote: Music; and other particulars.]

30. The musicians formed an important part of the equipment. Sanudo
says that in going into action every vessel should make the greatest
possible display of colours; gonfalons and broad banners should float
from stem to stern, and gay pennons all along the bulwarks; whilst it
was impossible to have too much of noisy music, of pipes, trumpets,
kettle-drums, and what not, to put heart into the crew and strike fear
into the enemy.[24]

So Joinville, in a glorious passage, describes the galley of his
kinsman, the Count of Jaffa, at the landing of St. Lewis in Egypt:—

“That galley made the most gallant figure of them all, for it was
painted all over, above water and below, with scutcheons of the
count’s arms, the field of which was _or_ with a cross _patée
gules_.[25] He had a good 300 rowers in his galley, and every man
of them had a target blazoned with his arms in beaten gold. And,
as they came on, the galley looked to be some flying creature,
with such spirit did the rowers spin it along;—or rather, with
the rustle of its flags, and the roar of its nacaires and drums
and Saracen horns, you might have taken it for a rushing bolt of
heaven.”[26]

The galleys, which were very low in the water,[27] could not keep the
sea in rough weather, and in winter they never willingly kept the sea
at night, however fair the weather might be. Yet Sanudo mentions that
he had been with armed galleys to Sluys in Flanders.

I will mention two more particulars before concluding this digression.
When captured galleys were towed into port it was stern foremost, and
with their colours dragging on the surface of the sea.[28] And the
custom of saluting at sunset (probably by music) was in vogue on board
the galleys of the 13th century.[29]

We shall now sketch the circumstances that led to the appearance of our
Traveller in the command of a war-galley.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] I regret not to have had access to Jal’s learned memoirs
(_Archéologie Navale_, Paris, 1839) whilst writing this section,
nor since, except for a hasty look at his Essay on the difficult
subject of the oar arrangements. I see that he rejects so great
a number of oars as I deduce from the statements of Sanudo and
others, and that he regards a large number of the rowers as
supplementary.

[2] It seems the more desirable to elucidate this, because writers on
mediæval subjects so accomplished as Buchon and Capmany have (it
would seem) entirely misconceived the matter, assuming that all the
men on one bench pulled at one oar.

[3] See _Coronelli, Atlante Veneto_, I. 139, 140. Marino Sanudo the
Elder, though not using the term _trireme_, says it was well
understood from ancient authors that the Romans employed their
rowers _three to a bench_ (p. 59).

[4] “_Ad terzarolos_” (_Secreta Fidelium Crucis_, p. 57). The Catalan
Worthy, Ramon de Muntaner, indeed constantly denounces the practice
of manning _all_ the galleys with _terzaruoli_, or _tersols_,
as his term is. But his reason is that these thirds-men were
taken from the oar when crossbowmen were wanted, to act in that
capacity, and as such they were good for nothing; the crossbowmen,
he insists, should be men specially enlisted for that service and
kept to that. He would have some 10 or 20 per cent. only of the
fleet built very light and manned in threes. He does not seem to
have contemplated oars three-banked, and crossbowmen _besides_, as
Sanudo does. (See below; and _Muntaner_, pp. 288, 323, 525, etc.)

In Sanudo we have a glimpse worth noting of the word _soldiers_
advancing towards the modern sense; he expresses a strong
preference for _soldati_ (viz. _paid_ soldiers) over _crusaders_
(viz. volunteers), p. 74.

[5] _L’Armata Navale_, Roma, 1616, pp. 150–151.

[6] See a work to which I am indebted for a good deal of light and
information, the Engineer Giovanni Casoni’s Essay: “_Dei Navigli
Poliremi usati nella Marina dagli Antichi Veneziani_,” in
“_Esercitazioni dell’Ateneo Veneto_,” vol. ii. p. 338. This great
_Quinquereme_, as it was styled, is stated to have been struck by a
fire-arrow, and blown up, in January 1570.

[7] _Pantera_, p. 22.

[8] _Lazarus Bayfius de Re Navali Veterum_, in _Gronovii Thesaurus_,
Ven. 1737, vol. xi. p. 581. This writer also speaks of the
Quinquereme mentioned above (p. 577).

[9] _Marinus Sanutius_, p. 65.

[10] See the woodcuts opposite and at p. 37; also _Pantera_, p. 46
(who is here, however, speaking of the great-oared galleys), and
_Coronelli_, i. 140.

[11] _Casoni_, p. 324. He obtains these particulars from a manuscript
work of the 16th century by Cristoforo Canale.

[12] Signor Casoni (p. 324) expresses his belief that no galley of
the 14th century had more than 100 oars. I differ from him with
hesitation, and still more as I find M. Jal agrees in this view. I
will state the grounds on which I came to a different conclusion.
(1) Marino Sanudo assigns 180 rowers for a galley equipped _ai
Terzaruoli_ (p. 75). This seemed to imply something near 180 oars,
for I do not find any allusion to reliefs being provided. In the
French galleys of the 18th century there were no reliefs except in
this way, that in long runs without urgency only half the oars were
pulled. (See _Mém. d’un Protestant condamné aux Galères_, etc.,
Réimprimés, Paris, 1865, p. 447.) If four men to a bench were to be
employed, then Sanudo seems to calculate for his smaller galleys
220 men actually rowing (see pp. 75–78). This seems to assume 55
benches, _i.e._, 28 on one side and 27 on the other, which with
3-banked oars would give 165 rowers. (2) Casoni himself refers to
Pietro Martire d’Anghieria’s account of a Great Galley of Venice
in which he was sent ambassador to Egypt from the Spanish Court in
1503. The crew amounted to 200, of whom 150 were for working the
sails and oars, _that being the number of oars in each galley_,
one man to each oar and three to each bench. Casoni assumes that
this vessel must have been much larger than the galleys of the 14th
century; but, however that may have been, Sanudo to his galley
assigns the larger crew of 250, of whom almost exactly the same
proportion (180) were rowers. And in the _galeazza_ described by
Pietro Martire the oars were used only as an occasional auxiliary.
(See his _Legationis Babylonicæ Libri Tres_, appended to his 3
Decads concerning the New World; _Basil_. 1533, f. 77 _ver._) (3)
The galleys of the 18th century, with their great oars 50 feet
long pulled by six or seven men each, had 25 benches to the side,
and only 4′ 6″ (French) gunnel-space to each oar. (See _Mém. d’un
Protest._, p. 434.) I imagine that a smaller space would suffice
for the 3 light oars of the mediæval system, so that this need
scarcely be a difficulty in the face of the preceding evidence.
Note also the _three hundred rowers_ in Joinville’s description
quoted at p. _40_. The great galleys of the Malay Sultan of Achin
in 1621 had, according to Beaulieu, from 700 to 800 rowers, but I
do not know on what system.

[13] _Marinus Sanutius_, p. 78. These titles occur also in the
_Documenti d’ Amore_ of Fr. Barberino referred to at p. 117 of this
volume:—

“Convienti qui manieri _Portolatti e prodieri_ E presti galeotti
Aver, e forti e dotti.”

[14] Spinello’s works, according to Vasari, extended from 1334 till
late in the century. A religious picture of his at Siena is
assigned to 1385, so the frescoes may probably be of about the same
period. Of the battle represented I can find no record.

[15] Engraved in Jal, i. 330; with other mediæval illustrations of the
same points.

[16] To these Casoni adds _Sifoni_ for discharging Greek fire; but this
he seems to take from the Greek treatise of the Emperor Leo. Though
I have introduced Greek fire in the cut at p. _49_, I doubt if
there is evidence of its use by the Italians in the thirteenth
century. Joinville describes it like something strange and new.

In after days the artillery occupied the same position, at the bow
of the galley.

Great beams, hung like battering rams, are mentioned by Sanudo, as
well as iron crow’s-feet with fire attached, to shoot among the
rigging, and jars of quick-lime and soft soap to fling in the eyes
of the enemy. The lime is said to have been used by Doria against
the Venetians at Curzola (_infra_, p. _48_), and seems to have been
a usual provision. Francesco Barberini specifies among the stores
for his galley: “_Calcina_, con lancioni, Pece, pietre, e ronconi”
(p. 259). And Christine de Pisan, in her _Faiz du Sage Roy Charles_
(V. of France), explains also the use of the soap: “_Item_, on
doit avoir pluseurs vaisseaulx legiers à rompre, comme _poz plains
de chauls_ ou pouldre, et gecter dedens; et, par ce, seront comme
avuglez, au brisier des poz. _Item_, on doit avoir autres _poz
de mol savon_ et gecter es nefzs des adversaires, et quant les
vaisseaulx brisent, le savon est glissant, si ne se peuent en piez
soustenir et chiéent en l’eaue” (pt. ii. ch. 38).

[17] _Balistariæ_, whence no doubt _Balistrada_ and our _Balustrade_.
Wedgwood’s etymology is far-fetched. And in his new edition (1872),
though he has shifted his ground, he has not got nearer the truth.

[18] _Sanutius_, p. 53; _Joinville_, p. 40; _Muntaner_, 316, 403.

[19] See pp. 270, 288, 324, and especially 346.

[20] See the _Protestant_, cited above, p. 441, _et seqq._

[21] _Venezia e le sue Lagune_, ii. 52.

[22] _Mar. Sanut._ p. 75.

[23] _Mar. Sanut._, p. 30.

[24] The Catalan Admiral Roger de Loria, advancing at daybreak to
attack the Provençal Fleet of Charles of Naples (1283) in the
harbour of Malta, “did a thing which should be reckoned to him
rather as an act of madness,” says Muntaner, “than of reason. He
said, ‘God forbid that I should attack them, all asleep as they
are! Let the trumpets and nacaires sound to awaken them, and I will
tarry till they be ready for action. No man shall have it to say,
if I beat them, that it was by catching them asleep.’” (_Munt._ p.
287.) It is what Nelson might have done!

The Turkish admiral Sidi ’Ali, about to engage a Portuguese
squadron in the Straits of Hormuz, in 1553, describes the Franks as
“dressing their vessels with flags and coming on.” (_J. As._ ix.
70.)

[25] A cross _patée_, is one with the extremities broadened out into
_feet_ as it were.

[26] Page 50.

[27] The galley at p. _49_ is somewhat too high; and I believe it
should have had no _shrouds_.

[28] See _Muntaner_, passim, _e.g._ 271, 286, 315, 349.

[29] _Ibid._ 346.

VI. THE JEALOUSIES AND NAVAL WARS OF VENICE AND GENOA. LAMBA DORIA’S
EXPEDITION TO THE ADRIATIC; BATTLE OF CURZOLA; AND IMPRISONMENT
OF MARCO POLO BY THE GENOESE.

[Sidenote: Growing jealousies and outbreaks between the Republics.]

31. Jealousies, too characteristic of the Italian communities, were,
in the case of the three great trading republics of Venice, Genoa,
and Pisa, aggravated by commercial rivalries, whilst, between the two
first of those states, and also between the two last, the bitterness of
such feelings had been augmenting during the whole course of the 13th
century.[1]

The brilliant part played by Venice in the conquest of Constantinople
(1204), and the preponderance she thus acquired on the Greek shores,
stimulated her arrogance and the resentment of her rivals. The three
states no longer stood on a level as bidders for the shifting favour
of the Emperor of the East. By treaty, not only was Venice established
as the most important ally of the empire and as mistress of a large
fraction of its territory, but all members of nations at war with her
were prohibited from entering its limits. Though the Genoese colonies
continued to exist, they stood at a great disadvantage, where their
rivals were so predominant and enjoyed exemption from duties, to which
the Genoese remained subject. Hence jealousies and resentments reached
a climax in the Levantine settlements, and this colonial exacerbation
reacted on the mother States.

A dispute which broke out at Acre in 1255 came to a head in a war which
lasted for years, and was felt all over Syria. It began in a quarrel
about a very old church called St. Sabba’s, which stood on the common
boundary of the Venetian and Genoese estates in Acre,[2] and this flame
was blown by other unlucky occurrences. Acre suffered grievously.[3]
Venice at this time generally kept the upper hand, beating Genoa by
land and sea, and driving her from Acre altogether.✛ Four ancient
porphyry figures from St. Sabba’s were sent in triumph to Venice, and
with their strange devices still stand at the exterior corner of St.
Mark’s, towards the Ducal Palace.[4]

But no number of defeats could extinguish the spirit of Genoa, and the
tables were turned when in her wrath she allied herself with Michael
Palaeologus to upset the feeble and tottering Latin Dynasty, and with
it the preponderance of Venice on the Bosphorus. The new emperor handed
over to his allies the castle of their foes, which they tore down with
jubilations, and now it was their turn to send its stones as trophies
to Genoa. Mutual hate waxed fiercer than ever; no merchant fleet of
either state could go to sea without convoy, and wherever their ships
met they fought.[5] It was something like the state of things between
Spain and England in the days of Drake.

[Illustration: Figures from St. Sabba’s, sent to Venice.]

The energy and capacity of the Genoese seemed to rise with their
success, and both in seamanship and in splendour they began almost
to surpass their old rivals. The fall of Acre (1291), and the total
expulsion of the Franks from Syria, in great measure barred the
southern routes of Indian trade, whilst the predominance of Genoa in
the Euxine more or less obstructed the free access of her rival to the
northern routes by Trebizond and Tana.

[Sidenote: Battle in Bay of Ayas in 1294.]

32. Truces were made and renewed, but the old fire still smouldered. In
the spring of 1294 it broke into flame, in consequence of the seizure
in the Grecian seas of three Genoese vessels by a Venetian fleet.
This led to an action with a Genoese convoy which sought redress. The
fight took place off Ayas in the Gulf of Scanderoon,[6] and though the
Genoese were inferior in strength by one-third they gained a signal
victory, capturing all but three of the Venetian galleys, with rich
cargoes, including that of Marco Basilio (or Basegio), the commodore.

This victory over their haughty foe was in its completeness evidently
a surprise to the Genoese, as well as a source of immense exultation,
which is vigorously expressed in a ballad of the day, written in a
stirring salt-water rhythm.[7] It represents the Venetians, as they
enter the bay, in arrogant mirth reviling the Genoese with very
unsavoury epithets as having deserted their ships to skulk on shore.
They are described as saying:—

“‘Off they’ve slunk! and left us nothing;
We shall get nor prize nor praise;
Nothing save those crazy timbers
Only fit to make a blaze.’”

So they advance carelessly—

“On they come! But lo their blunder!
When our lads start up anon,
Breaking out like unchained lions,
With a roar, ‘Fall on! Fall on!’”[8]

After relating the battle and the thoroughness of the victory, ending
in the conflagration of five-and-twenty captured galleys, the poet
concludes by an admonition to the enemy to moderate his pride and curb
his arrogant tongue, harping on the obnoxious epithet _porci leproxi_,
which seems to have galled the Genoese.[9] He concludes:—

“Nor can I at all remember
Ever to have heard the story
Of a fight wherein the Victors
Reaped so rich a meed of glory!”[10]

The community of Genoa decreed that the victory should be commemorated
by the annual presentation of a golden pall to the monastery of St.
German’s, the saint on whose feast (28th May) it had been won.[11]

The startling news was received at Venice with wrath and grief, for
the flower of their navy had perished, and all energies were bent at
once to raise an overwhelming force.[12] The Pope (Boniface VIII.)
interfered as arbiter, calling for plenipotentiaries from both sides.
But spirits were too much inflamed, and this mediation came to nought.

Further outrages on both sides occurred in 1296. The Genoese
residences at Pera were fired, their great alum works on the coast of
Anatolia were devastated, and Caffa was stormed and sacked; whilst
on the other hand a number of the Venetians at Constantinople were
massacred by the Genoese, and Marco Bembo, their Bailo, was flung from
a house-top. Amid such events the fire of enmity between the cities
waxed hotter and hotter.

[Sidenote: Lamba Doria’s Expedition to the Adriatic.]

33. In 1298 the Genoese made elaborate preparations for a great blow at
the enemy, and fitted out a powerful fleet which they placed under the
command of LAMBA DORIA, a younger brother of Uberto of that illustrious
house, under whom he had served fourteen years before in the great rout
of the Pisans at Meloria.

The rendezvous of the fleet was in the Gulf of Spezia, as we learn
from the same pithy Genoese poet who celebrated Ayas. This time the
Genoese were bent on bearding St. Mark’s Lion in his own den; and after
touching at Messina they steered straight for the Adriatic:—

“Now, as astern Otranto bears,
Pull with a will! and, please the Lord,
Let them who bragged, with fire and sword,
To waste our homesteads, look to theirs!”[13]

On their entering the gulf a great storm dispersed the fleet. The
admiral with twenty of his galleys got into port at Antivari on the
Albanian coast, and next day was rejoined by fifty-eight more, with
which he scoured the Dalmatian shore, plundering all Venetian property.
Some sixteen of his galleys were still missing when he reached the
island of Curzola, or Scurzola as the more popular name seems to have
been, the Black Corcyra of the Ancients—the chief town of which, a rich
and flourishing place, the Genoese took and burned.[14] Thus they were
engaged when word came that the Venetian fleet was in sight.

Venice, on first hearing of the Genoese armament, sent Andrea Dandolo
with a large force to join and supersede Maffeo Quirini, who was
already cruising with a squadron in the Ionian sea; and, on receiving
further information of the strength of the hostile expedition, the
Signory hastily equipped thirty-two more galleys in Chioggia and the
ports of Dalmatia, and despatched them to join Dandolo, making the
whole number under his command up to something like ninety-five.
Recent drafts had apparently told heavily upon the Venetian sources of
enlistment, and it is stated that many of the complements were made up
of rustics swept in haste from the Euganean hills. To this the Genoese
poet seems to allude, alleging that the Venetians, in spite of their
haughty language, had to go begging for men and money up and down
Lombardy. “Did _we_ do like that, think you?” he adds:—

“Beat up for aliens? _We_ indeed?
When lacked we homeborn Genoese?
Search all the seas, no salts like these,
For Courage, Seacraft, Wit at need.”[15]

Of one of the Venetian galleys, probably in the fleet which sailed
under Dandolo’s immediate command, went Marco Polo as _Sopracomito_ or
Gentleman-Commander.[16]

[Sidenote: The Fleets come in sight of each other at Curzola.]

34. It was on the afternoon of Saturday the 6th September that the
Genoese saw the Venetian fleet approaching, but, as sunset was not far
off, both sides tacitly agreed to defer the engagement.[17]

The Genoese would appear to have occupied a position near the eastern
end of the Island of Curzola, with the Peninsula of Sabbioncello behind
them, and Meleda on their left, whilst the Venetians advanced along the
south side of Curzola. (See map on p. _50_).

According to Venetian accounts the Genoese were staggered at the sight
of the Venetian armaments, and sent more than once to seek terms,
offering finally to surrender galleys and munitions of war, if the
crews were allowed to depart. This is an improbable story, and that
of the Genoese ballad seems more like truth. Doria, it says, held
a council of his captains in the evening at which they all voted
for attack, whilst the Venetians, with that overweening sense of
superiority which at this time is reflected in their own annals as
distinctly as in those of their enemies, kept scout-vessels out to
watch that the Genoese fleet, which they looked on as already their
own, did not steal away in the darkness. A vain imagination, says the
poet:—

“Blind error of vainglorious men
To dream that we should seek to flee
After those weary leagues of sea
Crossed, but to hunt them in their den!”[18]

[Sidenote: The Venetians defeated, and Marco Polo a prisoner.]

35. The battle began early on Sunday and lasted till the afternoon. The
Venetians had the wind in their favour, but the morning sun in their
eyes. They made the attack, and with great impetuosity, capturing ten
Genoese galleys; but they pressed on too wildly, and some of their
vessels ran aground. One of their galleys too, being taken, was cleared
of her crew and turned against the Venetians. These incidents caused
confusion among the assailants; the Genoese, who had begun to give
way, took fresh heart, formed a close column, and advanced boldly
through the Venetian line, already in disorder. The sun had begun
to decline when there appeared on the Venetian flank the fifteen or
sixteen missing galleys of Doria’s fleet, and fell upon it with fresh
force. This decided the action. The Genoese gained a complete victory,
capturing all but a few of the Venetian galleys, and including the
flagship with Dandolo. The Genoese themselves lost heavily, especially
in the early part of the action, and Lamba Doria’s eldest son Octavian
is said to have fallen on board his father’s vessel.[19] The number of
prisoners taken was over 7000, and among these was Marco Polo.[20]

[Illustration: Marco Polo’s Galley going into action at Curzola.

... “=il sembloit que la galie volast, par les nageurs qui la
contreingnoient aux avirons, et sembloit que foudre cheist des ciex,
au bruit que les pennonciaus menoient; et que les nacaires les tabours
et les cors sarrazinnois menoient, qui estoient en sa galie.=”

(_Joinville_, vide _ante_, p. 40.)]

The prisoners, even of the highest rank, appear to have been chained.
Dandolo, in despair at his defeat, and at the prospect of being carried
captive into Genoa, refused food, and ended by dashing his head against
a bench.[21] A Genoese account asserts that a noble funeral was given
him after the arrival of the fleet at Genoa, which took place on the
evening of the 16th October.[22] It was received with great rejoicing,
and the City voted the annual presentation of a pallium of gold brocade
to the altar of the Virgin in the Church of St. Matthew, on every
8th of September, the Madonna’s day, on the eve of which the Battle
had been won. To the admiral himself a Palace was decreed. It still
stands, opposite the Church of St. Matthew, though it has passed from
the possession of the Family. On the striped marble façades, both of
the Church and of the Palace, inscriptions of that age, in excellent
preservation, still commemorate Lamba’s achievement.[23] Malik al
Mansúr, the Mameluke Sultan of Egypt, as an enemy of Venice, sent a
complimentary letter to Doria accompanied by costly presents.[24]

[Illustration: Scene of the Battle of Curzola.]

[Illustration: Church of San Matteo, Genoa.]

The latter died at Savona 17th October, 1323, a few months before
the most illustrious of his prisoners, and his bones were laid in a
sarcophagus which may still be seen forming the sill of one of the
windows of S. Matteo (on the right as you enter). Over this sarcophagus
stood the Bust of Lamba till 1797, when the mob of Genoa, in idiotic
imitation of the French proceedings of that age, threw it down. All
of Lamba’s six sons had fought with him at Meloria. In 1291 one of
them, Tedisio, went forth into the Atlantic in company with Ugolino
Vivaldi on a voyage of discovery, and never returned. Through Cæsar,
the youngest, this branch of the Family still survives, bearing the
distinctive surname of _Lamba-Doria_.[25]

As to the treatment of the prisoners, accounts differ; a thing usual in
such cases. The Genoese Poet asserts that the hearts of his countrymen
were touched, and that the captives were treated with compassionate
courtesy. Navagiero the Venetian, on the other hand, declares that most
of them died of hunger.[26]

[Sidenote: Marco Polo in prison dictates his book to Rusticiano of
Pisa. Release of Venetian prisoners.]

36. Howsoever they may have been treated, here was Marco Polo one of
those many thousand prisoners in Genoa; and here, before long, he
appears to have made acquaintance with a man of literary propensities,
whose destiny had brought him into the like plight, by name RUSTICIANO
or RUSTICHELLO of Pisa. It was this person perhaps who persuaded
the Traveller to defer no longer the reduction to writing of his
notable experiences; but in any case it was he who wrote down those
experiences at Marco’s dictation; it is he therefore to whom we owe the
preservation of this record, and possibly even that of the Traveller’s
very memory. This makes the Genoese imprisonment so important an
episode in Polo’s biography.

To Rusticiano we shall presently recur. But let us first bring to
a conclusion what may be gathered as to the duration of Polo’s
imprisonment.

It does not appear whether Pope Boniface made any new effort for
accommodation between the Republics; but other Italian princes did
interpose, and Matteo Visconti, Captain-General of Milan, styling
himself Vicar-General of the Holy Roman Empire in Lombardy, was
accepted as Mediator, along with the community of Milan. Ambassadors
from both States presented themselves at that city, and on the 25th
May, 1299, they signed the terms of a Peace.

These terms were perfectly honourable to Venice, being absolutely
equal and reciprocal; from which one is apt to conclude that the
damage to the City of the Sea was rather to her pride than to her
power; the success of Genoa, in fact, having been followed up by no
systematic attack upon Venetian commerce.[27] Among the terms was the
mutual release of prisoners on a day to be fixed by Visconti after the
completion of all formalities. This day is not recorded, but as the
Treaty was ratified by the Doge of Venice on the 1st July, and the
latest extant document connected with the formalities appears to be
dated 18th July, we may believe that before the end of August Marco
Polo was restored to the family mansion in S. Giovanni Grisostomo.

[Sidenote: Grounds on which the story of Marco Polo’s capture at
Curzola rests.]

37. Something further requires to be said before quitting this event in
our Traveller’s life. For we confess that a critical reader may have
some justification in asking what evidence there is that Marco Polo
ever fought at Curzola, and ever was carried a prisoner to Genoa from
that unfortunate action?

A learned Frenchman, whom we shall have to quote freely in the
immediately ensuing pages, does not venture to be more precise in
reference to the meeting of Polo and Rusticiano than to say of the
latter: “In 1298, being in durance in the Prison of Genoa, he there
became acquainted with Marco Polo, whom the Genoese had deprived of his
liberty _from motives equally unknown_.”[28]

To those who have no relish for biographies that round the meagre
skeleton of authentic facts with a plump padding of what _might have
been_, this sentence of Paulin Paris is quite refreshing in its stern
limitation to positive knowledge. And certainly no contemporary
authority has yet been found for the capture of our Traveller at
Curzola. Still I think that the fact is beyond reasonable doubt.

Ramusio’s biographical notices certainly contain many errors of detail;
and some, such as the many years’ interval which he sets between the
Battle of Curzola and Marco’s return, are errors which a very little
trouble would have enabled him to eschew. But still it does seem
reasonable to believe that the main fact of Marco’s command of a galley
at Curzola, and capture there, was derived from a genuine tradition, if
not from documents.

Let us then turn to the words which close Rusticiano’s preamble (see
_post_, p. 2):—“Lequel (Messire Marc) puis demorant en le charthre de
Jene, fist retraire toutes cestes chouses a Messire Rustacians de Pise
que en celle meissme charthre estoit, au tens qu’il avoit 1298 anz que
Jezu eut vesqui.” These words are at least thoroughly consistent with
Marco’s capture at Curzola, as regards both the position in which they
present him, and the year in which he is thus presented.

There is however another piece of evidence, though it is curiously
indirect.

The Dominican Friar Jacopo of Acqui was a contemporary of Polo’s,
and was the author of a somewhat obscure Chronicle called _Imago
Mundi_.[29] Now this Chronicle does contain mention of Marco’s capture
in action by the Genoese, but attributes it to a different action
from Curzola, and one fought at a time when Polo could not have been
present. The passage runs as follows in a manuscript of the Ambrosian
Library, according to an extract given by Baldelli Boni:—

“In the year of Christ MCCLXXXXVI, in the time of Pope Boniface
VI., of whom we have spoken above, a battle was fought in Arminia,
at the place called Layaz, between xv. galleys of Genoese merchants
and xxv. of Venetian merchants; and after a great fight the galleys
of the Venetians were beaten, and (the crews) all slain or taken;
and among them was taken Messer Marco the Venetian, who was in
company with those merchants, and who was called _Milono_, which
is as much as to say ‘a thousand thousand pounds,’ for so goes
the phrase in Venice. So this Messer Marco Milono the Venetian,
with the other Venetian prisoners, is carried off to the prison
of Genoa, and there kept for a long time. This Messer Marco was a
long time with his father and uncle in Tartary, and he there saw
many things, and made much wealth, and also learned many things,
for he was a man of ability. And so, being in prison at Genoa,
he made a Book concerning the great wonders of the World, _i.e._,
concerning such of them as he had seen. And what he told in the
Book was not as much as he had really seen, because of the tongues
of detractors, who, being ready to impose their own lies on others,
are over hasty to set down as lies what they in their perversity
disbelieve, or do not understand. And because there are many great
and strange things in that Book, which are reckoned past all
credence, he was asked by his friends on his death-bed to correct
the Book by removing everything that went beyond the facts. To
which his reply was that he had not told _one-half_ of what he had
really seen!”[30]

This statement regarding the capture of Marco _at the Battle of
Ayas_ is one which cannot be true, for we know that he did not reach
Venice till 1295, travelling from Persia by way of Trebizond and the
Bosphorus, whilst the Battle of Ayas of which we have purposely given
some detail, was fought in May, 1294. The date MCCLXXXXVI assigned
to it in the preceding extract has given rise to some unprofitable
discussion. Could that date be accepted, no doubt it would enable us
also to accept this, the sole statement from the Traveller’s own age
of the circumstances which brought him into a Genoese prison; it would
enable us to place that imprisonment within a few months of his return
from the East, and to extend its duration to three years, points which
would thus accord better with the general tenor of Ramusio’s tradition
than the capture of Curzola. But the matter is not open to such a
solution. The date of the Battle of Ayas is not more doubtful than that
of the Battle of the Nile. It is clearly stated by several independent
chroniclers, and is carefully established in the Ballad that we have
quoted above.[31] We shall see repeatedly in the course of this Book
how uncertain are the transcriptions of dates in Roman numerals, and in
the present case the LXXXXVI is as certainly a mistake for LXXXXIV as
is Boniface VI. in the same quotation a mistake for Boniface VIII.

But though we cannot accept the statement that Polo was taken prisoner
at _Ayas, in the spring of 1294_, we may accept the passage as evidence
from a contemporary source that he was _taken prisoner in some
sea-fight with the Genoese_, and thus admit it in corroboration of the
Ramusian Tradition of his capture in a sea-fight at Curzola in 1298,
which is perfectly consistent with all other facts in our possession.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] In this part of these notices I am repeatedly indebted to _Heyd._
(See _supra_, p. 9.)

[2] On or close to the Hill called _Monjoie_; see the plan from Marino
Sanudo at p. 18.

[3] “Throughout that year there were not less than 40 machines all at
work upon the city of Acre, battering its houses and its towers,
and smashing and overthrowing everything within their range.
There were at least ten of those engines that shot stones so big
and heavy that they weighed a good 1500 lbs. by the weight of
Champagne; insomuch that nearly all the towers and forts of Acre
were destroyed, and only the religious houses were left. And there
were slain in this same war good 20,000 men on the two sides,
but chiefly of Genoese and Spaniards.” (_Lettre de Jean Pierre
Sarrasin_, in _Michel’s Joinville_, p. 308.)

[4] The origin of these columns is, however, somewhat uncertain. [See
_Cicogna_, I. p. 379.]

[5] In 1262, when a Venetian squadron was taken by the Greek fleet
in alliance with the Genoese, the whole of the survivors of the
captive crews were _blinded_ by order of Palaeologus. (_Roman._ ii.
272.)

[6] See pp. 16, 41, and Plan of Ayas at beginning of Bk. I.

[7] See _Archivio Storico Italiano_, Appendice, tom. iv.

[8]

_Niente ne resta a prender
Se no li corpi de li legni:
Preixi som senza difender;
De bruxar som tute degni!_
* * * *
_Como li fom aproximai
Queli si levan lantor
Como leon descaenai
Tuti criando_ “Alor! Alor!”

This _Alor! Alor!_ (“Up, Boys, and at ’em”), or something similar,
appears to have been the usual war-cry of both parties. So a
trumpet-like poem of the Troubadour warrior Bertram de Born, whom
Dante found in such evil plight below (xxviii. 118 _seqq._), in
which he sings with extraordinary spirit the joys of war:—

“=Ie us dic que tan no m’a sabor
Manjars, ni beure, ni dormir,
Cum a quant aug cridar,= ALOR!
=D’ambas la partz; et aug agnir
Cavals voits per l’ombratge=....”

“I tell you a zest far before
Aught of slumber, or drink, or of food,
I snatch when the shouts of ALOR
Ring from both sides: and out of the wood
Comes the neighing of steeds dimly seen....”

In a galley fight at Tyre in 1258, according to a Latin narrative,
the Genoese shout “Ad arma, ad arma! _ad ipsos, ad ipsos!_” The
cry of the Venetians before engaging the Greeks is represented
by Martino da Canale, in his old French, as “_or à yaus! or à
yaus!_” that of the Genoese on another occasion as _Aur! Aur!_ and
this last is the shout of the Catalans also in Ramon de Muntaner.
(_Villemain, Litt. du Moyen Age_, i. 99; _Archiv. Stor. Ital._
viii. 364, 506; _Pertz, Script._ xviii. 239; _Muntaner_, 269, 287.)
Recently in a Sicilian newspaper, narrating an act of gallant and
successful reprisal (only too rare) by country folk on a body of
the brigands who are such a scourge to parts of the island, I read
that the honest men in charging the villains raised a shout of “_Ad
iddi! Ad iddi!_”

[9] A phrase curiously identical, with a similar sequence, is
attributed to an Austrian General at the battle of Skalitz in 1866.
(_Stoffel’s Letters._)

[10]

_E no me posso aregordar
Dalcuno romanzo vertadê
Donde oyse uncha cointar
Alcun triumfo si sobré!_

[11] _Stella_ in _Muratori_, xvii. 984.

[12] _Dandulo_, Ibid. xii. 404–405.

[13]

_Or entram con gran vigor,
En De sperando aver triumpho,
Queli zerchando inter lo Gorfo
Chi menazeram zercha lor!_

And in the next verse note the pure Scotch use of the word _bra_:—

_Sichè da Otranto se partim
Quella bra compagnia,
Per assar in Ihavonia,
D’Avosto a vinte nove dì._

[14] The island of Curzola now counts about 4000 inhabitants; the town
half the number. It was probably reckoned a dependency of Venice
at this time. The King of Hungary had renounced his claims on the
Dalmatian coasts by treaty in 1244. (_Romanin_, ii. 235.) The
gallant defence of the place against the Algerines in 1571 won
for Curzola from the Venetian Senate the honourable title in all
documents of _fedelissima_. (_Paton’s Adriatic_, I. 47.)

[15]

_Ma sé si gran colmo avea
Perchè andava mendigando_

_Per terra de Lombardia
Peccunia, gente a sodi?
Pone mente tu che l’odi
Se noi tegnamo questa via?_

_No, ma’ più! ajamo omi nostrar
Destri, valenti, e avisti,
Che mai par de lor n’o visti
In tuti officj de mar._

[16] In July 1294, a Council of Thirty decreed that galleys should be
equipped by the richest families in proportion to their wealth.
Among the families held to equip one galley each, or one galley
among two or more, in this list, is the CA’ POLO. But this was
before the return of the travellers from the East, and just after
the battle of Ayas. (_Romanin_, ii. 332; this author misdates Ayas,
however.) When a levy was required in Venice for any expedition
the heads of each _contrada_ divided the male inhabitants, between
the ages of twenty and sixty, into groups of twelve each, called
_duodene_. The dice were thrown to decide who should go first on
service. He who went received five _lire_ a month from the State,
and one _lira_ from each of his colleagues in the _duodena_. Hence
his pay was sixteen _lire_ a month, about 2_s._ a day in silver
value, if these were _lire ai grossi_, or 1_s._ 4_d._ if _lire dei
piccoli_. (See _Romanin_, ii. 393–394.)

Money on such occasions was frequently raised by what was called an
_Estimo_ or _Facion_, which was a force loan levied on the citizens
in proportion to their estimated wealth; and for which they were
entitled to interest from the State.

[17] Several of the Italian chroniclers, as Ferreto of Vicenza and
Navagiero, whom Muratori has followed in his “Annals,” say the
battle was fought on the 8th September, the so-called Birthday of
the Madonna. But the inscription on the Church of St. Matthew at
Genoa, cited further on, says the 7th, and with this agree both
Stella and the Genoese poet. For the latter, though not specifying
the day of the month, says it was on a Sunday:—

“Lo di de Domenga era
Passa prima en l’ora bona
Stormezam fin provo nona
Con bataio forte e fera.”

Now the 7th September, 1298, fell on a Sunday.

[18]

_Ma li pensavam grande error
Che in fuga se fussem tuti metui
Che de si lonzi eram vegnui
Per cerchali a casa lor._

[19] “Note here that the Genoese generally, commonly, and by nature,
are the most covetous of Men, and the Love of Gain spurs them to
every Crime. Yet are they deemed also the most valiant Men in the
World. Such an one was Lampa, of that very Doria family, a man
of an high Courage truly. For when he was engaged in a Sea-Fight
against the Venetians, and was standing on the Poop of his Galley,
his Son, fighting valiantly at the Forecastle, was shot by an Arrow
in the Breast, and fell wounded to the Death; a Mishap whereat
his Comrades were sorely shaken, and Fear came upon the whole
Ship’s Company. But Lampa, hot with the Spirit of Battle, and more
mindful of his Country’s Service and his own Glory than of his Son,
ran forward to the spot, loftily rebuked the agitated Crowd, and
ordered his Son’s Body to be cast into the Deep, telling them for
their Comfort that the Land could never have afforded his Boy a
nobler Tomb. And then, renewing the Fight more fiercely than ever,
he achieved the Victory.” (_Benvenuto of Imola_, in _Comment. on
Dante, in Muratori, Antiq._ i. 1146.)

(“Yet like an English General will I die,
And all the Ocean make my spacious Grave;
Women and Cowards on the Land may lie,
The Sea’s the Tomb that’s proper for the Brave!”
—_Annus Mirabilis_.)

[20] The particulars of the battle are gathered from _Ferretus
Vicentinus_, in _Murat._ ix. 985 _seqq._; _And. Dandulo_, in xii.
407–408; _Navagiero_, in xxiii. 1009–1010; and the Genoese Poem as
before.

[21] _Navagiero_, u.s. Dandulo says, “after a few days he died of
grief”; Ferretus, that he was killed in the action and buried at
Curzola.

[22] For the funeral, a MS. of Cibo Recco quoted by _Jacopo Doria_ in
_La Chiesa di San Matteo descritta_, etc., Genova, 1860, p. 26. For
the date of arrival the poem so often quoted:—

“_De Oitover_, a zoia, _a seze di_
Lo nostro ostel, con gran festa
En nostro porto, a or di sesta
Domine De restitui.”

[23] S. Matteo was built by Martin Doria in 1125, but pulled down
and rebuilt by the family in a slightly different position in
1278. On this occasion is recorded a remarkable anticipation of
the feats of American engineering: “As there was an ancient and
very fine picture of Christ upon the apse of the Church, it was
thought a great pity that so fine a work should be destroyed. And
so they contrived an ingenious method by which the apse bodily was
transported without injury, picture and all, for a distance of 25
ells, and firmly set upon the foundations where it now exists.”
(_Jacopo de Varagine_ in _Muratori_, vol. ix. 36.)

The inscription on S. Matteo regarding the battle is as
follows:—“_Ad Honorem Dei et Beate Virginis Marie Anno MCCLXXXXVIII
Die Dominico VII Septembris iste Angelus captus fuit in Gulfo
Venetiarum in Civitate Scursole et ibidem fuit prelium Galearum
LXXVI Januensium cum Galeis LXXXXVI Veneciarum. Capte fuerunt
LXXXIIII per Nobilem Virum Dominum Lambam Aurie Capitaneum et
Armiratum tunc Comunis et Populi Janue cum omnibus existentibus
in eisdem, de quibus conduxit Janue homines vivos carceratos VII
cccc et Galeas XVIII, reliquas LXVI fecit cumburi in dicto Gulfo
Veneciarum. Qui obiit Sagone I. MCCCXXIII._” It is not clear to
what the _Angelus_ refers.

[24] _Rampoldi, Ann. Musulm._ ix. 217.

[25] _Jacopo Doria_, p. 280.

[26] _Murat._ xxiii. 1010. I learn from a Genoese gentleman, through
my friend Professor Henry Giglioli (to whose kindness I owe the
transcript of the inscription just given), that a faint tradition
exists as to the place of our traveller’s imprisonment. It is
alleged to have been a massive building, standing between the
_Grazie_ and the Mole, and bearing the name of the _Malapaga_,
which is now a barrack for Doganieri, but continued till
comparatively recent times to be used as a civil prison. “It is
certain,” says my informant, “that men of fame in arms who had
fallen into the power of the Genoese _were_ imprisoned there, and
among others is recorded the name of the Corsican Giudice dalla
Rocca and Lord of Cinarca, who died there in 1312;” a date so
near that of Marco’s imprisonment as to give some interest to the
hypothesis, slender as are its grounds. Another Genoese, however,
indicates as the scene of Marco’s captivity certain old prisons
near the Old Arsenal, in a site still known as the _Vico degli
Schiavi_. (_Celesia, Dante in Liguria_, 1865, p. 43.) [Was not the
place of Polo’s captivity the basement of the _Palazzo del Capitan
del Popolo_, afterwards _Palazzo del Comune al Mare_, where the
Customs (_Dogana_) had their office, and from the 15th century the
_Casa_ or _Palazzo di S. Giorgio?_—H. C.]

[27] The Treaty and some subsidiary documents are printed in the
Genoese _Liber Jurium_, forming a part of the _Monumenta Historiae
Patriae_, published at Turin. (See _Lib. Jur._ II. 344, _seqq._)
Muratori in his Annals has followed John Villani (Bk. VIII. ch. 27)
in representing the terms as highly unfavourable to Venice. But for
this there is no foundation in the documents. And the terms are
stated with substantial accuracy in Navagiero. (_Murat. Script._
xxiii. 1011.)

[28] _Paulin Paris, Les Manuscrits François de la Bibliothèque du Roi_,
ii. 355.

[29] Though there is no precise information as to the birth or death
of this writer, who belonged to a noble family of Lombardy, the
Bellingeri, he can be traced with tolerable certainty as in life in
1289, 1320, and 1334. (See the Introduction to his Chronicle in the
Turin _Monumentà_, _Scriptores_ III.)

[30] There is another MS. of the _Imago Mundi_ at Turin, which has
been printed in the _Monumenta_. The passage about Polo in that
copy differs widely in wording, is much shorter, and contains no
date. But it relates his capture as having taken place at _Là
Glazà_, which I think there can be no doubt is also intended for
Ayas (sometimes called _Giàzza_), a place which in fact is called
_Glaza_ in three of the MSS. of which various readings are given in
the edition of the Société de Géographie (p. 535).

[31]

“_E per meio esse aregordenti
De si grande scacho mato
Correa mille duxenti
Zonto ge novanta e quatro._”

The Armenian Prince Hayton or Héthum has put it under 1293. (See
_Langlois, Mém. sur les Relations de Gênes avec la Petite-Arménie_.)

VII. RUSTICIANO OR RUSTICHELLO OF PISA, MARCO POLO’S FELLOW-PRISONER
AT GENOA, THE SCRIBE WHO WROTE DOWN THE TRAVELS.

38. We have now to say something of that Rusticiano to whom all who
value Polo’s book are so much indebted.

[Sidenote: Rusticiano, perhaps a prisoner from Meloria.]

The relations between Genoa and Pisa had long been so hostile that it
was only too natural in 1298 to find a Pisan in the gaol of Genoa. An
unhappy multitude of such prisoners had been carried thither fourteen
years before, and the survivors still lingered there in vastly dwindled
numbers. In the summer of 1284 was fought the battle from which Pisa
had to date the commencement of her long decay. In July of that year
the Pisans, at a time when the Genoese had no fleet in their own
immediate waters, had advanced to the very port of Genoa and shot their
defiance into the proud city in the form of silver-headed arrows, and
stones belted with scarlet.[1] They had to pay dearly for this insult.
The Genoese, recalling their cruisers, speedily mustered a fleet of
eighty-eight galleys, which were placed under the command of another of
that illustrious House of Doria, the Scipios of Genoa as they have been
called, Uberto, the elder brother of Lamba. Lamba himself with his six
sons, and another brother, was in the fleet, whilst the whole number of
Dorias who fought in the ensuing action amounted to 250, most of them
on board one great galley bearing the name of the family patron, St.
Matthew.[2]

The Pisans, more than one-fourth inferior in strength, came out boldly,
and the battle was fought off the Porto Pisano, in fact close in front
of Leghorn, where a lighthouse on a remarkable arched basement still
marks the islet of MELORIA, whence the battle got its name. The day
was the 6th of August, the feast of St. Sixtus, a day memorable in
the Pisan Fasti for several great victories. But on this occasion the
defeat of Pisa was overwhelming. Forty of their galleys were taken or
sunk, and upwards of 9000 prisoners carried to Genoa. In fact so vast
a sweep was made of the flower of Pisan manhood that it was a common
saying then: “_Che vuol veder Pisa, vada a Genova_!” Many noble ladies
of Pisa went in large companies on foot to Genoa to seek their husbands
or kinsmen: “And when they made enquiry of the Keepers of the Prisons,
the reply would be, ‘Yesterday there died thirty of them, to-day there
have died forty; all of whom we have cast into the sea; and so it is
daily.’”[3]

[Illustration: Seal of the Pisan Prisoners.]

A body of prisoners so numerous and important naturally exerted
themselves in the cause of peace, and through their efforts, after many
months of negotiation, a formal peace was signed (15th April, 1288).
But through the influence, as was alleged, of Count Ugolino (Dante’s)
who was then in power at Pisa, the peace became abortive; war almost
immediately recommenced, and the prisoners had no release.[4] And,
when the 6000 or 7000 Venetians were thrown into the prisons of Genoa
in October 1298, they would find there the scanty surviving remnant
of the Pisan Prisoners of Meloria, and would gather from them dismal
forebodings of the fate before them.

It is a fair conjecture that to that remnant Rusticiano of Pisa may
have belonged.

We have seen Ramusio’s representation of the kindness shown to Marco
during his imprisonment by a certain Genoese gentleman who also
assisted him to reduce his travels to writing. We may be certain
that this Genoese gentleman is only a distorted image of Rusticiano,
the Pisan prisoner in the gaol of Genoa, whose name and part in the
history of his hero’s book Ramusio so strangely ignores. Yet patriotic
Genoese writers in our own times have striven to determine the identity
of this their imaginary countryman![5]

[Sidenote: Rusticiano, a person known from other sources.]

39. Who, then, was Rusticiano, or, as the name actually is read in the
oldest type of MS., “Messire Rustacians de Pise”?

Our knowledge of him is but scanty. Still something is known of him
besides the few words concluding his preamble to our Traveller’s Book,
which you may read at pp. 1–2 of the body of this volume.

In Sir Walter Scott’s “Essay on Romance,” when he speaks of the new
mould in which the subjects of the old metrical stories were cast by
the school of prose romancers which arose in the 13th century, we find
the following words:—

“Whatever fragments or shadows of true history may yet remain
hidden under the mass of accumulated fable which had been heaped
upon them during successive ages, must undoubtedly be sought in
the metrical romances.... But those prose authors who wrote under
the imaginary names of RUSTICIEN DE PISE, Robert de Borron, and
the like, usually seized upon the subject of some old minstrel;
and recomposing the whole narrative after their own fashion, with
additional character and adventure, totally obliterated in that
operation any shades which remained of the original and probably
authentic tradition,” &c.[6]

Evidently, therefore, Sir Walter regarded Rustician of Pisa as a person
belonging to the same ghostly company as his own Cleishbothams and
Dryasdusts. But in this we see that he was wrong.

In the great Paris Library and elsewhere there are manuscript volumes
containing the stories of the Round Table abridged and somewhat
clumsily combined from the various Prose Romances of that cycle,
such as _Sir Tristan_, _Lancelot_, _Palamedes_, _Giron le Courtois_,
&c., which had been composed, it would seem, by various Anglo-French
gentlemen at the court of Henry III., styled, or styling themselves,
Gasses le Blunt, Luces du Gast, Robert de Borron, and Hélis de Borron.
And these abridgments or recasts are professedly the work of _Le
Maistre Rusticien de Pise_. Several of them were printed at Paris in
the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries as the works of
Rusticien de Pise; and as the preambles and the like, especially in the
form presented in those printed editions, appear to be due sometimes to
the original composers (as Robert and Hélis de Borron) and sometimes to
Rusticien de Pise the recaster, there would seem to have been a good
deal of confusion made in regard to their respective personalities.

From a preamble to one of those compilations which undoubtedly belongs
to Rustician, and which we shall quote at length by and bye, we learn
that Master Rustician “translated” (or perhaps _transferred?_) his
compilation from a book belonging to King Edward of England, at the
time when that prince went beyond seas to recover the Holy Sepulchre.
Now Prince Edward started for the Holy Land in 1270, spent the winter
of that year in Sicily, and arrived in Palestine in May 1271. He
quitted it again in August, 1272, and passed again by Sicily, where in
January, 1273, he heard of his father’s death and his own consequent
accession. Paulin Paris supposes that Rustician was attached to the
Sicilian Court of Charles of Anjou, and that Edward “may have deposited
with that king the Romances of the Round Table, of which all the
world was talking, but the manuscripts of which were still very rare,
especially those of the work of Helye de Borron[7] ... whether by
order, or only with permission of the King of Sicily, our Rustician
made haste to read, abridge, and re-arrange the whole, and when Edward
returned to Sicily he recovered possession of the book from which the
indefatigable Pisan had extracted the contents.”

But this I believe is, in so far as it passes the facts stated in
Rustician’s own preamble, pure hypothesis, for nothing is cited that
connects Rustician with the King of Sicily. And if there be not some
such confusion of personality as we have alluded to, in another of the
preambles, which is quoted by Dunlop as an utterance of Rustician’s,
that personage would seem to claim to have been a comrade in arms of
the two de Borrons. We might, therefore, conjecture that Rustician
himself had accompanied Prince Edward to Syria.[8]

[Sidenote: Character of Rustician’s Romance compilations.]

40. Rustician’s literary work appears from the extracts and remarks of
Paulin Paris to be that of an industrious simple man, without method
or much judgment. “The haste with which he worked is too perceptible;
the adventures are told without connection; you find long stories of
Tristan followed by adventures of his father Meliadus.” For the latter
derangement of historical sequence we find a quaint and ingenuous
apology offered in Rustician’s epilogue to Giron le Courtois:—

“Cy fine le Maistre Rusticien de Pise son conte en louant et
regraciant le Père le Filz et le Saint Esperit, et ung mesme Dieu,
Filz de la Benoiste Vierge Marie, de ce qu’il m’a doné grace, sens,
force, et mémoire, temps et lieu, de me mener à fin de si haulte
et si noble matière come ceste-cy dont j’ay traicté les faiz et
proesses recitez et recordez à mon livre. Et se aucun me demandoit
pour quoy j’ay parlé de Tristan avant que de son père le Roy
Meliadus, je respons que ma matière n’estoist pas congneue. Car je
ne puis pas scavoir tout, ne mettre toutes mes paroles par ordre.
Et ainsi fine mon conte. Amen.”[9]

In a passage of these compilations the Emperor Charlemagne is asked
whether in his judgment King Meliadus or his son Tristan were the
better man? The Emperor’s answer is: “I should say that the King
Meliadus was the better man, and I will tell you why I say so. As far
as I can see, everything that Tristan did was done for Love, and his
great feats would never have been done but under the constraint of
Love, which was his spur and goad. Now that never can be said of King
Meliadus! For what deeds he did, he did them not by dint of Love, but
by dint of his strong right arm. Purely out of his own goodness he
did good, and not by constraint of Love.” “It will be seen,” remarks
on this Paulin Paris, “that we are here a long way removed from the
ordinary principles of Round Table Romances. And one thing besides will
be manifest, viz., that Rusticien de Pise was no Frenchman!”[10]

The same discretion is shown even more prominently in a passage of one
of his compilations, which contains the romances of Arthur, Gyron, and
Meliadus (No. 6975—see last note but one):—

“No doubt,” Rustician says, “other books tell the story of the
Queen Ginevra and Lancelot differently from this; and there were
certain passages between them of which the Master, in his concern
for the honour of both those personages, will say not a word.”
Alas, says the French Bibliographer, that the copy of Lancelot,
which fell into the hands of poor Francesca of Rimini, was not one
of those _expurgated_ by our worthy friend Rustician![11]

[Sidenote: Identity of the Romance Compiler with Polo’s
fellow-prisoner.]

41. A question may still occur to an attentive reader as to the
identity of this Romance-compiler Rusticien de Pise with the Messire
_Rustacians de Pise_, of a solitary MS. of Polo’s work (though the
oldest and most authentic), a name which appears in other copies as
_Rusta Pisan_, _Rasta Pysan_, _Rustichelus Civis Pisanus_, _Rustico_,
_Restazio da Pisa_, _Stazio da Pisa_, and who is stated in the preamble
to have acted as the Traveller’s scribe at Genoa.

M. Pauthier indeed[12] asserts that the French of the MS. Romances
of Rusticien de Pise is of the same barbarous character as that of
the early French MS. of Polo’s Book to which we have just alluded,
and which we shall show to be the nearest presentation of the work as
originally dictated by the Traveller. The language of the latter MS. is
so peculiar that this would be almost perfect evidence of the identity
of the writers, if it were really the fact. A cursory inspection which
I have made of two of those MSS. in Paris, and the extracts which
I have given and am about to give, do not, however, by any means
support M. Pauthier’s view. Nor would that view be consistent with the
judgment of so competent an authority as Paulin Paris, implied in his
calling Rustician a _nom recommandable_ in old French literature, and
his speaking of him as “versed in the secrets of the French Romance
Tongue.”[13] In fact the difference of language in the two cases would
really be a difficulty in the way of identification, if there were room
for doubt. This, however, Paulin Paris seems to have excluded finally,
by calling attention to the peculiar formula of preamble which is
common to the Book of Marco Polo and to one of the Romance compilations
of Rusticien de Pise.

The former will be found in English at pp. 1, 2, of our Translation;
but we give a part of the original below[14] for comparison with the
preamble to the Romances of Meliadus, Tristan, and Lancelot, as taken
from MS. 6961 (Fr. 340) of the Paris Library:—

“_Seigneurs Empereurs et Princes, Ducs et Contes et Barons et
Chevaliers et Vavasseurs et Bourgeois, et tous les preudommes de
cestui monde qui avez talent de vous deliter en rommans, si prenez
cestui (livre) et le faites lire de chief en chief, si orrez toutes
les grans aventure_ qui advindrent entre les Chevaliers errans
du temps au Roy Uter Pendragon, jusques à le temps au Roy Artus
son fils, et des compaignons de la Table Ronde. Et sachiez tout
vraiment que cist livres fust translatez du livre Monseigneur
Edouart le Roy d’Engleterre en cellui temps qu’il passa oultre la
mer au service nostre Seigneur Damedieu pour conquester le Sant
Sepulcre, et Maistre Rusticiens de Pise, lequel est ymaginez yci
dessus,[15] compila ce rommant, car il en translata toutes les
merveilleuses nouvelles et aventures qu’il trouva en celle livre
et traita tout certainement de toutes les aventures du monde, et
si sachiez qu’il traitera plus de Monseigneur Lancelot du Lac, et
Monsʳ Tristan le fils au Roy Meliadus de Leonnoie que d’autres,
porcequ’ilz furent sans faille les meilleurs chevaliers qui à ce
temps furent en terre; et li Maistres en dira de ces deux pluseurs
choses et pluseurs nouvelles que l’en treuvera escript en tous les
autres livres; et porce que le Maistres les trouva escript au Livre
d’Engleterre.”

[Illustration: Palazzo di S. Giorgio Genoa.]

“Certainly,” Paulin Paris observes, “there is a singular analogy
between these two prefaces. And it must be remarked that the formula is
not an ordinary one with translators, compilers, or authors of the 13th
and 14th centuries. Perhaps you would not find a single other example
of it.”[16]

This seems to place beyond question the identity of the
Romance-compiler of Prince Edward’s suite in 1270, and the Prisoner of
Genoa in 1298.

[Sidenote: Further particulars concerning Rustician.]

42. In Dunlop’s History of Fiction a passage is quoted from the
preamble of _Meliadus_, as set forth in the Paris printed edition of
1528, which gives us to understand that Rusticien de Pise had received
as a reward for some of his compositions from King Henry III. the
prodigal gift of two _chateaux_. I gather, however, from passages in
the work of Paulin Paris that this must certainly be one of those
confusions of persons to which I have referred before, and that the
recipient of the chateaux was in reality Helye de Borron, the author of
some of the originals which Rustician manipulated.[17] This supposed
incident in Rustician’s scanty history must therefore be given up.

We call this worthy _Rustician_ or _Rusticiano_, as the nearest
probable representation in Italian form of the _Rusticien_ of the
Round-Table MSS. and the _Rustacians_ of the old text of Polo. But
it is highly probable that his real name was _Rustichello_, as is
suggested by the form _Rustichelus_ in the early Latin version
published by the _Société de Géographie_. The change of one liquid for
another never goes for much in Italy,[18] and Rustichello might easily
Gallicize himself as Rusticien. In a very long list of Pisan officials
during the Middle Ages I find several bearing the name of _Rustichello_
or _Rustichelli_, but no _Rusticiano_ or _Rustigiano_.[19]

Respecting him we have only to add that the peace between Genoa and
Venice was speedily followed by a treaty between Genoa and Pisa. On the
31st July, 1299, a truce for twenty-five years was signed between those
two Republics. It was a very different matter from that between Genoa
and Venice, and contained much that was humiliating and detrimental to
Pisa. But it embraced the release of prisoners; and those of Meloria,
reduced it is said to less than one tithe of their original number,
had their liberty at last. Among the prisoners then released no doubt
Rustician was one. But we hear of him no more.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _B. Marangone, Croniche della C. di Pisa_, in _Rerum Ital. Script._
of _Tartini_, Florence, 1748, i. 563; _Dal Borgo, Dissert. sopra
l’Istoria Pisana_, ii. 287.

[2] The list of the whole number is preserved in the Doria archives,
and has been published by Sign. Jacopo D’Oria. Many of the
Baptismal names are curious, and show how far sponsors wandered
from the Church Calendar. _Assan, Alton, Turco, Soldan_ seem to
come of the constant interest in the East. _Alaone_, a name which
remained in the family for several generations, I had thought
certainly borrowed from the fierce conqueror of the Khalif
(_infra_, p. 63). But as one Alaone, present at this battle, had a
son also there, he must surely have been christened before the
fame of Hulaku could have reached Genoa. (See _La Chiesa di S.
Matteo_, pp. 250, _seqq._)

In documents of the kingdom of Jerusalem there are names still more
anomalous, _e.g._, _Gualterius Baffumeth_, _Joannes Mahomet_. (See
_Cod. Dipl. del Sac. Milit. Ord. Gerosol._ I. 2–3, 62.)

[3] _Memorial. Potestat. Regiens._ in _Muratori_, viii. 1162.

[4] See _Fragm. Hist. Pisan._ in _Muratori_, xxiv. 651, _seqq._; and
_Caffaro_, _id._ vi. 588, 594–595. The cut in the text represents
a striking memorial of those Pisan Prisoners, which perhaps
still survives, but which at any rate existed last century in a
collection at Lucca. It is the seal of the prisoners as a body
corporate: SIGILLUM UNIVERSITATIS CARCERATORUM PISANORUM JANUE
DETENTORUM, and was doubtless used in their negotiations for peace
with the Genoese Commissioners. It represents two of the prisoners
imploring the Madonna, Patron of the Duomo at Pisa. It is from
_Manni, Osserv. Stor. sopra Sigilli Antichi_, etc., Firenze, 1739,
tom. xii. The seal is also engraved in _Dal Borgo_, _op. cit._ ii.
316.

[5] The Abate Spotorno in his _Storia Letteraria della Liguria_, II.
219, fixes on a Genoese philosopher called Andalo del Negro,
mentioned by Boccaccio.

[6] I quote from Galignani’s ed. of Prose Works, v. 712. This has
“Rusticien de _Puise_.” In this view of the fictitious character of
the names of Rusticien and the rest, Sir Walter seems to have been
following Ritson, as I gather from a quotation in Dunlop’s H. of
Fiction. (_Liebrecht’s_ German Version, p. 63.)

[7] _Giron le Courtois_, and the conclusion of _Tristan_.

[8] The passage runs thus as quoted (from the preamble of the
_Meliadus_—I suspect in one of the old printed editions):—

“Aussi Luces du Gau (Gas) translata en langue Françoise une
partie de l’Hystoire de Monseigneur Tristan, et moins assez qu’il
ne deust. Moult commença bien son livre et si ny mist tout les
faicts de Tristan, ains la greigneur partie. Après s’en entremist
Messire Gasse le Blond, qui estoit parent au Roy Henry, et divisa
l’Hystoire de Lancelot du Lac, et d’autre chose ne parla il mye
grandement en son livre. Messire Robert de Borron s’en entremist
et Helye de Borron, par la prière du dit Robert de Borron, _et
pource que compaignons feusmes d’armes longuement_, je commencay
mon livre,” etc. (_Liebrecht’s Dunlop_, p. 80.) If this passage be
authentic it would set beyond doubt the age of the de Borrons and
the other writers of Anglo-French Round Table Romances, who are
placed by the _Hist. Littéraire de la France_, and apparently by
Fr. Michel, under Henry II. I have no means of pursuing the matter,
and have preferred to follow Paulin Paris, who places them under
Henry III. I notice, moreover, that the _Hist. Litt._ (xv. p. 498)
puts not only the de Borrons but Rustician himself under Henry II.;
and, as the last view is certainly an error, the first is probably
so too.

[9] Transc. from MS. 6975 (now Fr. 355) of Paris Library.

[10] _MSS. François_, iii. 60–61.

[11] _Ibid._ 56–59.

[12] _Introd._ pp. lxxxvi.–vii. note.

[13] See _Jour. As._ sér. II. tom. xii. p. 251.

[14] “_Seignors Enperaor, & Rois, Dux & Marquois, Cuens, Chevaliers
& Bargions_ [for Borgiois] _& toutes gens qe uoles sauoir les
deuerses jenerasions des homes_, & les deuersités des deuerses
region dou monde, _si prennés cestui liure & le feites lire & chi
trouerés toutes les grandismes meruoilles_,” etc.

[15] The portrait of Rustician here referred to would have been a
precious illustration for our book. But unfortunately it has not
been transferred to MS. 6961, nor apparently to any other noticed
by Paulin Paris.

[16] _Jour. As._ as above.

[17] See _Liebrecht’s Dunlop_, p. 77; and _MSS. François_, II. 349,
353. The alleged gift to Rustician is also put forth by D’Israeli
the Elder in his _Amenities of Literature_, 1841, I. p. 103.

[18] _E.g._ Geronimo, _Girolamo_; and garofalo, _garofano_; Cristoforo,
_Cristovalo_; gonfalone, _gonfanone_, etc.

[19] See the List in _Archivio Stor. Ital._ VI. p. 64, _seqq._

VIII. NOTICES OF MARCO POLO’S HISTORY, AFTER THE TERMINATION
OF HIS IMPRISONMENT AT GENOA.

43. A few very disconnected notices are all that can be collected of
matter properly biographical in relation to the quarter century during
which Marco Polo survived the Genoese captivity.

[Sidenote: Death of Marco’s Father before 1300. Will of his brother
Maffeo.]

We have seen that he would probably reach Venice in the course of
August, 1299. Whether he found his aged father alive is not known; but
we know at least that a year later (31st August, 1300) Messer Nicolo
was no longer in life.

This we learn from the Will of the younger Maffeo, Marco’s brother,
which bears the date just named, and of which we give an abstract
below.[1] It seems to imply strong regard for the testator’s brother
Marco, who is made inheritor of the bulk of the property, failing the
possible birth of a son. I have already indicated some conjectural
deductions from this document. I may add that the terms of the second
clause, as quoted in the note, seem to me to throw considerable doubt
on the genealogy which bestows a large family of sons upon this brother
Maffeo. If he lived to have such a family it seems improbable that the
draft which he thus left in the hands of a notary, to be converted into
a Will in the event of his death (a curious example of the validity
attaching to all acts of notaries in those days), should never have
been superseded, but should actually have been so converted after his
death, as the existence of the parchment seems to prove. But for this
circumstance we might suppose the Marcolino mentioned in the ensuing
paragraph to have been a son of the younger Maffeo.

Messer Maffeo, the uncle, was, we see, alive at this time. We do not
know the year of his death. But it is alluded to by Friar Pipino in the
Preamble to his Translation of the Book, supposed to have been executed
about 1315–1320; and we learn from a document in the Venetian archives
(see p. 77) that it must have been previous to 1318, and subsequent
to February 1309, the date of his last Will. The Will itself is not
known to be extant, but from the reference to it in this document we
learn that he left 1000 _lire_ of public debt[2] (_? imprestitorum_)
to a certain Marco Polo, called _Marcolino_. The relationship of this
Marco to old Maffeo is not stated, but we may suspect him to have been
an illegitimate son. [Marcolino was a son of Nicolo, son of Marco the
Elder; see vol. ii., _Calendar_, No. 6.—H. C.]

[Sidenote: Documentary notices of Polo at this time. The sobriquet of
Milione.]

44. In 1302 occurs what was at first supposed to be a glimpse of
Marco as a citizen, slight and quaint enough; being a resolution on
the Books of the Great Council to exempt the respectable Marco Polo
from the penalty incurred by him on account of the omission to have
his water-pipe duly inspected. But since our Marco’s claims to the
designation of _Nobilis Vir_ have been established, there is a doubt
whether the _providus vir_ or _prud’-homme_ here spoken of may not have
been rather his namesake Marco Polo of Cannareggio or S. Geremia, of
whose existence we learn from another entry of the same year.[3] It is,
however, possible that Marco the Traveller was called to the Great
Council _after_ the date of the document in question.

We have seen that the Traveller, and after him his House and his Book,
acquired from his contemporaries the surname, or nickname rather, of
_Il Milione_. Different writers have given different explanations
of the origin of this name; some, beginning with his contemporary
Fra Jacopo d’Acqui, (_supra_, p. _54_), ascribing it to the family’s
having brought home a fortune of a million of _lire_, in fact to their
being _millionaires_. This is the explanation followed by Sansovino,
Marco Barbaro, Coronelli, and others.[4] More far-fetched is that of
Fontanini, who supposes the name to have been given to the Book as
containing a great number of stories, like the _Cento Novelle_ or the
_Thousand and One Nights!_ But there can be no doubt that Ramusio’s
is the true, as it is the natural, explanation; and that the name was
bestowed on Marco by the young wits of his native city, because of
his frequent use of a word which appears to have been then unusual,
in his attempts to convey an idea of the vast wealth and magnificence
of the Kaan’s Treasury and Court.[5] Ramusio has told us (_supra_, p.
_6_) that he had seen Marco styled by this sobriquet in the Books of
the Signory; and it is pleasant to be able to confirm this by the next
document which we cite. This is an extract from the Books of the Great
Council under 10th April, 1305, condoning the offence of a certain
Bonocio of Mestre in smuggling wine, for whose penalty one of the
sureties had been the NOBILIS VIR MARCHUS PAULO MILIONI.[6]

It is alleged that long after our Traveller’s death there was always,
in the Venetian Masques, one individual who assumed the character of
Marco Milioni, and told Munchausenlike stories to divert the vulgar.
Such, if this be true, was the honour of our prophet among the populace
of his own country.[7]

45. A little later we hear of Marco once more, as presenting a copy of
his Book to a noble Frenchman in the service of Charles of Valois.

[Sidenote: Polo’s relations with Thibault de Cepoy.]

This Prince, brother of Philip the Fair, in 1301 had married Catharine,
daughter and heiress of Philip de Courtenay, titular Emperor of
Constantinople, and on the strength of this marriage had at a later
date set up his own claim to the Empire of the East. To this he was
prompted by Pope Clement V., who in the beginning of 1306 wrote to
Venice, stimulating that Government to take part in the enterprise. In
the same year, Charles and his wife sent as their envoys to Venice, in
connection with this matter, a noble knight called THIBAULT DE CEPOY,
along with an ecclesiastic of Chartres called Pierre le Riche, and
these two succeeded in executing a treaty of alliance with Venice,
of which the original, dated 14th December, 1306, exists at Paris.
Thibault de Cepoy eventually went on to Greece with a squadron of
Venetian Galleys, but accomplished nothing of moment, and returned to
his master in 1310.[8]

[Illustration: Miracle of S. Lorenzo.]

During the stay of Thibault at Venice he seems to have made
acquaintance with Marco Polo, and to have received from him a copy
of his Book. This is recorded in a curious note which appears on two
existing MSS. of Polo’s Book, viz., that of the Paris Library (10,270
or Fr. 5649), and that of Bern, which is substantially identical in its
text with the former, and is, as I believe, a copy of it.[9] The note
runs as follows:—

“Here you have the Book of which My Lord THIEBAULT, Knight and LORD
OF CEPOY, (whom may God assoil!) requested a copy from SIRE MARC
POL, Burgess and Resident of the City of Venice. And the said Sire
Marc Pol, being a very honourable Person, of high character and
respect in many countries, because of his desire that what he had
witnessed should be known throughout the World, and also for the
honour and reverence he bore to the most excellent and puissant
Prince my Lord CHARLES, Son of the King of France and COUNT OF
VALOIS, gave and presented to the aforesaid Lord of Cepoy the first
copy (that was taken) of his said Book after he had made the same.
And very pleasing it was to him that his Book should be carried
to the noble country of France and there made known by so worthy
a gentleman. And from that copy which the said Messire Thibault,
Sire de Cepoy above-named, did carry into France, Messire John, who
was his eldest son and is the present Sire de Cepoy,[10] after his
Father’s decease did have a copy made, and that very first copy
that was made of the Book after its being carried into France he
did present to his very dear and dread Lord Monseigneur de Valois.
Thereafter he gave copies of it to such of his friends as asked for
them.

“And the copy above-mentioned was presented by the said Sire Marc
Pol to the said Lord de Cepoy when the latter went to Venice, on
the part of Monseigneur de Valois and of Madame the Empress his
wife, as Vicar General for them both in all the Territories of the
Empire of Constantinople. And this happened in the year of the
Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ one thousand three hundred and
seven, and in the month of August.”

Of the bearings of this memorandum on the literary history of Polo’s
Book we shall speak in a following section.

[Sidenote: His marriage and his daughters. Marco as a merchant.]

46. When Marco married we have not been able to ascertain, but it was
no doubt early in the 14th century, for in 1324, we find that he had
two married daughters besides one unmarried. His wife’s Christian name
was _Donata_, but of her family we have as yet found no assurance. I
suspect, however, that her name may have been Loredano (_vide infra_,
p. _77_).

Under 1311 we find a document which is of considerable interest,
because it is the only one yet discovered which exhibits Marco under
the aspect of a practical trader. It is the judgment of the Court of
Requests upon a suit brought by the NOBLE MARCO POLO of the parish of
S. Giovanni Grisostomo against one Paulo Girardo of S. Apollinare. It
appears that Marco had entrusted to the latter as a commission agent
for sale, on an agreement for half profits, a pound and a half of
musk, priced at six _lire of grossi_ (about 22_l._ 10_s._ in value of
silver) the pound. Girardo had sold half-a-pound at that rate, and the
remaining pound which he brought back was deficient of a _saggio_, or,
one-sixth of an ounce, but he had accounted for neither the sale nor
the deficiency. Hence Marco sues him for three _lire of Grossi_, the
price of the half-pound sold, and for twenty _grossi_ as the value of
the saggio. And the Judges cast the defendant in the amount with costs,
and the penalty of imprisonment in the common gaol of Venice if the
amounts were not paid within a suitable term.[11]

Again in May, 1323, probably within a year of his death, Ser Marco
appears (perhaps only by attorney), before the Doge and his judicial
examiners, to obtain a decision respecting a question touching the
rights to certain stairs and porticoes in contact with his own house
property, and that obtained from his wife, in S. Giovanni Grisostomo.
To this allusion has been already made (_supra_, p. _31_).

[Illustration: MARCO POLO’S LAST WILL

(_Dimensions of Original, 26·4 inches by 9·4 inches_)

FROM A PHOTOGRAPH SPECIALLY TAKEN IN ST. MARK’S LIBRARY BY SIGNOR
BERTANI.]

[Sidenote: Marco Polo’s Last Will and Death.]

47. We catch sight of our Traveller only once more. It is on the 9th of
January, 1324; he is labouring with disease, under which he is sinking
day by day; and he has sent for Giovanni Giustiniani, Priest of S.
Proculo and Notary, to make his Last Will and Testament. It runs thus:—

“IN THE NAME OF THE ETERNAL GOD AMEN!

“In the year from the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ 1323, on
the 9th day of the month of January, in the first half of the 7th
Indiction,[12] at Rialto.

“It is the counsel of Divine Inspiration as well as the judgment
of a provident mind that every man should take thought to make a
disposition of his property before death become imminent, lest in
the end it should remain without any disposition:

“Wherefore I MARCUS PAULO of the parish of St. John Chrysostom,
finding myself to grow daily feebler through bodily ailment, but
being by the grace of God of a sound mind, and of senses and
judgment unimpaired, have sent for JOHN GIUSTINIANI, Priest of S.
Proculo and Notary, and have instructed him to draw out in complete
form this my Testament:

“Whereby I constitute as my Trustees DONATA my beloved wife, and
my dear daughters FANTINA, BELLELA, and MORETA,[13] in order that
after my decease they may execute the dispositions and bequests
which I am about to make herein.

“First of all: I will and direct that the proper Tithe be paid.[14]
And over and above the said tithe I direct that 2000 _lire_ of
Venice denari be distributed as follows:[15]

“_Viz._, 20 _soldi_ of Venice _grossi_ to the Monastery of St.
Lawrence where I desire to be buried.

“Also 300 _lire_ of Venice denari to my sister-in-law YSABETA
QUIRINO,[16] that she owes me.

“Also 40 _soldi_ to each of the Monasteries and Hospitals all the
way from Grado to Capo d’Argine.[17]

“Also I bequeath to the Convent of SS. Giovanni and Paolo, of the
Order of Preachers, that which it owes me, and also 10 _lire_ to
Friar RENIER, and 5 _lire_ to Friar BENVENUTO the Venetian, of the
Order of Preachers, in addition to the amount of his debt to me.

“I also bequeath 5 _lire_ to every Congregation in Rialto, and 4
_lire_ to every Guild or Fraternity of which I am a member.[18]

“Also I bequeath 20 _soldi_ of Venetian grossi to the Priest
Giovanni Giustiniani the Notary, for his trouble about this my
Will, and in order that he may pray the Lord in my behalf.

“Also I release PETER the Tartar, my servant, from all bondage, as
completely as I pray God to release mine own soul from all sin and
guilt. And I also remit him whatever he may have gained by work
at his own house; and over and above I bequeath him 100 _lire_ of
Venice denari.[19]

“And the residue of the said 2000 _lire_ free of tithe, I direct
to be distributed for the good of my soul, according to the
discretion of my trustees.

“Out of my remaining property I bequeath to the aforesaid Donata,
my Wife and Trustee, 8 _lire_ of Venetian grossi annually during
her life, for her own use, over and above her settlement, and the
linen and all the household utensils,[20] with 3 beds garnished.

“And all my other property movable and immovable that has not
been disposed of [here follow some lines of mere technicality]
I specially and expressly bequeath to my aforesaid Daughters
Fantina, Bellela, and Moreta, freely and absolutely, to be divided
equally among them. And I constitute them my heirs as regards all
and sundry my property movable and immovable, and as regards all
rights and contingencies tacit and expressed, of whatsoever kind
as hereinbefore detailed, that belong to me or may fall to me.
Save and except that before division my said daughter Moreta shall
receive the same as each of my other daughters hath received for
dowry and outfit [here follow many lines of technicalities, ending]

“And if any one shall presume to infringe or violate this Will, may
he incur the malediction of God Almighty, and abide bound under the
anathema of the 318 Fathers; and farthermore he shall forfeit to
my Trustees aforesaid five pounds of gold;[21] and so let this my
Testament abide in force. The signature of the above named Messer
Marco Paulo who gave instructions for this deed.

“‡ I Peter Grifon, Priest, Witness.

“* I Humfrey Barberi, Witness.

“† I John Giustiniani, Priest of S. Proculo, and Notary, have
completed and authenticated (this testament).”[22]

We do not know, as has been said, how long Marco survived the making
of this will, but we know, from a scanty series of documents commencing
in June of the following year (1325), that he had _then_ been some time
dead.[23]

[Sidenote: Place of Sepulture. Professed Portraits of Polo.]

48. He was buried, no doubt, according to his declared wish, in the
Church of S. Lorenzo; and indeed Sansovino bears testimony to the fact
in a confused notice of our Traveller.[24] But there does not seem to
have been any monument to Marco, though the sarcophagus which had been
erected to his father Nicolo, by his own filial care, existed till
near the end of the 16th century in the porch or corridor leading to
the old Church of S. Lorenzo, and bore the inscription: “SEPULTURA
DOMINI NICOLAI PAULO DE CONTRATA S. IOANNIS GRISOSTEMI.” The church
was renewed from its foundations in 1592, and then, probably, the
sarcophagus was cast aside and lost, and with it all certainty as to
the position of the tomb.[25]

[Illustration: Pavement in front of San Lorenzo, Venice.]

There is no portrait of Marco Polo in existence with any claim to
authenticity. The quaint figure which we give in the _Bibliography_,
vol. ii. p. 555, extracted from the earliest printed edition of his
book, can certainly make no such pretension. The oldest one after this
is probably a picture in the collection of Monsignor Badia at Rome, of
which I am now able, by the owner’s courtesy, to give a copy. It is set
down in the catalogue to Titian, but is probably a work of 1600, or
thereabouts, to which the aspect and costume belong. It is inscribed
“_Marcus Polvs Venetvs Totivs Orbis et Indie Peregrator Primus._” Its
history unfortunately cannot be traced, but I believe it came from a
collection at Urbino. A marble statue was erected in his honour by a
family at Venice in the 17th century, and is still to be seen in the
Palazzo Morosini-Gattemburg in the Campo S. Stefano in that city. The
medallion portrait on the wall of the _Sala dello Scudo_ in the ducal
palace, and which was engraved in Bettom’s “Collection of Portraits of
Illustrious Italians,” is a work of imagination painted by Francesco
Griselini in 1761.[26] From this, however, was taken the medal by
Fabris, which was struck in 1847 in honour of the last meeting of the
Italian Congresso Scientifico; and from the medal again is copied,
I believe, the elegant woodcut which adorns the introduction to M.
Pauthier’s edition, though without any information as to its history.
A handsome bust, by Augusto Gamba, has lately been placed among the
illustrious Venetians in the inner arcade of the Ducal Palace.[27]
There is also a mosaic portrait of Polo, opposite the similar portrait
of Columbus in the Municipio at Genoa.

[Illustration: S. Lorenzo as it was in the 15th century]

[Sidenote: Further History of the Polo Family.]

49. From the short series of documents recently alluded to,[28] we
gather all that we know of the remaining history of Marco Polo’s
immediate family. We have seen in his will an indication that the two
elder daughters, Fantina and Bellela, were married before his death. In
1333 we find the youngest, Moreta, also a married woman, and Bellela
deceased. In 1336 we find that their mother Donata had died in the
interval. We learn, too, that Fantina’s husband was MARCO BRAGADINO,
and Moreta’s, RANUZZO DOLFINO.[29] The name of Bellela’s husband does
not appear.

Fantina’s husband is probably the Marco Bragadino, son of Pietro, who
in 1346 is mentioned to have been sent as Provveditore-Generale to
act against the Patriarch of Acquileia.[30] And in 1379 we find Donna
Fantina herself, presumably in widowhood, assessed as a resident of S.
Giovanni Grisostomo, on the _Estimo_ or forced loan for the Genoese
war, at 1300 _lire_, whilst Pietro Bragadino of the same parish—her son
as I imagine—is assessed at 1500 _lire_.[31] [See vol. ii., _Calendar_.]

The documents show a few other incidents which may be briefly noted.
In 1326 we have the record of a charge against one Zanino Grioni for
insulting Donna Moreta in the Campo of San Vitale; a misdemeanour
punished by the Council of Forty with two months’ imprisonment.

[Illustration: Mosaic Portrait of Marco Polo at Genoa.]

In March, 1328, Marco Polo, called Marcolino, of St. John Chrysostom
(see p. _66_), represents before the _Domini Advocatores_ of the
Republic that certain _imprestita_ that had belonged to the late Maffeo
Polo the Elder, had been alienated and transferred in May 1318, by
the late Marco Polo of St. John Chrysostom and since his death by his
heirs, without regard to the rights of the said Marcolino, to whom the
said Messer Maffeo had bequeathed 1000 _lire_ by his will executed
on 6th February, 1308 (_i.e._ 1309). The Advocatores find that the
transfer was to that extent unjust and improper, and they order that
to the same extent it should be revoked and annulled. Two months later
the Lady Donata makes rather an unpleasant figure before the Council
of Forty. It would seem that on the claim of Messer Bertuccio Quirino
a mandate of sequestration had been issued by the Court of Requests
affecting certain articles in the Ca’ Polo; including two bags of
money which had been tied and sealed, but left in custody of the Lady
Donata. The sum so sealed was about 80 _lire_ of grossi (300_l._ in
silver value), but when opened only 45 _lire_ and 22 _grossi_ (about
170_l._) were found therein, and the Lady was accused of abstracting
the balance _non bono modo_. Probably she acted, as ladies sometimes
do, on a strong sense of her own rights, and a weak sense of the claims
of law. But the Council pronounced against her, ordering restitution,
and a fine of 200 _lire_ over and above “_ut ceteris transeat in
exemplum._”[32]

It will have been seen that there is nothing in the amounts mentioned
in Marco’s will to bear out the large reports as to his wealth, though
at the same time there is no positive ground for a deduction to the
contrary.[33]

The mention in two of the documents of Agnes Loredano as the sister
of the Lady Donata suggests that the latter may have belonged to the
Loredano family, but as it does not appear whether Agnes was maid or
wife this remains uncertain.[34]

Respecting the further history of the family there is nothing certain,
nor can we give unhesitating faith to Ramusio’s statement that the
last male descendant of the Polos of S. Giovanni Grisostomo was Marco,
who died Castellano of Verona in 1417 (according to others, 1418,
or 1425),[35] and that the family property then passed to Maria (or
_Anna_, as she is styled in a MS. statement furnished to me from
Venice), who was married in 1401 to Benedetto Cornaro, and again in
1414 to Azzo Trevisan. Her descendant in the fourth generation by the
latter was Marc Antonio Trevisano,[36] who was chosen Doge in 1553.

[Illustration: Arms of the Trevisan family.]

The genealogy recorded by Marco Barbaro, as drawn up from documents
by Ramusio, makes the Castellano of Verona a grandson of our Marco by
a son Maffeo, whom we may safely pronounce not to have existed, and
makes Maria the daughter of Maffeo, Marco’s brother—that is to say,
makes a lady marry in 1414 and have children, whose father was born
in 1271 at the very latest! The genealogy is given in several other
ways, but as I have satisfied myself that they all (except perhaps
this of Barbaro’s, which we see to be otherwise erroneous) confound
together the two distinct families of Polo of S. Geremia and Polo of
S. Giov. Grisostomo, I reserve my faith, and abstain from presenting
them. Assuming that the Marco or Marcolino Polo, spoken of in the
preceding page, was a near relation (as is probable, though perhaps
an illegitimate one), he is the only male descendant of old Andrea of
San Felice whom we can indicate as having survived Marco himself; and
from a study of the links in the professed genealogies I think it not
unlikely that both Marco the Castellano of Verona and Maria Trevisan
belonged to the branch of S. Geremia.[37] [See vol. ii., _App. C_, p.
510.]

[Illustration: The Pseudo Marco Polo at Canton.]

[49. _bis._—It is interesting to note some of the _reliques_ left by
our traveller.

I. The unfortunate Doge of Venice, Marino Faliero, seems to have
possessed many souvenirs of Marco Polo, and among them two manuscripts,
one in the handwriting of his celebrated fellow-citizen(?), and one
adorned with miniatures. M. Julius von Schlosser has reprinted (_Die
ältesten Medaillen und die Antike_, Bd. XVIII., _Jahrb. d. Kunsthist.
Samml. d. Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses_, Vienna, 1897, pp. 42–43) from
the _Bulletino di arti, industrie e curiosità veneziane_, III.,
1880–81, p. 101,[38] the inventory of the curiosities kept in the “Red
Chamber” of Marino Faliero’s palace in the Parish of the SS. Apostles;
we give the following abstract of it:—

Anno ab incarnacione domini nostri Jesu Christi 1351° indictione
sexta mensis aprilis. Inuentarium rerum qui sunt in camera rubea
domi habitationis clarissimi domini MARINI FALETRO de confinio SS.
Apostolorum, scriptum per me Johannem, presbiterum, dicte ecclesie.

• • • • •

_Item_ alia capsaleta cum ogiis auri et argenti, inter quos unum
anulum con inscriptione que dicit: _Ciuble Can Marco Polo_, et unum
torques cum multis animalibus Tartarorum sculptis, que res donum
dedit predictus MARCUS cuidam Faletrorum.

• • • • •

_Item_ 2 capsalete de corio albo cum variis rebus auri et argenti,
quas habuit praedictus MARCUS a Barbarorum rege.

• • • • •

_Item_ 1 ensem mirabilem, qui habet 3 enses simul, quem habuit in
suis itineribus praedictus MARCUS.

• • • • •

_Item_ 1 tenturam de pannis indicis, quam habuit praedictus MARCUS.

_Item_ de itineribus MARCI praedicti liber in corio albo cum multis
figuris.

_Item_ aliud volumen quod vocatur _de locis mirabilibus Tartarorum,
scriptum manu praedicti_ MARCI.

• • • • •

II. There is kept at the Louvre, in the very valuable collection
of China Ware given by M. Ernest Grandidier, a white porcelain
incense-burner said to come from Marco Polo. This incense-burner, which
belonged to Baron Davillier, who received it, as a present, from one of
the keepers of the Treasury of St. Mark’s at Venice, is an octagonal
_ting_ from the Fo-kien province, and of the time of the Sung Dynasty.
By the kind permission of M. P. Grandidier, we reproduce it from Pl.
II. 6, of the _Céramique chinoise_, Paris, 1894, published by this
learned amateur.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] 1. The Will is made in prospect of his voyage to Crete.

2. He had drafted his will with his own hand, sealed the draft,
and made it over to Pietro Pagano, priest of S. Felice and Notary,
to draw out a formal testament in faithful accordance therewith
in case of the Testator’s death; and that which follows is the
substance of the said draft rendered from the vernacular into
Latin. (“Ego Matheus Paulo ... volens ire in Cretam, ne repentinus
casus hujus vite fragilis me subreperet intestatum, mea propria
manu meum scripsi et condidi testamentum, rogans Petrum Paganum
ecclesie Scti. Felicis presbiterum et Notarium, sana mente et
integro consilio, ut, secundum ipsius scripturam quam sibi tunc
dedi meo sigillo munitam, meum scriberet testamentum, si me de hoc
seculo contigeret pertransire; cujus scripture tenor translato
vulgari in latinum per omnia talis est.”)

3. Appoints as Trustees Messer Maffeo Polo his uncle, Marco Polo
his brother, Messer Nicolo Secreto (or Sagredo) his father-in-law,
and Felix Polo his cousin (_consanguineum_).

4. Leaves 20 _soldi_ to each of the Monasteries from Grado to Capo
d’Argine; and 150 _lire_ to all the congregations of Rialto, on
condition that the priests of these maintain an annual service in
behalf of the souls of his father, mother, and self.

5. To his daughter Fiordelisa 2000 _lire_ to marry her withal. To
be invested in safe mortgages in Venice, and the interest to go to
her.

Also leaves her the interest from 1000 _lire_ of his funds in
Public Debt (? _de meis imprestitis_) to provide for her till she
marries. After her marriage this 1000 _lire_ and its interest shall
go to his male heir if he has one, and failing that to his brother
Marco.

6. To his wife Catharine 400 _lire_ and all her clothes as they
stand now. To the Lady Maroca 100 _lire_.

7. To his natural daughter Pasqua 400 _lire_ to marry her withal.
Or, if she likes to be a nun, 200 _lire_ shall go to her convent
and the other 200 shall purchase securities for her benefit. After
her death these shall come to his male heir, or failing that be
sold, and the proceeds distributed for the good of the souls of his
father, mother, and self.

8. To his natural brothers Stephen and Giovannino he leaves 500
_lire_. If one dies the whole to go to the other. If both die
before marrying, to go to his male heir; failing such, to his
brother Marco or _his_ male heir.

9. To his uncle Giordano Trevisano 200 _lire_. To Marco de Tumba
100. To Fiordelisa, wife of Felix Polo, 100. To Maroca, the
daughter of the late Pietro Trevisano, living at Negropont, 100. To
Agnes, wife of Pietro Lion, 100; and to Francis, son of the late
Pietro Trevisano, in Negropont, 100.

10. To buy Public Debt producing an annual 20 _lire ai grossi_ to
be paid yearly to Pietro Pagano, Priest of S. Felice, who shall
pray for the souls aforesaid: on death of said Pietro the income to
go to Pietro’s cousin Lionardo, Clerk of S. Felice; and after him
always to the senior priest of S. Giovanni Grisostomo with the same
obligation.

11. Should his wife prove with child and bear a son or sons they
shall have his whole property not disposed of. If a daughter, she
shall have the same as Fiordelisa.

12. If he have no male heir his Brother Marco shall have the
Testator’s share of his Father’s bequest, and 2000 _lire_ besides.
Cousin Nicolo shall have 500 _lire_, and Uncle Maffeo 500.

13. Should Daughter Fiordelisa die unmarried her 2000 _lire_ and
interest to go to his male heir, and failing such to Brother Marco
and his male heir. But in that case Marco shall pay 500 _lire_ to
Cousin Nicolo or his male heir.

14. Should his wife bear him a male heir or heirs, but these should
die under age, the whole of his undisposed property shall go to
Brother Marco or his male heir. But in that case 500 _lire_ shall
be paid to Cousin Nicolo.

15. Should his wife bear a daughter and she die unmarried, her
2000 _lire_ and interest shall go to Brother Marco, with the same
stipulation in behalf of Cousin Nicolo.

16. Should the whole amount of his property between cash and goods
not amount to 10,000 _lire_ (though he believes he has fully as
much), his bequests are to be ratably diminished, except those to
his own children which he does not wish diminished. Should any
legatee die before receiving the bequest, its amount shall fall to
the Testator’s heir male, and failing such, the half to go to Marco
or his male heir, and the other half to be distributed for the good
of the souls aforesaid.

The witnesses are Lionardo priest of S. Felice, Lionardo clerk of
the same, and the Notary Pietro Pagano priest of the same.

[2] According to Romanin (I. 321) the _lira dei grossi_ was also called
_Lira d’imprestidi_, and if the _lire_ here are to be so taken, the
sum will be 10,000 ducats, the largest amount by far that occurs in
any of these Polo documents, unless, indeed, the 1000 _lire_ in § 5
of Maffeo Junior’s Will be the like; but I have some doubt if such
lire are intended in either case.

[3] “(Resolved) That grace be granted to the respectable MARCO PAULO,
relieving him of the penalty he has incurred for neglecting to have
his water-pipe examined, seeing that he was ignorant of the order
on that subject.” (See _Appendix C._ No. 3.) The other reference,
to M. Polo, of S. Geremia, runs as follows:—

[_MCCCII. indic. XV. die VIII. Macii q̄ fiat grā Gūillō aurifici q̄
ipe absolvat a pena ī qua dicit icurisse p̄ uno spōtono sibi iūeto
veuiēdo de Mestre p̄p̄e domū Macī Pauli de Canaregio ūi descenderat
ad bibendū._]

“That grace be granted to William the Goldsmith, relieving him of
the penalty which he is stated to have incurred on account of a
spontoon (_spontono_, a loaded bludgeon) found upon him near the
house of MARCO PAULO of Cannareggio, where he had landed to drink
on his way from Mestre.” (See _Cicogna_, V. p. 606.)

[4] _Sansovino, Venezia, Città Nobilissima e Singolare, Descritta_,
etc., Ven. 1581, f. 236 _v._; _Barbaro, Alberi; Coronelli, Allante
Veneto_, I. 19.

[5] The word _Millio_ occurs several times in the Chronicle of the
Doge Andrea Dandolo, who wrote about 1342; and _Milion_ occurs at
least once (besides the application of the term to Polo) in the
History of Giovanni Villani; viz. when he speaks of the Treasury
of Avignon:— “_diciotto_ milioni _di fiorini d’oro_ ec. _che ogni_
milione _è mille migliaja di fiorini d’ oro la valuta_.” (xi. 20,
§ 1; _Ducange_, and _Vocab. Univ. Ital._). But the definition,
thought necessary by Villani, in itself points to the use of the
word as rare. _Domilion_ occurs in the estimated value of houses
at Venice in 1367, recorded in the _Cronaca Magna_ in St. Mark’s
Library. (_Romanin_, III. 385).

[6] “Also; that Pardon be granted to Bonocio of Mestre for that 152
_lire_ in which he stood condemned by the Captains of the Posts,
on account of wine smuggled by him, in such wise: to wit, that he
was to pay the said fine in 4 years by annual instalments of one
fourth, to be retrenched from the pay due to him on his journey in
the suite of our ambassadors, with assurance that anything then
remaining deficient of his instalments should be made good by
himself or his securities. And his securities are the Nobles Pietro
Morosini and MARCO PAULO MILION̄.” Under _Milion̄_ is written in an
ancient hand “_mortuus_.” (See _Appendix C_, No. 4.)

[7] Humboldt tells this (_Examen_, II. 221), alleging _Jacopo d’Acqui_
as authority; and Libri (_H. des Sciences Mathématiques_, II. 149),
quoting _Doglioni, Historia Veneziana_. But neither authority bears
out the citations. The story seems really to come from Amoretti’s
commentary on the _Voyage du Cap. L. F. Maldonado_, Plaisance,
1812, p. 67. Amoretti quotes as authority _Pignoria, Degli Dei
Antichi_.

An odd revival of this old libel was mentioned to me recently by
Mr. George Moffatt. When he was at school it was common among the
boys to express incredulity by the phrase: “Oh, what a Marco Polo!”

[8] Thibault, according to Ducange, was in 1307 named Grand Master
of the Arblasteers of France; and Buchon says his portrait is at
Versailles among the Admirals (No. 1170). Ramon de Muntaner fell
in with the Seigneur de Cepoy in Greece, and speaks of him as “but
a Captain of the Wind, as his Master was King of the Wind.” (See
_Ducange, H. de l’Empire de Const. sous les Emp. François_, Venice
ed. 1729, pp. 109, 110; _Buchon, Chroniques Etrangères_, pp. lv.
467–470.)

[9] The note is not found in the Bodleian MS., which is the third known
one of this precise type.

[10] Messire Jean, the son of Thibault, is mentioned in the accounts of
the latter in the _Chambre des Comptes_ at Paris, as having been
with his Father in Romania. And in 1344 he commanded a confederate
Christian armament sent to check the rising power of the Turks,
and beat a great Turkish fleet in the Greek seas. (_Heyd._ I. 377;
_Buchon_, 468.)

[11] The document is given in _Appendix C_, No. 5. It was found by
Comm. Barozzi, the Director of the Museo Civico, when he had most
kindly accompanied me to aid in the search for certain other
documents in the archives of the _Casa di Ricovero_, or Poor House
of Venice. These archives contain a great mass of testamentary
and other documents, which probably have come into that singular
depository in connection with bequests to public charities.

The document next mentioned was found in as strange a site, viz.,
the _Casa degli Esposti_ or Foundling Hospital, which possesses
similar muniments. This also I owe to Comm. Barozzi, who had
noted it some years before, when commencing an arrangement of the
archives of the Institution.

[12] The Legal Year at Venice began on the 1st of March. And 1324 was
7th of the Indiction. Hence the date is, according to the modern
Calendar, 1324.

[13] Marsden says of Moreta and Fantina, the only daughters named
by Ramusio, that these may be thought rather familiar terms of
endearment than baptismal names. This is a mistake however.
_Fantina_ is from one of the parochial saints of Venice, S.
Fantino, and the male name was borne by sundry Venetians, among
others by a son of Henry Dandolo’s. Moreta is perhaps a variation
of Maroca, which seems to have been a family name among the Polos.
We find also the male name of Bellela, written _Bellello_,
_Bellero_, _Belletto_.

[14] The _Decima_ went to the Bishop of Castello (eventually converted
into Patriarch of Venice) to divide between himself, the Clergy,
the Church, and the Poor. It became a source of much bad feeling,
which came to a head after the plague of 1348, when some families
had to pay the tenth three times within a very short space. The
existing Bishop agreed to a composition, but his successor Paolo
Foscari (1367) claimed that on the death of every citizen an exact
inventory should be made, and a full tithe levied. The Signory
fought hard with the Bishop, but he fled to the Papal Court and
refused all concession. After his death in 1376 a composition was
made for 5500 ducats yearly. (_Romanin_, II. 406; III. 161, 165.)

[15] There is a difficulty about estimating the value of these sums
from the variety of Venice pounds or _lire_. Thus the _Lira dei
piccoli_ was reckoned 3 to the ducat or zecchin, the _Lira ai
grossi_ 2 to the ducat, but the _Lira_ dei _grossi_ or _Lira
d’imprestidi_ was equal to 10 ducats, or (allowing for higher
value of silver then) about 3_l._ 15_s._; a little more than
the equivalent of the then Pound sterling. This last money is
_specified_ in some of the bequests, as in the 20 soldi (or 1
lira) to St. Lorenzo, and in the annuity of 8 lire to Polo’s wife;
but it seems doubtful what money is meant when _libra_ only or
_libra denariorum venetorum_ is used. And this doubt is not new.
Gallicciolli relates that in 1232 Giacomo Menotto left to the
Church of S. Cassiano as an annuity _libras denariorum venetorum
quatuor_. Till 1427 the church received the income as of _lire dei
piccoli_, but on bringing a suit on the subject it was adjudged
that _lire ai grossi_ were to be understood. (_Delle Mem. Venet.
Ant._ II. 18.) This story, however, cuts both ways, and does not
decide our doubt.

[16] The form of the name _Ysabeta_ aptly illustrates the transition
that seems so strange from _Elizabeth_ into the _Isabel_ that the
Spaniards made of it.

[17] _I.e._ the extent of what was properly called the Dogado, all
along the Lagoons from Grado on the extreme east to Capo d’Argine
(Cavarzere at the mouth of the Adige) on the extreme west.

[18] The word rendered _Guilds_ is “_Scholarum_.” The crafts at Venice
were united in corporations called _Fraglie_ or _Scholae_, each
of which had its statutes, its head called the _Gastald_, and its
place of meeting under the patronage of some saint. These acted as
societies of mutual aid, gave dowries to poor girls, caused masses
to be celebrated for deceased members, joined in public religious
processions, etc., nor could any craft be exercised except by
members of such a guild. (_Romanin_, I. 390.)

[19] A few years after Ser Marco’s death (1328) we find the Great
Council granting to this Peter the rights of a natural Venetian, as
having been a long time at Venice, and well-conducted. (See App. C,
_Calendar of Documents_, No. 13.) This might give some additional
colour to M. Pauthier’s supposition that this Peter the Tartar was
a faithful servant who had accompanied Messer Marco from the East
30 years before. But yet the supposition is probably unfounded.
Slavery and slave-trade were very prevalent at Venice in the Middle
Ages, and V. Lazari, a writer who examined a great many records
connected therewith, found that by far the greater number of slaves
were described as _Tartars_. There does not seem to be any clear
information as to how they were imported, but probably from the
factories on the Black Sea, especially Tana after its establishment.

A tax of 5 ducats per head was set on the export of slaves in 1379,
and as the revenue so received under the Doge Tommaso Mocenigo
(1414–1423) amounted (so says Lazari) to 50,000 ducats, the
startling conclusion is that 10,000 slaves yearly were exported!
This it is difficult to accept. The slaves were chiefly employed
in domestic service, and the records indicate the women to have
been about twice as numerous as the men. The highest price recorded
is 87 ducats paid for a Russian girl sold in 1429. All the higher
prices are for young women; a significant circumstance. With the
existence of this system we may safely connect the extraordinary
frequence of mention of illegitimate children in Venetian wills and
genealogies. (See _Lazari, Del Traffico degli Schiavi in Venezia_,
etc., in _Miscellanea di Storia Italiana_, I. 463 _seqq._) In 1308
the Khan Toktai of Kipchak (see Polo, II. 496), hearing that the
Genoese and other Franks were in the habit of carrying off Tartar
children to sell, sent a force against Caffa, which was occupied
without resistance, the people taking refuge in their ships. The
Khan also seized the Genoese property in Sarai. (_Heyd._ II. 27.)

[20] “_Stracium et omne capud massariciorum_”; in Scotch phrase
“_napery and plenishing_.” A Venetian statute of 1242 prescribes
that a bequest of _massariticum_ shall be held to carry to the
legatee all articles of common family use except those of gold
and silver plate or jeweller’s work. (See _Ducange, sub voce._)
_Stracci_ is still used technically in Venice for “household linen.”

[21] In the original _aureas libras quinque_. According to Marino
Sanudo the Younger (_Vite dei Dogi_ in _Muratori_, xxii. 521) this
should be pounds or _lire_ of _aureole_, the name of a silver
coin struck by and named after the Doge _Aurio_ Mastropietro
(1178–1192): “Ancora fu fatta una Moneta d’argento che si chiamava
_Aureola_ per la casata del Doge; _è quella Moneta che i Notai de
Venezia mettevano di pena sotto i loro instrumenti_.” But this was
a vulgar error. An example of the penalty of 5 pounds of gold is
quoted from a decree of 960; and the penalty is sometimes expressed
“_auri purissimi librae_ 5.” A coin called the _lira d’oro_ or
_redonda_ is alleged to have been in use before the ducat was
introduced. (See _Gallicciolli_, II. 16.) But another authority
seems to identify the _lira a oro_ with the _lira dei grossi_. (See
_Zanetti, Nuova Racc. delle Monete &c. d’Italia_, 1775. I. 308.)

[22] We give a photographic reduction of the original document. This,
and the other two Polo Wills already quoted, had come into the
possession of the Noble Filippo Balbi, and were by him presented in
our own time to the St. Mark’s Library. They are all on parchment,
in writing of that age, and have been officially examined and
declared to be originals. They were first published by _Cicogna,
Iscrizioni Veneziane_, III. 489–493. We give Marco’s in the
original language, line for line with the facsimile, in _Appendix
C_.

There is no signature, as may be seen, except those of the
Witnesses and the Notary. The sole presence of a Notary was held
to make a deed valid, and from about the middle of the 13th
century in Italy it is common to find no actual signature (even of
witnesses) except that of the Notary. The peculiar flourish before
the Notary’s name is what is called the _Tabellionato_, a fanciful
distinctive monogram which each Notary adopted. Marco’s Will is
unfortunately written in a very cramp hand with many contractions.
The other two Wills (of Marco the Elder and Maffeo) are in
beautiful and clear Gothic penmanship.

[23] We have noticed formerly (pp. _14–15_, _note_) the recent
discovery of a document bearing what was supposed to be the
autograph signature of our Traveller. The document in question is
the Minute of a Resolution of the Great Council, attested by the
signatures of three members, of whom the last is MARCUS PAULLO.
But the date alone, 11th March, 1324, is sufficient to raise the
gravest doubts as to this signature being that of our Marco. And
further examination, as I learn from a friend at Venice, has shown
that the same name occurs in connection with analogous entries on
several subsequent occasions up to the middle of the century. I
presume that this Marco Polo is the same that is noticed in our
_Appendix B_, II. as a voter in the elections of the Doges Marino
Faliero and Giovanni Gradenigo. I have not been able to ascertain
his relation to either branch of the Polo family; but I suspect
that he belonged to that of S. Geremia, of which there _was_
certainly a Marco about the middle of the century.

[24] “Under the _angiporta_ (of S. Lorenzo) [see plate] is buried
that Marco Polo surnamed Milione, who wrote the Travels in the
New World, and who was the first before Christopher Columbus to
discover new countries. No faith was put in him because of the
extravagant things that he recounted; but in the days of our
Fathers Columbus augmented belief in him, by discovering that
part of the world which eminent men had heretofore judged to be
uninhabited.” (_Venezia ... Descritta_, etc., f. 23 _v._) Marco
Barbaro attests the same inscription in his Genealogies (copy in
Museo Civico at Venice).

[25] _Cicogna_, II. 385.

[26] _Lazari_, xxxi.

[27] In the first edition I noticed briefly a statement that had
reached me from China that, in the Temple at Canton vulgarly called
“of the 500 gods,” there is a foreign figure which from the name
attached had been supposed to represent Marco Polo! From what I
have heard from Mr. Wylie, a very competent authority, this is
nonsense. The temple contains 500 figures of _Arhans_ or Buddhist
saints, and one of these attracts attention from having a hat like
a sailor’s straw hat. Mr. Wylie had not remarked the name. [A
model of this figure was exhibited at Venice at the international
Geographical Congress, in 1881. I give a reproduction of this
figure and of the Temple of 500 Genii (_Fa Lum Sze_) at Canton,
from drawings by Félix Régamey made after photographs sent to me
by my late friend, M. Camille Imbault Huart, French Consul at
Canton.—H. C.]

[28] These documents are noted in Appendix C, Nos. 9–12, 14, 17, 18.

[29] I can find no _Ranuzzo_ Dolfino among the Venetian genealogies,
but several _Reniers_. And I suspect Ranuzzo may be a form of the
latter name.

[30] _Cappellari_ (see p. 77, footnote) under _Bragadino_.

[31] _Ibid._ and _Gallicciolli_, II. 146.

[32] The _lire_ of the fine are not specified; but probably _ai
grossi_, which would be = 37_l._ 10_s._; not, we hope, _dei_ grossi!

[33] Yet, if the family were so wealthy as tradition represents, it is
strange that Marco’s brother Maffeo, _after_ receiving a share of
his father’s property, should have possessed barely 10,000 _lire_,
probably equivalent to 5000 ducats at most. (See p. _65_, _supra_.)

[34] An Agnes Loredano, Abbess of S. Maria delle Vergini, died in 1397.
(_Cicogna_, V. 91 and 629.) The interval of 61 years makes it
somewhat improbable that it should be the same.

[35] In the _Museo Civico_ (No. 2271 of the Cicogna collection) there
is a commission addressed by the Doge Michiel Steno in 1408,
“_Nobili Viro Marcho Paulo_,” nominating him Podestà of Arostica (a
Castello of the Vicentino). This is probably the same Marco.

[36] The descent runs: (1) Azzo = Maria Polo; (2) Febo, Captain at
Padua; (3) Zaccaria, Senator; (4) Domenico, Procurator of St.
Mark’s; (5) Marc’Antonio, Doge (_Cappellari_, _Campidoglio
Veneto_, MS. St. Mark’s Lib.).

Marc’Antonio _nolebat ducari_ and after election desired to
renounce. His friends persuaded him to retain office, but he lived
scarcely a year after. (_Cicogna_, IV. 566.) [See p. _8_.]

[37] In Appendix B will be found tabulated all the facts that seem to
be positively ascertained as to the Polo genealogies.

In the Venetian archives occurs a procuration executed by the Doge
in favour of the _Nobilis Vir_ SER MARCO PAULO that he may present
himself before the king of Sicily; under date, Venice 9th November,
1342. And some years later we have in the Sicilian Archives an
order by King Lewis of Sicily, directed to the Maestri Procuratori
of Messina, which grants to MARCO POLO of Venice, on account of
services rendered to the king’s court, the privilege of free import
and export at the port of Messina, without payment of customs of
goods to the amount annually of 20 ounces. Dated in Catania 13th
January, 1346 (1347?).

For the former notice I am indebted to the courtesy of Signor B.
Cecchetti of the Venetian Archives, who cites it as “transcribed
in the _Commemor._ IV. p. 5”; for the latter to that of the Abate
Carini of the _Reale Archivio_ at Palermo; it is in _Archivio della
Regia Cancellaria_ 1343–1357, f. 58.

The mission of this MARCO POLO is mentioned also in a rescript of
the Sicilian king Peter II., dated Messina, 14th November, 1340, in
reference to certain claims of Venice, about which the said Marco
appeared as the Doge’s ambassador. This is printed in F. TESTA, _De
Vitâ et Rebus Gestis Federici II., Siciliæ Regis_, Panormi, 1775,
pp. 267 _seqq._ The Sicilian Antiquary Rosario Gregorio identifies
the Envoy with our Marco, dead long before. (See _Opere scelte del
Canon Ros. Gregorio_, Palermo, 1845, 3za ediz., p. 352.)

It is possible that this Marco, who from the latter notice seems
to have been engaged in mercantile affairs, may have been the
Marcolino above mentioned, but it is perhaps on the whole more
probable that this _nobilis vir_ is the Marco spoken of in the note
at p. _74_.

[38] _La Collezione del Doge Marin Faliero e i Tesori di Marco Polo_,
pp. 98–103. I have seen this article.—H. C.

IX. MARCO POLO’S BOOK; AND THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH IT WAS
FIRST WRITTEN.

[Sidenote: General statement of what the Book contains.]

50. The Book itself consists essentially of Two Parts. _First_, of
a Prologue, as it is termed, the only part which is actual personal
narrative, and which relates, in a very interesting but far too brief
manner, the circumstances which led the two elder Polos to the Kaan’s
Court, and those of their second journey with Mark, and of their return
to Persia through the Indian Seas. _Secondly_, of a long series of
chapters of very unequal length, descriptive of notable sights and
products, of curious manners and remarkable events, relating to the
different nations and states of Asia, but, above all, to the Emperor
Kúblái, his court, wars, and administration. A series of chapters near
the close treats in a verbose and monotonous manner of sundry wars that
took place between the various branches of the House of Chinghiz in the
latter half of the 13th century. This last series is either omitted
or greatly curtailed in all the copies and versions except one; a
circumstance perfectly accounted for by the absence of interest as well
as value in the bulk of these chapters. Indeed, desirous though I have
been to give the Traveller’s work complete, and sharing the dislike
that every man who _uses_ books must bear to abridgments, I have felt
that it would be sheer waste and dead-weight to print these chapters in
full.

[Illustration: Porcelain Incense-Burner, from the Louvre.]

This second and main portion of the Work is in its oldest forms
undivided, the chapters running on consecutively to the end.[1] In some
very early Italian or Venetian version, which Friar Pipino translated
into Latin, it was divided into three Books, and this convenient
division has generally been adhered to. We have adopted M. Pauthier’s
suggestion in making the final series of chapters, chiefly historical,
into a Fourth.

[Sidenote: Language of the original Work.]

51. As regards the language in which Marco’s Book was first
committed to writing, we have seen that Ramusio assumed, somewhat
arbitrarily, that it was _Latin_; Marsden supposed it to have been
the _Venetian_ dialect; Baldelli Boni first showed, in his elaborate
edition (Florence, 1827), by arguments that have been illustrated and
corroborated by learned men since, that it was _French_.

That the work was originally written in _some_ Italian dialect was a
natural presumption, and slight contemporary evidence can be alleged in
its favour; for Fra Pipino, in the Latin version of the work, executed
whilst Marco still lived, describes his task as a translation _de
vulgari_. And in one MS. copy of the same Friar Pipino’s Chronicle,
existing in the library at Modena, he refers to the said version
as made “_ex vulgari idiomate_ Lombardico.” But though it may seem
improbable that at so early a date a Latin version should have been
made at second hand, I believe this to have been the case, and that
some internal evidence also is traceable that Pipino translated _not_
from the original but from an Italian _version_ of the original.

The oldest MS. (it is supposed) in any Italian dialect is one in
the Magliabecchian Library at Florence, which is known in Italy as
_L’Ottima_, on account of the purity of its Tuscan, and as _Della
Crusca_ from its being one of the authorities cited by that body
in their Vocabulary.[2] It bears on its face the following note in
Italian:—

“This Book called the Navigation of Messer Marco Polo, a noble
Citizen of Venice, was written in Florence by Michael Ormanni my
great grandfather by the Mother’s side, who died in the Year of
Grace One Thousand Three Hundred and Nine; and my mother brought it
into our Family of Del Riccio, and it belongs to me Pier del Riccio
and to my Brother; 1452.”

As far as I can learn, the age which this note implies is considered to
be supported by the character of the MS. itself.[3] If it be accepted,
the latter is a performance going back to within eleven years _at most_
of the first dictation of the Travels. At first sight, therefore, this
would rather argue that the original had been written in pure Tuscan.
But when Baldelli came to prepare it for the press he found manifest
indications of its being a Translation from the _French_. Some of these
he has noted; others have followed up the same line of comparison. We
give some detailed examples in a note.[4]

[Illustration: Temple of 500 Genii, at Canton, _after a Drawing by_
FÉLIX RÉGAMEY.]

[Sidenote: Old French Text published by the Société de Géographie.]

52. The French Text that we have been quoting, published by the
Geographical Society of Paris in 1824, affords on the other hand
the strongest corresponding proof that it is an original and not a
Translation. Rude as is the language of the manuscript (Fr. 1116,
formerly No. 7367, of Paris Library), it is, in the correctness of the
proper names, and the intelligible exhibition of the itineraries, much
superior to any form of the Work previously published.

The language is very peculiar. We are obliged to call it French, but it
is not “Frenche of Paris.” “Its style,” says Paulin Paris, “is about as
like that of good French authors of the age, as in our day the natural
accent of a German, an Englishman, or an Italian, is like that of a
citizen of Paris or Blois.” The author is at war with all the practices
of French grammar; subject and object, numbers, moods, and tenses, are
in consummate confusion. Even readers of his own day must at times
have been fain to guess his meaning. Italian words are constantly
introduced, either quite in the crude or rudely Gallicized.[5] And
words also, we may add, sometimes slip in which appear to be purely
Oriental, just as is apt to happen with Anglo-Indians in these days.[6]
All this is perfectly consistent with the supposition that we have
in this MS. a copy at least of the original words as written down
by Rusticiano a Tuscan, from the dictation of Marco an Orientalized
Venetian, in French, a language foreign to both.

But the character of the language _as French_ is not its only
peculiarity. There is in the style, apart from grammar or vocabulary, a
rude angularity, a rough dramatism like that of oral narrative; there
is a want of proportion in the style of different parts, now over curt,
now diffuse and wordy, with at times even a hammering reiteration; a
constant recurrence of pet colloquial phrases (in which, however, other
literary works of the age partake); a frequent change in the spelling
of the same proper names, even when recurring within a few lines, as if
caught by ear only; a literal following to and fro of the hesitations
of the narrator; a more general use of the third person in speaking
of the Traveller, but an occasional lapse into the first. All these
characteristics are strikingly indicative of the unrevised product of
dictation, and many of them would _necessarily_ disappear either in
translation or in a revised copy.

Of changes in representing the same proper name, take as an example
that of the Kaan of Persia whom Polo calls _Quiacatu_ (Kaikhátú), but
also _Acatu, Catu_, and the like.

As an example of the literal following of dictation take the following:—

“Let us leave Rosia, and I will tell you about the Great Sea (the
Euxine), and what provinces and nations lie round about it, all
in detail; and we will begin with Constantinople—First, however,
I should tell you about a province, etc.... There is nothing more
worth mentioning, so I will speak of other subjects,—but there is
one thing more to tell you about Rosia that I had forgotten.... Now
then let us speak of the Great Sea as I was about to do. To be sure
many merchants and others have been here, but still there are many
again who know nothing about it, so it will be well to include it
in our Book. We will do so then, and let us begin first with the
Strait of Constantinople.

“At the Straits leading into the Great Sea, on the West Side, there
is a hill called the Faro.—But since beginning on this matter I
have changed my mind, because so many people know all about it, so
we will not put it in our description but go on to something else.”
(See vol. ii. p. 487 _seqq._)

And so on.

As a specimen of tautology and hammering reiteration the following
can scarcely be surpassed. The Traveller is speaking of the _Chughi_,
_i.e._ the Indian Jogis:—

“And there are among them certain devotees, called _Chughi_; these
are longer-lived than the other people, for they live from 150 to
200 years; and yet they are so hale of body that they can go and
come wheresoever they please, and do all the service needed for
their monastery or their idols, and do it just as well as if they
were younger; and that comes of the great abstinence that they
practise, in eating little food and only what is wholesome; for
they use to eat rice and milk more than anything else. And again I
tell you that these Chughi who live such a long time as I have told
you, do also eat what I am going to tell you, and you will think
it a great matter. For I tell you that they take quicksilver and
sulphur, and mix them together, and make a drink of them, and then
they drink this, and they say that it adds to their life; and in
fact they do live much longer for it; and I tell you that they do
this twice every month. And let me tell you that these people use
this drink from their infancy in order to live longer, and without
fail those who live so long as I have told you use this drink of
sulphur and quicksilver.” (See G. T. p. 213.)

Such talk as this does not survive the solvent of translation; and
we may be certain that we have here the nearest approach to the
Traveller’s reminiscences as they were taken down from his lips in the
prison of Genoa.

[Sidenote: Conclusive proof that the Old French Text is the source of
all the others.]

53. Another circumstance, heretofore I believe unnoticed, is in itself
enough to demonstrate the Geographic Text to be the source of all other
versions of the Work. It is this.

In reviewing the various classes or types of texts of Polo’s Book,
which we shall hereafter attempt to discriminate, there are certain
proper names which we find in the different texts to take very
different forms, each class adhering in the main to one particular form.

Thus the names of the Mongol ladies introduced at pp. 32 and 36 of this
volume, which are in proper Oriental form _Bulughán_ and _Kukáchin_,
appear in the class of MSS. which Pauthier has followed as _Bolgara_
and _Cogatra_; in the MSS. of Pipino’s version, and those founded
on it, including Ramusio, the names appear in the correcter forms
_Bolgana_ or _Balgana_ and _Cogacin_. Now _all the forms_ Bolgana,
Balgana, Bolgara, _and_ Cogatra, Cocacin _appear in the Geographic
Text_.

Kaikhátú Kaan appears in the Pauthier MSS. as _Chiato_, in the Pipinian
as _Acatu_, in the Ramusian as _Chiacato. All three forms_, Chiato,
Achatu, and Quiacatu _are found in the Geographic Text_.

The city of Koh-banan appears in the Pauthier MSS. as _Cabanant_, in
the Pipinian and Ramusian editions as _Cobinam_ or _Cobinan_. _Both
forms are found in the Geographic Text_.

The city of the Great Kaan (Khanbalig) is called in the Pauthier MSS.
_Cambaluc_, in the Pipinian and Ramusian less correctly _Cambalu_.
_Both forms appear in the Geographic Text_.

The aboriginal People on the Burmese Frontier who received from the
Western officers of the Mongols the Persian name (translated from that
applied by the Chinese) of _Zardandán_, or Gold-Teeth, appear in the
Pauthier MSS. most accurately as Zardandan, but in the Pipinian as
_Ardandan_ (still further corrupted in some copies into _Arcladam_).
Now _both forms are found in the Geographic Text_. Other examples might
be given, but these I think may suffice to prove that this Text was the
common source of both classes.

In considering the question of the French original too we must remember
what has been already said regarding Rusticien de Pise and his other
French writings; and we shall find hereafter an express testimony borne
in the next generation that Marco’s Book was composed _in vulgari
Gallico_.

[Sidenote: Greatly diffused employment of French in that age.]

54. But, after all, the circumstantial evidence that has been adduced
from the texts themselves is the most conclusive. We have then every
reason to believe both that the work was written in French, and that
an existing French Text is a close representation of it as originally
committed to paper. And that being so we may cite some circumstances
to show that the use of French or quasi-French for the purpose was not
a fact of a very unusual or surprising nature. The French language had
at that time almost as wide, perhaps relatively a wider, diffusion than
it has now. It was still spoken at the Court of England, and still
used by many English writers, of whom the authors or translators of
the Round Table Romances at Henry III.’s Court are examples.[7] In
1249 Alexander III. King of Scotland, at his coronation spoke in Latin
and French; and in 1291 the English Chancellor addressing the Scotch
Parliament did so in French. At certain of the Oxford Colleges as late
as 1328 it was an order that the students should converse _colloquio
latino vel saltem gallico_.[8] Late in the same century Gower had not
ceased to use French, composing many poems in it, though apologizing
for his want of skill therein:—

“Et si jeo nai de François la faconde
* * * *
Jeo suis Englois; si quier par tiele voie
Estre excusé.”[9]

Indeed down to nearly 1385, boys in the English grammar-schools
were taught to construe their Latin lessons into French.[10] St.
Francis of Assisi is said by some of his biographers to have had his
original name changed to Francesco because of his early mastery of
that language as a qualification for commerce. French had been the
prevalent tongue of the Crusaders, and was that of the numerous Frank
Courts which they established in the East, including Jerusalem and
the states of the Syrian coast, Cyprus, Constantinople during the
reign of the Courtenays, and the principalities of the Morea. The
Catalan soldier and chronicler Ramon de Muntaner tells us that it was
commonly said of the Morean chivalry that they spoke as good French as
at Paris.[11] Quasi-French at least was still spoken half a century
later by the numerous Christians settled at Aleppo, as John Marignolli
testifies;[12] and if we may trust Sir John Maundevile the Soldan
of Egypt himself and four of his chief Lords “_spak Frensche righte
wel!_”[13] Gházán Kaan, the accomplished Mongol Sovereign of Persia,
to whom our Traveller conveyed a bride from Cambaluc, is said by the
historian Rashiduddin to have known something of the Frank tongue,
probably French.[14] Nay, if we may trust the author of the Romance
of Richard Cœur-de-Lion, French was in his day the language of still
higher spheres![15]

Nor was Polo’s case an exceptional one even among writers on the East
who were not Frenchmen. Maundevile himself tells us that he put his
book first “out of Latyn into Frensche,” and then out of French into
English.[16] The History of the East which the Armenian Prince and Monk
Hayton dictated to Nicolas Faulcon at Poictiers in 1307 was taken down
in French. There are many other instances of the employment of French
by foreign, and especially by Italian authors of that age. The Latin
chronicle of the Benedictine Amato of Monte Cassino was translated into
French early in the 13th century by another monk of the same abbey, at
the particular desire of the Count of Militrée (or Malta), “_Pour ce
qu’il set lire et entendre fransoize et s’en delitte._”[17] Martino da
Canale, a countryman and contemporary of Polo’s, during the absence
of the latter in the East wrote a Chronicle of Venice in the same
language, as a reason for which he alleges its general popularity.[18]
The like does the most notable example of all, Brunetto Latini, Dante’s
master, who wrote in French his encyclopædic and once highly popular
work _Li Tresor_.[19] Other examples might be given, but in fact such
illustration is superfluous when we consider that Rusticiano himself
was a compiler of French Romances.

But why the language of the Book as we see it in the Geographic Text
should be so much more rude, inaccurate, and Italianized than that of
Rusticiano’s other writings, is a question to which I can suggest no
reply quite satisfactory to myself. Is it possible that we have in it a
literal representation of Polo’s own language in dictating the story,—a
rough draft which it was intended afterwards to reduce to better form,
and which was so reduced (after a fashion) in French copies of another
type, regarding which we shall have to speak presently?[20] And, if
this be the true answer, why should Polo have used a French jargon in
which to tell his story? Is it possible that his own mother Venetian,
such as he had carried to the East with him and brought back again,
was so little intelligible to Rusticiano that French of some kind was
the handiest medium of communication between the two? I have known
an Englishman and a Hollander driven to converse in Malay; Chinese
Christians of different provinces are said sometimes to take to English
as the readiest means of intercommunication; and the same is said even
of Irish-speaking Irishmen from remote parts of the Island.

It is worthy of remark how many notable narratives of the Middle Ages
have been dictated instead of being written by their authors, and
that in cases where it is impossible to ascribe this to ignorance
of writing. The Armenian Hayton, though evidently a well-read man,
possibly could not write in Roman characters. But Joinville is an
illustrious example. And the narratives of four of the most famous
Mediæval Travellers[21] seem to have been drawn from them by a kind
of pressure, and committed to paper by other hands. I have elsewhere
remarked this as indicating how little diffused was literary ambition
or vanity; but it would perhaps be more correct to ascribe it to that
intense dislike which is still seen on the shores of the Mediterranean
to the use of pen and ink. On certain of those shores at least there
is scarcely any inconvenience that the majority of respectable and
good-natured people will not tolerate—inconvenience to their neighbours
be it understood—rather than put pen to paper for the purpose of
preventing it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] 232 chapters in the oldest French which we quote as the _Geographic
Text_ (or G. T.), 200 in Pauthier’s Text, 183 in the Crusca Italian.

[2] The MS. has been printed by Baldelli as above, and again by Bartoli
in 1863.

[3] This is somewhat peculiar. I traced a few lines of it, which with
Del Riccio’s note were given in facsimile in the First Edition.

[4] The Crusca is cited from Bartoli’s edition.

French idioms are frequent, as _l’uomo_ for the French _on_;
_quattro-vinti_ instead of _ottanta_; etc.

We have at p. 35, “_Questo piano è molto_ cavo,” which is nonsense,
but is explained by reference to the French (G. T.) “_Voz di qu’il
est celle plaingne mout_ chaue” (_chaude_).

The bread in Kerman is bitter, says the G. T. “_por ce que l’eive
hi est_ amer,” because the water there is bitter. The Crusca
mistakes the last word and renders (p. 40) “_e questi è per lo_
mare _che vi viene_.”

“_Sachiés de voir qe_ endementiers,” know for a truth that
whilst——, by some misunderstanding of the last word becomes (p.
129) “_Sappiate di vero_ sanza mentire.”

“_Mès de sel_ font-il monoie”—“They make money of salt,” becomes
(p. 168) “_ma fannole_ da loro,” _sel_ being taken for a pronoun,
whilst in another place _sel_ is transferred bodily without
translation.

“_Chevoil_,” “hair” of the old French, appears in the Tuscan (p.
20) as _cavagli_, “horses.”—“_La Grant Provence_ Jereraus,” the
great general province, appears (p. 68) as a province whose proper
name is _Ienaraus_. In describing Kúblái’s expedition against Mien
or Burma, Polo has a story of his calling on the Jugglers at his
court to undertake the job, promising them a Captain and other
help, “_Cheveitain et aide_.” This has fairly puzzled the Tuscan,
who converts these (p. 186) into two Tartar tribes, “_quegli
d’_Aide _e quegli di_ Caveità.”

So also we have _lievre_ for hare transferred without change;
_lait_, milk, appearing as _laido_ instead of _latte_; _très_,
rendered as “three”; _bue_, “mud,” Italianised as _buoi_, “oxen,”
and so forth. Finally, in various places when Polo is explaining
Oriental terms we find in the Tuscan MS. “_cioè a dire in_
Francesco.”

The blunders mentioned are intelligible enough as in a version
_from the French_; but in the description of the Indian
pearl-fishery we have a startling one not so easy to account for.
The French says, “the divers gather the sea-oysters (_hostrige de
Mer_), and in these the pearls are found.” This appears in the
Tuscan in the extraordinary form that the divers catch those fishes
called _Herrings_ (Aringhe), and in those Herrings are found the
Pearls!

[5] As examples of these Italianisms: “_Et ont del_ olio _de la lanpe
dou_ sepolchro _de Crist_”; “_L’Angel ven en vision pour mesajes
de Deu à un_ Veschevo _qe mout estoient home de_ sante vite”;
“_E certes il estoit bien_ beizongno”; “_ne trop caut ne trop_
fredo”; “_la_ crense” (_credenza_); “remort” for noise (_rumore_);
“inverno”; “jorno”; “dementiqué” (_dimenticato_); “enferme” for
sickly; “leign” (_legno_); “devisce” (_dovizia_); “ammalaide”
(_ammalato_), etc. etc.

Professor Bianconi points out that there are also traces of
_Venetian_ dialect, as _Pare_ for _père_; _Mojer_ for wife;
_Zabater_, cobbler; _cazaor_, huntsman, etc.

I have not been able to learn to what extent books in this kind
of mixed language are extant. I have observed one, a romance in
verse called _Macaire_ (_Altfranzösische Gedichte aus Venez.
Handschriften_, von _Adolf Mussafia_, Wien, 1864), the language of
which is not unlike this jargon of Rustician’s, _e.g._:—

“‘Dama,’ fait-il, ‘molto me poso merviler De ves enfant quant le fi
batecer De un signo qe le vi sor la spal’a droiturer Qe non ait nul
se no filz d’inperer.’”—(p. 41)

[6] As examples of such Orientalisms: _Bonus_, “ebony,” and _calamanz_,
“pencases,” seem to represent the Persian _abnús_ and _ḳalamdàn_;
the dead are mourned by _les mères et les_ Araines, the _Harems_;
in speaking of the land of the Ismaelites or Assassins, called
_Mulhete_, _i.e._ the Arabic _Muláhidah_, “Heretics,” he explains
this term as meaning “des _Aram_” (_Ḥarám_, “the reprobate”).
Speaking of the Viceroys of Chinese Provinces, we are told that
they rendered their accounts yearly to the _Safators_ of the
Great Kaan. This is certainly an Oriental word. Sir H. Rawlinson
has suggested that it stands for _dafátir_ (“registers or public
books”), pl. of _daftar_. This seems probable, and in that case the
true reading may have been _dafators_.

[7] Luces du Gast, one of the first of these, introduces himself thus:—
“Je Luces, Chevaliers et Sires du Chastel du Gast, voisins prochain
de Salebieres, comme chevaliers amoureus enprens à translater du
Latin en François une partie de cette estoire, non mie pour ce que
je sache gramment de François, ainz apartient plus ma langue et ma
parleure à la manière de l’Engleterre que à celle de France, comme
cel qui fu en Engleterre nez, mais tele est ma volentez et mon
proposement, que je en langue françoise le translaterai.” (_Hist.
Litt. de La France_, xv. 494.)

[8] _Hist. Litt. de la France_, xv. 500.

[9] _Ibid._ 508.

[10] _Tyrwhitt’s Essay on Lang., etc., of Chaucer_, p. xxii. (Moxon’s
Ed. 1852.)

[11] _Chroniques Etrangères_, p. 502.

[12] “_Loquuntur linguam quasi Gallicam, scilicet quasi de Cipro_.”
(See _Cathay_, p. 332.)

[13] Page 138.

[14] _Hammers Ilchan_, II. 148.

[15] After the capture of Acre, Richard orders 60,000 Saracen prisoners
to be executed:—

“They wer brought out off the toun,
Save twenty, he heeld to raunsoun.
They wer led into the place ful evene:
_Ther they herden Aungeles off Hevene_:
_They sayde_: ‘SEYNYORS, TUEZ, TUEZ!
‘Spares hem nought! Behedith these!’
Kyng Rychard herde the Aungelys voys,
And thankyd God, and the Holy Croys.”
—_Weber_, II. 144.

Note that, from the rhyme, the Angelic French was apparently
pronounced “_Too-eese! Too-eese!_”

[16] [Refer to the edition of Mr. George F. Warner, 1889, for the
Roxburghe Club, and to my own paper in the _T’oung Pao_, Vol.
II., No. 4, regarding the compilation published under the name of
Maundeville. Also _App. L_. 13—H. C.]

[17] _L’Ystoire de li Normand_, etc., edited by M. Champollion-Figeac,
Paris, 1835, p. v.

[18] “_Porce que lengue Frenceise cort parmi le monde, et est la plus
delitable à lire et à oir que nule autre, me sui-je entremis de
translater l’ancien estoire des Veneciens de Latin en Franceis._”
(Archiv. Stor. Ital. viii. 268.)

[19] “_Et se aucuns demandoit por quoi cist livres est escriz en
Romans, selonc le langage des François, puisque nos somes Ytaliens,
je diroie que ce est por. ij. raisons: l’une, car nos somes en
France; et l’autre porce que la parleure est plus delitable et plus
commune à toutes gens._” (Li Livres dou Tresor, p. 3.)

[20] It is, however, not improbable that Rusticiano’s hasty and
abbreviated original was extended by a scribe who knew next to
nothing of French; otherwise it is hard to account for such forms
as _perlinage_ (pelerinage), _peseries_ (espiceries), _proque_ (see
vol. ii. p. 370), _oisi_ (G. T. p. 208), _thochere_ (toucher), etc.
(See _Bianconi_, 2nd Mem. pp. 30–32.)

[21] Polo, Friar Odoric, Nicolo Conti, Ibn Batuta.

X. VARIOUS TYPES OF TEXT OF MARCO POLO’S BOOK.

[Sidenote: Four Principal Types of Text. First, that of the Geographic,
or oldest French.]

55. In treating of the various Texts of Polo’s Book we must necessarily
go into some irksome detail.

Those Texts that have come down to us may be classified under Four
principal Types.

I. The First Type is that of the Geographic Text of which we have
already said so much. This is found nowhere _complete_ except in the
unique MS. of the Paris Library, to which it is stated to have come
from the old Library of the French Kings at Blois. But the Italian
_Crusca_, and the old Latin version (No. 3195 of the Paris Library)
published with the Geographic Text, are evidently derived entirely from
it, though both are considerably abridged. It is also demonstrable that
neither of these copies has been translated from the other, for each
has passages which the other omits, but that both have been taken, the
one as a copy more or less loose, the other as a translation, from an
intermediate _Italian_ copy.[1] A special difference lies in the fact
that the Latin version is divided into three Books, whilst the Crusca
has no such division. I shall show in a tabular form the _filiation_ of
the texts which these facts seem to demonstrate (see Appendix G).

There are other Italian MSS. of this type, some of which show signs of
having been derived independently from the French;[2] but I have not
been able to examine any of them with the care needful to make specific
deductions regarding them.

[Sidenote: Second; the remodelled French Text, followed by Pauthier.]

56. II. The next Type is that of the French MSS. on which M. Pauthier’s
Text is based, and for which he claims the highest authority, as having
had the mature revision and sanction of the Traveller. There are, as
far as I know, five MSS. which may be classed together under this type,
three in the Great Paris Library, one at Bern, and one in the Bodleian.

The high claims made by Pauthier on behalf of this class of MSS. (on
the first three of which his Text is formed) rest mainly upon the kind
of certificate which two of them bear regarding the presentation of a
copy by Marco Polo to Thibault de Cepoy, which we have already quoted
(_supra_, p. _69_). This certificate is held by Pauthier to imply that
the original of the copies which bear it, and of those having a general
correspondence with them, had the special seal of Marco’s revision and
approval. To some considerable extent their character is corroborative
of such a claim, but they are far from having the perfection which
Pauthier attributes to them, and which leads him into many paradoxes.

It is not possible to interpret rigidly the bearing of this so-called
certificate, as if no copies had previously been taken of _any_ form
of the Book; nor can we allow it to impugn the authenticity of the
Geographic Text, which demonstratively represents an older original,
and has been (as we have seen) the parent of all other versions,
including some very old ones, Italian and Latin, which certainly owe
nothing to this revision.

The first idea apparently entertained by d’Avezac and Paulin Paris was
that the Geographic Text was _itself_ the copy given to the Sieur de
Cepoy, and that the differences in the copies of the class which we
describe as Type II. merely resulted from the modifications which would
naturally arise in the process of transcription into purer French.
But closer examination showed the differences to be too great and too
marked to admit of this explanation. These differences consist not
only in the conversion of the rude, obscure, and half Italian language
of the original into good French of the period. There is also very
considerable curtailment, generally of tautology, but also extending
often to circumstances of substantial interest; whilst we observe the
omission of a few notably erroneous statements or expressions; and a
few insertions of small importance. None of the MSS. of this class
contain more than a few of the historical chapters which we have formed
into Book IV.

The only _addition_ of any magnitude is that chapter which in our
translation forms chapter xxi. of Book II. It will be seen that
it contains no new facts, but is only a tedious recapitulation of
circumstances already stated, though scattered over several chapters.
There are a few minor additions. I have not thought it worth while to
collect them systematically here, but two or three examples are given
in a note.[3]

There are also one or two corrections of erroneous statements in the
G. T. which seem not to be accidental and to indicate some attempt at
revision. Thus a notable error in the account of Aden, which seems to
conceive of the Red Sea as a _river_, disappears in Pauthier’s MSS.
A and B.[4] And we find in these MSS. one or two interesting names
preserved which are not found in the older Text.[5]

But on the other hand this class of MSS. contains many erroneous
readings of names, either adopting the worse of two forms occurring in
the G. T. or originating blunders of its own.[6]

M. Pauthier lays great stress on the character of these MSS. as
the sole authentic form of the work, from their claim to have been
specially revised by Marco Polo. It is evident, however, from what has
been said, that this revision can have been only a very careless and
superficial one, and must have been done in great measure by deputy,
being almost entirely confined to curtailment and to the improvement of
the expression, and that it is by no means such as to allow an editor
to dispense with a careful study of the Older Text.

[Sidenote: The Bern MS. and two others form a sub-class of this Type.]

57. There is another curious circumstance about the MSS. of this
type, viz., that they clearly divide into two distinct recensions,
of which both have so many peculiarities and errors in common that
they must necessarily have been both derived from _one_ modification
of the original text, whilst at the same time there are such
differences between the two as cannot be set down to the accidents of
transcription. Pauthier’s MSS. A and B (Nos. 16 and 15 of the List
in App. F) form one of these subdivisions: his C (No. 17 of List),
Bern (No. 56), and Oxford (No. 6), the other. Between A and B the
differences are only such as seem constantly to have arisen from the
whims of transcribers or their dialectic peculiarities. But between
A and B on the one side, and C on the other, the differences are
much greater. The readings of proper names in C are often superior,
sometimes worse; but in the latter half of the work especially it
contains a number of substantial passages[7] which are to be found in
the G. T., but are altogether absent from the MSS. A and B; whilst in
one case at least (the history of the Siege of Saianfu, vol. ii. p.
159) it diverges considerably from the G. T. _as well_ as from A and
B.[8]

I gather from the facts that the MS. C represents an older form of the
work than A and B. I should judge that the latter had been derived from
that older form, but intentionally modified from it. And as it is the
MS. C, with its copy at Bern, that alone presents the certificate of
derivation from the Book given to the Sieur de Cepoy, there can be no
doubt that it is the true representative of that recension.

[Sidenote: Third; Friar Pipino’s Latin.]

58. III. The next Type of Text is that found in Friar Pipino’s Latin
version. It is the type of which MSS. are by far the most numerous.
In it condensation and curtailment are carried a good deal further
than in Type II. The work is also divided into three Books. But this
division does not seem to have originated with Pipino, as we find it
in the ruder and perhaps older Latin version of which we have already
spoken under Type I. And we have demonstrated that this ruder Latin is
a translation from an Italian copy. It is probable therefore that an
Italian version similarly divided was the common source of what we call
the Geographic Latin and of Pipino’s more condensed version.[9]

Pipino’s version appears to have been executed in the later years of
Polo’s life.[10] But I can see no ground for the idea entertained by
Baldelli-Boni and Professor Bianconi that it was executed with Polo’s
cognizance and retouched by him.

[Sidenote: The Latin of Grynæus a translation at fifth hand.]

59. The absence of effective publication in the Middle Ages led to a
curious complication of translation and retranslation. Thus the Latin
version published by Grynæus in the _Novus Orbis_ (Basle, 1532) is
different from Pipino’s, and yet clearly traceable to it as a base.
In fact it is a retranslation into Latin from some version (Marsden
thinks the printed Portuguese one) of Pipino. It introduces many minor
modifications, omitting specific statements of numbers and values,
generalizing the names and descriptions of specific animals, exhibiting
frequent sciolism and self-sufficiency in modifying statements which
the Editor disbelieved.[11] It is therefore utterly worthless as a
Text, and it is curious that Andreas Müller, who in the 17th century
devoted himself to the careful editing of Polo, should have made so
unfortunate a choice as to reproduce this fifth-hand Translation. I
may add that the French editions published in the middle of the 16th
century are _translations_ from Grynæus. Hence they complete this
curious and vicious circle of translation: French—Italian—Pipino’s
Latin—Portuguese?—Grynæus’s Latin—French![12]

[Sidenote: Fourth; Ramusio’s Italian.]

60. IV. We now come to a Type of Text which deviates largely from
any of those hitherto spoken of, and the history and true character
of which are involved in a cloud of difficulty. We mean that Italian
version prepared for the press by G. B. Ramusio, with most interesting,
though, as we have seen, not always accurate preliminary dissertations,
and published at Venice two years after his death, in the second volume
of the _Navigationi e Viaggi_.[13]

The peculiarities of this version are very remarkable. Ramusio seems
to imply that he used as one basis at least the Latin of Pipino; and
many circumstances, such as the division into Books, the absence of
the terminal historical chapters and of those about the Magi, and
the form of many proper names, confirm this. But also many additional
circumstances and anecdotes are introduced, many of the names assume
a new shape, and the whole style is more copious and literary in
character than in any other form of the work.

Whilst some of the changes or interpolations seem to carry us further
from the truth, others contain facts of Asiatic nature or history, as
well as of Polo’s own experiences, which it is extremely difficult to
ascribe to any hand but the Traveller’s own. This was the view taken
by Baldelli, Klaproth, and Neumann;[14] but Hugh Murray, Lazari, and
Bartoli regard the changes as interpolations by another hand; and
Lazari is rash enough to ascribe the whole to a _rifacimento_ of
Ramusio’s own age, asserting it to contain interpolations not merely
from Polo’s own contemporary Hayton, but also from travellers of later
centuries, such as Conti, Barbosa, and Pigafetta. The grounds for these
last assertions have not been cited, nor can I trace them. But I admit
_to a certain extent_ indications of modern tampering with the text,
especially in cases where proper names seem to have been identified
and more modern forms substituted. In days, however, where an Editor’s
duties were ill understood, this was natural.

[Sidenote: Injudicious tamperings in Ramusio.]

61. Thus we find substituted for the _Bastra_ (or _Bascra_) of the
older texts the more modern and incorrect _Balsora_, dear to memories
of the Arabian Nights; among the provinces of Persia we have _Spaan_
(Ispahan) where older texts read _Istanit_; for _Cormos_ we have
_Ormus_; for _Herminia_ and _Laias_, _Armenia_ and _Giazza_; _Coulam_
for the older _Coilum_; _Socotera_ for _Scotra_. With these changes may
be classed the chapter-headings, which are undisguisedly modern, and
probably Ramusio’s own. In some other cases this editorial spirit has
been over-meddlesome and has gone astray. Thus _Malabar_ is substituted
wrongly for _Maabar_ in one place, and by a grosser error for _Dalivar_
in another. The age of young Marco, at the time of his father’s first
return to Venice, has been arbitrarily altered from 15 to 19, in
order to correspond with a date which is itself erroneous. Thus also
Polo is made to describe Ormus as on an Island, contrary to the old
texts and to the fact; for the city of Hormuz was not transferred to
the island, afterwards so famous, till some years after Polo’s return
from the East. It is probably also the editor who in the notice of
the oil-springs of Caucasus (i. p. 46) has substituted _camel-loads_
for _ship-loads_, in ignorance that the site of those alluded to was
probably Baku on the Caspian.

Other erroneous statements, such as the introduction of window-glass as
one of the embellishments of the palace at Cambaluc, are probably due
only to accidental misunderstanding.

[Sidenote: Genuine statements peculiar to Ramusio.]

62. Of circumstances certainly genuine, which are peculiar to this
edition of Polo’s work, and which it is difficult to assign to any
one but himself, we may note the specification of the woods east of
Yezd as composed of _date trees_ (vol. i pp. 88–89); the unmistakable
allusion to the subterranean irrigation channels of Persia (p. 123);
the accurate explanation of the term _Mulehet_ applied to the sect of
Assassins (pp. 139–142); the mention of the Lake (Sirikul?) on the
plateau of Pamer, of the wolves that prey on the wild sheep, and of the
piles of wild rams’ horns used as landmarks in the snow (pp. 171–177).
To the description of the Tibetan Yak, which is in all the texts,
Ramusio’s version alone adds a fact probably not recorded again till
the present century, viz., that it is the practice to cross the Yak
with the common cow (p. 274). Ramusio alone notices the prevalence of
_goître_ at Yarkand, confirmed by recent travellers (i. p. 187); the
vermilion seal of the Great Kaan imprinted on the paper-currency, which
may be seen in our plate of a Chinese note (p. 426); the variation in
Chinese dialects (ii. p. 236); the division of the hulls of junks into
water-tight compartments (ii. p. 249); the introduction into China from
Egypt of the art of refining sugar (ii. p. 226). Ramusio’s account of
the position of the city of Sindafu (Ch’êng-tu fu) encompassed and
intersected by many branches of a great river (ii. p. 40), is much
more just than that in the old text, which speaks of but one river
through the middle of the city. The intelligent notices of the Kaan’s
charities as originated by his adoption of “idolatry” or Buddhism; of
the astrological superstitions of the Chinese, and of the manners and
character of the latter nation, are found in Ramusio alone. To whom but
Marco himself, or one of his party, can we refer the brief but vivid
picture of the delicious atmosphere and scenery of the Badakhshan
plateaux (i. p. 158), and of the benefit that Messer Marco’s health
derived from a visit to them? In this version alone again we have an
account of the oppressions exercised by Kúblái’s Mahomedan Minister
Ahmad, telling how the Cathayans rose against him and murdered him,
with the addition that Messer Marco was on the spot when all this
happened. Now not only is the whole story in substantial accordance
with the Chinese Annals, even to the name of the chief conspirator,[15]
but those annals also tell of the courageous frankness of “Polo,
assessor of the Privy Council,” in opening the Kaan’s eyes to the truth.

Many more such examples might be adduced, but these will suffice. It
is true that many of the passages peculiar to the Ramusian version,
and indeed the whole version, show a freer utterance and more of a
literary faculty than we should attribute to Polo, judging from the
earlier texts. It is possible, however, that this may be almost, if not
entirely, due to the fact that the version is the result of a double
translation, and probably of an editorial fusion of several documents;
processes in which angularities of expression would be dissolved.[16]

[Sidenote: Hypothesis of the sources of the Ramusian Version.]

63. Though difficulties will certainly remain,[17] the most probable
explanation of the origin of this text seems to me to be some such
hypothesis as the following:—I suppose that Polo in his latter years
added with his own hand supplementary notes and reminiscences,
marginally or otherwise, to a copy of his book; that these, perhaps
in his lifetime, more probably after his death, were digested and
translated into Latin;[18] and that Ramusio, or some friend of his,
in retranslating and fusing them with Pipino’s version for the
_Navigationi_, made those minor modifications in names and other
matters which we have already noticed. The mere facts of digestion
from memoranda and double translation would account for a good deal of
unintentional corruption.

That more than one version was employed in the composition of Ramusio’s
edition we have curious proof in at least one passage of the latter.
We have pointed out at p. 410 of this volume a curious example of
misunderstanding of the old French Text, a passage in which the term
_Roi des Pelaines_, or “King of Furs,” is applied to the Sable, and
which in the Crusca has been converted into an imaginary Tartar phrase
_Leroide pelame_, or as Pipino makes it _Rondes_ (another indication
that Pipino’s Version and the Crusca passed through a common medium).
But Ramusio exhibits _both_ the true reading and the perversion: “_E li
Tartari la chiamano_ Regina delle pelli” (there is the true reading),
“_E gli animali si chiamano_ Rondes” (and there the perverted one).

We may further remark that Ramusio’s version betrays indications that
one of its bases either was in the Venetian dialect, or had passed
through that dialect; for a good many of the names appear in Venetian
forms, _e.g._, substituting the _z_ for the sound of _ch_, _j_, or
soft _g_, as in _Goza_, _Zorzania_, _Zagatay_, _Gonza_ (for Giogiu),
_Quenzanfu_, _Coiganzu_, _Tapinzu_, _Zipangu_, _Ziamba_.

[Sidenote: Summary in regard to Text of Polo.]

64. To sum up. It is, I think, beyond reasonable dispute that we
have, in what we call the Geographic Text, as nearly as may be an
exact transcript of the Traveller’s words as originally taken down in
the prison of Genoa. We have again in the MSS. of the second type an
edition pruned and refined, probably under instructions from Marco
Polo, but not with any critical exactness. And lastly, I believe,
that we have, imbedded in the Ramusian edition, the supplementary
recollections of the Traveller, noted down at a later period of his
life, but perplexed by repeated translation, compilation, and editorial
mishandling.

And the most important remaining problem in regard to the text of
Polo’s work is the discovery of the supplemental manuscript from which
Ramusio derived those passages which are found only in his edition. It
is possible that it may still exist, but no trace of it in anything
like completeness has yet been found; though when my task was all but
done I discovered a small part of the Ramusian peculiarities in a MS.
at Venice.[19]

65. Whilst upon this subject of manuscripts of our Author, I will give
some particulars regarding a very curious one, containing a version in
the _Irish_ language.

[Sidenote: Notice of a curious Irish Version of Polo.]

This remarkable document is found in the _Book of Lismore_, belonging
to the Duke of Devonshire. That magnificent book, finely written on
vellum of the largest size, was discovered in 1814, enclosed in a
wooden box, along with a superb crozier, on opening a closed doorway in
the castle of Lismore. It contained Lives of the Saints, the (Romance)
History of Charlemagne, the History of the Lombards, histories and
tales of Irish wars, etc., etc., and among the other matter this
version of Marco Polo. A full account of the Book and its mutilations
will be found in _O’Curry’s Lectures on the MS. Materials of Ancient
Irish History_, p. 196 _seqq._, Dublin, 1861. The _Book of Lismore_
was written about 1460 for Finghin MacCarthy and his wife Catharine
Fitzgerald, daughter of Gerald, Eighth Earl of Desmond.

The date of the Translation of Polo is not known, but it may be
supposed to have been executed about the above date, probably in the
Monastery of Lismore (county of Waterford).

From the extracts that have been translated for me, it is obvious that
the version was made, with an astounding freedom certainly, from Friar
Francesco Pipino’s Latin.

Both beginning and end are missing. But what remains opens thus;
compare it with Friar Pipino’s real prologue as we give it in the
Appendix![20]

[Irish text] &c.

——“Kings and chieftains of that city. There was then in the city a
princely Friar in the habit of St. Francis, named Franciscus, who
was versed in many languages. He was brought to the place where
those nobles were, and they requested of him to translate the book
from the Tartar (!) into the Latin language. ‘It is an abomination
to me,’ said he, ‘to devote my mind or labour to works of Idolatry
and Irreligion.’ They entreated him again. ‘It shall be done,’ said
he; ‘for though it be an irreligious narrative that is related
therein, yet the things are miracles of the True God; and every one
who hears this much against the Holy Faith shall pray fervently for
their conversion. And he who will not pray shall waste the vigour
of his body to convert them.’ I am not in dread of this Book of
Marcus, for there is no lie in it. My eyes beheld him bringing the
relics of the holy Church with him, and he left [his testimony],
whilst tasting of death, that it was true. And Marcus was a devout
man. What is there in it, then, but that Franciscus translated this
Book of Marcus from the Tartar into Latin; and the years of the
Lord at that time were fifteen years, two score, two hundred, and
one thousand” (1255).

It then describes _Armein Bec_ (Little Armenia), _Armein Mor_ (Great
Armenia), _Musul_, _Taurisius_, _Persida_, _Camandi_, and so forth. The
last chapter is that on _Abaschia_:—

“ABASCHIA also is an extensive country, under the government of
Seven Kings, four of whom worship the true God, and each of them
wears a golden cross on the forehead; and they are valiant in
battle, having been brought up fighting against the Gentiles of
the other three kings, who are Unbelievers and Idolaters. And the
kingdom of ADEN; a Soudan rules over them.

“The king of Abaschia once took a notion to make a pilgrimage to
the Sepulchre of Jesus. ‘Not at all,’ said his nobles and warriors
to him, ‘for we should be afraid lest the infidels through whose
territories you would have to pass, should kill you. There is a
Holy Bishop with you,’ said they; ‘send him to the Sepulchre of
Jesus, and much gold with him’”——

The rest is wanting.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] In the following citations, the Geographic Text (G. T.) is quoted
by page from the printed edition (1824); the Latin published in
the same volume (G. L.) also by page; the Crusca, as before, from
Bartoli’s edition of 1863. References in parentheses are to the
present translation:—

A. _Passages showing the G. L. to be a translation from the Italian,
and derived from the same Italian text as the_ Crusca.

Page
(1). G.T. 17 (I. 43). Il hi se laborent _le souran tapis_
dou monde.

Crusca, 17 .. E quivi si fanno _i sovrani tappeti_
del mondo.

G.L. 311 .. Et ibi fiunt _soriani et tapeti_
pulcriores de mundo.

(2). G.T. 23 (I. 69). Et adonc le calif mande par tuit les
cristiez ... _que en sa tere estoient_.

Crusca, 27 .. _Ora mandò_ lo aliffo per tutti gli
Cristiani _ch’erano di là_.

G.L. 316 .. _Or misit_ califus pro Christianis
_qui erant ultra fluvium_ (the last
words being clearly a misunderstanding
of the Italian _di là_).

(3). G.T. 198 (II. 313). Ont _sosimain_ (sesamum) de coi il
font le olio.

Crusca, 253 .. Hanno _sosimai_ onde fanno l’olio.

G.L. 448 .. Habent _turpes manus_ (taking _sosimani_
for _sozze mani_ “Dirty hands”!).

(4). Crusca, 52 (I. 158). _Cacciare e uccellare_ v’è lo migliore
del mondo.

G.L. 332 .. Et est ibi optimum _caciare et
ucellare_.

(5). G.T. 124 (II. 36). Adonc treuve ... une Provence _qe est
encore_ de le confin dou Mangi.

Crusca, 162–3 .. L’uomo truova una Provincia _ch’è
chiamata ancora_ delle confine de’
Mangi.

G.L. 396 .. Invenit unam Provinciam _quae vocatur
Anchota_ de confinibus Mangi.

(6). G.T. 146 (II. 119). Les dames portent as jambes et es
braces, braciaus d’or et d’arjent de
grandisme vailance.

Crusca, 189 .. Le donne _portano alle braccia e alle
gambe bracciali d’oro_ e d’ariento
di gran valuta.

G.L. 411 .. Dominæ eorum _portant ad brachia et
ad gambas brazalia de auro_ et de
argento magni valoris.

B. _Passages showing additionally the errors, or other peculiarities
of a translation from a French original, common to the Italian and
the Latin._

(7). G.T. 32 (I. 97). Est celle plaingne mout _chaue_
(chaude).

Crusca, 35 .. Questo piano è molto _cavo_.

G.L. 322 .. Ista planities est multum _cava_.

(8). G.T. 36 (I. 110). Avent por ce que l’eive hi est _amer_.

Crusca, 40 .. E questo è _per lo mare_ che vi viene.

G.L. 324 .. Istud est _propter mare_ quod est ibi.

(9). G.T. 18 (I. 50). Un roi qi est apelés par tout tens
Davit Melic, que veut à dir _en
fransois_ Davit Roi.

Crusca, 20 .. Uno re il quale si chiama _sempre_
David Melic, ciò è a dire _in
francesco_ David Re.

G.L. 312 .. Rex qui _semper_ vocatur David Mellic,
quod sonat _in gallico_ David Rex.

These passages, and many more that might be quoted, seem to me to
demonstrate (1) that the Latin and the Crusca have had a common
original, and (2) that this original was an Italian version from
the French.

[2] Thus the _Pucci_ MS. at Florence, in the passage regarding the
Golden King (vol. ii. p. 17) which begins in G. T. “_Lequel fist
faire_ jadis _un rois qe fu apellés le Roi Dor_,” renders “_Lo
quale fa fare_ Jaddis _uno re_,” a mistake which is not in the
Crusca nor in the Latin, and seems to imply derivation from the
French directly, or by some other channel (_Baldelli Boni_).

[3] In the Prologue (vol. i. p. 34) this class of MSS. alone names the
King of England.

In the account of the Battle with Nayan (i. p. 337) this class
alone speaks of the two-stringed instruments which the Tartars
played whilst awaiting the signal for battle. But the circumstance
appears elsewhere in the G. T. (p. 250).

In the chapter on _Malabar_ (vol. ii. p. 390), it is said that the
ships which go with cargoes towards Alexandria are not one-tenth of
those that go to the further East. This is not in the older French.

In the chapter on _Coilun_ (ii. p. 375), we have a notice of the
Columbine ginger so celebrated in the Middle Ages, which is also
absent from the older text.

[4] See vol. ii. p. 439. It is, however, remarkable that a like mistake
is made about the Persian Gulf (see i. 63, 64). Perhaps Polo
_thought_ in Persian, in which the word _darya_ means either _sea_
or a _large river_. The same habit and the ambiguity of the Persian
_sher_ led him probably to his confusion of lions and tigers (see
i. 397).

[5] Such are Pasciai-_Dir_ and _Ariora_ Kesciemur (i. p. 98.)

[6] Thus the MSS. of this type have elected the erroneous readings
_Bolgara, Cogatra, Chiato, Cabanant_, etc., instead of the
correcter _Bolgana, Cocacin, Quiacatu, Cobinan_, where the G. T.
presents both (_supra_, p. _86_). They read _Esanar_ for the
correct _Etzina_; _Chascun_ for _Casvin_; _Achalet_ for _Acbalec_;
_Sardansu_ for _Sindafu_, _Kayteu, Kayton, Sarcon_ for _Zaiton_ or
_Caiton_; _Soucat_ for _Locac_; _Falec_ for _Ferlec_, and so on,
the worse instead of the better. They make the _Mer Occeane_ into
_Mer Occident_; the wild asses (_asnes_) of the Kerman Desert into
wild geese (_oes_); the _escoillez_ of Bengal (ii. p. 115) into
_escoliers_; the _giraffes_ of Africa into _girofles_, or cloves,
etc., etc.

[7] There are about five-and-thirty such passages altogether.

[8] The Bern MS. I have satisfied myself is an actual _copy_ of the
Paris MS. C.

The Oxford MS. closely resembles both, but I have not made the
comparison minutely enough to say if it is an exact copy of either.

[9] The following comparison will also show that these two Latin
versions have probably had a common source, such as is here
suggested.

At the end of the Prologue the Geographic Text reads simply:—

“Or puis que je voz ai contez tot le fat dou prolegue ensi con voz
avés oï, adonc (commencerai) le Livre.”

Whilst the Geographic Latin has:—

“_Postquam recitavimus et diximus facta et condictiones morum,
itinerum_ et ea quae nobis contigerunt per vias, _incipiemus dicere
ea quae vidimus. Et primo dicemus de Minore Hermenia_.”

And Pipino:—

“_Narratione facta nostri itineris, nunc ad ea narranda quae
vidimus accedamus. Primo autem Armeniam Minorem describemus
breviter_.”

[10] Friar Francesco Pipino of Bologna, a Dominican, is known also
as the author of a lengthy chronicle from the time of the Frank
Kings down to 1314; of a Latin Translation of the French History
of the Conquest of the Holy Land, by Bernard the Treasurer; and of
a short Itinerary of a Pilgrimage to Palestine in 1320. Extracts
from the Chronicle, and the version of Bernard, are printed in
Muratori’s Collection. As Pipino states himself to have executed
the translation of Polo by order of his Superiors, it is probable
that the task was set him at a general chapter of the order which
was held at Bologna in 1315. (See _Muratori_, IX. 583; and _Quétif,
Script. Ord. Praed._ I. 539). We do not know why Ramusio assigned
the translation specifically to 1320, but he may have had grounds.

[11] See _Bianconi_, 1st Mem. 29 _seqq._

[12] C. Dickens somewhere narrates the history of the equivalents
for a sovereign as changed and rechanged at every frontier on
a continental tour. The final equivalent received at Dover on
his return was some 12 or 13 shillings; a fair parallel to the
comparative value of the first and last copies in the circle of
translation.

[13] The Ramusios were a family of note in literature for several
generations. Paolo, the father of Gian Battista, came originally
from Rimini to Venice in 1458, and had a great repute as a jurist,
besides being a littérateur of some eminence, as was also his
younger brother Girolamo. G. B. Ramusio was born at Treviso in
1485, and early entered the public service. In 1533 he became one
of the Secretaries of the Council of X. He was especially devoted
to geographical studies, and had a school for such studies in his
house. He retired eventually from public duties, and lived at
Villa Ramusia, near Padua. He died in the latter city, 10th July,
1557, but was buried at Venice in the Church of S. Maria dell’Orto.
There was a portrait of him by Paul Veronese in the Hall of the
Great Council, but it perished in the fire of 1577; and that
which is now seen in the Sala dello Scudo is, like the companion
portrait of Marco Polo, imaginary. Paolo Ramusio, his son, was the
author of the well-known History of the Capture of Constantinople.
(_Cicogna_, II. 310 _seqq._)

[14] The old French texts were unknown in Marsden’s time. Hence this
question did not present itself to him.

[15] _Wangcheu_ in the Chinese Annals; _Vanchu_ in Ramusio. I assume
that Polo’s _Vanchu_ was pronounced as in English; for in Venetian
the _ch_ very often has that sound. But I confess that I can adduce
no other instance in Ramusio where I suppose it to have this
sound, except in the initial sound of _Chinchitalas_ and twice in
_Choiach_ (see II. 364).

Professor Bianconi, who has treated the questions connected with the
Texts of Polo with honest enthusiasm and laborious detail, will
admit nothing genuine in the Ramusian interpolations beyond the
preservation of some _oral traditions_ of Polo’s supplementary
recollections. But such a theory is out of the question in face of
a chapter like that on Ahmad.

[16] Old Purchas appears to have greatly relished Ramusio’s comparative
lucidity: “I found (says he) this Booke translated by Master
Hakluyt out of the Latine (_i.e._ among Hakluyt’s MS. collections).
But where the blind leade the blind both fall: as here the corrupt
_Latine_ could not but yeeld a corruption of truth in _English_.
Ramusio, Secretarie to the _Decemviri_ in _Venice_, found a better
Copie and published the same, whence you have the worke in manner
new: so renewed, that I have found the Proverbe true, that it is
better to pull downe an old house and to build it anew, then to
repaire it; as I also should have done, had I knowne that which in
the event I found. The _Latine_ is Latten, compared to _Ramusio’s_
Gold. And hee which hath the _Latine_ hath but _Marco Polo’s_
carkasse or not so much, but a few bones, yea, sometimes stones
rather then bones; things divers, averse, adverse, perverted in
manner, disjoynted in manner, beyond beliefe. I have seene some
Authors maymed, but never any so mangled and so mingled, so present
and so absent, as this vulgar _Latine_ of _Marco Polo_; not so like
himselfe, as the Three _Polo’s_ were at their returne to _Venice_,
where none knew them.... Much are wee beholden to _Ramusio_, for
restoring this _Pole_ and Load-starre of _Asia_, out of that mirie
poole or puddle in which he lay drouned.” (III. p. 65.)

[17] Of these difficulties the following are some of the more
prominent:—

1. The mention of the death of Kúblái (see note 7, p. 38 of this
volume), whilst throughout the book Polo speaks of Kúblái as if
still reigning.

2. Mr. Hugh Murray objects that whilst in the old texts Polo
appears to look on Kúblái with reverence as a faultless Prince, in
the Ramusian we find passages of an opposite tendency, as in the
chapter about Ahmad.

3. The same editor points to the manner in which one of the
Ramusian additions represents the traveller to have visited the
Palace of the Chinese Kings at Kinsay, which he conceives to be
inconsistent with Marco’s position as an official of the Mongol
Government. (See vol. ii. p. 208.)

If we could conceive the Ramusian additions to have been originally
notes written by old Maffeo Polo on his nephew’s book, this
hypothesis would remove almost all difficulty.

One passage in Ramusio seems to bear a reference to the date at
which these interpolated notes were amalgamated with the original.
In the chapter on Samarkand (i. p. 191) the conversion of the
Prince Chagatai is said in the old texts to have occurred “not a
great while ago” (_il ne a encore grament de tens_). But in Ramusio
the supposed event is fixed at “one hundred and twenty-five years
since.” This number could not have been uttered with reference to
1298, the year of the dictation at Genoa, nor to any year of Polo’s
own life. Hence it is probable that the original note contained a
date or definite term which was altered by the compiler to suit the
date of his own compilation, some time in the 14th century.

[18] In the first edition of Ramusio the preface contained the
following passage, which is omitted from the succeeding editions;
but as even the first edition was issued after Ramusio’s own death,
I do not see that any stress can be laid on this:

“A copy of the Book of Marco Polo, as it was originally written
in Latin, marvellously old, and perhaps directly copied from the
original as it came from M. Marco’s own hand, has been often
consulted by me and compared with that which we now publish, having
been lent me by a nobleman of this city, belonging to the Ca’
Ghisi.”

[19] For a moment I thought I had been lucky enough to light on a part
of the missing original of Ramusio in the Barberini Library at
Rome. A fragment of a Venetian version in that library (No. 56 in
our list of MSS.) bore on the fly-leaf the title “_Alcuni primi
capi del Libro di S. Marco Polo, copiati dall esemplare manoscritto
di PAOLO RANNUSIO._” But it proved to be of no importance. One
brief passage of those which have been thought peculiar to Ramusio,
viz., the reference to the Martyrdom of St. Blaize at Sebaste (see
p. 43 of this volume), is found also in the Geographic Latin.

It was pointed out by Lazari, that another passage (vol. i. p. 60)
of those otherwise peculiar to Ramusio, is found in a somewhat
abridged Latin version in a MS. which belonged to the late eminent
antiquary Emanuel Cicogna. (See List in Appendix F, No. 35.)
This fact induced me when at Venice in 1870 to examine the MS.
throughout, and, though I could give little time to it, the result
was very curious.

I find that this MS. contains, not one only, but at least _seven_
of the passages otherwise peculiar to Ramusio, and must have been
one of the elements that went to the formation of his text. Yet of
his more important interpolations, such as the chapter on Ahmad’s
oppressions and the additional matter on the City of Kinsay, there
is no indication. The seven passages alluded to are as follows; the
words corresponding to Ramusian peculiarities are in italics, the
references are to my own volumes.

1. In the chapter on Georgia:

“Mare quod dicitur Gheluchelan _vel ABACU_”....

“Est ejus stricta via et dubia. Ab una parte est mare _quod dixi de
ABACU_ et ab aliâ nemora invia,” etc. (See I. p. 59, note 8.)

2. “Et ibi optimi austures _dicti AVIGI_” (I. 50).

3. After the chapter on Mosul is another short chapter, already
alluded to:

“_Prope hanc civitatem (est) alia provincia dicta MUS e MEREDIEN in
quâ nascitur magna quantitas bombacis, et hic fiunt bocharini et
alia multa, et sunt mercatores homines et artiste_.” (See i. p. 60.)

4. In the chapter on _Tarcan_ (for Carcan, _i.e._ Yarkand):

“_Et maior pars horum habent unum ex pedibus grossum et habent
gosum in gulâ_; et est hic fertilis contracta.” (See i. p. 187.)

5. In the Desert of Lop:

“_Homines trasseuntes appendunt bestiis suis capanullas_ [_i.e._
campanellas] _ut ipsas senciant et ne deviare possint_” (i. p. 197.)

6. “Ciagannor, _quod sonat in Latino STAGNUM ALBUM_.” (i. p. 296.)

7. “Et in medio hujus viridarii est palacium sive logia, _tota
super columpnas. Et in summitate cujuslibet columnæ est draco
magnus circundans totam columpnam, et hic substinet eorum
cohoperturam cum ore et pedibus_; et est cohopertura tota de cannis
hoc modo,” etc. (See i. p. 299.)

[20] My valued friend Sir Arthur Phayre made known to me the passage
in _O’Curry’s Lectures_. I then procured the extracts and further
particulars from Mr. J. Long, Irish Transcriber and Translator
in Dublin, who took them from the Transcript of the _Book of
Lismore_, in the possession of the Royal Irish Academy. [Cf.
_Anecdota Oxoniensia. Lives of the Saints from the Book of
Lismore, edited with a translation ... by_ Whitley Stokes, Oxford,
1890.—_Marco Polo_ forms fo. 79 a, 1–fo. 89 b, 2, of the MS., and
is described pp. xxii.–xxiv. of Mr. Whitley Stokes’ Book, who has
since published the Text in the _Zeit. f. Celtische Philol._ (See
_Bibliography_, vol. ii. p. 573.)— H. C.]

XI. SOME ESTIMATE OF THE CHARACTER OF POLO AND HIS BOOK.

[Sidenote: Grounds of Polo’s pre-eminence among mediæval travellers.]

66. That Marco Polo has been so universally recognised as the King of
Mediæval Travellers is due rather to the width of his experience, the
vast compass of his journeys, and the romantic nature of his personal
history, than to transcendent superiority of character or capacity.

The generation immediately preceding his own has bequeathed to us, in
the Report of the Franciscan Friar William de Rubruquis,[1] on the
Mission with which St. Lewis charged him to the Tartar Courts, the
narrative of one great journey, which, in its rich detail, its vivid
pictures, its acuteness of observation and strong good sense, seems
to me to form a Book of Travels of much higher claims than _any one
series_ of Polo’s chapters; a book, indeed, which has never had justice
done to it, for it has few superiors in the whole Library of Travel.

Enthusiastic Biographers, beginning with Ramusio, have placed Polo on
the same platform with Columbus. But where has our Venetian Traveller
left behind him any trace of the genius and lofty enthusiasm, the
ardent and justified previsions which mark the great Admiral as one
of the lights of the human race?[2] It is a juster praise that the
spur which his Book eventually gave to geographical studies, and the
beacons which it hung out at the Eastern extremities of the Earth
helped to guide the aims, though scarcely to kindle the fire, of the
greater son of the rival Republic. His work was at least a link in the
Providential chain which at last dragged the New World to light.[3]

[Sidenote: His true claims to glory.]

67. Surely Marco’s real, indisputable, and, in their kind, unique
claims to glory may suffice! _He was the first Traveller to trace a
route across the whole longitude of_ ASIA, _naming and describing
kingdom after kingdom which he had seen with his own eyes; the Deserts
of_ PERSIA, _the flowering plateaux and wild gorges of_ BADAKHSHAN,
_the jade-bearing rivers of_ KHOTAN, _the_ MONGOLIAN _Steppes, cradle
of the power that had so lately threatened to swallow up Christendom,
the new and brilliant Court that had been established at_ CAMBALUC:
_The first Traveller to reveal_ CHINA _in all its wealth and vastness,
its mighty rivers, its huge cities, its rich manufactures, its swarming
population, the inconceivably vast fleets that quickened its seas and
its inland waters; to tell us of the nations on its borders with all
their eccentricities of manners and worship; of_ TIBET _with its sordid
devotees; of_ BURMA _with its golden pagodas and their tinkling crowns;
of_ LAOS, _of_ SIAM, _of_ COCHIN CHINA, _of_ JAPAN, _the Eastern Thule,
with its rosy pearls and golden-roofed palaces; the first to speak
of that Museum of Beauty and Wonder, still so imperfectly ransacked,
the_ INDIAN ARCHIPELAGO, _source of those aromatics then so highly
prized and whose origin was so dark; of_ JAVA _the Pearl of Islands;
of_ SUMATRA _with its many kings, its strange costly products, and its
cannibal races; of the naked savages of_ NICOBAR _and_ ANDAMAN; _of_
CEYLON _the Isle of Gems with its Sacred Mountain and its Tomb of Adam;
of_ INDIA THE GREAT, _not as a dream-land of Alexandrian fables, but
as a country seen and partially explored, with its virtuous Brahmans,
its obscene ascetics, its diamonds and the strange tales of their
acquisition, its sea-beds of pearl, and its powerful sun; the first in
mediæval times to give any distinct account of the secluded Christian
Empire of_ ABYSSINIA, _and the semi-Christian Island of_ SOCOTRA; _to
speak, though indeed dimly, of_ ZANGIBAR _with its negroes and its
ivory, and of the vast and distant_ MADAGASCAR, _bordering on the Dark
Ocean of the South, with its Ruc and other monstrosities; and, in a
remotely opposite region, of_ SIBERIA _and the_ ARCTIC OCEAN, _of
dog-sledges, white bears, and reindeer-riding Tunguses_.

That all this rich catalogue of discoveries should belong to the
revelations of one Man and one Book is surely ample ground enough to
account for and to justify the Author’s high place in the roll of Fame,
and there can be no need to exaggerate his greatness, or to invest him
with imaginary attributes.[4]

[Sidenote: His personal attributes seen but dimly.]

68. What manner of man was Ser Marco? It is a question hard to answer.
Some critics cry out against personal detail in books of Travel; but as
regards him who would not welcome a little more egotism! In his Book
impersonality is carried to excess; and we are often driven to discern
by indirect and doubtful indications alone, whether he is speaking of
a place from personal knowledge or only from hearsay. In truth, though
there are delightful exceptions, and nearly every part of the book
suggests interesting questions, a desperate meagreness and baldness
does extend over considerable tracts of the story. In fact his book
reminds us sometimes of his own description of Khorasan:—“_On chevauche
par beaus plains et belles costieres, là où il a moult beaus herbages
et bonne pasture et fruis assez.... Et aucune fois y treuve l’en un
desert de soixante milles ou de mains, esquels desers ne treuve l’en
point d’eaue; mais la convient porter o lui!_”

Still, some shadowy image of the man may be seen in the Book; a
practical man, brave, shrewd, prudent, keen in affairs, and never
losing his interest in mercantile details, very fond of the chase,
sparing of speech; with a deep wondering respect for Saints, even
though they be Pagan Saints, and their asceticism, but a contempt for
Patarins and such like, whose consciences would not run in customary
grooves, and on his own part a keen appreciation of the World’s pomps
and vanities. See, on the one hand, his undisguised admiration of
the hard life and long fastings of Sakya Muni; and on the other how
enthusiastic he gets in speaking of the great Kaan’s command of the
good things of the world, but above all of his matchless opportunities
of sport![5]

Of humour there are hardly any signs in his Book. His almost solitary
joke (I know but one more, and it pertains to the οὐκ ἀνήκοντα)
occurs in speaking of the Kaan’s paper-money when he observes that
Kúblái might be said to have the true Philosopher’s Stone, for he
made his money at pleasure out of the bark of Trees.[6] Even the
oddest eccentricities of outlandish tribes scarcely seem to disturb
his gravity; as when he relates in his brief way of the people called
Gold-Teeth on the frontier of Burma, that ludicrous custom which Mr.
Tylor has so well illustrated under the name of the _Couvade_. There is
more savour of laughter in the few lines of a Greek Epic, which relate
precisely the same custom of a people on the Euxine:—

————“In the Tibarenian Land
When some good woman bears her lord a babe,
’Tis _he_ is swathed and groaning put to bed;
Whilst _she_, arising, tends his baths, and serves
Nice possets for her husband in the straw.”[7]

[Illustration: Probable View OF MARCO POLO’S OWN GEOGRAPHY

Lit. Frauenfelder, Palermo]

[Sidenote: Absence of scientific notions.]

69. Of scientific notions, such as we find in the unveracious
Maundevile, we have no trace in truthful Marco. The former, “lying with
a circumstance,” tells us boldly that he was in 33° of South Latitude;
the latter is full of wonder that some of the Indian Islands where he
had been lay so far to the south that you lost sight of the Pole-star.
When it rises again on his horizon he estimates the Latitude by the
Pole-star’s being so many _cubits_ high. So the gallant Baber speaks
of the sun having mounted _spear-high_ when the onset of battle began
at Paniput. Such expressions convey no notion at all to such as have
had their ideas sophisticated by angular perceptions of altitude, but
similar expressions are common among Orientals,[8] and indeed I have
heard them from educated Englishmen. In another place Marco states
regarding certain islands in the Northern Ocean that they lie so
very far to the north that in going thither one actually leaves the
Pole-star a trifle behind towards the south; a statement to which we
know only one parallel, to wit, in the voyage of that adventurous Dutch
skipper who told Master Moxon, King Charles II.’s Hydrographer, that he
had sailed two degrees beyond the Pole!

[Sidenote: Map constructed on Polo’s data.]

70. The Book, however, is full of bearings and distances, and I have
thought it worth while to construct a map from its indications, in
order to get some approximation to Polo’s own idea of the face of that
world which he had traversed so extensively. There are three allusions
to maps in the course of his work (II. 245, 312, 424).

In his own bearings, at least on land journeys, he usually carries us
along a great general traverse line, without much caring about small
changes of direction. Thus on the great outward journey from the
frontier of Persia to that of China the line runs almost continuously
“_entre Levant et Grec_” or E.N.E. In his journey from Cambaluc or
Peking to Mien or Burma, it is always _Ponent_ or W.; and in that
from Peking to Zayton in Fo-kien, the port of embarkation for India,
it is _Sceloc_ or S.E. The line of bearings in which he deviates most
widely from truth is that of the cities on the Arabian Coast from Aden
to Hormuz, which he makes to run steadily _vers Maistre_ or N.W., a
conception which it has not been very easy to realise on the map.[9]

[Sidenote: Singular omissions of Polo in regard to China; Historical
inaccuracies.]

71. In the early part of the Book we are told that Marco acquired
several of the languages current in the Mongol Empire, and no less than
four written characters. We have discussed what these are likely to
have been (i. pp. 28–29), and have given a decided opinion that Chinese
was not one of them. Besides intrinsic improbability, and positive
indications of Marco’s ignorance of Chinese, in no respect is his
book so defective as in regard to Chinese manners and peculiarities.
The Great Wall is never mentioned, though we have shown reason for
believing that it was in his mind when one passage of his book was
dictated.[10] The use of Tea, though he travelled through the Tea
districts of Fo-kien, is never mentioned;[11] the compressed feet of
the women and the employment of the fishing cormorant (both mentioned
by Friar Odoric, the contemporary of his later years), artificial
egg-hatching, printing of books (though the notice of this art seems
positively challenged in his account of paper-money), besides a score
of remarkable arts and customs which one would have expected to recur
to his memory, are never alluded to. Neither does he speak of the great
characteristic of the Chinese writing. It is difficult to account
for these omissions, especially considering the comparative fulness
with which he treats the manners of the Tartars and of the Southern
Hindoos; but the impression remains that his associations in China
were chiefly with foreigners. Wherever the place he speaks of had a
Tartar or Persian name he uses that rather than the Chinese one. Thus
_Cathay_, _Cambaluc_, _Pulisanghin_, _Tangut_, _Chagannor_, _Saianfu_,
_Kenjanfu_, _Tenduc_, _Acbalec_, _Carajan_, _Zardandan_, _Zayton_,
_Kemenfu_, _Brius_, _Caramoran_, _Chorcha_, _Juju_, are all Mongol,
Turki, or Persian forms, though all have Chinese equivalents.[12]

In reference to the then recent history of Asia, Marco is often
inaccurate, _e.g._ in his account of the death of Chinghiz, in the list
of his successors, and in his statement of the relationship between
notable members of that House.[13] But the most perplexing knot in the
whole book lies in the interesting account which he gives of the Siege
of Sayanfu or Siang-yang, during the subjugation of Southern China by
Kúblái. I have entered on this matter in the notes (vol. ii. p. 167),
and will only say here that M. Pauthier’s solution of the difficulty
is no solution, being absolutely inconsistent with the story as told
by Marco himself, and that I see none; though I have so much faith in
Marco’s veracity that I am loath to believe that the facts admit of no
reconciliation.

Our faint attempt to appreciate some of Marco’s qualities, as gathered
from his work, will seem far below the very high estimates that have
been pronounced, not only by some who have delighted rather to enlarge
upon his frame than to make themselves acquainted with his work,[14]
but also by persons whose studies and opinions have been worthy of all
respect. Our estimate, however, does not abate a jot of our intense
interest in his Book and affection for his memory. And we have a strong
feeling that, owing partly to his reticence, and partly to the great
disadvantages under which the Book was committed to writing, we have in
it a singularly imperfect image of the Man.

[Sidenote: Was Polo’s Book materially affected by the Scribe
Rusticiano?]

72. A question naturally suggests itself, how far Polo’s narrative,
at least in its expression, was modified by passing under the pen of
a professed littérateur of somewhat humble claims, such as Rusticiano
was. The case is not a singular one, and in our own day the ill-judged
use of such assistance has been fatal to the reputation of an
adventurous Traveller.

We have, however, already expressed our own view that in the
Geographic Text we have the nearest possible approach to a photographic
impression of Marco’s oral narrative. If there be an exception to
this we should seek it in the descriptions of battles, in which we
find the narrator to fall constantly into a certain vein of bombastic
commonplaces, which look like the stock phrases of a professed
romancer, and which indeed have a strong resemblance to the actual
phraseology of certain metrical romances.[15] Whether this feature
be due to Rusticiano I cannot say, but I have not been able to trace
anything of the same character in a cursory inspection of some of his
romance-compilations. Still one finds it impossible to conceive of
our sober and reticent Messer Marco pacing the floor of his Genoese
dungeon, and seven times over rolling out this magniloquent bombast,
with sufficient deliberation to be overtaken by the pen of the faithful
amanuensis!

[Sidenote: Marco’s reading embraced the Alexandrian Romances. Examples.]

73. On the other hand, though Marco, who had left home at fifteen
years of age, naturally shows very few signs of reading, there are
indications that he had read romances, especially those dealing with
the fabulous adventures of Alexander.

To these he refers explicitly or tacitly in his notices of the Irongate
and of Gog and Magog, in his allusions to the marriage of Alexander
with Darius’s daughter, and to the battle between those two heroes,
and in his repeated mention of the _Arbre Sol_ or _Arbre Sec_ on the
Khorasan frontier.

The key to these allusions is to be found in that Legendary History
of Alexander, entirely distinct from the true history of the
Macedonian Conqueror, which in great measure took the place of the
latter in the imagination of East and West for more than a thousand
years. This fabulous history is believed to be of Græco-Egyptian
origin, and in its earliest extant compiled form, in the Greek of the
Pseudo-Callisthenes, can be traced back to at least about A.D. 200.
From the Greek its marvels spread eastward at an early date; some part
at least of their matter was known to Moses of Chorene, in the 5th
century;[16] they were translated into Armenian, Arabic, Hebrew, and
Syriac; and were reproduced in the verses of Firdusi and various other
Persian Poets; spreading eventually even to the Indian Archipelago,
and finding utterance in Malay and Siamese. At an early date they had
been rendered into Latin by Julius Valerius; but this work had probably
been lost sight of, and it was in the 10th century that they were
re-imported from Byzantium to Italy by the Archpriest Leo, who had
gone as Envoy to the Eastern Capital from John Duke of Campania.[17]
Romantic histories on this foundation, in verse and prose, became
diffused in all the languages of Western Europe, from Spain to
Scandinavia, rivalling in popularity the romantic cycles of the Round
Table or of Charlemagne. Nor did this popularity cease till the 16th
century was well advanced.

The heads of most of the Mediæval Travellers were crammed with these
fables as genuine history.[18] And by the help of that community of
legend on this subject which they found wherever Mahomedan literature
had spread, Alexander Magnus was to be traced everywhere in Asia.
Friar Odoric found Tana, near Bombay, to be the veritable City of King
Porus; John Marignolli’s vainglory led him to imitate King Alexander
in setting up a marble column “in the corner of the world over against
Paradise,” _i.e._ somewhere on the coast of Travancore; whilst Sir
John Maundevile, with a cheaper ambition, borrowed wonders from the
Travels of Alexander to adorn his own. Nay, even in after days, when
the Portuguese stumbled with amazement on those vast ruins in Camboja,
which have so lately become familiar to us through the works of Mouhot,
Thomson, and Garnier, they ascribed them to Alexander.[19]

Prominent in all these stories is the tale of Alexander’s shutting up
a score of impure nations, at the head of which were Gog and Magog,
within a barrier of impassable mountains, there to await the latter
days; a legend with which the disturbed mind of Europe not unnaturally
connected that cataclysm of unheard-of Pagans that seemed about to
deluge Christendom in the first half of the 13th century. In these
stories also the beautiful Roxana, who becomes the bride of Alexander,
is _Darius’s_ daughter, bequeathed to his arms by the dying monarch.
Conspicuous among them again is the Legend of the Oracular Trees of the
Sun and Moon, which with audible voice foretell the place and manner of
Alexander’s death. With this Alexandrian legend some of the later forms
of the story had mixed up one of Christian origin about the Dry Tree,
_L’Arbre Sec_. And they had also adopted the Oriental story of the Land
of Darkness and the mode of escape from it, which Polo relates at p.
484 of vol. ii.

[Sidenote: Injustice long done to Polo. Singular modern instance.]

74. We have seen in the most probable interpretation of the nickname
_Milioni_ that Polo’s popular reputation in his lifetime was of a
questionable kind; and a contemporary chronicler, already quoted,
has told us how on his death-bed the Traveller was begged by anxious
friends to retract his extraordinary stories.[20] A little later one
who copied the Book “_per passare tempo e malinconia_” says frankly
that he puts no faith in it.[21] Sir Thomas Brown is content “to carry
a wary eye” in reading “Paulus Venetus”; but others of our countrymen
in the last century express strong doubts whether he ever was in
Tartary or China.[22] Marden’s edition might well have extinguished
the last sparks of scepticism.[23] Hammer meant praise in calling Polo
“_der Vater orientalischer Hodogetik_,” in spite of the uncouthness of
the eulogy. But another grave German writer, ten years after Marsden’s
publication, put forth in a serious book that the whole story was a
clumsy imposture![24]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] M. d’Avezac has refuted the common supposition that this admirable
traveller was a native of Brabant.

The form _Rubruquis_ of the name of the traveller William de Rubruk
has been habitually used in this book, perhaps without sufficient
consideration, but it is the most familiar in England, from its
use by Hakluyt and Purchas. The former, who first published the
narrative, professedly printed from an imperfect MS. belonging to
the Lord Lumley, which does not seem to be now known. But all the
MSS. collated by Messrs. Francisque-Michel and Wright, in preparing
their edition of the Traveller, call him simply Willelmus de Rubruc
or Rubruk.

Some old authors, apparently without the slightest ground, having
called him _Risbroucke_ and the like, it came to be assumed that he
was a native of Ruysbroeck, a place in South Brabant.

But there is a place still called _Rubrouck_ in French Flanders.
This is a commune containing about 1500 inhabitants, belonging to
the Canton of Cassel and _arrondissement_ of Hazebrouck, in the
Department du Nord. And we may take for granted, till facts are
alleged against it, that _this_ was the place from which the envoy
of St. Lewis drew his origin. Many documents of the Middle Ages,
referring expressly to this place Rubrouck, exist in the Library
of St. Omer, and a detailed notice of them has been published by
M. Edm. Coussemaker, of Lille. Several of these documents refer
to persons bearing the same name as the Traveller, _e.g._, in 1190,
Thierry de Rubrouc; in 1202 and 1221, Gauthier du Rubrouc; in
1250, Jean du Rubrouc; and in 1258, Woutermann de Rubrouc. It is
reasonable to suppose that Friar William was of the same stock.
See _Bulletin de la Soc. de Géographie_, 2nd vol. for 1868, pp.
569–570, in which there are some remarks on the subject by M.
d’Avezac; and I am indebted to the kind courtesy of that eminent
geographer himself for the indication of this reference and the
main facts, as I had lost a note of my own on the subject.

It seems a somewhat complex question whether a native even of
_French_ Flanders at that time should be necessarily claimable
as a Frenchman;[A] but no doubt on this point is alluded to by
M. d’Avezac, so he probably had good ground for that assumption.
[See also _Yule’s_ article in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, and
_Rockhill’s Rubruck_, Int., p. xxxv.—H. C.]

That cross-grained Orientalist, I. J. Schmidt, on several occasions
speaks contemptuously of this veracious and delightful traveller,
whose evidence goes in the teeth of some of his crotchets. But I am
glad to find that Professor Peschel takes a view similar to that
expressed in the text: “The narrative of Ruysbroek [Rubruquis],
almost immaculate in its freedom from fabulous insertions, may
be indicated on account of its truth to nature as the greatest
geographical masterpiece of the Middle Ages.” (_Gesch. der
Erdkunde_, 1865, p. 151.)

[A] The County of Flanders was at this time in large part a fief of
the French Crown. (See _Natalis de Wailly_, notes to Joinville,
p. 576.) But that would not much affect the question either one
way or the other.

[2] High as Marco’s name deserves to be set, his place is not beside
the writer of such burning words as these addressed to Ferdinand
and Isabella: “From the most tender age I went to sea, and to
this day I have continued to do so. Whosoever devotes himself to
this craft must desire to know the secrets of Nature here below.
For 40 years now have I thus been engaged, and wherever man has
sailed hitherto on the face of the sea, thither have I sailed also.
I have been in constant relation with men of learning, whether
ecclesiastic or secular, Latins and Greeks, Jews and Moors, and
men of many a sect besides. To accomplish this my longing (to
know the Secrets of the World) I found the Lord favourable to my
purposes; it is He who hath given me the needful disposition and
understanding. He bestowed upon me abundantly the knowledge of
seamanship: and of Astronomy He gave me enough to work withal,
and so with Geometry and Arithmetic.... In the days of my youth
I studied works of all kinds, history, chronicles, philosophy,
and other arts, and to apprehend these the Lord opened my
understanding. Under His manifest guidance I navigated hence to the
Indies; for it was the Lord who gave me the will to accomplish that
task, and it was in the ardour of that will that I came before your
Highnesses. All those who heard of my project scouted and derided
it; all the acquirements I have mentioned stood me in no stead;
and if in your Highnesses, and in you alone, Faith and Constancy
endured, to Whom are due the Lights that have enlightened you as
well as me, but to the Holy Spirit?” (Quoted in _Humboldt’s Examen
Critique_, I. 17, 18.)

[3] Libri, however, speaks too strongly when he says: “The finest
of all the results due to the influence of Marco Polo is that
of having stirred Columbus to the discovery of the New World.
Columbus, jealous of Polo’s laurels, spent his life in preparing
means to get to that Zipangu of which the Venetian traveller had
told such great things; his desire was to reach China by sailing
westward, and in his way he fell in with America.” (_H. des
Sciences Mathém._ etc. II. 150.)

The fact seems to be that Columbus knew of Polo’s revelations only
at second hand, from the letters of the Florentine Paolo Toscanelli
and the like; and I cannot find that he _ever_ refers to Polo by
name. [How deep was the interest taken by Colombus in Marco Polo’s
travels is shown by the numerous marginal notes of the Admiral in
the printed copy of the latin version of Pipino kept at the Bib.
Colombina at Seville. See _Appendix H_. p. 558.—H. C.] Though to
the day of his death he was full of imaginations about Zipangu and
the land of the Great Kaan as being in immediate proximity to his
discoveries, these were but accidents of his great theory. It was
the intense conviction he had acquired of the absolute smallness
of the Earth, of the vast extension of Asia eastward, and of the
consequent narrowness of the Western Ocean, on which his life’s
project was based. This conviction he seems to have derived
chiefly from the works of Cardinal Pierre d’Ailly. But the latter
borrowed his collected arguments from Roger Bacon, who has stated
them, erroneous as they are, very forcibly in his _Opus Majus_ (p.
137), as Humboldt has noticed in his _Examen_ (vol. i. p. 64). The
Spanish historian Mariana makes a strange jumble of the alleged
guides of Columbus, saying that some ascribed his convictions
to “the information given by _one Marco Polo, a Florentine
Physician!_” (“como otros dizen, por aviso que le dio _un cierto
Marco Polo, Medico Florentin_;” _Hist. de España_, lib. xxvi. cap
3). Toscanelli is called by Columbus _Maestro Paulo_, which seems
to have led to this mistake; see Sign. _G. Uzielli_, in _Boll.
della Soc. Geog. Ital._ IX. p. 119. [Also by the same: _Paolo dal
Pozzo Toscanelli iniziatore della scoperta d’America_, Florence,
1892; _Toscanelli_, No. 1; _Toscanelli_, Vol. V. of the _Raccolta
Colombiana_, 1894.—H. C.]

[4] “C’est diminuer l’expression d’un éloge que de l’exagérer.”
(_Humboldt, Examen_, III. 13.)

[5] See vol. ii. p. 318, and vol. i. p. 404.

[6] Vol. i. p. 423.

[7] Vol. ii. p. 85, and _Apollonius Rhodius, Argonaut_. II. 1012.

[8] Chinese Observers record the length of Comets’ tails by _cubits_!

[9] The map, perhaps, gives too favourable an idea of Marco’s
geographical conceptions. For in such a construction much has to
be supplied for which there are no data, and that is apt to take
mould from modern knowledge. Just as in the book illustrations of
ninety years ago we find that Princesses of Abyssinia, damsels of
Otaheite, and Beauties of Mary Stuart’s Court have all somehow a
savour of the high waists, low foreheads, and tight garments of
1810.

We are told that Prince Pedro of Portugal in 1426 received from the
Signory of Venice a map which was supposed to be either an original
or a copy of one by Marco Polo’s own hand. (_Major’s P. Henry_, p.
62.) There is no evidence to justify any absolute expression of
disbelief; and if any map-maker with the spirit of the author of
the Carta Catalana then dwelt in Venice, Polo certainly could not
have gone to his grave uncatechised. But I should suspect the map
to have been a copy of the old one that existed in the Sala dello
Scudo of the Ducal Palace.

The maps now to be seen painted on the walls of that Hall, and on
which Polo’s route is marked, are not of any great interest. But in
the middle of the 15th century there was an old _Descriptio Orbis
sive Mappamundus_ in the Hall, and when the apartment was renewed
in 1459 a decree of the Senate ordered that such a map should be
repainted on the new walls. This also perished by a fire in 1483.
On the motion of Ramusio, in the next century, four new maps were
painted. These had become dingy and ragged, when, in 1762, the Doge
Marco Foscarini caused them to be renewed by the painter Francesco
Grisellini. He professed to have adhered closely to the old maps,
but he certainly did not, as Morelli testifies. Eastern Asia looks
as if based on a work of Ramusio’s age, but Western Asia is of
undoubtedly modern character. (See _Operetti di Iacopo Morelli_,
Ven. 1820, I. 299.)

[10] “Humboldt confirms the opinion I have more than once expressed
that too much must not be inferred from the silence of authors. He
adduces three important and perfectly undeniable matters of fact,
as to which no evidence is to be found where it would be most
anticipated: In the archives of Barcelona no trace of the triumphal
entry of Columbus into that city; _in Marco Polo no allusion to
the Chinese Wall_; in the archives of Portugal nothing about
the voyages of Amerigo Vespucci in the service of that crown.”
(_Varnhagen_ v. _Ense_, quoted by Hayward, _Essays_, 2nd Ser. I.
36.) See regarding the Chinese Wall the remarks referred to above,
at p. 292 of this volume.

[11] [It is a strange fact that Polo never mentions the use of _Tea_
in China, although he travelled through the Tea districts in Fu
Kien, and tea was then as generally drunk by the Chinese as it
is now. It is mentioned more than four centuries earlier by the
Mohammedan merchant Soleyman, who visited China about the middle of
the 9th century. He states (_Reinaud, Relation des Voyages faits
par les Arabes et les Persans dans l’Inde et à la Chine_, 1845,
I. 40): “The people of China are accustomed to use as a beverage
an infusion of a plant, which they call _sakh_, and the leaves of
which are aromatic and of a bitter taste. It is considered very
wholesome. This plant (the leaves) is sold in all the cities of the
empire.” (_Bretschneider, Hist. Bot. Disc._ I. p. 5.)—H. C.]

[12] It is probable that Persian, which had long been the language of
Turanian courts, was also the common tongue of foreigners at that
of the Mongols. _Pulisanghin_ and _Zardandan_, in the preceding
list, are pure Persian. So are several of the Oriental phrases
noted at p. _84_. See also notes on _Ondanique_ and _Vernique_ at
pp. 93 and 384 of this volume, on _Tacuin_ at p. 448, and a note
at p. _93_ _supra_. The narratives of Odoric, and others of the
early travellers to Cathay, afford corroborative examples. Lord
Stanley of Alderley, in one of his contributions to the Hakluyt
Series, has given evidence from experience that Chinese Mahomedans
still preserve the knowledge of numerous Persian words.

[13] Compare these errors with like errors of Herodotus, _e.g._,
regarding the conspiracy of the False Smerdis. (See Rawlinson’s
Introduction, p. 55.) There is a curious parallel between the two
also in the supposed occasional use of Oriental state records, as
in Herodotus’s accounts of the revenues of the satrapies, and of
the army of Xerxes, and in Marco Polo’s account of Kinsay, and of
the Kaan’s revenues. (Vol. ii pp. 185, 216.)

[14] An example is seen in the voluminous _Annali Musulmani_ of _G.
B. Rampoldi_, Milan, 1825. This writer speaks of the Travels of
Marco Polo with his _brother_ and uncle; declares that he visited
_Tipango_ (_sic_), Java, Ceylon, and the _Maldives_, collected all
the geographical notions of his age, traversed the two peninsulas
of the Indies, examined the islands of _Socotra, Madagascar,
Sofala_, and traversed with _philosophic eye_ the regions of
Zanguebar, Abyssinia, Nubia, and Egypt! and so forth (ix. 174).
And whilst Malte-Brun bestows on Marco the sounding and ridiculous
title of “_the Humboldt of the 13th century_,” he shows little real
acquaintance with his Book. (See his _Précis_, ed. of 1836, I. 551
_seqq._)

[15] See for example vol. i. p. 338, and note 4 at p. 341; also vol.
ii. p. 103. The descriptions in the style referred to recur in all
seven times; but most of them (which are in Book IV.) have been
omitted in this translation.

[16] [On the subject of Moses of Chorene and his works, I must refer to
the clever researches of the late Auguste Carrière, Professor of
Armenian at the École des Langues Orientales.—H. C.]

[17] _Zacher, Forschungen zur Critik, &c., der Alexandersage_, Halle,
1867, p. 108.

[18] Even so sagacious a man as Roger Bacon quotes the fabulous letter
of Alexander to Aristotle as authentic. (_Opus Majus_, p. 137.)

[19] _J. As._ sér. VI. tom. xviii. p. 352.

[20] See passage from Jacopo d’Acqui, _supra_, p. _54_.

[21] It is the transcriber of one of the Florence MSS. who appends
this terminal note, worthy of Mrs. Nickleby:—“Here ends the Book
of Messer M. P. of Venice, written with mine own hand by me Amalio
Bonaguisi when Podestà of Cierreto Guidi, to get rid of time and
_ennui_. The contents seem to me incredible things, not lies so
much as miracles; and it may be all very true what he says, but
I don’t believe it; though to be sure throughout the world very
different things are found in different countries. But these
things, it has seemed to me in copying, are entertaining enough,
but not things to believe or put any faith in; that at least is my
opinion. And I finished copying this at Cierreto aforesaid, 12th
November, A.D. 1392.”

[22] _Vulgar Errors_, Bk. I. ch. viii.; _Astley’s Voyages_, IV. 583.

[23] A few years before Marsden’s publication, the Historical branch of
the R. S. of Science at Göttingen appears to have put forth as the
subject of a prize Essay the Geography of the Travels of Carpini,
Rubruquis, and especially of Marco Polo. (See _L. of M. Polo_, by
_Zurla_, in _Collezione di Vite e Ritratti d’Illustri Italiani_.
Pad. 1816.)

[24] See _Städtewesen des Mittelalters_, by _K. D. Hüllmann_, Bonn,
1829, vol. iv.

After speaking of the Missions of Pope Innocent IV. and St.
Lewis, this author sketches the Travels of the Polos, and then
proceeds:—“Such are the clumsily compiled contents of this
ecclesiastical fiction (_Kirchengeschichtlichen Dichtung_)
disguised as a Book of Travels, a thing devised generally in the
spirit of the age, but specially in the interests of the Clergy
and of Trade.... This compiler’s aim was analogous to that of
the inventor of the Song of Roland, to kindle enthusiasm for the
conversion of the Mongols, and so to facilitate commerce through
their dominions.... Assuredly the Poli never got further than Great
Bucharia, which was then reached by many Italian Travellers. What
they have related of the regions of the Mongol Empire lying further
east consists merely of recollections of the bazaar and travel-talk
of traders from those countries; whilst the notices of India,
Persia, Arabia, and Ethiopia, are borrowed from Arabic Works. The
compiler no doubt carries his audacity in fiction a long way, when
he makes his hero Marcus assert that he had been seventeen years in
Kúblái’s service,” etc. etc. (pp. 360–362).

In the French edition of _Malcolm’s History of Persia_ (II. 141),
Marco is styled “_prêtre Venetien_”! I do not know whether this is
due to Sir John or to the translator.

[Polo is also called “a Venetian Priest,” in a note, vol. i., p.
409, of the original edition of London, 1815, 2 vols., 4to.—H. C.]

XII. CONTEMPORARY RECOGNITION OF POLO AND HIS BOOK.

[Sidenote: How far was there diffusion of his Book in his own day?]

75. But we must return for a little to Polo’s own times. Ramusio
states, as we have seen, that immediately after the first commission of
Polo’s narrative to writing (in Latin as he imagined), many copies of
it were made, it was translated into the vulgar tongue, and in a few
months all Italy was full of it.

The few facts that we can collect do not justify this view of the
rapid and diffused renown of the Traveller and his Book. The number
of MSS. of the latter dating from the 14th century is no doubt
considerable, but a large proportion of these are of Pipino’s condensed
Latin Translation, which was not put forth, if we can trust Ramusio,
till 1320, and certainly not much earlier. The whole number of MSS.
in various languages that we have been able to register, amounts to
about eighty. I find it difficult to obtain statistical data as to the
comparative number of copies of different works existing in manuscript.
With Dante’s great Poem, of which there are reckoned close upon 500
MSS.,[1] comparison would be inappropriate. But of the Travels of Friar
Odoric, a poor work indeed beside Marco Polo’s, I reckoned thirty-nine
MSS., and could now add at least three more to the list. [I described
seventy-three in my edition of _Odoric_.—H. C.] Also I find that of
the nearly contemporary work of Brunetto Latini, the _Tresor_, a sort
of condensed Encyclopædia of knowledge, but a work which one would
scarcely have expected to approach the popularity of Polo’s Book, the
Editor enumerates some fifty MSS. And from the great frequency with
which one encounters in Catalogues both MSS. and early printed editions
of Sir John Maundevile, I should suppose that the lying wonders of
our English Knight had a far greater popularity and more extensive
diffusion than the veracious and more sober marvels of Polo.[2] To
Southern Italy Polo’s popularity certainly does not seem at any time to
have extended. I cannot learn that any MS. of his Book exists in any
Library of the late Kingdom of Naples or in Sicily.[3]

Dante, who lived for twenty-three years after Marco’s work was
written, and who touches so many things in the seen and unseen Worlds,
never alludes to Polo, nor I think to anything that can be connected
with his Book. I believe that no mention of _Cathay_ occurs in the
_Divina Commedia_. That distant region is indeed mentioned more than
once in the poems of a humbler contemporary, Francesco da Barberino,
but there is nothing in his allusions besides this name to suggest any
knowledge of Polo’s work.[4]

Neither can I discover any trace of Polo or his work in that of his
contemporary and countryman, Marino Sanudo the Elder, though this
worthy is well acquainted with the somewhat later work of Hayton, and
many of the subjects which he touches in his own book would seem to
challenge a reference to Marco’s labours.

[Sidenote: Contemporary references to Polo.]

76. Of contemporary or nearly contemporary references to our Traveller
by name, the following are all that I can produce, and none of them are
new.

First there is the notice regarding his presentation of his book to
Thibault de Cepoy, of which we need say no more (_supra_, p. _68_).

Next there is the Preface to Friar Pipino’s Translation, which we give
at length in the Appendix (E) to these notices. The phraseology of this
appears to imply that Marco was still alive, and this agrees with the
date assigned to the work by Ramusio. Pipino was also the author of a
Chronicle, of which a part was printed by Muratori, and this contains
chapters on the Tartar wars, the destruction of the Old Man of the
Mountain, etc., derived from Polo. A passage not printed by Muratori
has been extracted by Prof. Bianconi from a MS. of this Chronicle in
the Modena Library, and runs as follows:—

“The matters which follow, concerning the magnificence of the
Tartar Emperors, whom in their language they call _Cham_ as we
have said, are related by Marcus Paulus the Venetian in a certain
Book of his which has been translated by me into Latin out of the
Lombardic Vernacular. Having gained the notice of the Emperor
himself and become attached to his service, he passed nearly 27
years in the Tartar countries.”[5]

Again we have that mention of Marco by Friar Jacopo d’Acqui, which
we have quoted in connection with his capture by the Genoese, at
p. _54_.[6] And the Florentine historian GIOVANNI VILLANI,[7] when
alluding to the Tartars, says:—

“Let him who would make full acquaintance with their history
examine the book of Friar Hayton, Lord of Colcos in Armenia, which
he made at the instance of Pope Clement V., and also the Book
called _Milione_ which was made by Messer Marco Polo of Venice,
who tells much about their power and dominion, having spent a long
time among them. And so let us quit the Tartars and return to our
subject, the History of Florence.”[8]

[Sidenote: Further contemporary references.]

77. Lastly, we learn from a curious passage in a medical work by PIETRO
OF ABANO, a celebrated physician and philosopher, and a man of Polo’s
own generation, that he was personally acquainted with the Traveller.
In a discussion on the old notion of the non-habitability of the
Equatorial regions, which Pietro controverts, he says:[9]

[Illustration: Star at the Antarctic as sketched by Marco Polo[10].]

“In the country of the ZINGHI there is seen a star as big as a
sack. I know a man who has seen it, and he told me it had a faint
light like a piece of a cloud, and is always in the south.[11] I
have been told of this and other matters by MARCO the Venetian, the
most extensive traveller and the most diligent inquirer whom I have
ever known. He saw this same star under the Antarctic; he described
it as having a great tail, and drew a figure of it _thus_. He
also told me that he saw the Antarctic Pole at an altitude above
the earth apparently equal to the length of a soldier’s lance,
whilst the Arctic Pole was as much below the horizon. ’Tis from
that place, he says, that they export to us camphor, lign-aloes,
and brazil. He says the heat there is intense, and the habitations
few. And these things he witnessed in a certain island at which he
arrived by Sea. He tells me also that there are (wild?) men there,
and also certain very great rams that have very coarse and stiff
wool just like the bristles of our pigs.”[12]

In addition to these five I know no other contemporary references to
Polo, nor indeed any other within the 14th century, though such there
must surely be, excepting in a Chronicle written after the middle of
that century by JOHN of YPRES, Abbot of St. Bertin, otherwise known
as Friar John the Long, and himself a person of very high merit in
the history of Travel, as a precursor of the Ramusios, Hakluyts and
Purchases, for he collected together and translated (when needful) into
French all of the most valuable works of Eastern Travel and Geography
produced in the age immediately preceding his own.[13] In his Chronicle
the Abbot speaks at some length of the adventures of the Polo Family,
concluding with a passage to which we have already had occasion to
refer:

“And so Messers Nicolaus and Maffeus, with certain Tartars, were
sent a second time to these parts; but Marcus Pauli was retained by
the Emperor and employed in his military service, abiding with him
for a space of 27 years. And the Cham, on account of his ability
despatched him upon affairs of his to various parts of Tartary
and India and the Islands, on which journeys he beheld many of
the marvels of those regions. And concerning these he afterwards
composed a book in the French vernacular, which said Book of
Marvels, with others of the same kind, we do possess.” (_Thesaur.
Nov. Anecdot._ III. 747.)

[Sidenote: Curious borrowings from Polo in the Romance of Bauduin de
Sebourc.]

78. There is, however, a notable work which is ascribed to a rather
early date in the 14th century, and which, though it contains no
reference to Polo by name, shows a thorough acquaintance with his book,
and borrows themes largely from it. This is the poetical Romance of
Bauduin de Sebourc, an exceedingly clever and vivacious production,
partaking largely of that bantering, half-mocking spirit which is,
I believe, characteristic of many of the later mediæval French
Romances.[14] Bauduin is a knight who, after a very wild and loose
youth, goes through an extraordinary series of adventures, displaying
great faith and courage, and eventually becomes King of Jerusalem. I
will cite some of the traits evidently derived from our Traveller,
which I have met with in a short examination of this curious work.

Bauduin, embarked on a dromond in the Indian Sea, is wrecked in the
territory of Baudas, and near a city called Falise, which stands on the
River of Baudas. The people of this city were an unbelieving race.

“Il ne créoient Dieu, Mahon, né Tervogant,
Ydole, cruchéfis, déable, né tirant.” P. 300.

Their only belief was this, that when a man died a great fire should be
made beside his tomb, in which should be burned all his clothes, arms,
and necessary furniture, whilst his horse and servant should be put to
death, and then the dead man would have the benefit of all these useful
properties in the other world.[15] Moreover, if it was the king that
died—

“Sé li rois de la terre i aloit trespassant,
* * * * *
Si fasoit-on tuer, .viij. jour en un tenant,
Tout chiaus c’on encontroit par la chité passant,
Pour tenir compaingnie leur ségnor soffisant.
Telle estoit le créanche ou païs dont je cant!”[16] P. 301.

Baudin arrives when the king has been dead three days, and through
dread of this custom all the people of the city are shut up in their
houses. He enters an inn, and helps himself to a vast repast, having
been fasting for three days. He is then seized and carried before the
king, Polibans by name. We might have quoted this prince at p. _87_ as
an instance of the diffusion of the French tongue:

“Polibans sot Fransois, car on le doctrina:
j. renoiés de Franche .vij. ans i demora,
Qui li aprist Fransois, si que bel en parla.” P. 309.

Bauduin exclaims against their barbarous belief, and declares the
Christian doctrine to the king, who acknowledges good points in it, but
concludes:

“Vassaus, dist Polibans, à le chière hardie,
Jà ne crerrai vou Dieux, à nul jour de ma vie;
Né vostre Loy ne vaut une pomme pourie!” P. 311.

Bauduin proposes to prove his Faith by fighting the prince, himself
unarmed, the latter with all his arms. The prince agrees, but is rather
dismayed at Bauduin’s confidence, and desires his followers, in case
of his own death, to burn with him horses, armour, etc., asking at the
same time which of them would consent to burn along with him, in order
to be his companions in the other world:

“Là en i ot .ijᵉ. dont cascuns s’escria:
Nous morons volentiers, quant vo corps mort sara!”[17] P. 313.

Bauduin’s prayer for help is miraculously granted; Polibans is beaten,
and converted by a vision. He tells Bauduin that in his neighbourhood,
beyond Baudas—

“ou .v. liewes, ou .vi.
Ché un felles prinches, orgoellieus et despis;
De la Rouge-Montaingne est Prinches et Marchis.
Or vous dirai comment il a ses gens nouris:
Je vous di que chius Roys a fait un Paradis
Tant noble et gratieus, et plain de tels déliis,
* * * * *
Car en che Paradis est un riex establis,
Qui se partist en trois, en che noble pourpris:
En l’un coert li clarés, d’espises bien garnis;
Et en l’autre li miés, qui les a resouffis;
Et li vins di pieument i queurt par droit avis—
* * * * *
Il n’i vente, né gèle. Che liés est de samis,
De riches dras de soie, bien ouvrés à devis.
Et aveukes tout che que je chi vous devis,
I a .ijᵉ. puchelles qui moult ont cler les vis,
Carolans et tresquans, menans gales et ris.
Et si est li dieuesse, dame et suppellatis,
Qui doctrine les autres et en fais et en dis,
Celle est la fille au Roy c’on dist des _Haus-Assis_.”[18]
Pp. 319–320.

This Lady Ivorine, the Old Man’s daughter, is described among other
points as having—

“Les iex vairs com faucons, nobles et agentis.”[19] P. 320.

The King of the Mountain collects all the young male children of the
country, and has them brought up for nine or ten years:

“Dedens un lieu oscur: là les met-on toudis
Aveukes males bestes; kiens, et cas, et soris,
Culoères, et lisaerdes, escorpions petis.
Là endroit ne peut nuls avoir joie, né ris.” Pp. 320–321.

And after this dreary life they are shown the Paradise, and told that
such shall be their portion if they do their Lord’s behest.

“S’il disoit à son homme: ‘Va-t-ent droit à Paris;
Si me fier d’un coutel le Roy de Saint Denis,
Jamais n’aresteroit, né par nuit né par dis,
S’aroit tué le Roy, voïant tous ches marchis;
Et déuist estre à fources traïnés et mal mis.’” P. 321.

Bauduin determines to see this Paradise and the lovely Ivorine. The
road led by Baudas:

“Or avoit à che tamps, sé l’istoire ne ment,
En le chit de Baudas Kristiens jusqu’à cent;
Qui manonent illoec par tréu d’argent,
Que cascuns cristiens au Roy-Calife rent.
Li pères du Calife, qui régna longement,
Ama les Crestiens, et Dieu primièrement:
* * * * *
Et lor fist establir. j. monstier noble et gent,
Où Crestien faisoient faire lor sacrement.
Une mout noble pière lor donna proprement,
Où on avoit posé Mahon moult longement.”[20] P. 322.

The story is, in fact, that which Marco relates of Samarkand.[21] The
Caliph dies. His son hates the Christians. His people complain of the
toleration of the Christians and their minister; but he says his father
had pledged him not to interfere, and he dared not forswear himself.
If, without doing so, he could do them an ill turn, he would gladly.
The people then suggest their claim to the stone:

“Or leur donna vos pères, dont che fu mesprisons.
Ceste pierre, biaus Sire, Crestiens demandons:
Il ne le porront rendre, pour vrai le vous disons,
Si li monstiers n’est mis et par pièches et par mons;
Et s’il estoit desfais, jamais ne le larons
Refaire chi-endroit. Ensément averons
Faites et acomplies nostres ententions.” P. 324.

The Caliph accordingly sends for Maistre Thumas, the Priest of the
Christians, and tells him the stone must be given up:

“Il a .c. ans ut plus c’on i mist à solas
Mahon, le nostre Dieu: dont che n’est mie estas
Que li vous monstiers soit fais de nostre harnas!” P. 324.

Master Thomas, in great trouble, collects his flock, mounts the pulpit,
and announces the calamity. Bauduin and his convert Polibans then
arrive. Bauduin recommends confession, fasting, and prayer. They follow
his advice, and on the third day the miracle occurs:

“L’escripture le dist, qui nous achertéfie
Que le pierre Mahon, qui ou mur fut fiquie,
Sali hors du piler, coi que nul vous en die,
Droit enmi le monstier, c’onques ne fut brisie.
Et demoura li traus, dont le pière ert widie,
Sans pière est sans quailliel, à cascune partie;
Chou deseure soustient, par divine maistrie,
Tout en air proprement, n’el tenés a falie.
Encore le voit-on en ichelle partie:
Qui croire ne m’en voelt, si voist; car je l’en prie!” P. 327.

The Caliph comes to see, and declares it to be the Devil’s doing.
Seeing Polibans, who is his cousin, he hails him, but Polibans draws
back, avowing his Christian faith. The Caliph in a rage has him off to
prison. Bauduin becomes very ill, and has to sell his horse and arms.
His disease is so offensive that he is thrust out of his hostel, and
in his wretchedness sitting on a stone he still avows his faith, and
confesses that even then he has not received his deserts. He goes to
beg in the Christian quarter, and no one gives to him; but still his
faith and love to God hold out:

“Ensément Bauduins chelle rue cherqua,
Tant qu’à .j. chavetier Bauduins s’arresta,
Qui chavates cousoit; son pain en garigna:
Jones fu et plaisans, apertement ouvra.
Bauduins le regarde, c’onques mot ne parla.” P. 334.

The cobler is charitable, gives him bread, shoes, and a grey coat that
was a foot too short. He then asks Bauduin if he will not learn his
trade; but that is too much for the knightly stomach:

“Et Bauduins respont, li preus et li membrus:
J’ameroie trop miex que je fuisse pendus!” P. 335.

The Caliph now in his Council expresses his vexation about the miracle,
and says he does not know how to disprove the faith of the Christians.
A very sage old Saracen who knew Hebrew, and Latin, and some thirty
languages, makes a suggestion, which is, in fact, that about the moving
of the Mountain, as related by Marco Polo.[22] Master Thomas is sent
for again, and told that they must transport the high mountain of
_Thir_ to the valley of _Joaquin_, which lies to the westward. He goes
away in new despair and causes his clerk to _sonner le clocke_ for his
people. Whilst they are weeping and wailing in the church, a voice
is heard desiring them to seek a certain holy man who is at the good
cobler’s, and to do him honour. God at his prayer will do a miracle.
They go in procession to Bauduin, who thinks they are mocking him. They
treat him as a saint, and strive to touch his old coat. At last he
consents to pray along with the whole congregation.

The Caliph is in his palace with his princes, taking his ease at a
window. Suddenly he starts up exclaiming:

“‘Seignour, par Mahoumet que j’aoure et tieng chier,
Le Mont de Thir enportent le déable d’enfeir!’
Li Califes s’écrie: ‘Seignour, franc palasin,
Voïés le Mont de Thir qui ch’est mis au chemin!
Vés-le-là tout en air, par mon Dieu Apolin;
Jà bientost le verrons ens ou val Joaquin!’” P. 345.

The Caliph is converted, releases Polibans, and is baptised, taking
the name of Bauduin, to whom he expresses his fear of the Viex de
la Montagne with his _Hauts-Assis_, telling anew the story of the
Assassin’s Paradise, and so enlarges on the beauty of Ivorine that
Bauduin is smitten, and his love heals his malady. Toleration is not
learned however:

“Bauduins, li Califes, fist baptisier sa gent,
Et qui ne voilt Dieu crore, li teste on li pourfent!” P. 350.

The Caliph gives up his kingdom to Bauduin, proposing to follow him to
the Wars of Syria. And Bauduin presents the Kingdom to the Cobler.

Bauduin, the Caliph, and Prince Polibans then proceed to visit the
Mountain of the Old Man. The Caliph professes to him that they want
help against Godfrey of Bouillon. The Viex says he does not give a
_bouton_ for Godfrey; he will send one of his _Hauts-Assis_ straight to
his tent, and give him a great knife of steel between _fie et poumon!_

After dinner they go out and witness the feat of devotion which we
have quoted elsewhere.[23] They then see the Paradise and the lovely
Ivorine, with whose beauty Bauduin is struck dumb. The lady had never
smiled before; now she declares that he for whom she had long waited
was come. Bauduin exclaims:

“‘Madame, fu-jou chou qui sui le vous soubgis?’
Quant la puchelle l’ot, lors li geta .j. ris;
Et li dist: ‘Bauduins, vous estes mes amis!’” Pp. 362–363.

The Old One is vexed, but speaks pleasantly to his daughter, who
replies with frightfully bad language, and declares herself to be a
Christian. The father calls out to the Caliph to kill her. The Caliph
pulls out a big knife and gives him a blow that nearly cuts him in two.
The amiable Ivorine says she will go with Bauduin:

“‘Sé mes pères est mors, n’en donne .j. paresis!’” P. 364.

We need not follow the story further, as I did not trace beyond this
point any distinct derivation from our Traveller, with the exception
of that allusion to the incombustible covering of the napkin of St.
Veronica, which I have quoted at p. 216 of this volume. But including
this, here are at least seven different themes borrowed from Marco
Polo’s book, on which to be sure his poetical contemporary plays the
most extraordinary variations.

[Sidenote: Chaucer and Marco Polo.]

[78 _bis._—In the third volume of _The Complete Works of Geoffrey
Chaucer_, Oxford, 1894, the Rev. Walter W. Skeat gives (pp. 372
_seqq._) an _Account of the Sources of the Canterbury Tales_. Regarding
_The Squieres Tales_, he says that one of his sources was the Travels
of Marco; Mr. Keighley in his _Tales and Popular Fictions_, published
in 1834, at p. 76, distinctly derives Chaucer’s Tale from the travels
of Marco Polo. (_Skeat, l. c._, p. 463, note.) I cannot quote all the
arguments given by the Rev. W. W. Skeat to support his theory, pp.
463–477.

Regarding the opinion of Professor Skeat of Chaucer’s indebtedness to
Marco Polo, cf. _Marco Polo and the Squire’s Tale_, by Professor John
Matthews Manly, vol. xi. of the _Publications of the Modern Language
Association of America_, 1896, pp. 349–362. Mr. Manly says (p. 360):
“It seems clear, upon reviewing the whole problem, that if Chaucer used
Marco Polo’s narrative, he either carelessly or intentionally confused
all the features of the setting that could possibly be confused, and
retained not a single really characteristic trait of any person,
place or event. It is only by twisting everything that any part of
Chaucer’s story can be brought into relation with any part of Polo’s.
To do this might be allowable, if any rational explanation could be
given for Chaucer’s supposed treatment of his ‘author,’ or if there
were any scarcity of sources from which Chaucer might have obtained as
much information about Tartary as he seems really to have possessed;
but such an explanation would be difficult to devise, and there is
no such scarcity. Any one of half a dozen accessible accounts could
be distorted into almost if not quite as great resemblance to the
_Squire’s Tale_ as Marco Polo’s can.”

Mr. A. W. Pollard, in his edition of _The Squire’s Tale_ (Lond.,
1899) writes: “A very able paper, by Prof. J. M. Manly, demonstrates
the needlessness of Prof. Skeat’s theory, which has introduced fresh
complications into an already complicated story. My own belief is that,
though we may illustrate the Squire’s Tale from these old accounts
of Tartary, and especially from Marco Polo, because he has been so
well edited by Colonel Yule, there is very little probability that
Chaucer consulted any of them. It is much more likely that he found
these details where he found more important parts of his story, _i.e._
in some lost romance. But if we must suppose that he provided his own
local colour, we have no right to pin him down to using Marco Polo to
the exclusion of other accessible authorities.” Mr. Pollard adds in a
note (p. xiii.): “There are some features in these narratives, _e.g._
the account of the gorgeous dresses worn at the Kaan’s feast, which
Chaucer with his love of colour could hardly have helped reproducing if
he had known them.”—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] See _Ferrazzi, Manuele Dantesca_, Bassano, 1865, p. 729.

[2] In Quaritch’s catalogue for Nov. 1870 there is only one old edition
of Polo; there are _nine_ of Maundevile. In 1839 there were
nineteen MSS. of the latter author _catalogued_ in the British
Museum Library. There are _now_ only six of Marco Polo. At least
twenty-five editions of Maundevile and only five of Polo were
printed in the 15th century.

[3] I have made personal enquiry at the National Libraries of Naples
and Palermo, at the Communal Library in the latter city, and at the
Benedictine Libraries of Monte Cassino, Monreale, S. Martino, and
Catania.

In the 15th century, when Polo’s book had become more generally
diffused we find three copies of it in the Catalogue of the Library
of Charles VI. of France, made at the Louvre in 1423, by order of
the Duke of Bedford.

The estimates of value are curious. They are in _sols parisis_,
which we shall not estimate very wrongly at a shilling each:—

“No. 295. _Item_. Marcus Paulus; _en ung cahier escript de lettre
formée, en françois, à deux coulombes. Commt. ou ii{e.} fo._
‘deux frères prescheurs,’ _et ou derrenier_ ‘que sa arrières.’
_X. s. p._

* * *

“No. 334. _Item_. Marcus Paulus. _Couvert de drap d’or, bien
escript & enluminé, de lettre de forme en françois, à deux
coulombes. Commt. ou ii{e.} fol._; ‘il fut Roys,’ _& ou
derrenier_ ‘propremen,’ _à deux fermouers de laton. XV. s. p._

* * *

“No. 336. _Item_. Marcus Paulus; _non enluminé, escript en
françois, de lettre de forme. Commt. ou ii{e.} fo._ ‘vocata
moult grant,’ _& ou derrenier_ ‘ilec dist il.’ _Couvert de
cuir blanc, à deux fermouers de laton. XII. s. p._”

(_Inventaire de la Bibliothèque du Roi Charles VI._, etc.
Paris, Société des Bibliophiles, 1867.)

[4] See _Del Reggimento e de’ Costumi delle donne di Messer Francesco
da Barberino_, Roma, 1815, pp. 166 and 271. The latter passage runs
thus, on _Slavery_:—

“E fu indutta prima da Noé,
E fu cagion lo vin, perchè si egge:
Ch’egli è un paese, dove
Son molti servi in parte di Cathay:
Che per questa cagione
Hanno a nimico il vino,
E non ne beon, nè voglion vedere.”

The author was born the year before Dante (1264), and though he
lived to 1348 it is probable that the poems in question were
written in his earlier years. _Cathay_ was no doubt known by dim
repute long before the final return of the Polos, both through
the original journey of Nicolo and Maffeo, and by information
gathered by the Missionary Friars. Indeed, in 1278 Pope Nicolas
III., in consequence of information said to have come from Abaka
Khan of Persia, that Kúblái was a baptised Christian, sent a party
of Franciscans with a long letter to the Kaan _Quobley_, as he is
termed. They never seem to have reached their destination. And in
1289 Nicolas IV. entrusted a similar mission to Friar John of Monte
Corvino, which eventually led to very tangible results. Neither of
the Papal letters, however, mentions _Cathay_. (See _Mosheim_, App.
pp. 76 and 94.)

[5] See _Muratori_, IX. 583, _seqq._; _Bianconi_, Mem. I. p. 37.

[6] This Friar makes a strange hotch-potch of what he had read, _e.g._:
“The Tartars, when they came out of the mountains, made them a
king, viz., the son of Prester John, who is thus vulgarly termed
_Vetulus de la Montagna!_” (_Mon. Hist. Patr._ Script. III. 1557.)

[7] G. Villani died in the great plague of 1348. But his book was begun
soon after Marco’s was written, for he states that it was the sight
of the memorials of greatness which he witnessed at Rome, during
the Jubilee of 1300, that put it into his head to write the history
of the rising glories of Florence, and that he began the work after
his return home. (Bk. VIII. ch. 36.)

[8] Book V. ch. 29.

[9] _Petri Aponensis Medici ac Philosophi Celeberrimi, Conciliator_,
Venice, 1521, fol. 97. Peter was born in 1250 at Abano, near Padua,
and was Professor of Medicine at the University in the latter city.
He twice fell into the claws of the Unholy Office, and only escaped
them by death in 1316.

[10] [It is curious that this figure is almost exactly that which
among oriental carpets is called a “cloud.” I have heard the term
so applied by Vincent Robinson. It often appears in old Persian
carpets, and also in Chinese designs. Mr. Purdon Clarke tells me
it is called _nebula_ in heraldry; it is also called in Chinese
by a term signifying cloud; in Persian, by a term which he called
_silen-i-khitai_, but of this I can make nothing.—_MS. Note by
Yule_.]

[11] The great Magellanic cloud? In the account of Vincent Yanez
Pinzon’s Voyage to the S.W. in 1499 as given in Ramusio (III. 15)
after Pietro Martire d’Anghieria, it is said:—“Taking the astrolabe
in hand, and ascertaining the Antarctic Pole, they did not see any
star like our Pole Star; but they related that they saw another
manner of stars very different from ours, and which they could not
clearly discern because of a certain dimness which diffused itself
about those stars, and obstructed the view of them.” Also the Kachh
mariners told Lieutenant Leech that midway to Zanzibar there was a
town (?) called Marethee, where the North Pole Star sinks below the
horizon, and they steer by _a fixed cloud in the heavens_. (Bombay
Govt. Selections, No. XV. N.S. p. 215.)

The great Magellan cloud is mentioned by an old Arab writer as a
white blotch at the foot of Canopus, visible in the Tehama along
the Red Sea, but not in Nejd or ’Irák. Humboldt, in quoting this,
calculates that in A.D. 1000 the Great Magellan would have been
visible at Aden some degrees above the horizon. (_Examen_, V. 235.)

[12] This passage contains points that are omitted in Polo’s book,
besides the drawing implied to be from Marco’s own hand! The island
is of course Sumatra. The animal is perhaps the peculiar Sumatran
wild-goat, figured by Marsden, the hair of which on the back is
“coarse and strong, almost like bristles.” (_Sumatra_, p. 115.)

[13] A splendid example of Abbot John’s Collection is the _Livre des
Merveilles_ of the Great French Library (No. 18 in our _App. F._).
This contains Polo, Odoric, William of Boldensel, the Book of the
Estate of the Great Kaan by the Archbishop of Soltania, Maundevile,
Hayton, and Ricold of Montecroce, of which all but Polo and
Maundevile are French versions by this excellent Long John. A list
of the Polo miniatures is given in _App. F_. of this Edition, p.
527.

It is a question for which there is sufficient ground, whether
the Persian Historians Rashiduddin and Wassáf, one or other or
both, did not derive certain information that appears in their
histories, from Marco Polo personally, he having spent many months
in Persia, and at the Court of Tabriz, when either or both may
have been there. Such passages as that about the Cotton-trees of
Guzerat (vol. ii. p. 393, and note), those about the horse trade
with Maabar (id. p. 340, and note), about the brother-kings of that
country (id. p. 331), about the naked savages of Necuveram (id. p.
306), about the wild people of Sumatra calling themselves subjects
of the Great Kaan (id. pp. 285, 292, 293, 299), have so strong
a resemblance to parallel passages in one or both of the above
historians, as given in the first and third volumes of Elliot, that
the probability, at least, of the Persian writers having derived
their information from Polo might be fairly maintained.

[14] _Li Romans de Bauduin de Sebourc IIIᵉ Roy de Jhérusalem_; Poēme
du XIVᵉ Siècle; Valenciennes, 1841. 2 vols. 8vo. I was indebted
to two references of M. Pauthier’s for knowledge of the existence
of this work. He cites the legends of the Mountain, and of the
Stone of the Saracens from an abstract, but does not seem to have
consulted the work itself, nor to have been aware of the extent
of its borrowings from Marco Polo. M. Génin, from whose account
Pauthier quotes, ascribes the poem to an early date after the death
of Philip the Fair (1314). See _Pauthier_, pp. 57, 58, and 140.

[15] See Polo, vol. i. p. 204, and vol. ii. p. 191.

[16] See Polo, vol. i. p. 246.

[17] See Polo, vol. ii. p. 339.

[18] See Polo, vol. i. p. 140. _Hashishi_ has got altered into _Haus
Assis_.

[19] See vol. i. p. 358, note.

[20] See vol. i. p. 189, note 2.

[21] Vol. i. pp. 183–186.

[22] Vol. i. pp. 68 _seqq._ The virtuous cobler is not left out, but is
made to play second fiddle to the hero Bauduin.

[23] Vol. i. p. 144.

XIII. NATURE OF POLO’S INFLUENCE ON GEOGRAPHICAL
KNOWLEDGE.

[Sidenote: Tardy operation, and causes thereof.]

79. Marco Polo contributed such a vast amount of new facts to the
knowledge of the Earth’s surface, that one might have expected his book
to have had a sudden effect upon the Science of Geography: but no such
result occurred speedily, nor was its beneficial effect of any long
duration.

No doubt several causes contributed to the slowness of its action
upon the notions of Cosmographers, of which the unreal character
attributed to the Book, as a collection of romantic marvels rather than
of geographical and historical facts, may have been one, as Santarem
urges. But the essential causes were no doubt the imperfect nature
of publication before the invention of the press; the traditional
character which clogged geography as well as all other branches of
knowledge in the Middle Ages; and the entire absence of scientific
principle in what passed for geography, so that there was no organ
competent to the assimilation of a large mass of new knowledge.

Of the action of the first cause no examples can be more striking than
we find in the false conception of the Caspian as a gulf of the Ocean,
entertained by Strabo, and the opposite error in regard to the Indian
Sea held by Ptolemy, who regards it as an enclosed basin, when we
contrast these with the correct ideas on both subjects possessed by
Herodotus. The later Geographers no doubt knew his statements, but did
not appreciate them, probably from not possessing the evidence on which
they were based.

[Sidenote: General characteristics of Mediæval Cosmography.]

80. As regards the second cause alleged, we may say that down nearly to
the middle of the 15th century cosmographers, as a rule, made scarcely
any attempt to reform their maps by any elaborate search for new
matter, or by lights that might be collected from recent travellers.
Their world was in its outline that handed down by the traditions
of their craft, as sanctioned by some Father of the Church, such as
Orosius or Isidore, as sprinkled with a combination of classical and
mediæval legend; Solinus being the great authority for the former.
Almost universally the earth’s surface is represented as filling the
greater part of a circular disk, rounded by the ocean; a fashion
that already existed in the time of Aristotle and was ridiculed by
him.[1] No dogma of false geography was more persistent or more
pernicious than this. Jerusalem occupies the central point, because
it was found written in the Prophet Ezekiel: “_Haec dicit Dominus
Deus: Ista est Jerusalem_, in medio gentium _posui eam, et in circuitu
ejus terras_;”[2] a declaration supposed to be corroborated by the
Psalmist’s expression, regarded as prophetic of the death of Our Lord:
“_Deus autem, Rex noster, ante secula operatus est salutem_ in medio
Terrae” (Ps. lxxiii. 12).[3] The Terrestrial Paradise was represented
as occupying the extreme East, because it was found in Genesis that
the Lord planted a garden eastward in Eden.[4] _Gog and Magog_ were
set in the far north or north-east, because it was said again in
Ezekiel: “_Ecce Ego super te Gog Principem capitis Mosoch et Thubal
... et ascendere te faciam de lateribus Aquilonis_,” whilst probably
the topography of those mysterious nationalities was completed by
a girdle of mountains out of the Alexandrian Fables. The loose and
scanty nomenclature was mainly borrowed from Pliny or Mela through
such Fathers as we have named; whilst vacant spaces were occupied
by Amazons, Arimaspians, and the realm of Prester John. A favourite
representation of the inhabited earth was this [circled T]; a great O
enclosing a T, which thus divides the circle in three parts; the
greater or half-circle being Asia, the two quarter circles Europe and
Africa.[5] These Maps were known to St. Augustine.[6]

[Sidenote: Roger Bacon as a geographer.]

81. Even Ptolemy seems to have been almost unknown; and indeed had his
Geography been studied it might, with all its errors, have tended to
some greater endeavours after accuracy. Roger Bacon, whilst lamenting
the exceeding deficiency of geographical knowledge in the Latin
world, and purposing to essay an exacter distribution of countries,
says he will not attempt to do so by latitude and longitude, for that
is a system of which the Latins have learned nothing. He himself,
whilst still somewhat burdened by the authoritative dicta of “saints
and sages” of past times, ventures at least to criticise some of the
latter, such as Pliny and Ptolemy, and declares his intention to
have recourse to the information of those who have travelled most
extensively over the Earth’s surface. And judging from the good use
he makes, in his description of the northern parts of the world, of
the Travels of Rubruquis, whom he had known and questioned, besides
diligently studying his narrative,[7] we might have expected much in
Geography from this great man, had similar materials been available
to him for other parts of the earth. He did attempt a map with
mathematical determination of places, but it has not been preserved.[8]

It may be said with general truth that the world-maps current up
to the end of the 13th century had more analogy to the mythical
cosmography of the Hindus than to any thing properly geographical.
Both, no doubt, were originally based in the main on real features. In
the Hindu cosmography these genuine features are symmetrised as in a
kaleidoscope; in the European cartography they are squeezed together in
a manner that one can only compare to a pig in brawn. Here and there
some feature strangely compressed and distorted is just recognisable.
A splendid example of this kind of map is that famous one at Hereford,
executed about A.D. 1275, of which a facsimile has lately been
published, accompanied by a highly meritorious illustrative Essay.[9]

82. Among the Arabs many able men, from the early days of Islám,
took an interest in Geography, and devoted labour to geographical
compilations, in which they often made use of their own observations,
of the itineraries of travellers, and of other fresh knowledge. But
somehow or other their maps were always far behind their books.
Though they appear to have had an early translation of Ptolemy, and
elaborate Tables of Latitudes and Longitudes form a prominent feature
in many of their geographical treatises, there appears to be no Arabic
map in existence, laid down with meridians and parallels; whilst
_all_ of their best known maps are on the old system of the circular
disk. This apparent incapacity for map-making appears to have acted
as a heavy drag and bar upon progress in Geography among the Arabs,
notwithstanding its early promise among them, and in spite of the
application to its furtherance of the great intellects of some (such
as Abu Rihán al-Biruni), and of the indefatigable spirit of travel and
omnivorous curiosity of others (such as Mas’udi).

[Sidenote: Marino Sanudo the Elder.]

83. Some distinct trace of acquaintance with the Arabian Geography is
to be found in the World-Map of Marino Sanudo the Elder, constructed
between 1300 and 1320; and this may be regarded as an exceptionally
favourable specimen of the cosmography in vogue, for the author was a
diligent investigator and compiler, who evidently took a considerable
interest in geographical questions, and had a strong enjoyment and
appreciation of a map.[10] Nor is the map in question without some
result of these characteristics. His representation of Europe,
Northern Africa, Syria, Asia Minor, Arabia and its two gulfs, is a
fair approximation to general facts; his collected knowledge has
enabled him to locate, with more or less of general truth, Georgia,
the Iron Gates, Cathay, the Plain of Moghan, Euphrates and Tigris,
Persia, Bagdad, Kais, Aden (though on the wrong side of the Red Sea),
Abyssinia (_Habesh_), Zangibar (_Zinz_), Jidda (Zede), etc. But after
all the traditional forms are too strong for him. Jerusalem is still
the centre of the disk of the habitable earth, so that the distance is
as great from Syria to Gades in the extreme West, as from Syria to the
India Interior of Prester John which terminates the extreme East. And
Africa beyond the Arabian Gulf is carried, according to the Arabian
modification of Ptolemy’s misconception, far to the eastward until it
almost meets the prominent shores of India.

[Sidenote: The Catalan Map of 1375, the most complete mediæval
embodiment of Polo’s Geography.]

84. The first genuine mediæval attempt at a geographical construction
that I know of, absolutely free from the traditional _idola_, is
the Map of the known World from the Portulano Mediceo (in the
Laurentian Library), of which an extract is engraved in the atlas
of Baldelli-Boni’s Polo. I need not describe it, however, because I
cannot satisfy myself that it makes much use of Polo’s contributions,
and its facts have been embodied in a more ambitious work of the next
generation, the celebrated Catalan Map of 1375 in the great Library of
Paris. This also, but on a larger scale and in a more comprehensive
manner, is an honest endeavour to represent the known world on the
basis of collected facts, casting aside all theories pseudo-scientific
or pseudo-theological; and a very remarkable work it is. In this map it
seems to me Marco Polo’s influence, I will not say on geography, but on
map-making, is seen to the greatest advantage. His Book is the basis of
the Map as regards Central and Further Asia, and partially as regards
India. His names are often sadly perverted, and it is not always easy
to understand the view that the compiler took of his itineraries. Still
we have Cathay admirably placed in the true position of China, as a
great Empire filling the south-east of Asia. The Eastern Peninsula of
India is indeed absent altogether, but the Peninsula of Hither India
is for the first time in the History of Geography represented with a
fair approximation to its correct form and position,[11] and Sumatra
also (_Jaua_) is not badly placed. Carajan, Vocian, Mien, and Bangala,
are located with a happy conception of their relation to Cathay and to
India. Many details in India foreign to Polo’s book,[12] and some in
Cathay (as well as in Turkestan and Siberia, which have been entirely
derived from other sources) have been embodied in the Map. But the
study of his Book has, I conceive, been essentially the basis of those
great portions which I have specified, and the additional matter has
not been in mass sufficient to perplex the compiler. Hence we really
see in this Map something like the idea of Asia that the Traveller
himself would have presented, had he bequeathed a Map to us.

[Illustration: Part of the Catalan Map (1375).]

[Some years ago, I made a special study of the Far East in the Catalan
Map (_L’Extrême-Orient dans l’Atlas catalan de Charles V._, Paris,
1895), and I have come to the conclusion that the cartographer’s
knowledge of Eastern Asia is drawn almost entirely from Marco Polo. We
give a reproduction of part of the Catalan Map.—H. C.]

[Sidenote: Confusions in Cartography of the 16th century, from the
endeavour to combine new and old information.]

85. In the following age we find more frequent indications that Polo’s
book was diffused and read. And now that the spirit of discovery
began to stir, it was apparently regarded in a juster light as a
Book of Facts, and not as a mere _Romman du Grant Kaan_.[13] But in
fact this age produced new supplies of crude information in greater
abundance than the knowledge of geographers was prepared to digest or
co-ordinate, and the consequence is that the magnificent Work of Fra
Mauro (1459), though the result of immense labour in the collection of
facts and the endeavour to combine them, really gives a considerably
less accurate idea of Asia than that which the Catalan Map had
afforded.[14]

And when at a still later date the great burst of discovery eastward
and westward took effect, the results of all attempts to combine the
new knowledge with the old was most unhappy. The first and crudest
forms of such combinations attempted to realise the ideas of Columbus
regarding the identity of his discoveries with the regions of the
Great Kaan’s dominion;[15] but even after AMERICA had vindicated
its independent position on the surface of the globe, and the new
knowledge of the Portuguese had introduced CHINA where the Catalan Map
of the 14th century had presented CATHAY, the latter country, with the
whole of Polo’s nomenclature, was shoved away to the north, forming
a separate system.[16] Henceforward the influence of Polo’s work on
maps was simply injurious; and when to his nomenclature was added a
sprinkling of Ptolemy’s, as was usual throughout the 16th century, the
result was a most extraordinary hotch-potch, conveying no approximation
to any consistent representation of facts.

Thus, in a map of 1522,[17] running the eye along the north of Europe
and Asia from West to East, we find the following succession of names:
Groenlandia, or Greenland, as a great peninsula overlapping that
of Norvegia and Suecia; Livonia, Plescovia and Moscovia, Tartaria
bounded on the South by _Scithia extra Imaum_, and on the East, by
the Rivers _Ochardes_ and _Bautisis_ (out of Ptolemy), which are made
to flow into the Arctic Sea. South of these are _Aureacithis_ and
_Asmirea_ (Ptolemy’s _Auxacitis_ and _Asmiræa_), and _Serica Regio_.
Then following the northern coast _Balor Regio_,[18] _Judei Clausi_,
_i.e._ the Ten Tribes who are constantly associated or confounded with
the Shut-up Nations of Gog and Magog. These impinge upon the River
_Polisacus_, flowing into the Northern Ocean in Lat. 75°, but which is
in fact no other than Polo’s _Pulisanghin_![19] Immediately south of
this is _Tholomon Provincia_ (Polo’s again), and on the coast _Tangut_,
_Cathaya_, the Rivers _Caramoran_ and _Oman_ (a misreading of Polo’s
_Quian_), _Quinsay_ and _Mangi_.

[Sidenote: Gradual disappearance of Polo’s nomenclature.]

86. The Maps of Mercator (1587) and Magini (1597) are similar in
character, but more elaborate, introducing China as a separate system.
Such indeed also is Blaeu’s Map (1663) excepting that Ptolemy’s
contributions are reduced to one or two.

In Sanson’s Map (1659) the data of Polo and the mediæval Travellers are
more cautiously handled, but a new element of confusion is introduced
in the form of numerous features derived from Edrisi.

It is scarcely worth while to follow the matter further. With the
increase of knowledge of Northern Asia from the Russian side, and that
of China from the Maps of Martini, followed by the surveys of the
Jesuits, and with the real science brought to bear on Asiatic Geography
by such men as De l’Isle and D’Anville, mere traditional nomenclature
gradually disappeared. And the task which the study of Polo has
provided for the geographers of later days has been chiefly that of
determining the true localities that his book describes under obsolete
or corrupted names.

[My late illustrious friend, Baron _A. E. Nordenskiöld_, who has
devoted much time and labour to the study of Marco Polo (see his
_Periplus_, Stockholm, 1897), and published a facsimile edition of one
of the French MSS. kept in the Stockholm Royal Library (see vol. ii.
_Bibliography_, p. 570), has given to _The Geographical Journal_ for
April, 1899, pp. 396–406, a paper on _The Influence of the “Travels
of Marco Polo” on Jacobo Gastaldi’s Maps of Asia_. He writes (p. 398)
that as far as he knows, none “of the many learned men who have devoted
their attention to the discoveries of Marco Polo, have been able to
refer to any maps in which all or almost all those places mentioned
by Marco Polo are given. All friends of the history of geography will
therefore be glad to hear that such an atlas from the middle of the
sixteenth century really does exist, viz. Gastaldi’s ‘Prima, seconda
e terza parte dell’Asia.’” All the names of places in Ramusio’s Marco
Polo are introduced in the maps of Asia of Jacobo Gastaldi (1561). Cf.
_Periplus_, liv., lv., and lvi.

I may refer to what both Yule and myself say _supra_ of the Catalan
Map.—H. C.]

[Sidenote: Alleged introduction of Block-printed Books into Europe by
Marco Polo.]

87. Before concluding, it may be desirable to say a few words on the
subject of important knowledge other than geographical, which various
persons have supposed that Marco Polo must have introduced from Eastern
Asia to Europe.

Respecting the mariner’s compass and gunpowder I shall say nothing, as
no one now, I believe, imagines Marco to have had anything to do with
their introduction. But from a highly respectable source in recent
years we have seen the introduction of Block-printing into Europe
connected with the name of our Traveller. The circumstances are stated
as follows:[20]

“In the beginning of the 15th century a man named Pamphilo
Castaldi, of Feltre ... was employed by the Seignory or Government
of the Republic, to engross deeds and public edicts of various
kinds ... the initial letters at the commencement of the writing
being usually ornamented with red ink, or illuminated in gold and
colours.

“According to Sansovino, certain stamps or types had been invented
some time previously by Pietro di Natali, Bishop of Aquilœa.[21]
These were made at Murano of glass, and were used to stamp or print
the outline of the large initial letters of public documents, which
were afterwards filled up by hand.... Pamphilo Castaldi improved
on these glass types, by having others made of wood or metal,
and having seen several Chinese books which the famous traveller
Marco Polo had brought from China, and of which the entire text
was printed with wooden blocks, he caused moveable wooden types to
be made, each type containing a single letter; and with these he
printed several broadsides and single leaves, at Venice, in the
year 1426. Some of these single sheets are said to be preserved
among the archives at Feltre....

“The tradition continues that John Faust, of Mayence ... became
acquainted with Castaldi, and passed some time with him, at his
_Scriptorium_, ... at Feltre;”

and in short developed from the knowledge so acquired the great
invention of printing. Mr. Curzon goes on to say that Panfilo Castaldi
was born in 1398, and died in 1490, and that he gives the story as
he found it in an article written by Dr. Jacopo Facen, of Feltre,
in a (Venetian?) newspaper called _Il Gondoliere_, No. 103, of 27th
December, 1843.

In a later paper Mr. Curzon thus recurs to the subject:[22]

“Though none of the early block-books have dates affixed to them,
many of them are with reason supposed to be more ancient than any
books printed with moveable types. Their resemblance to Chinese
block-books is so exact, that they would almost seem to be copied
from the books commonly used in China. _The impressions are taken
off on one side of the paper only, and in binding, both the
Chinese, and ancient German, or Dutch block-books, the blank sides
of the pages are placed opposite each other_, and sometimes pasted
together.... The impressions are not taken off with printer’s ink,
but _with a brown paint or colour, of a much thinner description,
more in the nature of Indian ink, as we call it, which is used
in printing Chinese books_. Altogether the German and Oriental
block-books are so precisely alike, in almost every respect, that
... we must suppose that the process of printing then must have
been copied from ancient Chinese specimens, brought from that
country by some early travellers, whose names have not been handed
down to our times.”

The writer then refers to the tradition about _Guttemberg_ (so it is
stated on this occasion, not Faust) having learned Castaldi’s art,
etc., mentioning a circumstance which he supposes to indicate that
Guttemberg had relations with Venice; and appears to assent to the
probability of the story of the art having been founded on specimens
brought home by Marco Polo.

This story was in recent years diligently propagated in Northern Italy,
and resulted in the erection at Feltre of a public statue of Panfilo
Castaldi, bearing this inscription (besides others of like tenor):—

“_To Panfilo Castaldi the illustrious Inventor of Movable Printing
Types, Italy renders this Tribute of Honour, too long deferred._”

In the first edition of this book I devoted a special note to the
exposure of the worthlessness of the evidence for this story.[23] This
note was, with the present Essay, translated and published at Venice by
Comm. Berchet, but this challenge to the supporters of the patriotic
romance, so far as I have heard, brought none of them into the lists in
its defence.

But since Castaldi has got his statue from the printers of Lombardy,
would it not be mere equity that the mariners of Spain should set up
a statue at Huelva to the Pilot Alonzo Sanchez of that port, who,
according to Spanish historians, after discovering the New World, died
in the house of Columbus at Terceira, and left the crafty Genoese to
appropriate his journals, and rob him of his fame?

Seriously; if anybody in Feltre cares for the real reputation of
his native city, let him do his best to have that preposterous and
discreditable fiction removed from the base of the statue. If Castaldi
has deserved a statue on other and truer grounds let _him_ stand; if
not, let him be burnt into honest lime! I imagine that the original
story that attracted Mr. Curzon was more _jeu d’esprit_ than anything
else; but that the author, finding what a stone he had set rolling, did
not venture to retract.

[Sidenote: Frequent opportunities for such introduction in the age
following Polo’s.]

88. Mr. Curzon’s own observations, which I have italicised about
the resemblance of the two systems are, however, very striking,
and seem clearly to indicate the derivation of the art from China.
But I should suppose that in the tradition, if there ever was any
genuine tradition of the kind at Feltre (a circumstance worthy of all
doubt), the name of Marco Polo was introduced merely because it was
so prominent a name in Eastern Travel. The fact has been generally
overlooked and forgotten[24] that, for many years in the course of
the 14th century, not only were missionaries of the Roman Church and
Houses of the Franciscan Order established in the chief cities of
China, but a regular trade was carried on overland between Italy and
China, by way of Tana (or Azov), Astracan, Otrar and Kamul, insomuch
that instructions for the Italian merchant following that route form
the two first chapters in the Mercantile Handbook of Balducci Pegolotti
(_circa_ 1340).[25] Many a traveller besides Marco Polo might therefore
have brought home the block-books. And this is the less to be ascribed
to him because he so curiously omits to speak of the art of printing,
when his subject seems absolutely to challenge its description.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] “They draw nowadays the map of the world in a laughable manner, for
they draw the inhabited earth as a circle; but this is impossible,
both from what we see and from reason.” (_Meteorolog. Lib._ II.
cap. 5.) Cf. _Herodotus_, iv. 36.

[2] In Dante’s Cosmography, Jerusalem is the centre of our οἰκουμένη,
whilst the Mount of Purgatory occupies the middle of the Antipodal
hemisphere:—

“Come ciò sia, se’ l vuoi poter pensare,
Dentro raccolto immagina Sion
Con questo monte in su la terra stare,
Sì, ch’ambodue hann’un solo orrizon
E diversi emisperi”....
—_Purg._ IV. 67.

[3] The belief, with this latter ground of it, is alluded to in curious
verses by Jacopo Alighieri, Dante’s son:—

“_E molti gran Profeti_
_Filosofi e Poeti_
Fanno il colco dell’Emme
Dov’è Gerusalemme;
_Se le loro scritture_
_Hanno vere figure:_
_E per la Santa fede_
_Cristiana ancor si vede_
_Che’ l’ suo principio Cristo_
Nel suo mezzo _conquisto_
_Per cui prese morte_
_E vi pose la sorte_.”
—(_Rime Antiche Toscane_, III. 9.)

Though the general meaning of the second couplet is obvious,
the expression _il colco dell’Emme_, “the couch of the M,” is
puzzling. The best solution that occurs to me is this: In looking
at the world map of Marino Sanudo, noticed on p. _133_, as engraved
by Bongars in the _Gesta Dei per Francos_, you find geometrical
lines laid down, connecting the N.E., N.W., S.E., and S.W. points,
and thus forming a square inscribed in the circular disk of the
Earth, with its diagonals passing through the Central Zion. The eye
easily discerns in these a great M inscribed in the circle, with
its middle angular point at Jerusalem. Gervasius of Tilbury (with
some confusion in his mind between tropic and equinoxial, like that
which Pliny makes in speaking of the Indian Mons Malleus) says that
“some are of opinion that the Centre is in the place where the Lord
spoke to the woman of Samaria at the well, for there, at the summer
solstice, the noonday sun descends perpendicularly into the water
of the well, casting no shadow; a thing which the philosophers say
occurs at Syene”! (_Otia Imperialia_, by Liebrecht, p. 1.)

[4] This circumstance does not, however, show in the Vulgate.

[5]

“Veggiamo in prima in general la terra
Come risiede e come il mar la serra.

Un T dentro ad un O mostra il disegno
Come in tre parti fu diviso il Mondo,
E la superiore è il maggior regno
Che quasi piglia la metà del tondo.
ASIA chiamata: il gambo ritto è segno
Che parte il terzo nome dal secondo
AFFRICA dico da EUROPA: il mare
Mediterran tra esse in mezzo appare.”
—_La Sfera_, di F. Leonardo di Stagio Dati,
Lib. iii. st. 11.

[6] _De Civ. Dei_, xvi. 17, quoted by _Peschel_, 92.

[7] _Opus Majus_, Venice ed. pp. 142, _seqq._

[8] _Peschel_, p. 195. This had escaped me.

[9] By the Rev. W. L. Bevan, M.A., and the Rev. H. W. Phillott, M.A.
In Asia, they point out, the only name showing any recognition of
modern knowledge is Samarcand.

[10] His work, _Liber Secretorum Fidelium Crucis_, intended to
stimulate a new Crusade, has three capital maps, besides that of
the World, one of which, translated, but otherwise in facsimile, is
given at p. 18 of this volume. But besides these maps, he gives,
in a tabular form of parallel columns, the reigning sovereigns in
Europe and Asia connected with his historical retrospect, just on
the plan presented in Sir Harris Nicolas’s Chronology of History.

[11] I do not see that al-Birúni deserves the credit in this respect
assigned to him by Professor Peschel, so far as one can judge
from the data given by Sprenger (_Peschel_, p. 128; _Post und
Reise-Routen_, 81–82.)

[12] For example, _Delli_, which Polo does not name; _Diogil_ (Deogír);
on the Coromandel coast _Setemelti_, which I take to be a clerical
error for _Sette-Templi_, the Seven Pagodas; round the Gulf of
Cambay we have _Cambetum_ (Kambayat), _Cocintaya_ (Kokan-Tana, see
vol. ii. p. 396), _Goga, Baroche, Neruala_ (Anharwala), and to the
north _Moltan_. Below Multan are _Hocibelch_ and _Bargelidoa_, two
puzzles. The former is, I think, _Uch-baligh_, showing that part of
the information was from Perso-Mongol sources.

[13] I see it stated by competent authority that _Romman_ is often
applied to any prose composition in a Romance language.

In or about 1426, Prince Pedro of Portugal, the elder brother of
the illustrious Prince Henry, being on a visit to Venice, was
presented by the Signory with a copy of Marco Polo’s book, together
with a map already alluded to. (_Major’s P. Henry_, pp. 61, 62.)

[14] This is partly due also to Fra Mauro’s reversion to the fancy of
the circular disk limiting the inhabited portion of the earth.

[15] An early graphic instance of this is Ruysch’s famous map
(1508). The following extract of a work printed as late as 1533
is an example of the like confusion in verbal description: “The
Territories which are beyond the limits of Ptolemy’s Tables have
not yet been described on certain authority. Behind the Sinae and
the Seres, and beyond 180° of East Longitude, many countries were
discovered by one [_quendam_] Marco Polo a Venetian and others,
and the sea-coasts of those countries have now recently again been
explored by Columbus the Genoese and Amerigo Vespucci in navigating
the Western Ocean.... To this part (of Asia) belong the territory
called that of the _Bachalaos_ [or Codfish, Newfoundland],
_Florida_, _the Desert of Lop_, _Tangut_, _Cathay_, the realm of
_Mexico_ (wherein is the vast city of _Temistitan_, built in the
middle of a great lake, but which the older travellers styled
QUINSAY), besides _Paria_, _Uraba_, and the countries of the
_Canibals_.” (_Joannis Schoneri Carolostadtii Opusculum Geogr._,
quoted by Humboldt, _Examen_, V. 171, 172.)

[16] In Robert Parke’s Dedication of his Translation of Mendoza’s,
London, 1st of January, 1589, he identifies China and Japan with
the regions of which _Paulus Venetus_ and _Sir John Mandeuill_
“wrote long agoe.”—_MS. Note by Yule_.

[17] “_Totius Europae et Asiae Tabula Geographica, Auctore Thoma D.
Aucupario. Edita Argentorati_, MDXXII.” Copied in Witsen.

[18] This strange association of _Balor_ (_i.e._, Bolor, that name of
so many odd vicissitudes, see pp. 178–179 _infra_) with the shut-up
Israelites must be traced to a passage which Athanasius Kircher
quotes from _R. Abraham Pizol_ (qu. Peritsol?): “_Regnum_, inquit,
Belor _magnum et excelsum nimis, juxta omnes illos qui scripserunt
Historicos_. Sunt in eo Judaei _plurimi inclusi, et illud in latere
Orientali et Boreali_,” etc. (_China Illustrata_, p. 49.)

[19] Vol. ii. p. 1.

[20] _A short Account of Libraries of Italy_, by the Hon. R. Curzon
(the late Lord de la Zouche); in _Bibliog. and Hist. Miscellanies;
Philobiblon Society_, vol. i, 1854, pp. 6. _seqq._

[21] P. del Natali was Bishop of Equilio, a city of the Venetian
Lagoons, in the latter part of the 14th century. (See _Ughelli,
Italia Sacra_, X. 87.) There is no ground whatever for connecting
him with these inventions. The story of the glass types appears
to rest entirely and solely on one obscure passage of Sansovino,
who says that under the Doge Marco Corner (1365–1367): “_certe
Natale Veneto lasciò un libro della materie delle forme da giustar
intorno alle lettere, ed il modo di formarle di vetro_.” There is
absolutely nothing more. Some kind of stencilling seems indicated.

[22] _History of Printing in China and Europe_, in _Philobiblon_, vol.
vi. p. 23.

[23] See _Appendix L_. in First Edition.

[24] Ramusio himself appears to have been entirely unconscious of it,
_vide supra_, p. 3.

[25] This subject has been fully treated in _Cathay and the Way
Thither_.

XIV. EXPLANATIONS REGARDING THE BASIS ADOPTED FOR THE
PRESENT TRANSLATION.

89. It remains to say a few words regarding the basis adopted for our
English version of the Traveller’s record.

[Sidenote: Text followed by Marsden and by Pauthier.]

Ramusio’s recension was that which Marsden selected for translation.
But at the date of his most meritorious publication nothing was known
of the real literary history of Polo’s Book, and no one was aware of
the peculiar value and originality of the French manuscript texts, nor
had Marsden seen any of them. A translation from one of those texts is
a translation at first hand; a translation from Ramusio’s Italian is,
as far as I can judge, the translation of a translated compilation from
two or more translations, and therefore, whatever be the merits of its
matter, inevitably carries us far away from the spirit and style of
the original narrator. M. Pauthier, I think, did well in adopting for
the text of his edition the MSS. which I have classed as of the second
Type, the more as there had hitherto been no publication from those
texts. But editing a text in the original language, and translating,
are tasks substantially different in their demands.

[Sidenote: Eclectic formation of the English Text of this Translation.]

90. It will be clear from what has been said in the preceding pages
that I should not regard as a fair or full representation of Polo’s
Work, a version on which the Geographic Text did not exercise a
material influence. But to adopt that Text, with all its awkwardnesses
and tautologies, as the absolute subject of translation, would have
been a mistake. What I have done has been, in the first instance, to
translate from Pauthier’s Text. The process of abridgment in this text,
however it came about, has been on the whole judiciously executed,
getting rid of the intolerable prolixities of manner which belong
to many parts of the Original Dictation, but _as a general rule_
preserving the matter. Having translated this,—not always from the
Text adopted by Pauthier himself, but with the exercise of my own
judgment on the various readings which that Editor lays before us,—I
then compared the translation with the Geographic Text, and transferred
from the latter not only all items of real substance that had been
omitted, but also all expressions of special interest and character,
and occasionally a greater fulness of phraseology where condensation
in Pauthier’s text seemed to have been carried too far. And finally I
introduced _between brackets_ everything peculiar to Ramusio’s version
that seemed to me to have a just claim to be reckoned authentic, and
that could be so introduced without harshness or mutilation. Many
passages from the same source which were of interest in themselves, but
failed to meet one or other of these conditions, have been given in the
notes.[1]

[Sidenote: Mode of rendering proper names.]

91. As regards the reading of proper names and foreign words, in which
there is so much variation in the different MSS. and editions, I have
done my best to select what seemed to be the true reading from the G.
T. and Pauthier’s three MSS., only in some rare instances transgressing
this limit.

Where the MSS. in the repetition of a name afforded a choice of forms,
I have selected that which came nearest the real name when known.
Thus the G. T. affords _Baldasciain, Badascian, Badasciam, Badausiam,
Balasian_. I adopt BADASCIAN, or in English spelling BADASHAN, because
it is closest to the real name _Badakhshan_. Another place appears as
COBINAN, _Cabanat, Cobian_. I adopt the first because it is the truest
expression of the real name _Koh-benán_. In chapters 23, 24 of Book I.,
we have in the G. T. _Asisim, Asciscin, Asescin_, and in Pauthier’s
MSS. _Hasisins, Harsisins_, etc. I adopt ASCISCIN, or in English
spelling ASHISHIN, for the same reason as before. So with _Creman,
Crerman, Crermain_, QUERMAN, Anglicè KERMAN; Cormos, HORMOS, and many
more.[2]

In two or three cases I have adopted a reading which I cannot show
_literatim_ in any authority, but because such a form appears to be the
just resultant from the variety of readings which are presented; as in
surveying one takes the mean of a number of observations when no one
can claim an absolute preference.

Polo’s proper names, even in the French Texts, are _in the main_ formed
on an Italian fashion of spelling.[3] I see no object in preserving
such spelling in an English book, so after selecting the best reading
of the name I express it in English spelling, printing _Badashan,
Pashai, Kerman_, instead of _Badascian, Pasciai, Querman_, and so on.

And when a little trouble has been taken to ascertain the true form and
force of Polo’s spelling of Oriental names and technical expressions,
it will be found that they are in the main as accurate as Italian lips
and orthography will admit, and not justly liable either to those
disparaging epithets[4] or to those exegetical distortions which have
been too often applied to them. Thus, for example, _Cocacin, Ghel_
or _Ghelan, Tonocain, Cobinan, Ondanique, Barguerlac, Argon, Sensin,
Quescican, Toscaol, Bularguci, Zardandan, Anin, Caugigu, Coloman,
Gauenispola, Mutfili, Avarian, Choiach_, are not, it will be seen,
the ignorant blunderings which the interpretations affixed by some
commentators would imply them to be, but are, on the contrary, all but
perfectly accurate utterances of the names and words intended.

The _-tchéou_ (of French writers), _-choo_, _-chow_, or _-chau_[5]
of English writers, which so frequently forms the terminal part in
the names of Chinese cities, is almost invariably rendered by Polo
as _-giu_. This has frequently in the MSS., and constantly in the
printed editions, been converted into _-gui_, and thence into _-guy_.
This is on the whole the most constant canon of Polo’s geographical
orthography, and holds in _Caagiu_ (Ho-chau), _Singiu_ (Sining-chau),
_Cui-giu_ (Kwei-chau), _Sin-giu_ (T’sining-chau), _Pi-giu_ (Pei-chau),
_Coigangiu_ (Hwaingan-chau), _Si-giu_ (Si-chau), _Ti-giu_ (Tai-chau),
_Tin-giu_ (Tung-chau), _Yan-giu_ (Yang-chau), _Sin-giu_ (Chin-chau),
_Cai-giu_ (Kwa-chau), _Chinghi-giu_ (Chang-chau), _Su-giu_ (Su-chau),
_Vu-giu_ (Wu-chau), and perhaps a few more. In one or two instances
only (as _Sinda-ciu_, _Caiciu_) he has _-ciu_ instead of _-giu_.

The chapter-headings I have generally taken from Pauthier’s Text, but
they are no essential part of the original work, and they have been
slightly modified or enlarged where it seemed desirable.

• • • • •

“=Behold! I see the Haven nigh at Hand,
To which I meane my wearie Course to bend;
Vere the maine Shete, and beare up with the Land,
The which afore is fayrly to be kend,
And seemeth safe from Storms that may offend.=
* * * * *
=There eke my Feeble Barke a while may stay,
Till mery Wynd and Weather call her thence away.=”
—THE FAERIE QUEENE, I. xii. 1.

[Illustration]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This “eclectic formation of the English text,” as I have called it
for brevity in the marginal rubric, has been disapproved by Mr. de
Khanikoff, a critic worthy of high respect. But I must repeat that
the duties of a translator, and of the Editor of an original text,
at least where the various recensions bear so peculiar a relation
to each other as in this case, are essentially different; and that,
on reconsidering the matter after an interval of four or five
years, the plan which I have adopted, whatever be the faults of
execution, still commends itself to me as the only appropriate one.

Let Mr. de Khanikoff consider what course he would adopt if he
were about to publish Marco Polo in Russian. I feel certain that
with whatever theory he might set out, before his task should be
concluded he would have arrived practically at the same system that
I have adopted.

[2] In Polo’s diction C frequently represents H., _e.g._, _Cormos_ =
Hormuz; _Camadi_ probably = Hamadi; _Caagiu_ probably = Hochau;
_Cacianfu_ = Hochangfu, and so on. This is perhaps attributable to
Rusticiano’s Tuscan ear. A true Pisan will absolutely contort his
features in the intensity of his efforts to aspirate sufficiently
the letter C. Filippo Villani, speaking of the famous Aguto (Sir
J. Hawkwood), says his name in English was _Kauchouvole_. (_Murat.
Script._ xiv. 746.)

[3] In the Venetian dialect _ch_ and _j_ are often sounded as in
English, not as in Italian. Some traces of such pronunciation I
think there are, as in _Coja, Carajan_, and in the Chinese name
_Vanchu_ (occurring only in Ramusio, _supra_, p. _99_). But the
scribe of the original work being a Tuscan, the spelling is in
the main Tuscan. The sound of the _Qu_ is, however, French, as in
_Quescican, Quinsai_, except perhaps in the case of _Quenianfu_,
for a reason given in vol. ii. p. 29.

[4] For example, that enthusiastic student of mediæval Geography,
Joachim Lelewel, speaks of Polo’s “gibberish” (_le baragouinage du
Venitien_) with special reference to such names as _Zayton_ and
_Kinsay_, whilst we now know that these names were in universal
use by all foreigners in China, and no more deserve to be called
gibberish than _Bocca-Tigris_, _Leghorn_, _Ratisbon_, or _Buda_.

[5] I am quite sensible of the diffidence with which any outsider
should touch any question of Chinese language or orthography. A
Chinese scholar and missionary (Mr. Moule) objects to my spelling
_chau_, whilst he, I see, uses _chow_. I imagine we mean the same
sound, according to the spelling which I try to use throughout the
book. Dr. C. Douglas, another missionary scholar, writes _chau_.

[Illustration: MARCO POLO’S ITINERARIES, Nᵒ. I. (Prologue; Book I,
Chapters 1–36; and Book IV.)

SKETCH SHOWING CHIEF MONARCHIES OF ASIA IN LATTER PART OF 13ᵗʰ
CENTURY]

THE
BOOK OF MARCO POLO.

PROLOGUE.

Great Princes, Emperors, and Kings, Dukes and Marquises, Counts,
Knights, and Burgesses! and People of all degrees who desire to get
knowledge of the various races of mankind and of the diversities of the
sundry regions of the World, take this Book and cause it to be read
to you. For ye shall find therein all kinds of wonderful things, and
the divers histories of the Great Hermenia, and of Persia, and of the
Land of the Tartars, and of India, and of many another country of which
our Book doth speak, particularly and in regular succession, according
to the description of Messer Marco Polo, a wise and noble citizen of
Venice, as he saw them with his own eyes. Some things indeed there be
therein which he beheld not; but these he heard from men of credit and
veracity. And we shall set down things seen as seen, and things heard
as heard only, so that no jot of falsehood may mar the truth of our
Book, and that all who shall read it or hear it read may put full faith
in the truth of all its contents.

For let me tell you that since our Lord God did mould with his hands
our first Father Adam, even until this day, never hath there been
Christian, or Pagan, or Tartar, or Indian, or any man of any nation,
who in his own person hath had so much knowledge and experience of
the divers parts of the World and its Wonders as hath had this Messer
Marco! And for that reason he bethought himself that it would be a
very great pity did he not cause to be put in writing all the great
marvels that he had seen, or on sure information heard of, so that
other people who had not these advantages might, by his Book, get such
knowledge. And I may tell you that in acquiring this knowledge he spent
in those various parts of the World good six-and-twenty years. Now,
being thereafter an inmate of the Prison at Genoa, he caused Messer
Rusticiano of Pisa, who was in the said Prison likewise, to reduce the
whole to writing; and this befell in the year 1298 from the birth of
Jesus.

CHAPTER I.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS POLO SET FORTH FROM CONSTANTINOPLE
TO TRAVERSE THE WORLD.

It came to pass in the year of Christ 1260, when Baldwin was reigning
at Constantinople,{1} that Messer Nicolas Polo, the father of my lord
Mark, and Messer Maffeo Polo, the brother of Messer Nicolas, were at
the said city of CONSTANTINOPLE, whither they had gone from Venice with
their merchants’ wares. Now these two Brethren, men singularly noble,
wise, and provident, took counsel together to cross the GREATER SEA on
a venture of trade; so they laid in a store of jewels and set forth
from Constantinople, crossing the Sea to SOLDAIA.{2}

NOTE 1.—Baldwin II. (de Courtenay), the last Latin Emperor of
Constantinople, reigned from 1237 to 1261, when he was expelled by
Michael Palaeologus.

The date in the text is, as we see, that of the Brothers’ voyage
across the Black Sea. It stands 1250 in all the chief texts.
But the figure is certainly wrong. We shall see that, when the
Brothers return to Venice in 1269, they find Mark, who, according
to Ramusio’s version, was _born after their departure_, a lad of
fifteen. Hence, if we rely on Ramusio, they must have left Venice
about 1253–54. And we shall see also that they reached the Volga
in 1261. Hence their start from Constantinople may well have
occurred in 1260, and this I have adopted as the most probable
correction. Where they spent the interval between 1254 (if they
really left Venice so early) and 1260, nowhere appears. But as
their brother, Mark the Elder, in his Will styles himself “_whilom
of Constantinople_,” their headquarters were probably there.

[Illustration: Castle of Soldaia or Sudak.]

NOTE 2.—In the Middle Ages the Euxine was frequently called _Mare
Magnum_ or _Majus_. Thus Chaucer:—

“In the GRETE SEE,
At many a noble Armee hadde he be.”

The term Black Sea (_Mare Maurum_ v. _Nigrum_) was, however, in
use, and Abulfeda says it was general in his day. That name has
been alleged to appear as early as the 10th century, in the form
Σκοτεινή, “The Dark Sea”; but an examination of the passage cited,
from Constantine Porphyrogenitus, shows that it refers rather to
the Baltic, whilst that author elsewhere calls the Euxine simply
Pontus. (_Reinaud’s Abulf._ I. 38, _Const. Porph. De Adm. Imp._ c.
31, c. 42.)

✛ _Sodaya, Soldaia_, or _Soldachia_, called by Orientals _Súdák_,
stands on the S.E. coast of the Crimea, west of Kaffa. It had
belonged to the Greek Empire, and had a considerable Greek
population. After the Frank conquest of 1204 it apparently fell to
Trebizond. It was taken by the Mongols in 1223 for the first time,
and a second time in 1239, and during that century was the great
port of intercourse with what is now Russia. At an uncertain date,
but about the middle of the century, the Venetians established a
factory there, which in 1287 became the seat of a consul. In 1323
we find Pope John XXII. complaining to Uzbek Khan of Sarai that
the Christians had been ejected from Soldaia and their churches
turned into mosques. Ibn Batuta, who alludes to this strife, counts
Sudak as one of the four great ports of the World. The Genoese got
Soldaia in 1365 and built strong defences, still to be seen. Kaffa,
with a good anchorage, in the 14th century, and later on Tana, took
the place of Soldaia as chief emporium in South Russia. Some of the
Arab Geographers call the Sea of Azov the Sea of Sudak.

The Elder Marco Polo in his Will (1280) bequeaths to the Franciscan
Friars of the place a house of his in _Soldachia_, reserving life
occupation to his own son and daughter, then residing in it.
Probably this establishment already existed when the two Brothers
went thither. (_Elie de Laprimaudaie_, passim; _Gold. Horde_, 87;
_Mosheim_, App. 148; _Ibn Bat._ I. 28, II. 414; _Cathay_, 231–33;
_Heyd_, II. passim.)

CHAPTER II.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS WENT ON BEYOND SOLDAIA.

Having stayed a while at Soldaia, they considered the matter, and
thought it well to extend their journey further. So they set forth from
Soldaia and travelled till they came to the Court of a certain Tartar
Prince, BARCA KAAN by name, whose residences were at SARA{1} and at
BOLGARA [and who was esteemed one of the most liberal and courteous
Princes that ever was among the Tartars.]{2} This Barca was delighted
at the arrival of the Two Brothers, and treated them with great honour;
so they presented to him the whole of the jewels that they had brought
with them. The Prince was highly pleased with these, and accepted the
offering most graciously, causing the Brothers to receive at least
twice its value.

After they had spent a twelvemonth at the court of this Prince there
broke out a great war between Barca and Aláu, the Lord of the Tartars
of the Levant, and great hosts were mustered on either side.{3}

[Illustration: Map to illustrate the Geographical Position of the CITY
of SARAI

Part of the Remains of the CITY of SARAI near TZAREV North of the
AKHTUBA Branch of the VOLGA

Lit. Frauenfelder, Palermo]

But in the end Barca, the Lord of the Tartars of the Ponent, was
defeated, though on both sides there was great slaughter. And by reason
of this war no one could travel without peril of being taken; thus it
was at least on the road by which the Brothers had come, though there
was no obstacle to their travelling forward. So the Brothers, finding
they could not retrace their steps, determined to go forward. Quitting
Bolgara, therefore, they proceeded to a city called UCACA, which was at
the extremity of the kingdom of the Lord of the Ponent;{4} and thence
departing again, and passing the great River Tigris, they travelled
across a Desert which extended for seventeen days’ journey, and wherein
they found neither town nor village, falling in only with the tents of
Tartars occupied with their cattle at pasture.{5}

NOTE 1.—✛ Barka Khan, third son of Jújí, the first-born of
Chinghiz, ruled the _Ulús_ of Juji and Empire of Kipchak (Southern
Russia) from 1257 to 1265. He was the first Musulman sovereign of
his race. His chief residence was at SARAI (Sara of the text), a
city founded by his brother and predecessor Bátú, on the banks of
the Akhtuba branch of the Volga. In the next century Ibn Batuta
describes Sarai as a very handsome and populous city, so large that
it made half a day’s journey to ride through it. The inhabitants
were Mongols, Aás (or Alans), Kipchaks, Circassians, Russians, and
Greeks, besides the foreign Moslem merchants, who had a walled
quarter. Another Mahomedan traveller of the same century says the
city itself was not walled, but, “The Khan’s Palace was a great
edifice surmounted by a golden crescent weighing two _kantars_ of
Egypt, and encompassed by a wall flanked with towers,” etc. Pope
John XXII., on the 26th February 1322, defined the limits of the
new Bishopric of Kaffa, which were Sarai to the east and Varna to
the west.

Sarai became the seat of both a Latin and a Russian metropolitan,
and of more than one Franciscan convent. It was destroyed by Timur
on his second invasion of Kipchak (1395–6), and extinguished by the
Russians a century later. It is the scene of Chaucer’s half-told
tale of Cambuscan:—

“At _Sarra_, in the Londe of Tartarie,
There dwelt a King that werriëd Russie.”

[“_Mesalek-al-absar_ (285, 287), says Sarai, meaning ‘the Palace,’
was founded by Bereké, brother of Batu. It stood in a salty plain,
and was without walls, though the palace had walls flanked by
towers. The town was large, had markets, _madrasas_—and baths. It
is usually identified with Selitrennoyé Gorodok, about 70 miles
above Astrakhan.” (_Rockhill, Rubruck_, p. 260, note.)—H. C.]

Several sites exhibiting extensive ruins near the banks of the
Akhtuba have been identified with Sarai; two in particular.
One of these is not far from the great elbow of the Volga at
Tzaritzyn: the other much lower down, at Selitrennoyé Gorodok or
Saltpetre-Town, not far above Astrakhan.

The upper site exhibits by far the most extensive traces of
former population, and is declared unhesitatingly to be the sole
site of Sarai by M. Gregorieff, who carried on excavations among
the remains for four years, though with what precise results I
have not been able to learn. The most dense part of the remains,
consisting of mounds and earth-works, traces of walls, buildings,
cisterns, dams, and innumerable canals, extends for about 7½ miles
in the vicinity of the town of Tzarev, but a tract of 66 miles in
length and 300 miles in circuit, commencing from near the head
of the Akhtuba, presents remains of like character, though of
less density, marking the ground occupied by the villages which
encircled the capital. About 2½ miles to the N.W. of Tzarev a vast
mass of such remains, surrounded by the traces of a brick rampart,
points out the presumable position of the Imperial Palace.

M. Gregorieff appears to admit no alternative. Yet it seems certain
that the indications of Abulfeda, Pegolotti, and others, with
regard to the position of the capital in the early part of the 14th
century, are not consistent with a site so far from the Caspian.
Moreover, F. H. Müller states that the site near Tzarev is known
to the Tartars as the “Sarai of Janibek Khan” (1341–1357). Now it
is worthy of note that in the coinage of Janibek we repeatedly
find as the place of mintage, _New Sarai_. Arabsháh in his History
of Timur states that 63 years had elapsed from the foundation to
the destruction of Sarai. But it must have been at least 140 years
since the foundation of Batu’s city. Is it not possible, therefore,
that both the sites which we have mentioned were successively
occupied by the Mongol capital; that the original Sarai of Batu was
at Selitrennoyé Gorodok, and that the _New Sarai_ of Janibek was
established by him, or by his father Uzbeg in his latter days, on
the upper Akhtuba? Pegolotti having carried his merchant from Tana
(Azov) to Gittarchan (Astrakhan), takes him _one day_ by river to
Sara, and from Sara to _Saracanco_, also by river, eight days more.
(_Cathay_, p. 287.) In the work quoted I have taken Saracanco for
Saraichik, on the Yaik. But it was possibly the Upper or New Sarai
on the Akhtuba. Ibn Batuta, marching on the frozen river, reached
Sarai in three days from Astrakhan. This could not have been at
Tzarev, 200 miles off.

In corroboration (_quantum valeat_) of my suggestion that there
must have been two Sarais near the Volga, Professor Bruun of Odessa
points to the fact that Fra Mauro’s map presents _two_ cities of
Sarai on the Akhtuba; only the Sarai of Janibeg is with him no
longer _New_ Sarai, but _Great_ Sarai.

The use of the latter name suggests the possibility that in the
_Saracanco_ of Pegolotti the latter half of the name may be the
Mongol _Kúnḳ_ “Great.” (See _Pavet de Courteille_, p. 439.)

Professor Bruun also draws attention to the impossibility of Ibn
Batuta’s travelling from Astrakhan to Tzarev in three days, an
argument which had already occurred to me and been inserted above.

[The Empire of Kipchak founded after the Mongol Conquest of 1224,
included also parts of Siberia and Khwarizm; it survived nominally
until 1502.—H. C.]

(_Four Years of Archæological Researches among the Ruins of Sarai_
[in Russian] by M. Gregorieff [who appears to have also published a
pamphlet specially on the site, but this has not been available];
_Historisch-geographische Darstellung des Stromsystems der Wolga,
von Ferd. Heinr. Müller_, Berlin, 1839, 568–577; _Ibn. Bat._ II.
447; _Not. et Extraits_, XIII. i. 286; _Pallas, Voyages; Cathay_,
231, etc.; _Erdmann, Numi Asiatici_, pp. 362 _seqq._; _Arabs._ I.
p. 381.)

NOTE 2.—BOLGHAR, our author’s Bolgara, was the capital of the
region sometimes called Great Bulgaria, by Abulfeda _Inner
Bulgaria_, and stood a few miles from the left bank of the Volga,
in latitude about 54° 54′, and 90 miles below Kazan. The old Arab
writers regarded it as nearly the limit of the habitable world, and
told wonders of the cold, the brief summer nights, and the fossil
ivory that was found in its vicinity. This was exported, and with
peltry, wax, honey, hazel-nuts, and Russia leather, formed the
staple articles of trade. The last item derived from Bolghar the
name which it still bears all over Asia. (See Bk. II. ch. xvi.,
and Note.) Bolghar seems to have been the northern limit of Arab
travel, and was visited by the curious (by Ibn Batuta among others)
in order to witness the phenomena of the short summer night, as
tourists now visit Hammerfest to witness its entire absence.

Russian chroniclers speak of an earlier capital of the Bulgarian
kingdom, Brakhimof, near the mouth of the Kama, destroyed by
Andrew, Grand Duke of Rostof and Susdal, about 1160; and this may
have been the city referred to in the earlier Arabic accounts. The
fullest of these is by Ibn Fozlán, who accompanied an embassy from
the Court of Baghdad to Bolghar, in A.D. 921. The King and people
had about this time been converted to Islam, having previously, as
it would seem, professed Christianity. Nevertheless, a Mahomedan
writer of the 14th century says the people had then long renounced
Islam for the worship of the Cross. (_Not. et Extr._ XIII. i. 270.)

[Illustration: Ruins of Bolghar.]

Bolghar was first captured by the Mongols in 1225. It seems to have
perished early in the 15th century, after which Kazan practically
took its place. Its position is still marked by a village called
Bolgari, where ruins of Mahomedan character remain, and where coins
and inscriptions have been found. Coins of the Kings of Bolghar,
struck in the 10th century, have been described by Fraehn, as
well as coins of the Mongol period struck at Bolghar. Its latest
known coin is of A.H. 818 (A.D. 1415–16). A history of Bolghar was
written in the first half of the 12th century by Yakub Ibn Noman,
Kadhi of the city, but this is not known to be extant.

Fraehn shows ground for believing the people to have been a mixture
of Fins, Slavs, and Turks. Nicephorus Gregoras supposes that they
took their name from the great river on which they dwelt (Βούλγα).

[“The ruins [of Bolghar],” says Bretschneider, in his _Mediæval
Researches_, published in 1888, vol. ii. p. 82, “still exist, and
have been the subject of learned investigation by several Russian
scholars. These remains are found on the spot where now the village
_Uspenskoye_, called also _Bolgarskoye_ (Bolgari), stands, in the
district of Spask, province of Kazan. This village is about 4
English miles distant from the Volga, east of it, and 83 miles from
Kazan.” Part of the Bulgars removed to the Balkans; others remained
in their native country on the shores of the Azov Sea, and were
subjugated by the Khazars. At the beginning of the 9th century,
they marched northwards to the Volga and the Kama, and established
the kingdom of Great Bulgaria. Their chief city, Bolghar, was on
the bank of the Volga, but the river runs now to the west; as the
Kama also underwent a change in its course, it is possible that
formerly Bolghar was built at the junction of the two rivers.
(Cf. _Reclus, Europe russe_, p. 761.) The Bulgars were converted
to Islam in 922. Their country was first invaded by the Mongols
under Subutai in 1223; this General conquered it in 1236, the
capital was destroyed the following year, and the country annexed
to the kingdom of Kipchak. Bolghar was again destroyed in 1391 by
Tamerlan. In 1438, Ulugh Mohammed, cousin of Toka Timur, younger
son of Juji, transformed this country into the khanate of Kazan,
which survived till 1552. It had probably been the capital of the
Golden Horde before Sarai.

With reference to the early Christianity of the Bulgarians, to
which Yule refers in his note, the _Laurentian Chronicle_ (A.D.
1229), quoted by Shpilevsky, adduces evidence to show that in the
Great City, _i.e._ _Bulgar_, there were Russian Christians and a
Christian cemetery, and the death of a Bulgarian Christian martyr
is related in the same chronicle as well as in the Nikon, Tver, and
Tatischef annals in which his name is given. (Cf. Shpilevsky, _Anc.
towns and other Bulgaro-Tartar monuments_, Kazan, 1877, p. 158
seq.; _Rockhill’s Rubruck_, Hakl. Soc. p. 121, note.)—H. C.]

The severe and lasting winter is spoken of by Ibn Fozlán and other
old writers in terms that seem to point to a modern mitigation
of climate. It is remarkable, too, that Ibn Fozlán speaks of the
aurora as of very frequent occurrence, which is not now the case
in that latitude. We may suspect this frequency to have been
connected with the greater cold indicated, and perhaps with a
different position of the magnetic pole. Ibn Fozlán’s account of
the aurora is very striking:—“Shortly before sunset the horizon
became all very ruddy, and at the same time I heard sounds in the
upper air, with a dull rustling. I looked up and beheld sweeping
over me a fire-red cloud, from which these sounds issued, and in
it movements, as it were, of men and horses; the men grasping
bows, lances, and swords. This I saw, or thought I saw. Then there
appeared a white cloud of like aspect; in it also I beheld armed
horsemen, and these rushed against the former as one squadron of
horse charges another. We were so terrified at this that we turned
with humble prayer to the Almighty, whereupon the natives about us
wondered and broke into loud laughter. We, however, continued to
gaze, seeing how one cloud charged the other, remained confused
with it a while, and then sundered again. These movements lasted
deep into the night, and then all vanished.”

(_Fraehn, Ueber die Wolga Bulgaren_, Petersb. 1832; _Gold.
Horde_, 8, 9, 423–424; _Not. et Extr._ II. 541; _Ibn Bat._ II.
398; _Büschings Mag._ V. 492; _Erdmann, Numi Asiat._ I. 315–318,
333–334, 520–535; _Niceph. Gregoras_, II. 2, 2.)

NOTE 3.—ALAU is Polo’s representation of the name of Hulákú,
brother of the Great Kaans Mangu and Kublai and founder of the
Mongol dynasty in Persia. In the Mongol pronunciation guttural
and palatal consonants are apt to be elided, hence this spelling.
The same name is written by Pope Alexander IV., in addressing the
Khan, _Olao_, by Pachymeres and Gregoras Χαλαὺ and Χαλαοῦ, by
Hayton _Haolon_, by Ibn Batuta _Huláún_, as well as in a letter of
Hulaku’s own, as given by Makrizi.

The war in question is related in Rashíduddín’s history, and by
Polo himself towards the end of the work. It began in the summer of
1262, and ended about eight months later. Hence the Polos must have
reached Barka’s Court in 1261.

Marco always applies to the Mongol Khans of Persia the title of
“Lords of the East” (_Levant_), and to the Khans of Kipchak that of
“Lords of the West” (_Ponent_). We use the term _Levant_ still with
a similar specific application, and in another form _Anatolia_. I
think it best to preserve the terms _Levant_ and _Ponent_ when used
in this way.

[Robert Parke in his translation out of Spanish of Mendoza,
_The Historie of the great and mightie kingdome of China_ ...
London, printed by I. Wolfe for Edward White, 1588, uses the word
_Ponent_: “You shall understande that this mightie kingdome is the
Orientalest part of all Asia, and his next neighbour towards the
_Ponent_ is the kingdome of _Quachinchina_ ... (p. 2).”—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—UCACA or UKEK was a town on the right bank of the Volga,
nearly equidistant between Sarai and Bolghar, and about six miles
south of the modern Saratov, where a village called _Uwek_ still
exists. Ukek is not mentioned before the Mongol domination, and is
supposed to have been of Mongol foundation, as the name Ukek is
said in Mongol to signify a dam of hurdles. The city is mentioned
by Abulfeda as marking the extremity of “the empire of the Barka
Tartars,” and Ibn Batuta speaks of it as “one day distant from
the hills of the Russians.” Polo therefore means that it was the
frontier of the Ponent towards Russia. Ukek was the site of a
Franciscan convent in the 14th century; it is mentioned several
times in the campaigns of Timur, and was destroyed by his army.
It is not mentioned under the form Ukek after this, but appears
as _Uwek_ and _Uwesh_ in Russian documents of the 16th century.
Perhaps this was always the Slavonic form, for it already is
written _Uguech_ (= Uwek) in Wadding’s 14th century catalogue of
convents. Anthony Jenkinson, in Hakluyt, gives an observation of
its latitude, as _Oweke_ (51° 40′), and Christopher Burrough, in
the same collection, gives a description of it as _Oueak_, and the
latitude as 51° 30′ (some 7′ too much). In his time (1579) there
were the remains of a “very faire stone castle” and city, with old
tombs exhibiting sculptures and inscriptions. All these have long
vanished. Burrough was told by the Russians that the town “was
swallowed into the earth by the justice of God, for the wickednesse
of the people that inhabited the same.” Lepechin in 1769 found
nothing remaining but part of an earthen rampart and some
underground vaults of larger bricks, which the people dug out for
use. He speaks of coins and other relics as frequent, and the like
have been found more recently. Coins with Mongol-Arab inscriptions,
struck at Ukek by Tuktugai Khan in 1306, have been described by
Fraehn and Erdmann.

(_Fraehn, Ueber die ehemalige Mong. Stadt Ukek_, etc., Petersb.
1835; _Gold. Horde_; _Ibn Bat._ II. 414; _Abulfeda, in Büsching_,
V. 365; _Ann. Minorum_, sub anno 1400; _Pétis de la Croix_, II.
355, 383, 388; _Hakluyt_, ed. 1809, I. 375 and 472; _Lepechin,
Tagebuch der Reise_, etc., I. 235–237; _Rockhill, Rubruck_,
120–121, note 2.)

NOTE 5.—The great River Tigeri or Tigris is the Volga, as Pauthier
rightly shows. It receives the same name from the Monk Pascal of
Vittoria in 1338. (_Cathay_, p. 234.) Perhaps this arose out of
some legend that the Tigris was a reappearance of the same river.
The ecclesiastical historian, Nicephorus Callistus, appears to
imply that the Tigris coming from Paradise flows under the Caspian
to emerge in Kurdistan. (See IX. 19.)

The “17 days” applies to one stretch of desert. The whole journey
from Ukek Bokhara would take some 60 days at least. Ibn Batuta is
58 days from Sarai to Bokhara, and of the last section he says, “we
entered the desert which extends between Khwarizm and Bokhara, and
_which has an extent of 18 days’ journey_.” (III. 19.)

CHAPTER III.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS, AFTER CROSSING A DESERT, CAME TO THE
CITY OF BOCARA, AND FELL IN WITH CERTAIN ENVOYS THERE.

After they had passed the desert, they arrived at a very great and
noble city called BOCARA, the territory of which belonged to a king
whose name was Barac, and is also called Bocara. The city is the best
in all Persia.{1} And when they had got thither, they found they could
neither proceed further forward nor yet turn back again; wherefore they
abode in that city of Bocara for three years. And whilst they were
sojourning in that city, there came from Alau, Lord of the Levant,
Envoys on their way to the Court of the Great Kaan, the Lord of all the
Tartars in the world. And when the Envoys beheld the Two Brothers they
were amazed, for they had never before seen Latins in that part of the
world. And they said to the Brothers: “Gentlemen, if ye will take our
counsel, ye will find great honour and profit shall come thereof.” So
they replied that they would be right glad to learn how. “In truth,”
said the Envoys, “the Great Kaan hath never seen any Latins, and he
hath a great desire so to do. Wherefore, if ye will keep us company
to his Court, ye may depend upon it that he will be right glad to see
you, and will treat you with great honour and liberality; whilst in
our company ye shall travel with perfect security, and need fear to be
molested by nobody.”{2}

NOTE 1.—Hayton also calls Bokhara a city of Persia, and I see
Vámbéry says that, up till the conquest by Chinghiz, Bokhara,
Samarkand, Balkh, etc., were considered to belong to Persia.
(_Travels_, p. 377.) The first Mongolian governor of Bokhara was
Buka Bosha.

King Barac is Borrak Khan, great-grandson of Chagatai, and
sovereign of the Ulús of Chagatai, from 1264 to 1270. The Polos,
no doubt, reached Bokhara before 1264, but Borrak must have been
sovereign some time before they left it.

NOTE 2.—The language of the envoys seems rather to imply that
they were the Great Kaan’s own people returning from the Court of
Hulaku. And Rashid mentions that Sartak, the Kaan’s ambassador to
Hulaku, returned from Persia in the year that the latter prince
died. It may have been his party that the Venetians joined, for the
year almost certainly was the same, viz. 1265. If so, another of
the party was Bayan, afterwards the greatest of Kublai’s captains,
and much celebrated in the sequel of this book. (See _Erdmann’s
Temudschin_, p. 214.)

Marsden justly notes that Marco habitually speaks of _Latins_,
never of _Franks_. Yet I suspect his own mental expression was
_Farangi_.

CHAPTER IV.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS TOOK THE ENVOYS’ COUNSEL, AND WENT TO
THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN.

So when the Two Brothers had made their arrangements, they set out on
their travels, in company with the Envoys, and journeyed for a whole
year, going northward and north-eastward, before they reached the Court
of that Prince. And on their journey they saw many marvels of divers
and sundry kinds, but of these we shall say nothing at present, because
Messer Mark, who has likewise seen them all, will give you a full
account of them in the Book which follows.

CHAPTER V.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS ARRIVED AT THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN.

When the Two Brothers got to the Great Kaan, he received them with
great honour and hospitality, and showed much pleasure at their visit,
asking them a great number of questions. First, he asked about the
emperors, how they maintained their dignity, and administered justice
in their dominions; and how they went forth to battle, and so forth.
And then he asked the like questions about the kings and princes and
other potentates.

CHAPTER VI.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN ASKED ALL ABOUT THE MANNERS OF THE
CHRISTIANS, AND PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE POPE OF ROME.

And then he inquired about the Pope and the Church, and about all
that is done at Rome, and all the customs of the Latins. And the Two
Brothers told him the truth in all its particulars, with order and good
sense, like sensible men as they were; and this they were able to do as
they knew the Tartar language well.{1}

NOTE 1.—The word generally used for Pope in the original is
_Apostoille_ (_Apostolicus_), the usual French expression of that
age.

It is remarkable that for the most part the text edited by Pauthier
has the correcter Oriental form _Tatar_, instead of the usual
_Tartar_. _Tattar_ is the word used by Yvo of Narbonne, in the
curious letter given by Matthew Paris under 1243.

We are often told that _Tartar_ is a vulgar European error. It is
in any case a very old one; nor does it seem to be of European
origin, but rather Armenian;[1] though the suggestion of Tartarus
may have given it readier currency in Europe. Russian writers, or
rather writers who have been in Russia, sometimes try to force on
us a specific limitation of the word _Tartar_ to a certain class of
Oriental Turkish race, to whom the Russians appropriate the name.
But there is no just ground for this. _Tátár_ is used by Oriental
writers of Polo’s age exactly as Tartar was then, and is still,
used in Western Europe, as a generic title for the Turanian hosts
who followed Chinghiz and his successors. But I believe the name in
this sense was unknown to Western Asia before the time of Chinghiz.
And General Cunningham must overlook this when he connects the
Ṭáṭaríya coins, mentioned by Arab geographers of the 9th century,
with “the Scythic or Tátár princes who ruled in Kabul” in the
beginning of our era. Tartars on the Indian frontier in those
centuries are surely to be classed with the Frenchmen whom Brennus
led to Rome, or the Scotchmen who fought against Agricola.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] See _J. As._ sér. V. tom. xi. p. 203.

CHAPTER VII.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN SENT THE TWO BROTHERS AS HIS ENVOYS TO
THE POPE.

When that Prince, whose name was CUBLAY KAAN, Lord of the Tartars all
over the earth, and of all the kingdoms and provinces and territories
of that vast quarter of the world, had heard all that the Brothers had
to tell him about the ways of the Latins, he was greatly pleased, and
he took it into his head that he would send them on an Embassy to the
Pope. So he urgently desired them to undertake this mission along with
one of his Barons; and they replied that they would gladly execute all
his commands as those of their Sovereign Lord. Then the Prince sent to
summon to his presence one of his Barons whose name was COGATAL, and
desired him to get ready, for it was proposed to send him to the Pope
along with the Two Brothers. The Baron replied that he would execute
the Lord’s commands to the best of his ability.

After this the Prince caused letters from himself to the Pope to be
indited in the Tartar tongue,{1} and committed them to the Two Brothers
and to that Baron of his own, and charged them with what he wished
them to say to the Pope. Now the contents of the letter were to this
purport: He begged that the Pope would send as many as an hundred
persons of our Christian faith; intelligent men, acquainted with the
Seven Arts,{2} well qualified to enter into controversy, and able
clearly to prove by force of argument to idolaters and other kinds of
folk, that the Law of Christ was best, and that all other religions
were false and naught; and that if they would prove this, he and all
under him would become Christians and the Church’s liegemen. Finally
he charged his Envoys to bring back to him some Oil of the Lamp which
burns on the Sepulchre of our Lord at Jerusalem.{3}

NOTE 1.—✛ The appearance of the Great Kaan’s letter may be
illustrated by two letters on so-called Corean paper preserved
in the French archives; one from Arghún Khan of Persia (1289),
brought by Buscarel, and the other from his son Oljaitu (May,
1305), to Philip the Fair. These are both in the Mongol language,
and according to Abel Rémusat and other authorities, in the Uighúr
character, the parent of the present Mongol writing. Facsimiles of
the letters are given in Rémusat’s paper on intercourse with Mongol
Princes, in _Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscript._ vols. vii. and viii.,
reproductions in J. B. Chabot’s _Hist. de Mar Jabalaha III._,
Paris, 1895, and preferably in Prince Roland Bonaparte’s beautiful
_Documents Mongols_, Pl. XIV., and we give samples of the two in
vol. ii.[1]

NOTE 2.—“The Seven Arts,” from a date reaching back nearly to
classical times, and down through the Middle Ages, expressed the
whole circle of a liberal education, and it is to these Seven
Arts that the degrees in arts were understood to apply. They were
divided into the _Trivium_ of Rhetoric, Logic, and Grammar, and
the _Quadrivium_ of Arithmetic, Astronomy, Music, and Geometry.
The 38th epistle of Seneca was in many MSS. (according to Lipsius)
entitled “_L. Annaei Senecae Liber de Septem Artibus liberalibus._”
I do not find, however, that Seneca there mentions categorically
more than five, viz., Grammar, Geometry, Music, Astronomy, and
Arithmetic. In the 5th century we find the Seven Arts to form
the successive subjects of the last seven books of the work of
Martianus Capella, much used in the schools during the early Middle
Ages. The Seven Arts will be found enumerated in the verses of
Tzetzes (_Chil. XI._ 525), and allusions to them in the mediæval
romances are endless. Thus, in one of the “Gestes d’Alexandre,” a
chapter is headed “_Comment Aristotle aprent à Alixandre les Sept
Arts._” In the tale of the Seven Wise Masters, Diocletian selects
that number of tutors for his son, each to instruct him in one of
the Seven Arts. In the romance of _Erec and Eneide_ we have a dress
on which the fairies had portrayed the Seven Arts (_Franc. Michel,
Recherches_, etc. II. 82); in the _Roman de Mahommet_ the young
impostor is master of all the seven. There is one mediæval poem
called the _Marriage of the Seven Arts_, and another called the
_Battle of the Seven Arts_. (See also Dante, _Convito_, Trat. II.
c. 14; _Not. et Ex._ V., 491 _seqq._)

NOTE 3.—The Chinghizide Princes were eminently liberal—or
indifferent—in religion; and even after they became Mahomedan,
which, however, the Eastern branch never did, they were rarely and
only by brief fits persecutors. Hence there was scarcely one of the
non-Mahomedan Khans of whose conversion to Christianity there were
not stories spread. The first rumours of Chinghiz in the West were
as of a Christian conqueror; tales may be found of the Christianity
of Chagatai, Hulaku, Abaka, Arghun, Baidu, Ghazan, Sartak, Kuyuk,
Mangu, Kublai, and one or two of the latter’s successors in China,
all probably false, with one or two doubtful exceptions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] See plates with ch. xvii. of Bk. IV. See also the Uighúr character
in the second _Païza_, Bk. II. ch. vii.

[Illustration: The Great Kaan delivering a Golden Tablet to the
Brothers. From a miniature of the 14th century.]

CHAPTER VIII.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN GAVE THEM A TABLET OF GOLD, BEARING HIS
ORDERS IN THEIR BEHALF.

When the Prince had charged them with all his commission, he caused to
be given them a Tablet of Gold, on which was inscribed that the three
Ambassadors should be supplied with everything needful in all the
countries through which they should pass—with horses, with escorts,
and, in short, with whatever they should require. And when they had
made all needful preparations, the three Ambassadors took their leave
of the Emperor and set out.

When they had travelled I know not how many days, the Tartar Baron
fell sick, so that he could not ride, and being very ill, and unable
to proceed further, he halted at a certain city. So the Two Brothers
judged it best that they should leave him behind and proceed to carry
out their commission; and, as he was well content that they should
do so, they continued their journey. And I can assure you, that
whithersoever they went they were honourably provided with whatever
they stood in need of, or chose to command. And this was owing to that
Tablet of Authority from the Lord which they carried with them.{1}

So they travelled on and on until they arrived at Layas in Hermenia,
a journey which occupied them, I assure you, for three years.{2} It
took them so long because they could not always proceed, being stopped
sometimes by snow, or by heavy rains falling, or by great torrents
which they found in an impassable state.

NOTE 1.—On these Tablets, see a note under Bk. II. ch. vii.

NOTE 2.—AYAS, called also Ayacio, Aiazzo, Giazza, Glaza, La Jazza,
and _Layas_, occupied the site of ancient Aegae, and was the chief
port of Cilician Armenia, on the Gulf of Scanderoon. _Aegae_ had
been in the 5th century a place of trade with the West, and the
seat of a bishopric, as we learn from the romantic but incomplete
story of Mary, the noble slave-girl, told by Gibbon (ch. 33). As
Ayas it became in the latter part of the 13th century one of the
chief places for the shipment of Asiatic wares arriving through
Tabriz, and was much frequented by the vessels of the Italian
Republics. The Venetians had a _Bailo_ resident there.

[Illustration: Castle of Ayas.]

Ayas is the _Leyes_ of Chaucer’s Knight,—

(“At LEYES was he and at Satalie”)—

and the Layas of Froissart. (Bk. III. ch. xxii.) The Gulf of Layas
is described in the xix. Canto of Ariosto, where Mafisa and Astolfo
find on its shores a country of barbarous Amazons:—

“Fatto è ’l porto a sembranza d’una luna,” etc.

Marino Sanuto says of it: “Laiacio has a haven, and a shoal in
front of it that we might rather call a reef, and to this shoal
the hawsers of vessels are moored whilst the anchors are laid out
towards the land.” (II. IV. ch. xxvi.)

The present Ayas is a wretched village of some 15 huts, occupied
by about 600 Turkmans, and standing inside the ruined walls of the
castle. This castle, which is still in good condition, was built
by the Armenian kings, and restored by Sultan Suleiman; it was
constructed from the remains of the ancient city; fragments of
old columns are embedded in its walls of cut stone. It formerly
communicated by a causeway with an advanced work on an island
before the harbour. The ruins of the city occupy a large space.
(_Langlois, V. en Cilicie_, pp. 429–31; see also _Beaufort’s
Karamania_, near the end.) A plan of Ayas will be found at the
beginning of Bk. I.—H. Y. and H. C.

CHAPTER IX.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS CAME TO THE CITY OF ACRE.

They departed from Layas and came to ACRE, arriving there in the month
of April, in the year of Christ 1269, and then they learned that the
Pope was dead. And when they found that the Pope was dead (his name was
Pope * *),{1} they went to a certain wise Churchman who was Legate
for the whole kingdom of Egypt, and a man of great authority, by name
THEOBALD OF PIACENZA, and told him of the mission on which they were
come. When the Legate heard their story, he was greatly surprised, and
deemed the thing to be of great honour and advantage for the whole of
Christendom. So his answer to the two Ambassador Brothers was this:
“Gentlemen, ye see that the Pope is dead; wherefore ye must needs
have patience until a new Pope be made, and then shall ye be able to
execute your charge.” Seeing well enough that what the Legate said was
just, they observed: “But while the Pope is a-making, we may as well
go to Venice and visit our households.” So they departed from Acre and
went to Negropont, and from Negropont they continued their voyage to
Venice.{2} On their arrival there, Messer Nicolas found that his wife
was dead, and that she had left behind her a son of fifteen years of
age, whose name was MARCO; and ’tis of him that this Book tells.{3} The
Two Brothers abode at Venice a couple of years, tarrying until a Pope
should be made.

[Illustration: ACRE _AS IT WAS WHEN LOST_ (A.D. 1291). _FROM THE PLAN
GIVEN BY_ MARINO SANUTO.]

NOTE 1.—The deceased Pope’s name is omitted both in the Geog. Text
and in Pauthier’s, clearly because neither Rusticiano nor Polo
remembered it. It is supplied correctly in the Crusca Italian as
_Clement_, and in Ramusio as _Clement IV._

It is not clear that _Theobald_, though generally adopted, is the
ecclesiastic’s proper name. It appears in different MSS. as _Teald_
(G. T.), _Ceabo_ for _Teabo_ (Pauthier), _Odoaldo_ (Crusca), and
in the Riccardian as _Thebaldus de Vice-comitibus de Placentia_,
which corresponds to Ramusio’s version. Most of the ecclesiastical
chroniclers call him _Tedaldus_, some _Thealdus_. _Tedaldo_ is a
real name, occurring in Boccaccio. (Day iii. Novel 7.)

NOTE 2.—After the expulsion of the Venetians from Constantinople,
Negropont was the centre of their influence in Romania. On the
final return of the travellers they again take Negropont on
their way. [It was one of the ports on the route from Venice to
Constantinople, Tana, Trebizond.—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The _edition_ of the Soc. de Géographie makes Mark’s age
_twelve_, but I have verified from inspection the fact noticed by
Pauthier that the _manuscript_ has distinctly xv. like all the
other old texts. In Ramusio it is _nineteen_, but this is doubtless
an arbitrary correction to suit the mistaken date (1250) assigned
for the departure of the father from Constantinople.

There is nothing in the old French texts to justify the usual
statement that Marco was born after the departure of his father
from Venice. All that the G. T. says is: “Meser Nicolau treuve
que sa fame estoit morte, et les remès un filz de xv. anz que
avoit à nom Marc,” and Pauthier’s text is to the same effect.
Ramusio, indeed, has: “M. Nicolò trovò, che sua moglie era morta,
la quale nella sua partita haveva partorito un figliuolo,” and the
other versions that are based on Pipino’s seem all to have like
statements.

CHAPTER X.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS AGAIN DEPARTED FROM VENICE, ON THEIR WAY BACK TO
THE GREAT KAAN, AND TOOK WITH THEM MARK, THE SON OF MESSER NICOLAS.

When the Two Brothers had tarried as long as I have told you, and saw
that never a Pope was made, they said that their return to the Great
Kaan must be put off no longer. So they set out from Venice, taking
Mark along with them, and went straight back to Acre, where they found
the Legate of whom we have spoken. They had a good deal of discourse
with him concerning the matter, and asked his permission to go to
JERUSALEM to get some Oil from the Lamp on the Sepulchre, to carry with
them to the Great Kaan, as he had enjoined.{1} The Legate giving them
leave, they went from Acre to Jerusalem and got some of the Oil, and
then returned to Acre, and went to the Legate and said to him: “As we
see no sign of a Pope’s being made, we desire to return to the Great
Kaan; for we have already tarried long, and there has been more than
enough delay.” To which the Legate replied: “Since ’tis your wish to go
back, I am well content.” Wherefore he caused letters to be written for
delivery to the Great Kaan, bearing testimony that the Two Brothers had
come in all good faith to accomplish his charge, but that as there was
no Pope they had been unable to do so.

NOTE 1.—In a Pilgrimage of date apparently earlier than this, the
Pilgrim says of the Sepulchre: “The Lamp which had been placed by
His head (when He lay there) still burns on the same spot day and
night. _We took a blessing from it_ (_i.e._ apparently took some of
the oil as a beneficent memorial), and replaced it.” (_Itinerarium
Antonini Placentini_ in _Bollandists_, May, vol. ii. p. xx.)

[“Five great oil lamps,” says Daniel, the Russian Hégoumène,
1106–1107 (_Itinéraires russes en Orient_, trad. pour la Soc. de
l’Orient Latin, par Mme. B. de Khitrowo, Geneva, 1889, p. 13),
“burning continually night and day, are hung in the Sepulchre of
Our Lord.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER XI.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS SET OUT FROM ACRE, AND MARK ALONG
WITH THEM.

When the Two Brothers had received the Legate’s letters, they set
forth from Acre to return to the Grand Kaan, and got as far as
Layas. But shortly after their arrival there they had news that the
Legate aforesaid was chosen Pope, taking the name of Pope Gregory of
Piacenza; news which the Two Brothers were very glad indeed to hear.
And presently there reached them at Layas a message from the Legate,
now the Pope, desiring them, on the part of the Apostolic See, not to
proceed further on their journey, but to return to him incontinently.
And what shall I tell you? The King of Hermenia caused a galley to be
got ready for the Two Ambassador Brothers, and despatched them to the
Pope at Acre.{1}

[Illustration: Portrait of Pope Gregory X.]

NOTE 1.—The death of Pope Clement IV. occurred on St Andrew’s
Day (29th November), 1268; the election of Tedaldo or Tebaldo of
Piacenza, a member of the Visconti family, and Archdeacon of Liège,
did not take place till 1st September, 1271, owing to the factions
among the cardinals. And it is said that some of them, anxious only
to get away, voted for Theobald in full belief that he was dead.
The conclave, in its inability to agree, had named a committee of
six with full powers which the same day elected Theobald, on the
recommendation of the Cardinal Bishop of Portus (John de Toleto,
said, in spite of his name, to have been an Englishman). This
facetious dignitary had suggested that the roof should be taken
off the Palace at Viterbo where they sat, to allow the divine
influences to descend more freely on their counsels (_quia nequeunt
ad nos per tot tecta ingredi_). According to some, these doggerel
verses, current on the occasion, were extemporised by Cardinal John
in the pious exuberance of his glee:—

“Papatûs munus tulit Archidiaconus unus
Quem Patrem Patrum fecit discordia Fratrum.”

The Archdeacon, a man of great weight of character, in consequence
of differences with his Bishop (of Liège), who was a disorderly
liver, had gone to the Holy Land, and during his stay there he
contracted great intimacy with Prince Edward of England (Edward
I.). Some authors, _e.g._ John Villani (VIII. 39), say that he was
Legate in Syria; others, as Rainaldus, deny this; but Polo’s
statement, and the authority which the Archdeacon took on himself
in writing to the Kaan, seem to show that he had some such position.

He took the name of Gregory X., and before his departure from
Acre, preached a moving sermon on the text, “_If I forget thee, O
Jerusalem_,” etc. Prince Edward fitted him out for his voyage.

Gregory reigned barely four years, dying at Arezzo 10th January,
1276. His character stood high to the last, and some of the
Northern Martyrologies enrolled him among the saints, but there
has never been canonisation by Rome. The people of Arezzo used
to celebrate his anniversary with torch-light gatherings at his
tomb, and plenty of miracles were alleged to have occurred there.
The tomb still stands in the Duomo at Arezzo, a handsome work
by Margaritone, an artist in all branches, who was the Pope’s
contemporary. There is an engraving of it in _Gonnelli, Mon.
Sepolc. di Toscana_.

(_Fra Pipino_ in _Muratori_, IX. 700; _Rainaldi Annal._ III. 252
_seqq._; _Wadding_, sub. an. 1217: _Bollandists_, 10th January;
_Palatii, Gesta Pontif. Roman._ vol. iii., and _Fasti Cardinalium_,
I. 463, etc.)

CHAPTER XII.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS PRESENTED THEMSELVES BEFORE
THE NEW POPE.

And when they had been thus honourably conducted to Acre they proceeded
to the presence of the Pope, and paid their respects to him with humble
reverence. He received them with great honour and satisfaction, and
gave them his blessing. He then appointed two Friars of the Order of
Preachers to accompany them to the Great Kaan, and to do whatever might
be required of them. These were unquestionably as learned Churchmen as
were to be found in the Province at that day—one being called Friar
Nicolas of Vicenza, and the other Friar William of Tripoli.{1} He
delivered to them also proper credentials, and letters in reply to the
Great Kaan’s messages [and gave them authority to ordain priests and
bishops, and to bestow every kind of absolution, as if given by himself
in proper person; sending by them also many fine vessels of crystal
as presents to the Great Kaan].{2} So when they had got all that was
needful, they took leave of the Pope, receiving his benediction; and
the four set out together from Acre, and went to Layas, accompanied
always by Messer Nicolas’s son Marco.

Now, about the time that they reached Layas, Bendocquedar, the Soldan
of Babylon, invaded Hermenia with a great host of Saracens, and ravaged
the country, so that our Envoys ran a great peril of being taken or
slain.{3} And when the Preaching Friars saw this they were greatly
frightened, and said that go they never would. So they made over to
Messer Nicolas and Messer Maffeo all their credentials and documents,
and took their leave, departing in company with the Master of the
Temple.{4}

NOTE 1.—Friar William, of Tripoli, of the Dominican convent at
Acre, appears to have served there as early as 1250. [He was born
_circa_ 1220, at Tripoli, in Syria, whence his name.—H. C.] He is
known as the author of a book, _De Statu Saracenorum post Ludovici
Regis de Syriâ reditum_, dedicated to Theoldus, Archdeacon of
Liège (_i.e._ Pope Gregory). Of this some extracts are printed in
Duchesne’s _Hist. Francorum Scriptores_. There are two MSS. of it,
with different titles, in the Paris Library, and a French version
in that of Berne. A MS. in Cambridge Univ. Library, which contains
among other things a copy of Pipino’s Polo, has also the work of
Friar William:—“_Willelmus Tripolitanus, Aconensis Conventus,
de Egressu Machometi et Saracenorum, atque progressu eorumdem,
de Statu Saracenorum_,” etc. It is imperfect; it is addressed
THEOBALDO _Ecclesiarcho digno Sancte Terre Peregrino Sancto_. And
from a cursory inspection I imagine that the Tract appended to one
of the Polo MSS. in the British Museum (Addl. MSS., No. 19,952)
is the same work or part of it. To the same author is ascribed a
tract called _Clades Damiatae_. (_Duchesne_, V. 432; _D’Avezac_ in
_Rec. de Voyages_, IV. 406; _Quétif, Script. Ord. Praed._ I. 264–5;
_Catal. of MSS. in Camb. Univ. Library_, I. 22.)

NOTE 2.—I presume that the powers, stated in this passage from
Ramusio to have been conferred on the Friars, are exaggerated.
In letters of authority granted in like cases by Pope Gregory’s
successors, Nicolas III. (in 1278) and Boniface VIII. (in 1299),
the missionary friars to remote regions are empowered to absolve
from excommunication and release from vows, to settle matrimonial
questions, to found churches and appoint _idoneos rectores_,
to authorise Oriental clergy who should publicly submit to the
Apostolic See to enjoy the _privilegium clericale_, whilst in the
absence of bishops those among the missionaries who were priests
might consecrate cemeteries, altars, palls, etc., admit to the
Order of Acolytes, but nothing beyond. (See _Mosheim, Hist. Tartar.
Eccles._ App. Nos. 23 and 42.)

NOTE 3.—The statement here about Bundúḳdár’s invasion of Cilician
Armenia is a difficulty. He had invaded it in 1266, and his second
devastating invasion, during which he burnt both Layas and Sis,
the king’s residence, took place in 1275, a point on which Marino
Sanuto is at one with the Oriental Historians. Now we know from
Rainaldus that Pope Gregory left Acre in November or December,
1271, and the text appears to imply that our travellers left Acre
before him. The utmost corroboration that I can find lies in the
following facts stated by Makrizi:—

On the 13th Safar, A.H. 670 (20th September 1271), Bundúḳdár
arrived unexpectedly at Damascus, and after a brief raid against
the Ismaelians he returned to that city. In the middle of Rabi I.
(about 20–25 October) the Tartars made an incursion in northern
Syria, and the troops of Aleppo retired towards Hamah. There was
great alarm at Damascus; the Sultan sent orders to Cairo for
reinforcements, and these arrived at Damascus on the 9th November.
The Sultan then advanced on Aleppo, sending corps likewise towards
Marash (which was within the Armenian frontier) and Harran. At
the latter place the Tartars were attacked and those in the town
slaughtered; the rest retreated. The Sultan was back at Damascus,
and off on a different expedition, by 7th December. Hence, if the
travellers arrived at Ayas towards the latter part of November they
would probably find alarm existing at the advance of Bundúḳdár,
though matters did not turn out so serious as they imply.

“Babylon,” of which Bundúḳdár is here styled Sultan, means Cairo,
commonly so styled (_Bambellonia d’Egitto_) in that age. Babylon
of Egypt is mentioned by Diodorus quoting Ctesias, by Strabo, and
by Ptolemy; it was the station of a Roman Legion in the days of
Augustus, and still survives in the name of _Babul_, close to old
Cairo.

Malik Dáhir Ruknuddín Bíbars Bundúḳdári, a native of Kipchak, was
originally sold at Damascus for 800 dirhems (about 18_l._), and
returned by his purchaser because of a blemish. He was then bought
by the Amir Aláuddín Aidekín _Bundúḳdár_ (“The Arblasteer”) whose
surname he afterwards adopted. He became the fourth of the Mameluke
Sultans, and reigned from 1259 to 1276. The two great objects of
his life were the repression of the Tartars and the expulsion of
the Christians from Syria, so that his reign was one of constant
war and enormous activity. William of Tripoli, in the work above
mentioned, says: “Bondogar, as a soldier, was not inferior to
Julius Caesar, nor in malignity to Nero.” He admits, however, that
the Sultan was sober, chaste, just to his own people, and even kind
to his Christian subjects; whilst Makrizi calls him one of the best
princes that ever reigned over Musulmans. Yet if we take Bibars as
painted by this admiring historian and by other Arabic documents,
the second of Friar William’s comparisons is justified, for he
seems almost a devil in malignity as well as in activity. More than
once he played tennis at Damascus and Cairo within the same week. A
strange sample of the man is the letter which he wrote to Boemond,
Prince of Antioch and Tripoli, to announce to him the capture of
the former city. After an ironically polite address to Boemond as
having by the loss of his great city had his title changed from
Princeship (_Al-Brensíyah_) to Countship (_Al-Komasíyah_), and
describing his own devastations round Tripoli, he comes to the
attack of Antioch: “We carried the place, sword in hand, at the
4th hour of Saturday, the 4th day of Ramadhán, ... Hadst thou but
seen thy Knights trodden under the hoofs of the horses! thy palaces
invaded by plunderers and ransacked for booty! thy treasures
weighed out by the hundredweight! thy ladies (_Dámátaka_, ‘tes
DAMES’) bought and sold with thine own gear, at four for a dinár!
hadst thou but seen thy churches demolished, thy crosses sawn in
sunder, thy garbled Gospels hawked about before the sun, the tombs
of thy nobles cast to the ground; thy foe the Moslem treading thy
Holy of the Holies; the monk, the priest, the deacon slaughtered
on the Altar; the rich given up to misery; princes of royal blood
reduced to slavery! Couldst thou but have seen the flames devouring
thy halls; thy dead cast into the fires temporal with the fires
eternal hard at hand; the churches of Paul and of Cosmas rocking
and going down—, then wouldst thou have said, ‘Would God that I
were dust!’ ... As not a man hath escaped to tell thee the tale, I
TELL IT THEE!”

A little later, when a mission went to treat with Boemond, Bibars
himself accompanied it in disguise, to have a look at the defences
of Tripoli. In drawing out the terms, the Envoys styled Boemond
_Count_, not _Prince_, as in the letter just quoted. He lost
patience at their persistence, and made a movement which alarmed
them. Bibars nudged the Envoy Mohiuddin (who tells the story)
with his foot to give up the point, and the treaty was made. On
their way back the Sultan laughed heartily at their narrow escape,
“sending to the devil all the counts and princes on the face of the
earth.”

(_Quatremère’s Makrizi_, II. 92–101, and 190 _seqq._; _J. As._ sér.
I. tom. xi. p. 89; _D’Ohsson_, III. 459–474; _Marino Sanuto_ in
Bongars, 224–226, etc.)

NOTE 4.—The ruling Master of the Temple was Thomas Berard
(1256–1273), but there is little detail about the Order in the East
at this time. They had, however, considerable possessions and great
influence in Cilician Armenia, and how much they were mixed up in
its affairs is shown by a circumstance related by Makrizi. In 1285,
when Sultan Mansúr, the successor of Bundúḳdár, was besieging
the Castle of Markab, there arrived in Camp the Commander of the
Temple (_Kamandúr-ul Dewet_) of the Country of Armenia, charged
to negotiate on the part of the King of Sis (_i.e._ of Lesser
Armenia, Leon III. 1268–1289, successor of Hayton I. 1224–1268),
and bringing presents from him and from the Master of the Temple,
Berard’s successor, William de Beaujeu (1273–1291). (III. 201.)—H.
Y. and H. C.

CHAPTER XIII.

HOW MESSER NICOLO AND MESSER MAFFEO POLO, ACCOMPANIED BY
MARK, TRAVELLED TO THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN.

So the Two Brothers, and Mark along with them, proceeded on their way,
and journeying on, summer and winter, came at length to the Great Kaan,
who was then at a certain rich and great city, called KEMENFU.{1} As to
what they met with on the road, whether in going or coming, we shall
give no particulars at present, because we are going to tell you all
those details in regular order in the after part of this Book. Their
journey back to the Kaan occupied a good three years and a half, owing
to the bad weather and severe cold that they encountered. And let me
tell you in good sooth that when the Great Kaan heard that Messers
Nicolo and Maffeo Polo were on their way back, he sent people a journey
of full 40 days to meet them; and on this journey, as on their former
one, they were honourably entertained upon the road, and supplied with
all that they required.

NOTE 1.—The French texts read _Clemeinfu_, Ramusio _Clemenfu_.
The Pucci MS. guides us to the correct reading, having _Chemensu_
(_Kemensu_) for _Chemenfu_. KAIPINGFU, meaning something like
“City of Peace,” and called by Rashiduddin _Kaiminfu_ (whereby
we see that Polo as usual adopted the Persian form of the name),
was a city founded in 1256, four years before Kublai’s accession,
some distance to the north of the Chinese wall. It became Kublai’s
favourite summer residence, and was styled from 1264 _Shangtu_
or “Upper Court.” (See _infra_, Bk. I. ch. lxi.) It was known to
the Mongols, apparently by a combination of the two names, as
_Shangdu Keibung_. It appears in D’Anville’s map under the name of
_Djao-Naiman Sumé_. Dr. Bushell, who visited Shangtu in 1872, makes
it 1103 _li_ (367 miles) by road distance _viâ_ Kalgan from Peking.
The busy town of Dolonnúr lies 26 miles S.E. of it, and according
to Kiepert’s _Asia_ that place is about 180 miles in a direct line
north of Peking.

(See _Klaproth_ in _J. As._ XI. 365; _Gaubil_, p. 115; _Cathay_, p.
260; _J. R. G. S._ vol. xliii.)

CHAPTER XIV.

HOW MESSER NICOLO AND MESSER MAFFEO POLO AND MARCO
PRESENTED THEMSELVES BEFORE THE GREAT KAAN.

And what shall I tell you? when the Two Brothers and Mark had arrived
at that great city, they went to the Imperial Palace, and there they
found the Sovereign attended by a great company of Barons. So they
bent the knee before him, and paid their respects to him, with all
possible reverence [prostrating themselves on the ground]. Then the
Lord bade them stand up, and treated them with great honour, showing
great pleasure at their coming, and asked many questions as to their
welfare, and how they had sped. They replied that they had in verity
sped well, seeing that they found the Kaan well and safe. Then they
presented the credentials and letters which they had received from
the Pope, which pleased him right well; and after that they produced
the Oil from the Sepulchre, and at that also he was very glad, for he
set great store thereby. And next, spying Mark, who was then a young
gallant,{1} he asked who was that in their company? “Sire,” said his
father, Messer Nicolo, “’tis my son and your liegeman.”{2} “Welcome is
he too,” quoth the Emperor. And why should I make a long story? There
was great rejoicing at the Court because of their arrival; and they met
with attention and honour from everybody.

So there they abode at the Court with the other Barons.

NOTE 1.—“_Joenne Bacheler_.”

NOTE 2.—“_Sire, il est mon filz et vostre_ homme.” The last word
in the sense which gives us the word _homage_. Thus in the miracle
play of Theophilus (13th century), the Devil says to Theophilus:—

“Or joing
Tes mains, et si devien _mes hom_.
_Theoph._ Vez ci que je vous faz _hommage_.”

So _infra_ (Bk. I. ch. xlvii.) Aung Khan is made to say of Chinghiz:
“_Il est_ mon homes _et mon serf_.” (See also Bk. II. ch. iv.
note.) St. Lewis said of the peace he had made with Henry III.: “Il
m’est mout grant honneur en la paix que je foiz au Roy d’Angleterre
pour ce qu’il est _mon home_, ce que n’estoit pas devant.” And
Joinville says with regard to the king, “Je ne voz faire point
de serement, car je n’estoie pas _son home_” (being a vassal of
Champagne). A famous Saturday Reviewer quotes the term applied to
a lady: “_Eddeva puella_ homo _Stigandi Archiepiscopi_.” (_Théâtre
Français au Moyen Age_, p. 145; _Joinville_, pp. 21, 37; _S. R._,
6th September, 1873, p. 305.)

CHAPTER XV.

HOW THE EMPEROR SENT MARK ON AN EMBASSY OF HIS.

Now it came to pass that Marco, the son of Messer Nicolo, sped
wondrously in learning the customs of the Tartars, as well as their
language, their manner of writing, and their practice of war; in fact
he came in brief space to know several languages, and four sundry
written characters. And he was discreet and prudent in every way,
insomuch that the Emperor held him in great esteem.{1} And so when he
discerned Mark to have so much sense, and to conduct himself so well
and beseemingly, he sent him on an ambassage of his, to a country
which was a good six months’ journey distant.{2} The young gallant
executed his commission well and with discretion. Now he had taken
note on several occasions that when the Prince’s ambassadors returned
from different parts of the world, they were able to tell him about
nothing except the business on which they had gone, and that the
Prince in consequence held them for no better than fools and dolts,
and would say: “I had far liever hearken about the strange things,
and the manners of the different countries you have seen, than merely
be told of the business you went upon;”—for he took great delight in
hearing of the affairs of strange countries. Mark therefore, as he went
and returned, took great pains to learn about all kinds of different
matters in the countries which he visited, in order to be able to tell
about them to the Great Kaan.{3}

NOTE 1.—The word Emperor stands here for _Seigneur_.

What the four characters acquired by Marco were is open to
discussion.

The Chronicle of the Mongol Emperors rendered by Gaubil mentions,
as characters used in their Empire, the Uíghúr, the Persian and
Arabic, that of the Lamas (Tibetan), that of the Niuché, introduced
by the Kin Dynasty, the Khitán, and the _Báshpah_ character,
a syllabic alphabet arranged, on the basis of the Tibetan and
Sanskrit letters chiefly, by a learned chief Lama so-called,
under the orders of Kublai, and established by edict in 1269 as
the official character. Coins bearing this character, and dating
from 1308 to 1354, are extant. The forms of the Niuché and Khitán
were devised in imitation of Chinese writing, but are supposed to
be syllabic. Of the Khitán but one inscription was known, and no
key. “The Khitan had two national scripts, the ‘small characters’
(_hsiao tzŭ_) and the ‘large characters’ (_ta tzŭ_).” S. W. Bushell,
_Insc. in the Juchen and Allied Scripts_, Cong. des Orientalistes,
Paris, 1897.—_Die Sprache und Schrift der Juchen_ von Dr. W. Grube,
Leipzig, 1896, from a polyglot MS. dictionary, discovered by Dr. F.
Hirth and now kept in the Royal Library, Berlin.—H. Y. and H. C.

Chinghiz and his first successors used the Uíghúr, and sometimes
the Chinese character. Of the Uíghúr character we give a specimen
in Bk. IV. It is of Syriac origin, undoubtedly introduced into
Eastern Turkestan by the early Nestorian missions, probably in the
8th or 9th century. The oldest known example of this character so
applied, the _Kudatku Bilik_, a didactic poem in Uíghúr (a branch
of Oriental Turkish), dating from A.D. 1069, was published by
Prof. Vámbéry in 1870. A new edition of the _Kudatku Bilik_ was
published at St. Petersburg, in 1891, by Dr. W. Radloff. Vámbéry
had a pleasing illustration of the origin of the Uíghúr character,
when he received a visit at Pesth from certain Nestorians of
Urumia on a begging tour. On being shown the original MS. of the
_Kudatku Bilik_, they read the character easily, whilst much to
their astonishment they could not understand a word of what was
written. This Uíghúr is the basis of the modern Mongol and Manchu
characters. (Cf. E. Bretschneider, _Mediæval Researches_, I. pp.
236, 263.)—H. Y. and H. C.

[At the village of Keuyung Kwan, 40 miles north of Peking, in the
sub-prefecture of Ch’ang Ping, in the Chih-li province, the road
from Peking to Kalgan runs beyond the pass of Nankau, under an
archway, a view of which will be found at the end of this volume,
on which were engraved, in 1345, two large inscriptions in six
different languages: Sanskrit, Tibetan, Mongol, _Báshpah_, Uíghúr,
Chinese, and a language unknown till recently. Mr. Wylie’s kindness
enabled Sir Henry Yule to present a specimen of this. (A much
better facsimile of these inscriptions than Wylie’s having since
been published by Prince Roland Bonaparte in his valuable _Recueil
des Documents de l’Époque Mongole_, this latter is, by permission,
here reproduced.) The Chinese and Mongol inscriptions have been
translated by M. Ed. Chavannes; the Tibetan by M. Sylvain Lévi
(_Jour. Asiat._, Sept.–Oct. 1894, pp. 354–373); the Uíghúr, by
Prof. W. Radloff (_Ibid._ Nov.–Dec. 1894, pp. 546, 550); the Mongol
by Prof. G. Huth. (_Ibid._ Mars–Avril 1895, pp. 351–360.) The
sixth language was supposed by A. Wylie (_J. R. A. S._ vol. xvii.
p. 331, and N.S., vol. v. p. 14) to be Neuchih, Niuché, Niuchen
or Juchen. M. Devéria has shown that the inscription is written
in _Si Hia_, or the language of Tangut, and gave a facsimile of a
stone stèle (_pei_) in this language kept in the great Monastery
of the Clouds (Ta Yun Ssŭ) at Liangchau in Kansuh, together with a
translation of the Chinese text, engraved on the reverse side of
the slab. M. Devéria thinks that this writing was borrowed by the
Kings of Tangut from the one derived in 920 by the Khitans from
the Chinese. (_Stèle Si-Hia de Leang-tcheou_ ... _J. As._, 1898;
_L’écriture du royaume de Si-Hia ou Tangout_, par M. Devéria....
Ext. des Mém.... présentés à l’Ac. des Ins. et B. Let. 1^{ère} Sér.
XI., 1898.) Dr. S. W. Bushell in two papers (_Inscriptions in the
Juchen and Allied Scripts, Actes du XI. Congrès des Orientalistes_,
Paris, 1897, 2nd. sect., pp. 11, 35, and the _Hsi Hsia Dynasty of
Tangut, their Money and their peculiar Script, J. China Br. R. A.
S._, xxx. N.S. No. 2, pp. 142, 160) has also made a special study
of the same subject. The Si Hia writing was adopted by Yuan Ho in
1036, on which occasion he changed the title of his reign to Ta
Ch’ing, _i.e._ “Great Good Fortune.” Unfortunately, both the late
M. Devéria and Dr. S. W. Bushell have deciphered but few of the Si
Hia characters.—H. C.]

[Illustration: Hexaglot Inscription on the East side of the Kiu-Yong
Kwan.]

[Illustration: Hexaglot Inscription on the West side of the Kiu-Yong
Kwan.]

The orders of the Great Kaan are stated to have been published
habitually in six languages, viz., Mongol, Uíghúr, Arabic, Persian,
Tangutan (Si-Hia), and Chinese.—H. Y. and H. C.

Gházán Khan of Persia is said to have understood Mongol, Arabic,
Persian, something of Kashmiri, of Tibetan, of Chinese, and a
little of the _Frank_ tongue (probably French).

The annals of the Ming Dynasty, which succeeded the Mongols in
China, mention the establishment in the 11th moon of the 5th year
Yong-lo (1407) of the _Sse yi kwan_, a linguistic office for
diplomatic purposes. The languages to be studied were Niuché,
Mongol, Tibetan, Sanskrit, Bokharan (Persian?), Uíghúr, Burmese,
and Siamese. To these were added by the Manchu Dynasty two
languages called _Papeh_ and _Pehyih_, both dialects of the S.W.
frontier. (See _infra_, Bk. II. ch. lvi.–lvii., and notes.) Since
1382, however, official interpreters had to translate Mongol texts;
they were selected among the Academicians, and their service
(which was independent of the _Sse yi kwan_ when this was created)
was under the control of the _Han-lin-yuen_. There may have been
similar institutions under the Yuen, but we have no proof of it. At
all events, such an office could not then be called _Sse yi kwan_
(_Sse yi_, Barbarians from four sides); Niuché (Niuchen) was taught
in Yong-lo’s office, but not Manchu. The _Sse yi kwan_ must not be
confounded with the _Hui t’ong kwan_, the office for the reception
of tributary envoys, to which it was annexed in 1748. (_Gaubil_, p.
148; _Gold. Horde_, 184; _Ilchan._ II. 147; _Lockhart_ in _J. R. G.
S._ XXXVI. 152; _Koeppen_, II. 99; G. Devéria, _Hist. du Collège
des Interprètes de Peking_ in _Mélanges_ Charles de Harlez, pp.
94–102; MS. Note of Prof. A. Vissière; _The Tangut Script in the
Nan-K’ou Pass_, by Dr. S. W. Bushell, _China Review_, xxiv. II. pp.
65–68.)—H. Y. and H. C.

Pauthier supposes Mark’s four acquisitions to have been
_Báshpah-Mongol, Arabic, Uighúr_, and _Chinese_. I entirely reject
the Chinese. Sir H. Yule adds: “We shall see no reason to believe
that he knew either language or character” [Chinese]. The blunders
Polo made in saying that the name of the city, Suju, signifies
in our tongue “Earth” and Kinsay “Heaven” show he did not know
the Chinese characters, but we read in Bk. II. ch. lxviii.: “And
Messer Marco Polo himself, of whom this Book speaks, did govern
this city (Yanju) for three full years, by the order of the Great
Kaan.” It seems to me [H. C.] hardly possible that Marco could have
for three years been governor of so important and so Chinese a
city as Yangchau, in the heart of the Empire, without acquiring a
knowledge of the spoken language.—H. C. The other three languages
seem highly probable. The fourth may have been Tibetan. But it is
more likely that he counted separately two varieties of the same
character (_e.g._ of the Arabic and Persian) as two “_lettres de
leur escriptures_.”—H. Y. and H. C.

NOTE 2.—[Ramusio here adds: “Ad und città, detta Carazan,” which,
as we shall see, refers to the Yun-nan Province.]—H. C.

NOTE 3.—From the context no doubt Marco’s employments were
honourable and confidential; but _Commissioner_ would perhaps
better express them than Ambassador in the modern sense. The word
_Ilchi_, which was probably in his mind, was applied to a large
variety of classes employed on the commissions of Government, as
we may see from a passage of Rashiduddin in D’Ohsson, which says
that “there were always to be found in every city from one to two
hundred _Ilchis_, who forced the citizens to furnish them with free
quarters,” etc., III. 404. (See also 485.)

CHAPTER XVI.

HOW MARK RETURNED FROM THE MISSION WHEREON HE HAD
BEEN SENT.

When Mark returned from his ambassage he presented himself before the
Emperor, and after making his report of the business with which he
was charged, and its successful accomplishment, he went on to give an
account in a pleasant and intelligent manner of all the novelties and
strange things that he had seen and heard; insomuch that the Emperor
and all such as heard his story were surprised, and said: “If this
young man live, he will assuredly come to be a person of great worth
and ability.” And so from that time forward he was always entitled
MESSER MARCO POLO, and thus we shall style him henceforth in this Book
of ours, as is but right.

Thereafter Messer Marco abode in the Kaan’s employment some seventeen
years, continually going and coming, hither and thither, on the
missions that were entrusted to him by the Lord [and sometimes, with
the permission and authority of the Great Kaan, on his own private
affairs.] And, as he knew all the sovereign’s ways, like a sensible
man he always took much pains to gather knowledge of anything that
would be likely to interest him, and then on his return to Court he
would relate everything in regular order, and thus the Emperor came
to hold him in great love and favour. And for this reason also he
would employ him the oftener on the most weighty and most distant of
his missions. These Messer Marco ever carried out with discretion and
success, God be thanked. So the Emperor became ever more partial to
him, and treated him with the greater distinction, and kept him so
close to his person that some of the Barons waxed very envious thereat.
And thus it came about that Messer Marco Polo had knowledge of, or had
actually visited, a greater number of the different countries of the
World than any other man; the more that he was always giving his mind
to get knowledge, and to spy out and enquire into everything in order
to have matter to relate to the Lord.

CHAPTER XVII.

HOW MESSER NICOLO, MESSER MAFFEO, AND MESSER MARCO, ASKED
LEAVE OF THE GREAT KAAN TO GO THEIR WAY.

When the Two Brothers and Mark had abode with the Lord all that time
that you have been told [having meanwhile acquired great wealth
in jewels and gold], they began among themselves to have thoughts
about returning to their own country; and indeed it was time. [For,
to say nothing of the length and infinite perils of the way, when
they considered the Kaan’s great age, they doubted whether, in the
event of his death before their departure, they would ever be able
to get home.{1}] They applied to him several times for leave to
go, presenting their request with great respect, but he had such a
partiality for them, and liked so much to have them about him, that
nothing on earth would persuade him to let them go.

Now it came to pass in those days that the Queen BOLGANA, wife of
ARGON, Lord of the Levant, departed this life. And in her Will she had
desired that no Lady should take her place, or succeed her as Argon’s
wife, except one of her own family [which existed in Cathay]. Argon
therefore despatched three of his Barons, by name respectively OULATAY,
APUSCA, and COJA, as ambassadors to the Great Kaan, attended by a very
gallant company, in order to bring back as his bride a lady of the
family of Queen Bolgana, his late wife.{2}

When these three Barons had reached the Court of the Great Kaan, they
delivered their message, explaining wherefore they were come. The Kaan
received them with all honour and hospitality, and then sent for a lady
whose name was COCACHIN, who was of the family of the deceased Queen
Bolgana. She was a maiden of 17, a very beautiful and charming person,
and on her arrival at Court she was presented to the three Barons as
the Lady chosen in compliance with their demand. They declared that the
Lady pleased them well.{3}

Meanwhile Messer Marco chanced to return from India, whither he had
gone as the Lord’s ambassador, and made his report of all the different
things that he had seen in his travels, and of the sundry seas over
which he had voyaged. And the three Barons, having seen that Messer
Nicolo, Messer Maffeo, and Messer Marco were not only Latins, but men
of marvellous good sense withal, took thought among themselves to get
the three to travel with them, their intention being to return to their
country by sea, on account of the great fatigue of that long land
journey for a lady. And the ambassadors were the more desirous to have
their company, as being aware that those three had great knowledge and
experience of the Indian Sea and the countries by which they would have
to pass, and especially Messer Marco. So they went to the Great Kaan,
and begged as a favour that he would send the three Latins with them,
as it was their desire to return home by sea.

The Lord, having that great regard that I have mentioned for those
three Latins, was very loath to do so [and his countenance showed great
dissatisfaction]. But at last he did give them permission to depart,
enjoining them to accompany the three Barons and the Lady.

NOTE 1.—Pegolotti, in his chapters on mercantile ventures to
Cathay, refers to the dangers to which foreigners were always
liable on the death of the reigning sovereign. (See _Cathay_, p.
292.)

NOTE 2.—Several ladies of the name of BULUGHAN (“Zibellina”) have
a place in Mongol-Persian history. The one here indicated, a lady
of great beauty and ability, was known as the _Great Khátún_ (or
Lady) Bulughan, and was (according to strange Mongol custom) the
wife successively of Ábáḳa and of his son ARGHUN, the Argon of the
text, Mongol sovereign of Persia. She died on the banks of the Kur
in Georgia, 7th April, 1286. She belonged to the Mongol tribe of
Bayaut, and was the daughter of Hulákú’s Chief Secretary Gúgah.
(_Ilchan._ I. 374 _et passim; Erdmann’s Temudschin_, p. 216.)

The names of the Envoys, ULADAI, APUSHKA, and KOJA, are all names
met with in Mongol history. And Rashiduddin speaks of an Apushka
of the Mongol Tribe of Urnaut, who on some occasion was sent as
Envoy to the Great Kaan from Persia,—possibly the very person. (See
_Erdmann_, 205.)

Of the Lady Cocachin we shall speak below.

NOTE 3.—Ramusio here has the following passage, genuine no doubt:
“So everything being ready, with a great escort to do honour to the
bride of King Argon, the Ambassadors took leave and set forth. But
after travelling eight months by the same way that they had come,
they found the roads closed, in consequence of wars lately broken
out among certain Tartar Princes; so being unable to proceed, they
were compelled to return to the Court of the Great Kaan.”

CHAPTER XVIII.

HOW THE TWO BROTHERS AND MESSER MARCO TOOK LEAVE OF THE
GREAT KAAN, AND RETURNED TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

And when the Prince saw that the Two Brothers and Messer Marco were
ready to set forth, he called them all three to his presence, and
gave them two golden Tablets of Authority, which should secure them
liberty of passage through all his dominions, and by means of which,
whithersoever they should go, all necessaries would be provided for
them, and for all their company, and whatever they might choose to
order.{1} He charged them also with messages to the King of France,
the King of England,{2} the King of Spain, and the other kings of
Christendom. He then caused thirteen ships to be equipt, each of which
had four masts, and often spread twelve sails.{3} And I could easily
give you all particulars about these, but as it would be so long an
affair I will not enter upon this now, but hereafter, when time and
place are suitable. [Among the said ships were at least four or five
that carried crews of 250 or 260 men.]

And when the ships had been equipt, the Three Barons and the Lady, and
the Two Brothers and Messer Marco, took leave of the Great Kaan, and
went on board their ships with a great company of people, and with all
necessaries provided for two years by the Emperor. They put forth to
sea, and after sailing for some three months they arrived at a certain
Island towards the South, which is called JAVA,{4} and in which there
are many wonderful things which we shall tell you all about by-and-bye.
Quitting this Island they continued to navigate the Sea of India for
eighteen months more before they arrived whither they were bound,
meeting on their way also with many marvels, of which we shall tell
hereafter.

And when they got thither they found that Argon was dead, so the Lady
was delivered to CASAN, his son.

But I should have told you that it is a fact that, when they embarked,
they were in number some 600 persons, without counting the mariners;
but nearly all died by the way, so that only eight survived.{5}

The sovereignty when they arrived was held by KIACATU, so they
commended the Lady to him, and executed all their commission. And when
the Two Brothers and Messer Marco had executed their charge in full,
and done all that the Great Kaan had enjoined on them in regard to
the Lady, they took their leave and set out upon their journey.{6}
And before their departure, Kiacatu gave them four golden tablets of
authority, two of which bore gerfalcons, one bore lions, whilst the
fourth was plain, and having on them inscriptions which directed that
the three Ambassadors should receive honour and service all through the
land as if rendered to the Prince in person, and that horses and all
provisions, and everything necessary, should be supplied to them. And
so they found in fact; for throughout the country they received ample
and excellent supplies of everything needful; and many a time indeed,
as I may tell you, they were furnished with 200 horsemen, more or
less, to escort them on their way in safety. And this was all the more
needful because Kiacatu was not the legitimate Lord, and therefore the
people had less scruple to do mischief than if they had had a lawful
prince.{7}

Another thing too must be mentioned, which does credit to those three
Ambassadors, and shows for what great personages they were held. The
Great Kaan regarded them with such trust and affection, that he had
confided to their charge the Queen Cocachin, as well as the daughter
of the King of Manzi,{8} to conduct to Argon the Lord of all the
Levant. And those two great ladies who were thus entrusted to them they
watched over and guarded as if they had been daughters of their own,
until they had transferred them to the hands of their Lord; whilst the
ladies, young and fair as they were, looked on each of those three as a
father, and obeyed them accordingly. Indeed, both Casan, who is now the
reigning prince, and the Queen Cocachin his wife, have such a regard
for the Envoys that there is nothing they would not do for them. And
when the three Ambassadors took leave of that Lady to return to their
own country, she wept for sorrow at the parting.

What more shall I say? Having left Kiacatu they travelled day by
day till they came to Trebizond, and thence to Constantinople, from
Constantinople to Negropont, and from Negropont to Venice. And this was
in the year 1295 of Christ’s Incarnation.

And now that I have rehearsed all the Prologue as you have heard, we
shall begin the Book of the Description of the Divers Things that
Messer Marco met with in his Travels.

NOTE 1.—On these plates or tablets, which have already been
spoken of, a note will be found further on. (Bk. II. ch. vii.)
Plano Carpini says of the Mongol practice in reference to royal
messengers: “Nuncios, quoscunque et quotcunque, et ubicunque
transmittit, oportet quod dent eis sine morâ equos subductitios et
expensas” (669).

NOTE 2.—The mention of the King of England appears for the first
time in Pauthier’s text. Probably we shall never know if the
communication reached him. But we have the record of several
embassies in preceding and subsequent years from the Mongol Khans
of Persia to the Kings of England; all with the view of obtaining
co-operation in attack on the Egyptian Sultan. Such messages came
from Ábáḳa in 1277; from Arghún in 1289 and 1291; from Gházán in
1302; from Oljaitu in 1307. (See _Rémusat_ in _Mém. de l’Acad._
VII.)

NOTE 3.—Ramusio has “_nine_ sails.” Marsden thinks even this
lower number an error of Ramusio’s, as “it is well known that
Chinese vessels do not carry any kind of topsail.” This is,
however, a mistake, for they do sometimes carry a small topsail
of cotton cloth (and formerly, it would seem from Lecomte, even a
topgallant sail at times), though only in quiet weather. And the
evidence as to the number of sails carried by the great Chinese
junks of the Middle Ages, which evidently made a great impression
on Western foreigners, is irresistible. Friar Jordanus, who saw
them in Malabar, says: “With a fair wind they carry ten sails;”
Ibn Batuta: “One of these great junks carries from three sails
to twelve;” Joseph, the Indian, speaking of those that traded
to India in the 15th century: “They were very great, and had
sometimes twelve sails, with innumerable rowers.” (_Lecomte_, I.
389; _Fr. Jordanus_, Hak. Soc., p. 55; _Ibn Batuta_, IV. 91; _Novus
Orbis_, p. 148.) A fuller account of these vessels is given at the
beginning of Bk. III.

[Illustration: Ancient Chinese War Vessel.]

NOTE 4.—_I.e._ in this case Sumatra, as will appear hereafter. “It
is quite possible for a fleet of fourteen junks which required
to keep together to take three months at the present time to
accomplish a similar voyage. A Chinese trader, who has come
annually to Singapore in junks for many years, tells us that he
has had as long a passage as sixty days, although the average is
eighteen or twenty days.” (_Logan_ in _J. Ind. Archip._ II. 609.)

NOTE 5.—Ramusio’s version here varies widely, and looks more
probable: “From the day that they embarked until their arrival
there died of mariners and others on board 600 persons; and of the
three ambassadors only one survived, whose name was Goza (_Coja_);
but of the ladies and damsels died but one.”

It is worth noting that in the case of an embassy sent to Cathay a
few years later by Gházán Khan, on the return by this same route
to Persia, the chief of the two Persian ambassadors, and the Great
Khan’s envoy, who was in company, both died by the way. Their
voyage, too, seems to have been nearly as long as Polo’s; for they
were seven years absent from Persia, and of these only four in
China. (See _Wassáf_ in _Elliot_, III. 47.)

NOTE 6.—Ramusio’s version states that on learning Arghún’s death
(which they probably did on landing at Hormuz), they sent word of
their arrival to Kiacatu, who directed them to conduct the lady to
Casan, who was then in the region of the _Arbre Sec_ (the Province
of Khorasan) guarding the frontier passes with 60,000 men, and that
they did so, and then turned back to Kiacatu (probably at Tabriz),
and stayed at his Court nine months. Even the Geog. Text seems to
imply that they had become personally known to Casan, and I have
no doubt that Ramusio’s statement is an authentic expansion of the
original narrative by Marco himself, or on his authority.

Arghún Khan died 10th March, 1291. He was succeeded (23rd July) by
his brother Kaikhátú (_Quiacatu_ of Polo), who was put to death
24th March, 1295.

We learn from Hammer’s History of the Ilkhans that when Gházán,
the son of Arghún (_Casan_ of Polo), who had the government of the
Khorasan frontier, was on his return to his post from Tabriz, where
his uncle Kaikhatu had refused to see him, “he met at Abher the
ambassador whom he had sent to the Great Khan to obtain in marriage
a relative of the Great Lady Bulghán. This envoy brought with him
the Lady KÚKÁCHIN (our author’s _Cocachin_), with presents from the
Emperor, and the marriage was celebrated with due festivity.” Abher
lies a little west of Kazvín.

Hammer is not, I find, here copying from Wassáf, and I have not
been able to procure a thorough search of the work of Rashiduddin,
which probably was his authority. As well as the date can be made
out from the History of the Ilkhans, Gházán must have met his
bride towards the end of 1293, or quite the beginning of 1294.
Rashiduddin in another place mentions the fair lady from Cathay;
“The _ordu_ (or establishment) of Tukiti Khatun was given to
KUKACHI KHATUN, who had been brought from the Kaan’s Court, and who
was a kinswoman of the late chief Queen Bulghán. Kúkáchi, the wife
of the Padshah of Islam, Gházán Khan, died in the month of Shaban,
695,” _i.e._ in June, 1296, so that the poor girl did not long
survive her promotion. (See _Hammer’s Ilch._ II. 20, and 8, and I.
273; and _Quatremère’s Rashiduddin_, p. 97.) Kukachin was the name
also of the wife of Chingkim, Kublai’s favourite son; but she was
of the Kungurát tribe. (_Deguignes_, IV. 179.)

NOTE 7.—Here Ramusio’s text says: “During this journey Messers
Nicolo, Maffeo, and Marco heard the news that the Great Khan had
departed this life; and this caused them to give up all hope of
returning to those parts.”

NOTE 8.—This Princess of Manzi, or Southern China, is mentioned
only in the Geog. Text and in the Crusca, which is based thereon. I
find no notice of her among the wives of Gházán or otherwise.

On the fall of the capital of the Sung Dynasty—the Kinsay of
Polo—in 1276, the Princesses of that Imperial family were sent to
Peking, and were graciously treated by Kublai’s favourite Queen,
the Lady Jamui. This young lady was, no doubt, one of those captive
princesses who had been brought up at the Court of Khánbálik. (See
_De Mailla_, IX. 376, and _infra_ Bk. II. ch. lxv., note 6.)

BOOK FIRST.

ACCOUNT OF REGIONS VISITED OR HEARD OF ON THE JOURNEY FROM THE LESSER
ARMENIA TO THE COURT OF THE GREAT KAAN AT CHANDU.

[Illustration: Aias, the LAIAS of POLO, from an Admiralty Chart.

Position of _Diláwar_, the supposed Site of POLO’S DILAVAR

Lit. Frauenfelder, Palermo]

BOOK I.

CHAPTER I.

HERE THE BOOK BEGINS; AND FIRST IT SPEAKS OF THE LESSER
HERMENIA.

There are two Hermenias, the Greater and the Less. The Lesser
Hermenia is governed by a certain King, who maintains a just rule in
his dominions, but is himself subject to the Tartar.{1} The country
contains numerous towns and villages,{2} and has everything in plenty;
moreover, it is a great country for sport in the chase of all manner
of beasts and birds. It is, however, by no means a healthy region,
but grievously the reverse.{3} In days of old the nobles there were
valiant men, and did doughty deeds of arms; but nowadays they are
poor creatures, and good at nought, unless it be at boozing; they are
great at that. Howbeit, they have a city upon the sea, which is called
LAYAS, at which there is a great trade. For you must know that all
the spicery, and the cloths of silk and gold, and the other valuable
wares that come from the interior, are brought to that city. And the
merchants of Venice and Genoa, and other countries, come thither to
sell their goods, and to buy what they lack. And whatsoever persons
would travel to the interior (of the East), merchants or others, they
take their way by this city of Layas.{4}

Having now told you about the Lesser Hermenia, we shall next tell you
about Turcomania.

NOTE 1.—The _Petite Hermenie_ of the Middle Ages was quite distinct
from the Armenia Minor of the ancient geographers, which name the
latter applied to the western portion of Armenia, west of the
Euphrates, and immediately north of Cappadocia.

[Illustration: Coin of King Hetum and his Queen Isabel.]

But when the old Armenian monarchy was broken up (1079–80), Rupen,
a kinsman of the Bagratid Kings, with many of his countrymen, took
refuge in the Taurus. His first descendants ruled as _barons_, a
title adopted apparently from the Crusaders, but still preserved in
Armenia. Leon, the great-great-grandson of Rupen, was consecrated
King under the supremacy of the Pope and the Western Empire in
1198. The kingdom was at its zenith under Hetum or Hayton I.,
husband of Leon’s daughter Isabel (1224–1269); he was, however,
prudent enough to make an early submission to the Mongols, and
remained ever staunch to them, which brought his territory
constantly under the flail of Egypt. It included at one time all
Cilicia, with many cities of Syria and the ancient Armenia Minor,
of Isauria and Cappadocia. The male line of Rupen becoming extinct
in 1342, the kingdom passed to John de Lusignan, of the royal
house of Cyprus, and in 1375 it was put an end to by the Sultan of
Egypt. Leon VI., the ex-king, into whose mouth Froissart puts some
extraordinary geography, had a pension of 1000_l._ a year granted
him by our Richard II., and died at Paris in 1398.

The chief remaining vestige of this little monarchy is the
continued existence of a _Catholicos_ of part of the Armenian
Church at Sis, which was the royal residence. Some Armenian
communities still remain both in hills and plains; and the former,
the more independent and industrious, still speak a corrupt
Armenian.

Polo’s contemporary, Marino Sanuto, compares the kingdom of the
Pope’s faithful Armenians to one between the teeth of four fierce
beasts, the _Lion_ Tartar, the _Panther_ Soldan, the Turkish
_Wolf_, the Corsair _Serpent_.

(_Dulaurier_, in _J. As._ sér. V. tom. xvii.; _St. Martin, Arm._;
_Mar. San._ p. 32; _Froissart_, Bk. II. ch. xxii. _seqq._;
_Langlois, V. en Cilicie_, 1861, p. 19.)

NOTE 2.—“_Maintes villes et maint chasteaux_.” This is a constantly
recurring phrase, and I have generally translated it as here,
believing _chasteaux (castelli)_ to be used in the frequent old
Italian sense of a _walled_ village or small walled town, or like
the Eastern _Kala’_, applied in Khorasan “to everything—town,
village, or private residence—surrounded by a wall of earth.”
(_Ferrier_, p. 292; see also _A. Conolly_, I. p. 211.) Martini,
in his _Atlas Sinensis_, uses “_Urbes_, _oppida_, castella,” to
indicate the three classes of Chinese administrative cities.

NOTE 3.—“_Enferme durement_.” So Marino Sanuto objects to Lesser
Armenia as a place of debarkation for a crusade “_quia terra est
infirma_.” Langlois, speaking of the Cilician plain: “In this region
once so fair, now covered with swamps and brambles, fever decimates
a population which is yearly diminishing, has nothing to oppose
to the scourge but incurable apathy, and will end by disappearing
altogether,” etc. (_Voyage_, p. 65.) Cilician Armenia retains its
reputation for sport, and is much frequented by our naval officers
for that object. Ayas is noted for the extraordinary abundance of
turtles.

NOTE 4.—The phrase twice used in this passage for the _Interior_
is _Fra terre_, an Italianism (_Fra terra_, or, as it stands in the
Geog. Latin, “_infra terram Orientis_”), which, however, Murray
and Pauthier have read as an allusion to the _Euphrates_, an error
based apparently on a marginal gloss in the published edition of
the Soc. de Géographie. It is true that the province of Comagene
under the Greek Empire got the name of _Euphratesia_, or in Arabic
_Furátíyah_, but that was not in question here. The great trade
of Ayas was with Tabriz, _viâ_ Sivas, Erzingan, and Erzrum, as we
see in Pegolotti. Elsewhere, too, in Polo we find the phrase _fra
terre_ used, where Euphrates could possibly have no concern, as in
relation to India and Oman. (See Bk. III. chs. xxix. and xxxviii.,
and notes in each case.)

With regard to the phrase _spicery_ here and elsewhere, it should
be noted that the Italian _spezerie_ included a vast deal more than
ginger and other things “hot i’ the mouth.” In one of Pegolotti’s
lists of _spezerie_ we find drugs, dye-stuffs, metals, wax, cotton,
etc.

CHAPTER II.

CONCERNING THE PROVINCE OF TURCOMANIA.

In Turcomania there are three classes of people. First, there are the
Turcomans; these are worshippers of Mahommet, a rude people with an
uncouth language of their own.{1} They dwell among mountains and downs
where they find good pasture, for their occupation is cattle-keeping.
Excellent horses, known as _Turquans_, are reared in their country, and
also very valuable mules. The other two classes are the Armenians and
the Greeks, who live mixt with the former in the towns and villages,
occupying themselves with trade and handicrafts. They weave the finest
and handsomest carpets in the world, and also a great quantity of fine
and rich silks of cramoisy and other colours, and plenty of other
stuffs. Their chief cities are CONIA, SAVAST [where the glorious Messer
Saint Blaise suffered martyrdom], and CASARIA, besides many other towns
and bishops’ sees, of which we shall not speak at present, for it would
be too long a matter. These people are subject to the Tartar of the
Levant as their Suzerain.{2} We will now leave this province, and speak
of the Greater Armenia.

NOTE 1.—Ricold of Montecroce, a contemporary of Polo, calls the
Turkmans _homines bestiales_. In our day Ainsworth notes of a
Turkman village: “The dogs were very ferocious; ... the people
only a little better.” (_J. R. G. S._ X. 292.) The ill report
of the people of this region did not begin with the Turkmans,
for the Emperor Constantine Porphyrog. quotes a Greek proverb to
the disparagement of the three _kappas_, Cappadocia, Crete, and
Cilicia. (In _Banduri_, I. 6.)

NOTE 2.—In Turcomania Marco perhaps embraces a great part of Asia
Minor, but he especially means the territory of the decaying
Seljukian monarchy, usually then called by Asiatics _Rúm_, as
the Ottoman Empire is now, and the capital of which was Iconium,
KUNIYAH, the Conia of the text, and Coyne of Joinville. Ibn
Batuta calls the whole country Turkey (_Al-Turkíyah_), and the
people _Turkmán_; exactly likewise does Ricold (_Thurchia_ and
_Thurchimanni_). Hayton’s account of the various classes of
inhabitants is quite the same in substance as Polo’s. [The Turkmans
emigrated from Turkestan to Asia Minor before the arrival of the
Seljukid Turks. “Their villages,” says Cuinet, _Turquie d’Asie_,
II. p. 767, “are distinguished by the peculiarity of the houses
being built of sun-baked bricks, whereas it is the general habit
in the country to build them of earth or a kind of plaster, called
_djès_”—H. C.] The migratory and pastoral Turkmans still exist in
this region, but the Kurds of like habits have taken their place to
a large extent. The fine carpets and silk fabrics appear to be no
longer produced here, any more than the excellent horses of which
Polo speaks, which must have been the remains of the famous old
breed of Cappadocia. [It appears, however (Vital Cuinet’s _Turquie
d’Asie_, I. p. 224), that fine carpets are still manufactured at
Koniah, also a kind of striped cotton cloth, called _Aladja_.—H. C.]

A grant of privileges to the Genoese by Leon II., King of Lesser
Armenia, dated 23rd December, 1288, alludes to the export of horses
and mules, etc., from Ayas, and specifies the duties upon them.
The horses now of repute in Asia as Turkman come from the east of
the Caspian. And Asia Minor generally, once the mother of so many
breeds of high repute, is now poorer in horses than any province of
the Ottoman empire.

(_Pereg. Quat._ p. 114; _I. B._ II. 255 _seqq._; _Hayton_, ch.
xiii.; _Liber Jurium Reip. Januensis_, II. 184; _Tchihatcheff, As.
Min._, 2ᵈᵉ partie, 631.)

[The Seljukian Sultanate of Iconium or Rúm, was founded at the
expense of the Byzantines by Suleiman (1074–1081); the last three
sovereigns of the dynasty contemporaneous with Marco Polo are
Ghiath ed-din Kaïkhosru III. (1267–1283), Ghiath ed-din Mas’ud
II. (1283–1294), Ala ed-din Kaïkobad III. (1294–1308), when this
kingdom was destroyed by the Mongols of Persia. Privileges had been
granted to Venice by Ghiath ed-din Kaïkhosru I. (✛1211), and his
sons Izz ed-din Kaikaus (1211–1220), and Ala ed-din Kaïkobad I.
(1220–1237); the diploma of 1220 is unfortunately the only one of
the three known to be preserved. (Cf. Heyd, I. p. 302.)—H. C.]

Though the authors quoted above seem to make no distinction between
Turks and Turkmans, that which we still understand does appear
to have been made in the 12th century: “That there may be some
distinction, at least in name, between those who made themselves a
king, and thus achieved such glory, and those who still abide in
their primitive barbarism and adhere to their old way of life, the
former are nowadays termed _Turks_, the latter by their old name of
_Turkomans_.” (_William of Tyre_, i. 7.)

Casaria is KAISARÍYA, the ancient Caesareia of Cappadocia, close to
the foot of the great Mount Argaeus. _Savast_ is the Armenian form
(_Sevasd_) of Sebaste, the modern SIVAS. The three cities, Iconium,
Caesareia, and Sebaste, were metropolitan sees under the Catholicos
of Sis.

[The ruins of Sebaste are situated at about 6 miles to the east of
modern Sivas, near the village of Gavraz, on the _Kizil Irmak_.
In the 11th century, the King of Armenia, Senecherim, made his
capital of Sebaste. It belonged after to the Seljukid Turks, and
was conquered in 1397 by Bayezid Ilderim with Tokat, Castambol and
Sinope. (Cf. _Vital Cuinet_.)

One of the oldest churches in Sivas is St. George (_Sourp-Kévork_),
occupied by the Greeks, but claimed by the Armenians; it is
situated near the centre of the town, in what is called the
“Black Earth,” the spot where Timur is said to have massacred the
garrison. A few steps north of St. George is the Church of St.
Blasius, occupied by the Roman Catholic Armenians. The tomb of
St. Blasius, however, is shown in another part of the town, near
the citadel mount, and the ruins of a very beautiful Seljukian
Medresseh. (From a MS. Note by Sir H. Yule. The information had
been supplied by the American Missionaries to General Sir C.
Wilson, and forwarded by him to Sir H. Yule.)

It must be remembered that at the time of the Seljuk Turks, there
were four Medressehs at Sivas, and a university as famous as that
of Amassia. Children to the number of 1000, each a bearer of a copy
of the Koran, were crushed to death under the feet of the horses
of Timur, and buried in the “Black Earth”; the garrison of 4000
soldiers were buried alive.

St. Blasius, Bishop of Sebaste, was martyred in 316 by order of
Agricola, Governor of Cappadocia and Lesser Armenia, during the
reign of Licinius. His feast is celebrated by the Latin Church
on the 3rd of February, and by the Greek Church on the 11th of
February. He is the patron of the Republic of Ragusa in Dalmatia,
and in France of wool-carders.

At the village of Hullukluk, near Sivas, was born in 1676 Mekhitar,
founder of the well-known Armenian Order, which has convents at
Venice, Vienna, and Trieste.—H. C.]

CHAPTER III.

DESCRIPTION OF THE GREATER HERMENIA.

This is a great country. It begins at a city called ARZINGA, at which
they weave the best buckrams in the world. It possesses also the best
baths from natural springs that are anywhere to be found.{1} The people
of the country are Armenians, and are subject to the Tartar. There are
many towns and villages in the country, but the noblest of their cities
is Arzinga, which is the See of an Archbishop, and then ARZIRON and
ARZIZI.{2}

The country is indeed a passing great one, and in the summer it is
frequented by the whole host of the Tartars of the Levant, because it
then furnishes them with such excellent pasture for their cattle. But
in winter the cold is past all bounds, so in that season they quit
this country and go to a warmer region, where they find other good
pastures. [At a castle called PAIPURTH, that you pass in going from
Trebizond to Tauris, there is a very good silver mine.{3}]

And you must know that it is in this country of Armenia that the Ark of
Noah exists on the top of a certain great mountain [on the summit of
which snow is so constant that no one can ascend;{4} for the snow never
melts, and is constantly added to by new falls. Below, however, the
snow does melt, and runs down, producing such rich and abundant herbage
that in summer cattle are sent to pasture from a long way round about,
and it never fails them. The melting snow also causes a great amount of
mud on the mountain].

The country is bounded on the south by a kingdom called Mosul, the
people of which are Jacobite and Nestorian Christians, of whom I shall
have more to tell you presently. On the north it is bounded by the
Land of the Georgians, of whom also I shall speak. On the confines
towards Georgiania there is a fountain from which oil springs in great
abundance, insomuch that a hundred shiploads might be taken from it at
one time. This oil is not good to use with food, but ’tis good to burn,
and is also used to anoint camels that have the mange. People come from
vast distances to fetch it, for in all the countries round about they
have no other oil.{5}

Now, having done with Great Armenia, we will tell you of Georgiania.

NOTE 1.—[ERZINJAN, Erzinga, or Eriza, in the vilayet of Erzrum,
was rebuilt in 1784, after having been destroyed by an earthquake.
“Arzendjan,” says Ibn Batuta, II. p. 294, “is in possession of
well-established markets; there are manufactured fine stuffs, which
are called after its name.” It was at Erzinjan that was fought in
1244 the great battle, which placed the Seljuk Turks under the
dependency of the Mongol Khans.—H. C.] I do not find mention of its
hot springs by modern travellers, but Lazari says Armenians assured
him of their existence. There are plenty of others in Polo’s route
through the country, as at Ilija, close to Erzrum, and at Hássan
Kalá.

The _Buckrams_ of Arzinga are mentioned both by Pegolotti (_circa_
1340) and by Giov. d’Uzzano (1442). But what were they?

Buckram in the modern sense is a coarse open texture of cotton
or hemp, loaded with gum, and used to stiffen certain articles
of dress. But this was certainly _not_ the mediæval sense. Nor
is it easy to bring the mediæval uses of the term under a single
explanation. Indeed Mr. Marsh suggests that probably two different
words have coalesced. Fr.-Michel says that _Bouqueran_ was _at
first_ applied to a light cotton stuff of the nature of muslin,
and _afterwards_ to linen, but I do not see that he makes out
this history of the application. Douet d’Arcq, in his _Comptes de
l’Argenterie_, etc., explains the word simply in the modern sense,
but there seems nothing in his text to bear this out.

A quotation in Raynouard’s Romance Dictionary has “_Vestirs de
polpra e de_ bisso _que est_ bocaran,” where Raynouard renders
_bisso_ as _lin_; a quotation in Ducange also makes Buckram the
equivalent of Bissus; and Michel quotes from an inventory of 1365,
“_unam culcitram pinctam_ (qu. punctam?) _albam factam_ de bisso
_aliter_ boquerant.”

Mr. Marsh again produces quotations, in which the word is used as
a proverbial example of _whiteness_, and inclines to think that it
was a bleached cloth with a lustrous surface.

It certainly was not _necessarily_ linen. Giovanni Villani, in
a passage which is curious in more ways than one, tells how the
citizens of Florence established races for their troops, and, among
other prizes, was one which consisted of a _Bucherame di bambagine_
(of cotton). Polo, near the end of the Book (Bk. III. ch. xxxiv.),
speaking of Abyssinia, says, according to Pauthier’s text: “_Et si
y fait on moult beaux_ bouquerans et autres draps de coton.” The G.
T. is, indeed, more ambiguous: “_Il hi se font maint biaus dras_
banbacin e bocaran” (cotton _and_ buckram). When, however, he uses
the same expression with reference to the delicate stuffs woven
on the coast of Telingana, there can be no doubt that a cotton
texture is meant, and apparently a fine muslin. (See Bk. III. ch.
xviii.) Buckram is _generally_ named as an article of price, _chier
bouquerant_, _rice boquerans_, etc, but not always, for Polo in one
passage (Bk. II. ch. xlv.) seems to speak of it as the clothing of
the poor people of Eastern Tibet.

Plano Carpini says the tunics of the Tartars were either of buckram
(_bukeranum_), of _purpura_ (a texture, perhaps velvet), or of
_baudekin_, a cloth of gold (pp. 614–615). When the envoys of the
Old Man of the Mountain tried to bully St. Lewis, one had a case
of daggers to be offered in defiance, another a _bouqueran_ for a
winding sheet (_Joinville_, p. 136.)

In accounts of materials for the use of Anne Boleyn in the time
of her prosperity, _bokeram_ frequently appears for “lyning and
taynting” (?) gowns, lining sleeves, cloaks, a bed, etc., but it
can scarcely have been for mere stiffening, as the colour of the
buckram is generally specified as the same as that of the dress.

A number of passages seem to point to a _quilted_ material.
Boccaccio (Day viii. Novel 10) speaks of a quilt (_coltre_)
of the whitest buckram of Cyprus, and Uzzano enters buckram
quilts (_coltre di Bucherame_) in a list of _Linajuoli_, or
linen-draperies. Both his handbook and Pegolotti’s state repeatedly
that buckrams were sold by the piece or the half-score pieces—never
by measure. In one of Michel’s quotations (from _Baudouin de
Sebourc_) we have:

“Gaufer li fist premiers armer d’un auqueton
Qui fu de _bougherant_ et _plaine de bon coton_.”

Mr. Hewitt would appear to take the view that Buckram meant a
quilted material; for, quoting from a roll of purchases made
for the Court of Edward I., an entry for Ten Buckrams to make
sleeves of, he remarks, “The sleeves appear to have been of
_pourpointerie_,” _i.e._ quilting. (_Ancient Armour_, I. 240.)

This signification would embrace a large number of passages
in which the term is used, though certainly not all. It would
account for the mode or sale by the piece, and frequent use of the
expression _a_ buckram, for its habitual application to _coltre_
or counterpanes, its use in the _auqueton_ of Baudouin, and in the
jackets of Falstaff’s “men in buckram,” as well as its employment
in the frocks of the Mongols and Tibetans. The winter _chapkan_,
or long tunic, of Upper India, a form of dress which, I believe,
correctly represents that of the Mongol hosts, and is probably
derived from them, is almost universally of quilted cotton.[1] This
signification would also facilitate the transfer of meaning to
the substance now called buckram, for that is used as a _kind_ of
quilting.

The derivation of the word is very uncertain. Reiske says it is
Arabic, _Abu-Kairám_, “Pannus cum intextis figuris”; Wedgwood,
attaching the modern meaning, that it is from It., _bucherare_, to
pierce full of holes, which might be if _bucherare_ could be used
in the sense of _puntare_, or the French _piquer_; Marsh connects
it with the _bucking_ of linen; and D’Avezac thinks it was a stuff
that took its name from _Bokhara_. If the name be local, as so many
names of stuffs are, the French form rather suggests _Bulgaria_.
[Heyd, II. 703, says that Buckram (Bucherame) was principally
manufactured at Erzinjan (Armenia), Mush, and Mardin (Kurdistan),
Ispahan (Persia), and in India, etc. It was shipped to the west at
Constantinople, Satalia, Acre, and Famagusta; the name is derived
from Bokhara.—H. C.]

(_Della Decima_, III. 18, 149, 65, 74, 212, etc.; IV. 4, 5, 6,
212; _Reiske’s_ Notes to _Const. Porphyrogen._ II.; _D’Avezac_, p.
524; _Vocab. Univ. Ital.; Franc.-Michel, Recherches_, etc. II. 29
_seqq._; _Philobiblon Soc. Miscell._ VI.; _Marsh’s Wedgwood’s Etym.
Dict._ sub voce.)

[Illustration: Castle of Baiburt.]

NOTE 2.—Arziron is ERZRUM, which, even in Tournefort’s time, the
Franks called _Erzeron_ (III. 126); [it was named _Garine_, then
_Theodosiopolis_, in honour of Theodosius the Great; the present
name was given by the Seljukid Turks, and it means “Roman Country”;
it was taken by Chinghiz Khan and Timur, but neither kept it long.
Odorico (_Cathay_, I. p. 46), speaking of this city, says it “is
mighty cold.” (See also on the low temperature of the place,
Tournefort, _Voyage du Levant_, II. pp. 258–259.) Arzizi, ARJISH,
in the vilayet of Van, was destroyed in the middle of the 19th
century; it was situated on the road from Van to Erzrum. Arjish
Kalá was one of the ancient capitals of the Kingdom of Armenia; it
was conquered by Toghrul I., who made it his residence. (Cf. Vital
Cuinet, _Turquie d’Asie_, II. p. 710).—H. C.]

Arjish is the ancient _Arsissa_, which gave the Lake Van one of its
names. It is now little more than a decayed castle, with a village
inside.

Notices of Kuniyah, Kaisariya, Sivas, Arzan-ar-Rumi, Arzangan,
and Arjish, will be found in Polo’s contemporary Abulfeda. (See
_Büsching_, IV. 303–311.)

NOTE 3.—Paipurth, or Baiburt, on the high road between Trebizond
and Erzrum, was, according to Neumann, an Armenian fortress in the
first century, and, according to Ritter, the castle _Baiberdon_
was fortified by Justinian. It stands on a peninsular hill,
encircled by the windings of the R. Charok. [According to Ramusio’s
version Baiburt was the third relay from Trebizund to Tauris, and
travellers on their way from one of these cities to the other
passed under this stronghold.—H. C.] The Russians, in retiring
from it in 1829, blew up the greater part of the defences. The
nearest silver mines of which we find modern notice, are those of
_Gumish-Khánah_ (“Silverhouse”), about 35 miles N.W. of Baiburt;
they are more correctly mines of lead rich in silver, and were once
largely worked. But the _Masálak-al-absár_ (14th century), besides
these, speaks of two others in the same province, one of which was
near _Bajert_. This Quatremère reasonably would read _Babert_ or
Baiburt. (_Not. et Extraits_, XIII. i. 337; _Texier_, _Arménie_, I.
59.)

NOTE 4.—Josephus alludes to the belief that Noah’s Ark still
existed, and that pieces of the pitch were used as amulets. (_Ant._
I. 3. 6.)

Ararat (16,953 feet) was ascended, first by Prof. Parrot, September
1829; by Spasski Aotonomoff, August 1834; by Behrens, 1835; by
Abich, 1845; by Seymour in 1848; by Khodzko, Khanikoff, and others,
for trigonometrical and other scientific purposes, in August 1850.
It is characteristic of the account from which I take these notes
(_Longrimoff_, in _Bull. Soc. Géog. Paris_, sér. IV. tom. i. p.
54), that whilst the writer’s countrymen, Spasski and Behrens, were
“moved by a noble curiosity,” the Englishman is only admitted to
have “gratified a tourist’s whim”!

NOTE 5.—Though Mr. Khanikoff points out that springs of naphtha are
abundant in the vicinity of Tiflis, the mention of _ship-loads_
(in Ramusio indeed altered, but probably by the Editor, to
_camel-loads_), and the vast quantities spoken of, point to the
naphtha-wells of the Baku Peninsula on the Caspian. Ricold speaks
of their supplying the whole country as far as Baghdad, and
Barbaro alludes to the practice of anointing camels with the oil.
The quantity collected from the springs about Baku was in 1819
estimated at 241,000 _poods_ (nearly 4000 tons), the greater part
of which went to Persia. (_Pereg. Quat._ p. 122; _Ramusio_, II.
109; _El. de Laprim._ 276; _V. du Chev. Gamba_, I. 298.)

[The phenomenal rise in the production of the Baku oil-fields
between 1890–1900, may be seen at a glance from the Official
Statistics where the total output for 1900 is given as 601,000,000
poods, about 9,500,000 tons. (Cf. _Petroleum_, No. 42, vol. ii. p.
13.)]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Polo’s contemporary, the Indian Poet Amír Khusrú, puts in the mouth
of his king Kaikobád a contemptuous gibe at the Mongols with their
cotton-quilted dresses. (_Elliot_, III. p. 526.)

CHAPTER IV.

OF GEORGIANIA AND THE KINGS THEREOF.

In Georgiania there is a King called David Melic, which is as much
as to say “David King”; he is subject to the Tartar.{1} In old times
all the kings were born with the figure of an eagle upon the right
shoulder. The people are very handsome, capital archers, and most
valiant soldiers. They are Christians of the Greek Rite, and have a
fashion of wearing their hair cropped, like Churchmen.{2}

This is the country beyond which Alexander could not pass when he
wished to penetrate to the region of the Ponent, because that the
defile was so narrow and perilous, the sea lying on the one hand,
and on the other lofty mountains impassable to horsemen. The strait
extends like this for four leagues, and a handful of people might hold
it against all the world. Alexander caused a very strong tower to be
built there, to prevent the people beyond from passing to attack him,
and this got the name of the IRON GATE. This is the place that the Book
of Alexander speaks of, when it tells us how he shut up the Tartars
between two mountains; not that they were really Tartars, however, for
there were no Tartars in those days, but they consisted of a race of
people called COMANIANS and many besides.{3}

[In this province all the forests are of box-wood.{4}] There are
numerous towns and villages, and silk is produced in great abundance.
They also weave cloths of gold, and all kinds of very fine silk stuffs.
The country produces the best goshawks in the world [which are called
_Avigi_].{5} It has indeed no lack of anything, and the people live
by trade and handicrafts. ’Tis a very mountainous region, and full of
strait defiles and of fortresses, insomuch that the Tartars have never
been able to subdue it out and out.

[Illustration: Mediæval Georgian Fortress, from a drawing dated 1634.
“La provence est toute plene de grant montagne et d’estroit pas et de
fort.”]

There is in this country a certain Convent of Nuns called St.
Leonard’s, about which I have to tell you a very wonderful
circumstance. Near the church in question there is a great lake at the
foot of a mountain, and in this lake are found no fish, great or small,
throughout the year till Lent come. On the first day of Lent they find
in it the finest fish in the world, and great store too thereof; and
these continue to be found till Easter Eve. After that they are found
no more till Lent come round again; and so ’tis every year. ’Tis really
a passing great miracle!{6}

That sea whereof I spoke as coming so near the mountains is called
the Sea of GHEL or GHELAN, and extends about 700 miles.{7} It is
twelve days’ journey distant from any other sea, and into it flows
the great River Euphrates and many others, whilst it is surrounded by
mountains. Of late the merchants of Genoa have begun to navigate this
sea, carrying ships across and launching them thereon. It is from the
country on this sea also that the silk called _Ghellé_ is brought.{8}
[The said sea produces quantities of fish, especially sturgeon, at the
river-mouths salmon, and other big kinds of fish.]{9}

NOTE 1.—Ramusio has: “One part of the said province is subject to
the Tartar, and the other part, owing to its fortresses, remains
subject to the King David.” We give an illustration of one of these
mediæval Georgian fortresses, from a curious collection of MS.
notices and drawings of Georgian subjects in the Municipal Library
at Palermo, executed by a certain P. Cristoforo di Castelli of that
city, who was a Theatine missionary in Georgia, in the first half
of the 17th century.

The G. T. says the King was _always_ called David. The Georgian
Kings of the family of Bagratidae claimed descent from King
David through a prince Shampath, said to have been sent north by
Nebuchadnezzar; a descent which was usually asserted in their
public documents. Timur in his Institutes mentions a suit of
armour given him by the King of Georgia as forged by the hand of
the Psalmist King. David is a very frequent name in their royal
lists. [The dynasty of the Bagratidae, which was founded in 786
by Ashod, and lasted until the annexation of Georgia by Russia on
the 18th January, 1801, had nine reigning princes named David.
During the second half of the 12th century the princes were: Dawith
(David) IV. Narin (1247–1259), Dawith V. (1243–1272), Dimitri II.
Thawdadebuli (1272–1289), Wakhtang II. (1289–1292), Dawith VI.
(1292–1308).—H. C.] There were two princes of that name, David,
who shared Georgia between them under the decision of the Great
Kaan in 1246, and one of them, who survived to 1269, is probably
meant here. The name of David was borne by the last titular King of
Georgia, who ceded his rights to Russia in 1801. It is probable,
however, as Marsden has suggested, that the statement about
the King _always_ being called David arose in part out of some
confusion with the title of _Dadian_, which, according to Chardin
(and also to P. di Castelli), was always assumed by the Princes of
Mingrelia, or Colchis as the latter calls it. Chardin refers this
title to the Persian _Dád_, “equity.” To a portrait of “Alexander,
King of Iberia,” or Georgia Proper, Castelli attaches the following
inscription, giving apparently his official style: “With the
sceptre of David, Crowned by Heaven, First King of the Orient and
of the World, King of Israel,” adding, “They say that he has on his
shoulder a small mark of a cross, ‘_Factus est principatus super
humerum ejus_,’ and they add that he has all his ribs in one piece,
and not divided.” In another place he notes that when attending the
King in illness his curiosity moved him strongly to ask if these
things were true, but he thought better of it! (_Khanikoff; Jour.
As._ IX. 370, XI. 291, etc.; _Tim. Instit._ p. 143; _Castelli_ MSS.)

[A descendant of these Princes was in St. Petersburg about
1870. He wore the Russian uniform, and bore the title of Prince
Bagration-Mukransky.]

NOTE 2.—This fashion of tonsure is mentioned by Barbaro and
Chardin. The latter speaks strongly of the beauty of both sexes, as
does Della Valle, and most modern travellers concur.

NOTE 3.—This refers to the Pass of Derbend, apparently the Sarmatic
Gates of Ptolemy, and _Claustra Caspiorum_ of Tacitus, known to
the Arab geographers as the “Gate of Gates” (_Báb-ul-abwáb_), but
which is still called in Turkish _Demír-Kápi_, or the Iron Gate,
and to the ancient Wall that runs from the Castle of Derbend along
the ridges of Caucasus, called in the East _Sadd-i-Iskandar_, the
Rampart of Alexander. Bayer thinks the wall was probably built
originally by one of the Antiochi, and renewed by the Sassanian
Kobad or his son Naoshirwan. It is ascribed to the latter by
Abulfeda; and according to Klaproth’s extracts from the _Derbend
Námah_, Naoshirwan completed the fortress of Derbend in A.D. 542,
whilst he and his father together had erected 360 towers upon
the Caucasian Wall which extended to the Gate of the Alans (_i.e._
the Pass of Dariel). Mas’udi says that the wall extended for
40 parasangs over the steepest summits and deepest gorges. The
Russians must have gained some knowledge as to the actual existence
and extent of the remains of this great work, but I have not been
able to meet with any modern information of a very precise kind.
According to a quotation from _Reinegg’s Kaukasus_ (I. 120, a work
which I have not been able to consult), the remains of defences
can be traced for many miles, and are in some places as much as
120 feet high. M. Moynet indeed, in the _Tour du Monde_ (I. 122),
states that he traced the wall to a distance of 27 versts (18
miles) from Derbend, but unfortunately, instead of describing
remains of such high interest from his own observation, he cites a
description written by Alex. Dumas, which he says is quite accurate.

[“To the west of Narin-Kaleh, a fortress which from the top of
a promontory rises above the city, the wall, strengthened from
distance to distance by large towers, follows the ridge of the
mountains, descends into the ravines, and ascends the slopes to
take root on some remote peak. If the natives were to be believed,
this wall, which, however, no longer has any strategetical
importance, had formerly its towers bristling upon the Caucasus
chain from one sea to another; at least, this rampart did protect
all the plains at the foot of the eastern Caucasus, since vestiges
were found up to 30 kilometres from Derbend.” (_Reclus, Asie
russe_, p. 160.) It has belonged to Russia since 1813. The first
European traveller who mentions it is Benjamin of Tudela.

Bretschneider (II. p. 117) observes: “Yule complains that he was
not able to find any modern information regarding the famous
Caucasian Wall which begins at Derbend. I may therefore observe
that interesting details on the subject are found in Legkobytov’s
_Survey of the Russian Dominions beyond the Caucasus_ (in Russian),
1836, vol. iv. pp. 158–161, and in Dubois de Montpéreux’s _Voyage
autour du Caucase_, 1840, vol. iv. pp. 291–298, from which I shall
give here an abstract.”

(He then proceeds to give an abstract, of which the following is a
part:)

“The famous _Dagh bary_ (mountain wall) now begins at the village
of _Djelgan_, 4 versts south-west of Derbend, but we know that
as late as the beginning of the last century it could be traced
down to the southern gate of the city. This ancient wall then
stretches westward to the high mountains of Tabasseran (it seems
the Tabarestan of Mas’udi).... Dubois de Montpéreux enumerates the
following sites of remains of the wall:—In the famous defile of
_Dariel_, north-east of Kazbek. In the valley of the _Assai_ river,
near Wapila, about 35 versts north-east of Dariel. In the valley
of the Kizil river, about 15 versts north-west of Kazbek. Farther
west, in the valley of the _Fiag_ or _Pog_ river, between _Lacz_
and _Khilak_. From this place farther west about 25 versts, in
the valley of the _Arredon_ river, in the district of _Valaghir_.
Finally, the westernmost section of the Caucasian Wall has been
preserved, which was evidently intended to shut up the maritime
defile of _Gagry_, on the Black Sea.”—H. C.]

There is another wall claiming the title of _Sadd-i-Iskandar_ at
the S.E. angle of the Caspian. This has been particularly spoken of
by Vámbéry, who followed its traces from S.W. to N.E. for upwards
of 40 miles. (See his _Travels in C. Asia_, 54 _seqq._, and _Julius
Braun_ in the _Ausland_, No. 22, of 1869.)

Yule (II. pp. 537–538) says, “To the same friendly correspondent
[Professor Braun] I owe the following additional particulars on
this interesting subject, extracted from _Eichwald, Periplus des
Kasp. M._ I. 128.

“‘At the point on the mountain, at the extremity of the fortress
(of Derbend), where the double wall terminates, there begins a
single wall constructed in the same style, only this no longer
runs in a straight line, but accommodates itself to the contour of
the hill, turning now to the north and now to the south. At first
it is quite destroyed, and showed the most scanty vestiges, a few
small heaps of stones or traces of towers, but all extending in
a general bearing from east to west.... It is not till you get 4
versts from Derbend, in traversing the mountains, that you come
upon a continuous wall. Thenceforward you can follow it over the
successive ridges ... and through several villages chiefly occupied
by the Tartar hill-people. The wall ... makes many windings, and
every ¾ verst it exhibits substantial towers like those of the
city-wall, crested with loop-holes. Some of these are still in
tolerably good condition; others have fallen, and with the wall
itself have left but slight vestiges.’

“Eichwald altogether followed it up about 18 versts (12 miles) not
venturing to proceed further. In later days this cannot have been
difficult, but my kind correspondent had not been able to lay his
hand on information.

“A letter from Mr. Eugene Schuyler communicates some notes
regarding inscriptions that have been found at and near Derbend,
embracing Cufic of A.D. 465, Pehlvi, and even Cuneiform. Alluding
to the fact that the other _Iron-gate_, south of Shahrsabz, was
called also _Kalugah_, or _Kohlugah_ he adds: ‘I don’t know what
that means, nor do I know if the Russian Kaluga, south-west of
Moscow, has anything to do with it, but I am told there is a
Russian popular song, of which two lines run:

‘“Ah Derbend, Derbend Kaluga,
Derbend my little Treasure!”’

[Illustration: View of Derbend.

“=Alexandre ne poit paser quand il vost aler au Ponent ... car de
l’un les est la mer, et de l’autre est gran montagne que ne se
poent cavaucher. La vie est mout estroit entre la montagne et la
mer.=”]

“I may observe that I have seen it lately pointed out that
_Koluga_ is a Mongol word signifying a _barrier_; and I see that
Timkowski (I. 288) gives the same explanation of _Kalgan_, the name
applied by Mongols and Russians to the gate in the Great Wall,
called Chang-kia-Kau by the Chinese, leading to Kiakhta.”

The story alluded to by Polo is found in the mediæval romances
of Alexander, and in the Pseudo-Callisthenes on which they are
founded. The hero chases a number of impure cannibal nations within
a mountain barrier, and prays that they may be shut up therein. The
mountains draw together within a few cubits, and Alexander then
builds up the gorge and closes it with gates of brass or iron.
There were in all twenty-two nations with their kings, and the
names of the nations were Gōth, Magōth, Anugi, Egēs, Exenach, etc.
Godfrey of Viterbo speaks of them in his rhyming verses:—

“Finibus Indorum species fuit una virorum;
Goth erat atque Magoth dictum cognomen eorum
* * * * *
Narrat Esias, Isidorus et Apocalypsis,
Tangit et in titulis Magna Sibylla suis.
Patribus ipsorum tumulus fuit venter eorum,” etc.

Among the questions that the Jews are said to have put, in order
to test Mahommed’s prophetic character, was one series: “Who are
Gog and Magog? Where do they dwell? What sort of rampart did
Zu’lḳarnain build between them and men?” And in the Koran we find
(ch. xviii. _The Cavern_): “They will question thee, O Mahommed,
regarding Zu’lḳarnain. Reply: I will tell you his history”—and
then follows the story of the erection of the Rampart of Yájúj and
Májúj. In ch. xxi. again there is an allusion to their expected
issue at the latter day. This last expectation was one of very
old date. Thus the Cosmography of Aethicus, a work long believed
(though erroneously) to have been abridged by St. Jerome, and
therefore to be as old at least as the 4th century, says that the
_Turks_ of the race of Gog and Magog, a polluted nation, eating
human flesh and feeding on all abominations, never washing, and
never using wine, salt, nor wheat, shall come forth in the Day of
Antichrist from where they lie shut up behind the Caspian Gates,
and make horrid devastation. No wonder that the irruption of
the Tartars into Europe, heard of at first with almost as much
astonishment as such an event would produce now, was connected
with this prophetic legend![1] The Emperor Frederic II., writing
to Henry III. of England, says of the Tartars: “’Tis said they are
descended from the Ten Tribes who abandoned the Law of Moses, and
worshipped the Golden Calf. They are the people whom Alexander
Magnus shut up in the Caspian Mountains.”

[See the chapter _Gog et Magog dans le roman en alexandrins_, in
Paul Meyer’s _Alexandre le Grand dans la Littérature française_,
Paris, 1886, II. pp. 386–389.—H. C.]:

“Gos et Margos i vienent de la tiere des Turs
Et .cccc. m. hommes amenerent u plus,
Il en jurent la mer dont sire est Neptunus
Et le porte d’infier que garde Cerberus
Que l’orguel d’Alixandre torneront a reüs
Por çou les enclot puis es estres desus.
Dusc’ al tans Antecrist n’en istera mais nus.”

According to some chroniclers, the Emperor Heraclius had already
let loose the Shut-up Nations to aid him against the Persians, but
it brought him no good, for he was beaten in spite of their aid,
and died of grief.

The theory that the Tartars were Gog and Magog led to the Rampart
of Alexander being confounded with the Wall of China (see _infra_,
Bk. I. ch. lix.), or being relegated to the extreme N.E. of Asia,
as we find it in the Carta Catalana.

These legends are referred to by Rabbi Benjamin, Hayton, Rubruquis,
Ricold, Matthew Paris, and many more. Josephus indeed speaks of
the Pass which Alexander fortified with gates of steel. But his
saying that the King of Hyrcania was Lord of this Pass points to
the Hyrcanian Gates of Northern Persia, or perhaps to the Wall of
Gomushtapah, described by Vámbéry.

Ricold of Montecroce allows two arguments to connect the Tartars
with the Jews who were shut up by Alexander; one that the Tartars
hated the very name of Alexander, and could not bear to hear it;
the other, that their manner of writing was very like the Chaldean,
meaning apparently the Syriac (_anté_, p. 29). But he points out
that they had no resemblance to Jews, and no knowledge of the law.

Edrisi relates how the Khalif Wathek sent one Salem the Dragoman
to explore the Rampart of Gog and Magog. His route lay by Tiflis,
the Alan country, and that of the Bashkirds, to the far north or
north-east, and back by Samarkand. But the report of what he saw is
pure fable.

In 1857, Dr. Bellew seems to have found the ancient belief in the
legend still held by Afghan gentlemen at Kandahar.

At Gelath in Imeretia there still exists one valve of a large iron
gate, traditionally said to be the relic of a pair brought as a
trophy from Derbend by David, King of Georgia, called the Restorer
(1089–1130). M. Brosset, however, has shown it to be the gate of
Ganja, carried off in 1139.

(_Bayer_ in _Comment. Petropol._ I. 401 _seqq._; _Pseudo-Callisth._
by _Müller_, p. 138; _Gott. Viterb._ in _Pistorii Nidani Script.
Germ._ II. 228; _Alexandriade_, pp. 310–311; _Pereg._ IV. p. 118;
_Acad. des Insc. Divers Savans_, II. 483; _Edrisi_, II. 416–420,
etc.)

NOTE 4.—The box-wood of the Abkhasian forests was so abundant, and
formed so important an article of Genoese trade, as to give the
name of _Chao de Bux_ (Cavo di Bussi) to the bay of Bambor, N.W.
of Sukum Kala’, where the traffic was carried on. (See _Elie de
Laprim._ 243.) Abulfeda also speaks of the Forest of Box (_Shará’
ul-buḳs_) on the shores of the Black Sea, from which box-wood was
exported to all parts of the world; but his indication of the exact
locality is confused. (_Reinaud’s Abulf._ I. 289.)

At the present time “Boxwood abounds on the southern coast of the
Caspian, and large quantities are exported from near Resht to
England and Russia. It is sent up the Volga to Tsaritzin, from
thence by rail to the Don, and down that river to the Black Sea,
from whence it is shipped to England.” (_MS. Note_, H. Y.)

[Cf. V. Helm’s _Cultivated Plants_, edited by J. S. Stallybrass,
Lond., 1891, _The Box Tree_, pp. 176–179.—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—Jerome Cardan notices that “the best and biggest goshawks
come from Armenia,” a term often including Georgia and Caucasus.
The name of the bird is perhaps the same as _’Afçi_, “Falco
montanus.” (See _Casiri_, I. 320.) Major St. John tells me that
the _Terlán_, or goshawk, much used in Persia, is still generally
brought from Caucasus. (_Cardan, de Rer. Varietate_, VII. 35.)

NOTE 6.—A letter of Warren Hastings, written shortly before
his death, and after reading Marsden’s Marco Polo, tells how a
fish-breeder of Banbury warned him against putting pike into his
fish-pond, saying, “If you should leave them where they are _till
Shrove Tuesday_ they will be sure to spawn, and then you will never
get any other fish to breed in it.” (_Romance of Travel_, I. 255.)
Edward Webbe in his Travels (1590, reprinted 1868) tells us that
in the “Land of Siria there is a River having great store of fish
like unto Salmon-trouts, but no Jew can catch them, though either
Christian and Turk shall catch them in abundance with great ease.”
The circumstance of fish being got only for a limited time in
spring is noticed with reference to Lake Van both by Tavernier and
Mr. Brant.

But the exact legend here reported is related (as M. Pauthier has
already noticed) by Wilibrand of Oldenburg of a stream under the
Castle of Adamodana, belonging to the Hospitallers, near Naversa
(the ancient _Anazarbus_), in Cilicia under Taurus. And Khanikoff
was told the same story of a lake in the district of Akhaltziké
in Western Georgia, in regard to which he explains the substance
of the phenomenon as a result of the rise of the lake’s level
by the melting of the snows, which often coincides with Lent. I
may add that Moorcroft was told respecting a sacred pond near
Sir-i-Chashma, on the road from Kabul to Bamian, that the fish
in the pond were not allowed to be touched, but that they were
accustomed to desert it for the rivulet that ran through the valley
regularly every year _on the day of the vernal equinox_, and it was
then lawful to catch them.

Like circumstances would produce the same effect in a variety of
lakes, and I have not been able to identify the convent of St.
Leonard’s. Indeed Leonard (_Sant Lienard_, G. T.) seems no likely
name for an Armenian Saint; and the patroness of the convent (as
she is of many others in that country) was perhaps Saint _Nina_,
an eminent personage in the Armenian Church, whose tomb is still a
place of pilgrimage; or possibly St. _Helena_, for I see that the
Russian maps show a place called _Elenovka_ on the shores of Lake
Sevan, N.E. of Erivan. Ramusio’s text, moreover, says that the
lake was _four days in compass_, and this description will apply,
I believe, to none but the lake just named. This is, according to
Monteith, 47 miles in length and 21 miles in breadth, and as far as
I can make out he travelled round it in three very long marches.
Convents and churches on its shores are numerous, and a very
ancient one occupies an island on the lake. The lake is noted for
its fish, especially magnificent trout.

(_Tavern._ Bk. III. ch. iii.; _J. R. G. S._ X. 897; _Pereg. Quat._
p. 179; _Khanikoff_, 15; _Moorcroft_, II. 382; _J. R. G. S._ III.
40 _seqq._)

Ramusio has: “In this province there is a fine city called TIFLIS,
and round about it are many castles and walled villages. It is
inhabited by Christians, Armenians, Georgians, and some Saracens
and Jews, but not many.”

NOTE 7.—The name assigned by Marco to the Caspian, “Mer de
Gheluchelan” or “Ghelachelan,” has puzzled commentators. I have no
doubt that the interpretation adopted above is the correct one. I
suppose that Marco said that the sea was called “La Mer de Ghel
ou (de) Ghelan,” a name taken from the districts of the ancient
_Gelae_ on its south-western shores, called indifferently _Gíl_ or
_Gílán_, just as many other regions of Asia have like duplicate
titles (singular and plural), arising, I suppose, from the change
of a _gentile_ into a _local_ name. Such are Lár, Lárán, Khutl,
Khutlán, etc., a class to which Badakhshán, Wakhán, Shaghnán,
Mungán, Chaghánián, possibly Bámián, and many others have formerly
belonged, as the adjectives in some cases surviving, _Badakhshi,
Shaghni, Wákhi_, etc., show.[2] The change exemplified in the
induration of these _gentile plurals_ into _local singulars_ is
everywhere traced in the passage from earlier to later geography.
The old Indian geographical lists, such as are preserved in the
Puránas, and in Pliny’s extracts from Megasthenes, are, in the
main, lists of _peoples_, not of provinces, and even where the real
name seems to be local a _gentile_ form is often given. So also
_Tochari_ and _Sogdi_ are replaced by _Tokháristán_ and _Sughd_;
the _Veneti_ and _Taurini_ by Venice and Turin; the _Remi_ and the
_Parisii_, by Rheims and Paris; _East-Saxons_ and _South-Saxons_ by
Essex and Sussex; not to mention the countless _-ings_ that mark
the tribal settlement of the Saxons in Britain.

Abulfeda, speaking of this territory, uses exactly Polo’s phrase,
saying that the districts in question are properly called
_Kíl-o-Kílán_, but by the Arabs _Jíl-o-Jílán_. Teixeira gives
the Persian name of the sea as _Darya Ghiláni_. (See _Abulf._ in
_Büsching_, v. 329.)

[The province of Gíl (Gílán), which is situated between the
mountains and the Caspian Sea, and between the provinces of
Azerbaíján and Mázanderán (H. C.)], gave name to the silk for
which it was and is still famous, mentioned as _Ghelle_ (_Gílí_)
at the end of this chapter. This _Seta Ghella_ is mentioned also
by Pegolotti (pp. 212, 238, 301), and by Uzzano, with an odd
transposition, as Seta _Leggi_, along with Seta _Masandroni_,
_i.e._ from the adjoining province of Mázanderán (p. 192). May
not the Spanish _Geliz_, “a silk-dealer,” which seems to have
been a puzzle to etymologists, be connected with this? (See _Dozy
and Engelmann_, 2nd ed. p. 275.) [Prof. F. de Filippi (_Viaggo in
Persia nel_ 1862, ... Milan, 1865, 8vo) speaks of the silk industry
of Ghílán (pp. 295–296) as the principal product of the entire
province.—H. C.]

The dimensions assigned to the Caspian in the text would be very
correct if length were meant, but the Geog. Text with the same
figure specifies _circuit_ (_zire_). Ramusio again has “a circuit
of 2800 miles.” Possibly the original reading was 2700; but this
would be in excess.

NOTE 8.—The Caspian is termed by Vincent of Beauvais _Mare
Seruanicum_, the Sea of Shirwan, another of its numerous Oriental
names, rendered by Marino Sanuto as _Mare Salvanicum_. (III. xi.
ch. ix.) But it was generally known to the Franks in the Middle
Ages as the SEA OF BACU. Thus Berni:—

“Fuor del deserto la diritta strada
Lungo il Mar di Bacu miglior pareva.”
(_Orl. Innam._ xvii. 60.)

And in the _Sfera_ of Lionardo Dati (_circa_ 1390):—

“Da Tramontana di quest’Asia Grande
Tartari son sotto la fredda Zona,
Gente bestial di bestie e vivande,
Fin dove _l’Onda di Baccù_ risuona,” etc. (p. 10.)

This name is introduced in Ramusio, but probably by interpolation,
as well as the correction of the statement regarding Euphrates,
which is perhaps a branch of the notion alluded to in _Prologue_,
ch. ii. note 5. In a later chapter Marco calls it the _Sea of
Sarai_, a title also given in the Carta Catalana. [Odorico calls it
Sea of _Bacuc_ (_Cathay_) and Sea of _Bascon_ (Cordier). The latter
name is a corruption of Abeskun, a small town and island in the
S.E. corner of the Caspian Sea, not far from Ashurada.—H. C.]

We have little information as to the Genoese navigation of the
Caspian, but the great number of names exhibited along its shores
in the map just named (1375) shows how familiar such navigation had
become by that date. See also _Cathay_, p. 50, where an account
is given of a remarkable enterprise by Genoese buccaneers on the
Caspian about that time. Mas’udi relates an earlier history of
how about the beginning of the 9th century a fleet of 500 Russian
vessels came out of the Volga, and ravaged all the populous
southern and western shores of the Caspian. The unhappy population
was struck with astonishment and horror at this unlooked-for
visitation from a sea that had hitherto been only frequented by
peaceful traders or fishermen. (II. 18–24.)

NOTE 9.—[The enormous quantity of fish found in the Caspian Sea is
ascribed to the mass of vegetable food to be found in the shallower
waters of the North and the mouth of the Volga. According to
Reclus, the Caspian fisheries bring in fish to the annual value of
between three and four millions sterling.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] See Letter of Frederic to the Roman Senate, of 20th June, 1241,
in _Bréholles_. Mahommedan writers, contemporary with the Mongol
invasions, regarded these as a manifest sign of the approaching end
of the world. (See Elliot’s _Historians_, II. p. 265.)

[2] When the first edition was published, I was not aware of remarks to
like effect regarding names of this character by Sir H. Rawlinson in
the _J. R. As. Soc._ vol. xi. pp. 64 and 103.

CHAPTER V.

OF THE KINGDOM OF MAUSUL.

On the frontier of Armenia towards the south-east is the kingdom
of MAUSUL. It is a very great kingdom, and inhabited{1} by several
different kinds of people whom we shall now describe.

First there is a kind of people called ARABI, and these worship
Mahommet. Then there is another description of people who are NESTORIAN
and JACOBITE Christians. These have a Patriarch, whom they call the
JATOLIC, and this Patriarch creates Archbishops, and Abbots, and
Prelates of all other degrees, and sends them into every quarter, as to
India, to Baudas, or to Cathay, just as the Pope of Rome does in the
Latin countries. For you must know that though there is a very great
number of Christians in those countries, they are all Jacobites and
Nestorians; Christians indeed, but not in the fashion enjoined by the
Pope of Rome, for they come short in several points of the Faith.{2}

All the cloths of gold and silk that are called _Mosolins_ are made in
this country; and those great Merchants called _Mosolins_, who carry
for sale such quantities of spicery and pearls and cloths of silk and
gold, are also from this kingdom.{3}

There is yet another race of people who inhabit the mountains in that
quarter, and are called CURDS. Some of them are Christians, and some of
them are Saracens; but they are an evil generation, whose delight it is
to plunder merchants.{4}

[Near this province is another called MUS and MERDIN, producing an
immense quantity of cotton, from which they make a great deal of
buckram{5} and other cloth. The people are craftsmen and traders, and
all are subject to the Tartar King.]

[Illustration: Coin of Badruddín of Mausul.]

NOTE 1.—Polo could scarcely have been justified in calling MOSUL a
very great kingdom. This is a bad habit of his, as we shall have
to notice again. Badruddín Lúlú, the last Atabeg of Mosul of the
race of Zenghi had at the age of 96 taken sides with Hulaku, and
stood high in his favour. His son Malik Sálih, having revolted,
surrendered to the Mongols in 1261 on promise of life; which
promise they kept in Mongol fashion by torturing him to death.
Since then the kingdom had ceased to exist as such. Coins of
Badruddín remain with the name and titles of Mangku Kaan on their
reverse, and some of his and of other atabegs exhibit curious
imitations of Greek art. (_Quat. Rash._ p. 389; _Jour. As._ IV. VI.
141.).—H. Y. and H. C. [Mosul was pillaged by Timur at the end of
the 14th century; during the 15th it fell into the hands of the
Turkomans, and during the 16th, of Ismail, Shah of Persia.—H. C.]

[The population of Mosul is to-day 61,000 inhabitants—(48,000
Musulmans, 10,000 Christians belonging to various churches, and
3000 Jews).—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—The Nestorian Church was at this time and in the preceding
centuries diffused over Asia to an extent of which little
conception is generally entertained, having a chain of Bishops and
Metropolitans from Jerusalem to Peking. The Church derived its
name from Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, who was deposed
by the Council of Ephesus in 431. The chief “point of the Faith”
wherein it came short, was (at least in its most tangible form) the
doctrine that in Our Lord there were two Persons, one of the Divine
Word, the other of the Man Jesus; the former dwelling in the latter
as in a Temple, or uniting with the latter “as fire with iron.”
_Nestorin_, the term used by Polo, is almost a literal transcript
of the Arab form _Nastúri_. A notice of the Metropolitan sees, with
a map, will be found in _Cathay_, p. ccxliv.

_Játhalík_, written in our text (from G. T.) _Jatolic_, by Fr.
Burchard and Ricold _Jaselic_, stands for Καθολικóς. No doubt it
was originally _Gáthalík_, but altered in pronunciation by the
Arabs. The term was applied by Nestorians to their Patriarch; among
the Jacobites to the _Mafrián_ or Metropolitan. The Nestorian
Patriarch at this time resided at Baghdad. (_Assemani_, vol. iii.
pt. 2; _Per. Quat._ 91, 127.)

The Jacobites, or Jacobins, as they are called by writers of that
age (Ar. _Ya’úbkíy_), received their name from Jacob Baradaeus or
James Zanzale, Bishop of Edessa (so called, Mas’udi says, because
he was a maker of _barda’at_ or saddle-cloths), who gave a great
impulse to their doctrine in the 6th century. [At some time between
the years 541 and 578, he separated from the Church and became a
follower of the doctrine of Eutyches.—H. C.] The Jacobites then
formed an independent Church, which at one time spread over the
East at least as far as Sístán, where they had a see under the
Sassanian Kings. Their distinguishing tenet was _Monophysitism_,
viz., that Our Lord had but one Nature, the Divine. It was in
fact a rebound from Nestorian doctrine, but, as might be expected
in such a case, there was a vast number of shades of opinion
among both bodies. The chief locality of the Jacobites was in the
districts of Mosul, Tekrit, and Jazírah, and their Patriarch was
at this time settled at the Monastery of St. Matthew, near Mosul,
but afterwards, and to the present day, at or near Mardin. [They
have at present two patriarchates: the Monastery of Zapharan near
Baghdad and Etchmiadzin.—H. C.] The Armenian, Coptic, Abyssinian,
and Malabar Churches all hold some shade of the Jacobite doctrine,
though the first two at least have Patriarchs apart.

(_Assemani_, vol. ii.; _Le Quien_, II. 1596; _Mas’udi_, II.
329–330; _Per. Quat._ 124–129.)

NOTE 3.—We see here that _mosolin_ or _muslin_ had a very different
meaning from what it has now. A quotation from Ives by Marsden
shows it to have been applied in the middle of last century to
a strong cotton cloth made at Mosul. Dozy says the Arabs use
_Mauçili_ in the sense of muslin, and refers to passages in ‘The
Arabian Nights.’ [Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ II. p. 122) observes
“that in the narrative of Ch’ang Ch’un’s travels to the west in
1221, it is stated that in Samarkand the men of the lower classes
and the priests wrap their heads about with a piece of white
_mo-sze_. There can be no doubt that mo-sze here denotes ‘muslin,’
and the Chinese author seems to understand by this term the same
material which we are now used to call muslin.”—H. C.] I have found
no elucidation of Polo’s application of _mosolini_ to a class of
merchants. But, in a letter of Pope Innocent IV. (1244) to the
Dominicans in Palestine, we find classed as different bodies of
Oriental Christians, “_Jacobitae, Nestoritae, Georgiani, Graeci,
Armeni, Maronitae, et_ Mosolini.” (_Le Quien_, III. 1342.)

NOTE 4.—“The Curds,” says Ricold, “exceed in malignant ferocity all
the barbarous nations that I have seen.... They are called _Curti_,
not because they are curt in stature, but from the Persian word
for _Wolves_.... They have three principal vices, viz., Murder,
Robbery, and Treachery.” Some say they have not mended since,
but his etymology is doubtful. _Kúrt_ is Turkish for a wolf, not
Persian, which is _Gurg_; but the name (_Karduchi, Kordiaei_, etc.)
is older, I imagine, than the Turkish language in that part of
Asia. Quatremère refers it to the Persian _gurd_, “strong, valiant,
hero.” As regards the statement that some of the Kurds were
Christians, Mas’udi states that the Jacobites and certain other
Christians in the territory of Mosul and Mount Judi were reckoned
among the Kurds. (_Not. et Ext._ XIII. i. 304.) [The Kurds of Mosul
are in part nomadic and are called _Kotcheres_, but the greater
number are sedentary and cultivate cereals, cotton, tobacco, and
fruits. (_Cuinet._) Old Kurdistan had Shehrizor (Kerkuk, in the
sanjak of that name) as its capital.—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—Ramusio here, as in all passages where other texts
have _Bucherami_ and the like, puts _Boccassini_, a word which
has become obsolete in its turn. I see both _Bochayrani_ and
_Bochasini_ coupled, in a Genoese fiscal statute of 1339, quoted by
Pardessus. (_Lois Maritimes_, IV. 456.)

MUSH and MARDIN are in very different regions, but as their actual
interval is only about 120 miles, they _may_ have been under one
provincial government. Mush is essentially Armenian, and, though
the seat of a Pashalik, is now a wretched place. Mardin, on the
verge of the Mesopotamian Plain, rises in terraces on a lofty hill,
and there, says Hammer, “Sunnis and Shias, Catholic and Schismatic
Armenians, Jacobites, Nestorians, Chaldæans, Sun-, Fire-, Calf-,
and Devil-worshippers dwell one over the head of the other.”
(_Ilchan._ I. 191.)

CHAPTER VI.

OF THE GREAT CITY OF BAUDAS, AND HOW IT WAS TAKEN.

Baudas is a great city, which used to be the seat of the Calif of all
the Saracens in the world, just as Rome is the seat of the Pope of all
the Christians.{1} A very great river flows through the city, and by
this you can descend to the Sea of India. There is a great traffic of
merchants with their goods this way; they descend some eighteen days
from Baudas, and then come to a certain city called KISI, where they
enter the Sea of India.{2} There is also on the river, as you go from
Baudas to Kisi, a great city called BASTRA, surrounded by woods, in
which grow the best dates in the world.{3}

In Baudas they weave many different kinds of silk stuffs and gold
brocades, such as _nasich_, and _nac_, and _cramoisy_, and many another
beautiful tissue richly wrought with figures of beasts and birds. It is
the noblest and greatest city in all those regions.{4}

Now it came to pass on a day in the year of Christ 1255, that the Lord
of the Tartars of the Levant, whose name was Alaü, brother to the Great
Kaan now reigning, gathered a mighty host and came up against Baudas
and took it by storm.{5} It was a great enterprise! for in Baudas
there were more than 100,000 horse, besides foot soldiers. And when
Alaü had taken the place he found therein a tower of the Califs, which
was full of gold and silver and other treasure; in fact the greatest
accumulation of treasure in one spot that ever was known.{6} When he
beheld that great heap of treasure he was astonished, and, summoning
the Calif to his presence, he said to him: “Calif, tell me now why
thou hast gathered such a huge treasure? What didst thou mean to do
therewith? Knewest thou not that I was thine enemy, and that I was
coming against thee with so great an host to cast thee forth of thine
heritage? Wherefore didst thou not take of thy gear and employ it in
paying knights and soldiers to defend thee and thy city?”

The Calif wist not what to answer, and said never a word. So the Prince
continued, “Now then, Calif, since I see what a love thou hast borne
thy treasure, I will e’en give it thee to eat!” So he shut the Calif
up in the Treasure Tower, and bade that neither meat nor drink should
be given him, saying, “Now, Calif, eat of thy treasure as much as thou
wilt, since thou art so fond of it; for never shalt thou have aught
else to eat!”

So the Calif lingered in the tower four days, and then died like a
dog. Truly his treasure would have been of more service to him had
he bestowed it upon men who would have defended his kingdom and his
people, rather than let himself be taken and deposed and put to death
as he was.{7} Howbeit, since that time, there has been never another
Calif, either at Baudas or anywhere else.{8}

Now I will tell you of a great miracle that befell at Baudas, wrought
by God on behalf of the Christians.

NOTE 1.—This form of the Mediæval Frank name of BAGHDAD, _Baudas_
[the Chinese traveller, Ch’ang Te, _Si Shi Ki_, XIII. cent., says,
“the kingdom of _Bao-da_,” H. C.], is curiously like that used by
the Chinese historians, _Paota_ (_Pauthier; Gaubil_), and both
are probably due to the Mongol habit of slurring gutturals. (See
_Prologue_, ch. ii. note 3.) [Baghdad was taken on the 5th of
February, 1258, and the Khalif surrendered to Hulaku on the 10th of
February.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—Polo is here either speaking without personal knowledge, or
is so brief as to convey an erroneous impression that the Tigris
flows to Kisi, whereas three-fourths of the length of the Persian
Gulf intervene between the river mouth and Kisi. The latter is the
island and city of KISH or KAIS, about 200 miles from the mouth of
the Gulf, and for a long time one of the chief ports of trade with
India and the East. The island, the _Cataea_ of Arrian, now called
Ghes or Kenn, is singular among the islands of the Gulf as being
wooded and well supplied with fresh water. The ruins of a city
[called Harira, according to Lord Curzon,] exist on the north side.
According to Wassáf, the island derived its name from one Kais,
the son of a poor widow of Síráf (then a great port of Indian trade
on the northern shore of the Gulf), who on a voyage to India, about
the 10th century, made a fortune precisely as Dick Whittington did.
The proceeds of the cat were invested in an establishment on this
island. Modern attempts to nationalise Whittington may surely be
given up! It is one of the tales which, like Tell’s shot, the dog
Gellert, and many others, are common to many regions. (_Hammer’s
Ilch._ I. 239; _Ouseley’s Travels_, I. 170; _Notes and Queries_,
2nd s. XI. 372.)

Mr. Badger, in a postscript to his translation of the History of
Omán (_Hak. Soc._ 1871), maintains that Kish or Kais was at this
time a city on the mainland, and identical from Síráf. He refers
to Ibn Batuta (II. 244), who certainly does speak of visiting “the
city of Kais, called also Síráf.” And Polo, neither here nor in Bk.
III. ch. xl., speaks of Kisi as an island. I am inclined, however,
to think that this was from not having visited it. Ibn Batuta says
nothing of Síráf as a seat of trade; but the historian Wassáf,
who had been in the service of Jamáluddín al-Thaibi, the Lord of
Kais, in speaking of the export of horses thence to India, calls
it “the _Island_ of Kais.” (Elliot, III. 34.) Compare allusions to
this horse trade in ch. xv. and in Bk. III. ch. xvii. Wassáf was
precisely a contemporary of Polo.

NOTE 3.—The name is _Bascra_ in the MSS., but this is almost
certainly the common error of _c_ for _t_. BASRA is still noted for
its vast date-groves. “The whole country from the confluence of
the Euphrates and Tigris to the sea, a distance of 30 leagues, is
covered with these trees.” (_Tav._ Bk. II. ch. iii.)

NOTE 4.—From Baudas, or Baldac, _i.e._ Baghdad, certain of these
rich silk and gold brocades were called _Baldachini_, or in English
_Baudekins_. From their use in the state canopies and umbrellas
of Italian dignitaries, the word _Baldacchino_ has come to mean a
canopy, even when architectural. [_Baldekino, baldacchino_, was
at first entirely made of silk, but afterwards silk was mixed
(_sericum mixtum_) with cotton or thread. When Hulaku conquered
Baghdad part of the tribute was to be paid with that kind of stuff.
Later on, says Heyd (II. p. 697), it was also manufactured in the
province of Ahwaz, at Damas and at Cyprus; it was carried as far
as France and England. Among the articles sent from Baghdad to
Okkodai Khan, mentioned in the _Yüan ch’ao pi shi_ (made in the
14th century), quoted by Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ II. p. 124),
we note: _Nakhut_ (a kind of gold brocade), _Nachidut_ (a silk
stuff interwoven with gold), _Dardas_ (a stuff embroidered in
gold). Bretschneider (p. 125) adds: “With respect to _nakhut_ and
_nachidut_, I may observe that these words represent the Mongol
plural form of _nakh_ and _nachetti_.... I may finally mention that
in the _Yüan shi_, ch. lxxviii. (on official dresses), a stuff,
_na-shi-shi_, is repeatedly named, and the term is explained there
by _kin kin_ (gold brocade).”—H. C.] The stuffs called _Nasich_
and _Nac_ are again mentioned by our traveller below (ch. lix.).
We only know that they were of silk and gold, as he implies here,
and as Ibn Batuta tells us, who mentions _Nakh_ several times and
_Nasíj_ once. The latter is also mentioned by Rubruquis (_Nasic_)
as a present made to him at the Kaan’s court. And Pegolotti speaks
of both _nacchi_ and _nacchetti_ of silk and gold, the latter
apparently answering to _Nasich_. _Nac, Nacques, Nachiz, Nacíz,
Nasís_, appear in accounts and inventories of the 14th century,
French and English. (See _Dictionnaire des Tissus_, II. 199, and
_Douet d’Arcq, Comptes de l’Argenterie des Rois de France_, etc.,
334.) We find no mention of _Nakh_ or _Nasíj_ among the stuffs
detailed in the _Aín Akbari_, so they must have been obsolete
in the 16th century. [Cf. Heyd, _Com. du Levant_, II. p. 698;
_Nacco_, nachetto, comes from the Arabic _nakh_ (_nekh_); _nassit_
(_nasith_) from the Arabic _nécidj_.—H. C.] _Quermesis_ or Cramoisy
derived its name from the Kermes insect (Ar. _Kirmiz_) found on
_Quercus coccifera_, now supplanted by cochineal. The stuff so
called is believed to have been originally a crimson velvet, but
apparently, like the mediæval _Purpura_, if not identical with it,
it came to indicate a tissue rather than a colour. Thus Fr.-Michel
quotes velvet of vermeil cramoisy, of violet, and of blue
cramoisy, and _pourpres_ of a variety of colours, though he says
he has never met with _pourpre blanche_. I may, however, point to
Plano Carpini (p. 755), who describes the courtiers at Karakorum as
clad in white _purpura_.

The London prices of _Chermisi_ and _Baldacchini_ in the early part
of the 15th century will be found in Uzzano’s work, but they are
hard to elucidate.

Babylon, of which Baghdad was the representative, was famous
for its variegated textures in very early days. We do not know
the nature of the goodly Babylonish garment which tempted Achan
in Jericho, but Josephus speaks of the affluence of rich stuffs
carried in the triumph of Titus, “gorgeous with life-like designs
from the Babylonian loom,” and he also describes the memorable Veil
of the Temple as a πέπλος Βαβυλώνιος of varied colours marvellously
wrought. Pliny says King Attalus invented the intertexture of cloth
with gold; but the weaving of damasks of a variety of colours was
perfected at Babylon, and thence they were called Babylonian.

The brocades wrought with figures of animals in gold, of which
Marco speaks, are still a _spécialité_ at Benares, where they
are known by the name of _Shikárgáh_ or hunting-grounds, which
is nearly a translation of the name _Thard-wahsh_ “beast-hunts,”
by which they were known to the mediæval Saracens. (See _Q.
Makrizi_, IV. 69–70.) Plautus speaks of such patterns in carpets,
the produce of Alexandria—“_Alexandrina_ belluata _conchyliata
tapetia_.” Athenaeus speaks of Persian carpets of like description
at an extravagant entertainment given by Antiochus Epiphanes; and
the same author cites a banquet given in Persia by Alexander, at
which there figured costly curtains embroidered with animals. In
the 4th century Asterius, Bishop of Amasia in Pontus, rebukes
the Christians who indulge in such attire: “You find upon them
lions, panthers, bears, huntsmen, woods, and rocks; whilst the
more devout display Christ and His disciples, with the stories of
His miracles,” etc. And Sidonius alludes to upholstery of like
character:

“Peregrina det supellex
* * * *
Ubi torvus, et per artem
Resupina flexus ora,
It equo reditque telo
Simulacra bestiarum
Fugiens fugansque Parthus.” (_Epist._ ix. 13.)

A modern Kashmír example of such work is shown under ch. xvii.

(_D’Avezac_, p. 524; _Pegolotti_, in _Cathay_, 295, 306; _I.
B._ II. 309, 388, 422; III. 81; _Della Decima_, IV. 125–126;
_Fr.-Michel, Recherches_, etc., II. 10–16, 204–206; _Joseph. Bell.
Jud._ VII. 5, 5, and V. 5, 4; _Pliny_, VIII. 74 (or 48); _Plautus,
Pseudolus_, I. 2; _Yonge’s Athenaeus_, V. 26 and XII. 54; _Mongez_
in _Mém. Acad._ IV. 275–276.)

NOTE 5.—[Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. p. 114) says: “Hulagu left
Karakorum, the residence of his brother, on the 2nd May, 1253,
and returned to his ordo, in order to organize his army. On the
19th October of the same year, all being ready, he started for
the west.” He arrived at Samarkand in September, 1255. For this
chapter and the following of Polo, see: _Hulagu’s Expedition to
Western Asia, after the Mohammedan Authors_, pp. 112–122, and
the _Translation of the Si Shi Ki_ (Ch’ang Te), pp. 122–156, in
Bretschneider’s _Mediæval Researches_, I.—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—[“Hulagu proceeded to the lake of _Ormia_ (Urmia), when
he ordered a castle to be built on the island of _Tala_, in the
middle of the lake, for the purpose of depositing here the immense
treasures captured at Baghdad. A great part of the booty, however,
had been sent to Mangu Khan.” (_Hulagu’s Exp._, Bretschneider,
_Med. Res._ I. p. 120.) Ch’ang Te says (_Si Shi Ki_, p. 139): “The
palace of the Ha-li-fa was built of fragrant and precious woods.
The walls of it were constructed of black and white jade. It is
impossible to imagine the quantity of gold and precious stones
found there.”—H. C.]

NOTE 7.—

“I said to the Kalif: ‘Thou art old,
Thou hast no need of so much gold.
Thou shouldst not have heaped and hidden it here,
Till the breath of Battle was hot and near,
But have sown through the land these useless hoards
To spring into shining blades of swords,
And keep thine honour sweet and clear.
* * * * *
Then into his dungeon I locked the drone,
And left him to feed there all alone
In the honey-cells of his golden hive:
Never a prayer, nor a cry, nor a groan
Was heard from those massive walls of stone,
Nor again was the Kalif seen alive.’
This is the story, strange and true,
That the great Captain Alaü
Told to his brother, the Tartar Khan,
When he rode that day into Cambalu,
By the road that leadeth to Ispahan.” (_Longfellow_.)[1]

The story of the death of Mosta’sim Billah, the last of the
Abbaside Khalifs, is told in much the same way by Hayton, Ricold,
Pachymeres, and Joinville. The memory of the last glorious old man
must have failed him, when he says the facts were related by some
merchants who came to King Lewis, when before Saiette (or Sidon),
viz. in 1253, for the capture of Baghdad occurred five years
later. Mar. Sanuto says melted gold was poured down the Khalif’s
throat—a transfer, no doubt, from the old story of Crassus and the
Parthians. Contemporary Armenian historians assert that Hulaku slew
him with his own hand.

All that Rashiduddin says is: “The evening of Wednesday, the 14th
of Safar, 656 (20th February, 1258), the Khalif was put to death in
the village of Wakf, with his eldest son and five eunuchs who had
never quitted him.” Later writers say that he was wrapt in a carpet
and trodden to death by horses.

[Cf. _The Story of the Death of the last Abbaside Caliph, from
the Vatican MS. of Ibn-al-Furāt_, by G. le Strange (_Jour. R. As.
Soc._, April, 1900, pp. 293–300). This is the story of the death of
the Khalif told by Ibn-al-Furāt (born in Cairo, 1335 A.D.):

“Then Hūlagū gave command, and the Caliph was left a-hungering,
until his case was that of very great hunger, so that he called
asking that somewhat might be given him to eat. And the accursed
Hūlagū sent for a dish with gold therein, and a dish with silver
therein, and a dish with gems, and ordered these all to be set
before the Caliph al Musta’sim, saying to him, ‘Eat these.’ But
the Caliph made answer, ‘These be not fit for eating.’ Then said
Hūlagū: ‘Since thou didst so well know that these be not fit for
eating, why didst thou make a store thereof? With part thereof
thou mightest have sent gifts to propitiate us, and with part thou
shouldst have raised an army to serve thee and defend thyself
against us! And Hūlagū commanded them to take forth the Caliph and
his son to a place without the camp, and they were here bound and
put into two great sacks, being afterwards trampled under foot till
they both died—the mercy of Allah be upon them.”—H. C.]

The foundation of the story, so widely received among the
Christians, is to be found also in the narrative of Nikbi (and
Mirkhond), which is cited by D’Ohsson. When the Khalif surrendered,
Hulaku put before him a plateful of gold, and told him to eat
it. “But one does not eat gold,” said the prisoner. “Why, then,”
replied the Tartar, “did you hoard it, instead of expending it
in keeping up an army? Why did you not meet me at the Oxus?” The
Khalif could only say, “Such was God’s will!” “And that which has
befallen you was also God’s will,” said Hulaku.

Wassáf’s narrative is interesting:—“Two days after his capture
the Khalif was at his morning prayer, and began with the verse
(_Koran_, III. 25), ‘Say God is the Possessor of Dominion! It
shall be given to whom He will; it shall be taken from whom He
will: whom He will He raiseth to honour; whom He will He casteth
to the ground.’ Having finished the regular office he continued
still in prayer with tears and importunity. Bystanders reported to
the Ilkhan the deep humiliation of the Khalif’s prayers, and the
text which seemed to have so striking an application to those two
princes. Regarding what followed there are different stories. Some
say that the Ilkhan ordered food to be withheld from the Khalif,
and that when he asked for food the former bade a dish of gold be
placed before him, etc. Eventually, after taking counsel with his
chiefs, the Padishah ordered the execution of the Khalif. It was
represented that the blood-drinking sword ought not to be stained
with the gore of Mosta’sim. He was therefore rolled in a carpet,
just as carpets are usually rolled up, insomuch that his limbs were
crushed.”

The avarice of the Khalif was proverbial. When the Mongol army was
investing Miafaraḳain, the chief, Malik Kamál, told his people that
everything he had should be at the service of those in need: “Thank
God, I am not like Mosta’sim, a worshipper of silver and gold!”

(_Hayton_ in _Ram._ ch. xxvi.; _Per. Quat._ 121; _Pachym. Mic.
Palaeol._ II. 24; _Joinville_, p. 182; _Sanuto_, p. 238; _J. As._
sér. V. tom. xi. 490, and xvi. 291; _D’Ohsson_, III. 243; _Hammer’s
Wassáf_, 75–76; _Quat. Rashid._ 305.)

NOTE 8.—Nevertheless Froissart brings the Khalif to life again one
hundred and twenty years later, as “_Le Galifre de Baudas_.” (Bk.
III. ch. xxiv.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Not that Alaü (_pace_ Mr. Longfellow) ever did see Cambalu.

CHAPTER VII.

HOW THE CALIF OF BAUDAS TOOK COUNSEL TO SLAY ALL THE
CHRISTIANS IN HIS LAND.

I will tell you then this great marvel that occurred between Baudas and
Mausul.

It was in the year of Christ{1} ... that there was a Calif at Baudas
who bore a great hatred to Christians, and was taken up day and night
with the thought how he might either bring those that were in his
kingdom over to his own faith, or might procure them all to be slain.
And he used daily to take counsel about this with the devotees and
priests of his faith,{2} for they all bore the Christians like malice.
And, indeed, it is a fact, that the whole body of Saracens throughout
the world are always most malignantly disposed towards the whole body
of Christians.

Now it happened that the Calif, with those shrewd priests of his, got
hold of that passage in our Gospel which says, that if a Christian
had faith as a grain of mustard seed, and should bid a mountain be
removed, it would be removed. And such indeed is the truth. But when
they had got hold of this text they were delighted, for it seemed to
them the very thing whereby either to force all the Christians to
change their faith, or to bring destruction upon them all. The Calif
therefore called together all the Christians in his territories, who
were extremely numerous. And when they had come before him, he showed
them the Gospel, and made them read the text which I have mentioned.
And when they had read it he asked them if that was the truth? The
Christians answered that it assuredly was so. “Well,” said the Calif,
“since you say that it is the truth, I will give you a choice. Among
such a number of you there must needs surely be this small amount of
faith; so you must either move that mountain there,”—and he pointed to
a mountain in the neighbourhood—“or you shall die an ill death; unless
you choose to eschew death by all becoming Saracens and adopting our
Holy Law. To this end I give you a respite of ten days; if the thing
be not done by that time, ye shall die or become Saracens.” And when
he had said this he dismissed them, to consider what was to be done in
this strait wherein they were.

NOTE 1.—The date in the G. Text and Pauthier is 1275, which of
course cannot have been intended. Ramusio has 1225.

[The Khalifs in 1225 were Abu’l Abbas Ahmed VII. en-Nassir lidini
’llah (1180–1225) and Abu Nasr Mohammed IX. ed-Dhahir bi-emri ’llah
(1225–1226).—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“_Cum sez regisles et cum sez casses._” (G. T.) I suppose
the former expression to be a form of _Regules_, which is used in
Polo’s book for persons of a religious _rule_ or order, whether
Christian or Pagan. The latter word (_casses_) I take to be the
Arabic _Kashísh_, properly a Christian Presbyter, but frequently
applied by old travellers, and habitually by the Portuguese
(_caxiz, caxix_), to Mahomedan Divines. (See _Cathay_, p. 568.) It
may, however, be _Kází_.

Pauthier’s text has simply “à ses prestres de la Loi.”

CHAPTER VIII.

HOW THE CHRISTIANS WERE IN GREAT DISMAY BECAUSE OF WHAT
THE CALIF HAD SAID.

The Christians on hearing what the Calif had said were in great dismay,
but they lifted all their hopes to God, their Creator, that He would
help them in this their strait. All the wisest of the Christians took
counsel together, and among them were a number of bishops and priests,
but they had no resource except to turn to Him from whom all good
things do come, beseeching Him to protect them from the cruel hands of
the Calif.

So they were all gathered together in prayer, both men and women,
for eight days and eight nights. And whilst they were thus engaged
in prayer it was revealed in a vision by a Holy Angel of Heaven to a
certain Bishop who was a very good Christian, that he should desire
a certain Christian Cobler,{1} who had but one eye, to pray to God;
and that God in His goodness would grant such prayer because of the
Cobler’s holy life.

Now I must tell you what manner of man this Cobler was. He was one who
led a life of great uprightness and chastity, and who fasted and kept
from all sin, and went daily to church to hear Mass, and gave daily a
portion of his gains to God. And the way how he came to have but one
eye was this. It happened one day that a certain woman came to him to
have a pair of shoes made, and she showed him her foot that he might
take her measure. Now she had a very beautiful foot and leg; and the
Cobler in taking her measure was conscious of sinful thoughts. And he
had often heard it said in the Holy Evangel, that if thine eye offend
thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee, rather than sin. So, as soon
as the woman had departed, he took the awl that he used in stitching,
and drove it into his eye and destroyed it. And this is the way he came
to lose his eye. So you can judge what a holy, just, and righteous man
he was.

NOTE 1.—Here the G. T. uses a strange word: “_Or te vais a tel_
cralantur.” It does not occur again, being replaced by _chabitier_
(savetier). It has an Oriental look, but I can make no satisfactory
suggestion as to what the word meant.

CHAPTER IX.

HOW THE ONE-EYED COBLER WAS DESIRED TO PRAY FOR THE
CHRISTIANS.

Now when this vision had visited the Bishop several times, he related
the whole matter to the Christians, and they agreed with one consent to
call the Cobler before them. And when he had come they told him it was
their wish that he should pray, and that God had promised to accomplish
the matter by his means. On hearing their request he made many excuses,
declaring that he was not at all so good a man as they represented. But
they persisted in their request with so much sweetness, that at last he
said he would not tarry, but do what they desired.

CHAPTER X.

HOW THE PRAYER OF THE ONE-EYED COBLER CAUSED THE
MOUNTAIN TO MOVE.

And when the appointed day was come, all the Christians got up early,
men and women, small and great, more than 100,000 persons, and went to
church, and heard the Holy Mass. And after Mass had been sung, they all
went forth together in a great procession to the plain in front of the
mountain, carrying the precious cross before them, loudly singing and
greatly weeping as they went. And when they arrived at the spot, there
they found the Calif with all his Saracen host armed to slay them if
they would not change their faith; for the Saracens believed not in the
least that God would grant such favour to the Christians. These latter
stood indeed in great fear and doubt, but nevertheless they rested
their hope on their God Jesus Christ.

So the Cobler received the Bishop’s benison, and then threw himself on
his knees before the Holy Cross, and stretched out his hands towards
Heaven, and made this prayer: “Blessed LORD GOD ALMIGHTY, I pray Thee
by Thy goodness that Thou wilt grant this grace unto Thy people,
insomuch that they perish not, nor Thy faith be cast down, nor abused
nor flouted. Not that I am in the least worthy to prefer such request
unto Thee; but for Thy great power and mercy I beseech Thee to hear
this prayer from me Thy servant full of sin.”

And when he had ended this his prayer to God the Sovereign Father and
Giver of all grace, and whilst the Calif and all the Saracens, and
other people there, were looking on, the mountain rose out of its place
and moved to the spot which the Calif had pointed out! And when the
Calif and all his Saracens beheld, they stood amazed at the wonderful
miracle that God had wrought for the Christians, insomuch that a great
number of the Saracens became Christians. And even the Calif caused
himself to be baptised in the name of the Father and of the Son and of
the Holy Ghost, Amen, and became a Christian, but in secret. Howbeit,
when he died they found a little cross hung round his neck; and
therefore the Saracens would not bury him with the other Califs, but
put him in a place apart. The Christians exulted greatly at this most
holy miracle, and returned to their homes full of joy, giving thanks to
their Creator for that which He had done.{1}

And now you have heard in what wise took place this great miracle. And
marvel not that the Saracens hate the Christians; for the accursed
law that Mahommet gave them commands them to do all the mischief in
their power to all other descriptions of people, and especially to
Christians; to strip such of their goods, and do them all manner of
evil, because they belong not to their law. See then what an evil
law and what naughty commandments they have! But in such fashion the
Saracens act, throughout the world.

Now I have told you something of Baudas. I could easily indeed have
told you first of the affairs and the customs of the people there.
But it would be too long a business, looking to the great and strange
things that I have got to tell you, as you will find detailed in this
Book.

So now I will tell you of the noble city of Tauris.

NOTE 1.—We may remember that at a date only three years before
Marco related this story (viz. in 1295), the cottage of Loreto is
asserted to have changed its locality for the third and last time
by moving to the site which it now occupies.

Some of the old Latin copies place the scene at Tauris. And I
observe that a missionary of the 16th century does the same. The
mountain, he says, is between Tauris and Nakhshiwan, and is called
_Manhuc_. (_Gravina_, _Christianità nell’Armenia_, etc., Roma,
1605, p. 91.)

The moving of a mountain is one of the miracles ascribed to
Gregory Thaumaturgus. Such stories are rife among the Mahomedans
themselves. “I know,” says Khanikoff, “at least half a score of
mountains which the Musulmans allege to have come from the vicinity
of Mecca.”

Ramusio’s text adds here: “All the Nestorian and Jacobite
Christians from that time forward have maintained a solemn
celebration of the day on which the miracle occurred, keeping a
fast also on the eve thereof.”

F. Göring, a writer who contributes three articles on Marco Polo to
the _Neue Züricher-Zeitung_, 5th, 6th, 8th April, 1878, says: “I
heard related in Egypt a report which Marco Polo had transmitted
to Baghdad. I will give it here in connection with another which I
also came across in Egypt.

“‘Many years ago there reigned in Babylon, on the Nile, a haughty
Khalif who vexed the Christians with taxes and corvées. He was
confirmed in his hate of the Christians by the Khakam Chacham
Bashi or Chief Rabbi of the Jews, who one day said to him: “The
Christians allege in their books that it shall not hurt them to
drink or eat any deadly thing. So I have prepared a potion that
one of them shall taste at my hand: if he does not die on the spot
then call me no more Chacham Bashi!” The Khalif immediately sent
for His Holiness the Patriarch of Babylon, and ordered him to drink
up the potion. The Patriarch just blew a little over the cup and
then emptied it at a draught, and took no harm. His Holiness then
on his side demanded that the Chacham Bashi should quaff a cup to
the health of the Khalif, which he (the Patriarch) should first
taste, and this the Khalif found only fair and right. But hardly
had the Chacham Bashi put the cup to his lips than he fell down
and expired.’ Still the Musulmans and Jews thirsted for Christian
blood. It happened at that time that a mass of the hill Mokattani
became loose and threatened to come down upon Babylon. This was
laid to the door of the Christians, and they were ordered to stop
it. The Patriarch in great distress has a vision that tells him
summon the saintly cobbler (of whom the same story is told as
here)—the cobbler bids the rock to stand still and it does so to
this day. ‘These two stories may still be heard in Cairo’—from
whom is not said. The hill that threatened to fall on the Egyptian
Babylon is called in Turkish _Dur Dagh_, ‘Stay, or halt-hill.’
(_L.c._ April, 1878.)”—_MS. Note_, H. Y.

CHAPTER XI.

OF THE NOBLE CITY OF TAURIS.

Tauris is a great and noble city, situated in a great province called
YRAC, in which are many other towns and villages. But as Tauris is the
most noble I will tell you about it.{1}

The men of Tauris get their living by trade and handicrafts, for they
weave many kinds of beautiful and valuable stuffs of silk and gold.
The city has such a good position that merchandize is brought thither
from India, Baudas, CREMESOR,{2} and many other regions; and that
attracts many Latin merchants, especially Genoese, to buy goods and
transact other business there; the more as it is also a great market
for precious stones. It is a city in fact where merchants make large
profits.{3}

The people of the place are themselves poor creatures; and are a
great medley of different classes. There are Armenians, Nestorians,
Jacobites, Georgians, Persians, and finally the natives of the city
themselves, who are worshippers of Mahommet. These last are a very evil
generation; they are known as TAURIZI.{4} The city is all girt round
with charming gardens, full of many varieties of large and excellent
fruits.{5}

Now we will quit Tauris, and speak of the great country of Persia.
[From Tauris to Persia is a journey of twelve days.]

NOTE 1.—Abulfeda notices that TABRÍZ was vulgarly pronounced
_Tauriz_, and this appears to have been adopted by the Franks. In
Pegolotti the name is always _Torissi_.

Tabriz is often reckoned to belong to Armenia, as by Hayton.
Properly it is the chief city of _Azerbaiján_, which never was
included in ’IRÁK. But it may be observed that Ibn Batuta generally
calls the Mongol Ilkhan of Persia _Sáhib_ or _Malik ul-’Irák_, and
as Tabriz was the capital of that sovereign, we can account for
the mistake, whilst admitting it to be one. [The destruction of
Baghdad by Hulaku made Tabriz the great commercial and political
city of Asia, and diverted the route of Indian products from the
Mediterranean to the Euxine. It was the route to the Persian Gulf
by Kashan, Yezd, and Kermán, to the Mediterranean by Lajazzo, and
later on by Aleppo,—and to the Euxine by Trebizond. The destruction
of the Kingdom of Armenia closed to Europeans the route of
Tauris.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—_Cremesor_, as Baldelli points out, is GARMSIR, meaning a
hot region, a term which in Persia has acquired several specific
applications, and especially indicates the coast-country on the
N.E. side of the Persian Gulf, including Hormuz and the ports in
that quarter.

NOTE 3.—[Of the Italians established at Tabriz, the first whose
name is mentioned is the Venetian Pietro Viglioni (Vioni); his
will, dated 10th December, 1264, is still in existence. (_Archiv.
Venet._ XXVI. pp. 161–165; _Heyd_, French Ed., II. p. 110.)—H. C.]
At a later date (1341) the Genoese had a factory at Tabriz headed
by a consul with a council of twenty-four merchants, and in 1320
there is evidence of a Venetian settlement there. (_Elie de la
Prim_, 161; _Heyd_, II. 82.)

Rashiduddin says of Tabriz that there were gathered there under the
eyes of the Padishah of Islam “philosophers, astronomers, scholars,
historians, of all religions, of all sects; people of Cathay, of
Máchín, of India, of Kashmir, of Tibet, of the Uighúr and other
Turkish nations, Arabs and Franks.” Ibn Batuta: “I traversed the
bazaar of the jewellers, and my eyes were dazzled by the varieties
of precious stones which I beheld. Handsome slaves, superbly
dressed, and girdled with silk, offered their gems for sale to the
Tartar ladies, who bought great numbers. [Odoric (ed. Cordier)
speaks also of the great trade of Tabriz.] Tabriz maintained a
large population and prosperity down to the 17th century, as may be
seen in Chardin. It is now greatly fallen, though still a place of
importance.” (_Quat. Rash._, p. 39; _I. B._ II. 130.)

[Illustration: Ghazan Khan’s Mosque at Tabriz.—(From Fergusson.)]

NOTE 4.—In Pauthier’s text this is _Touzi_, a mere clerical error,
I doubt not for _Torizi_, in accordance with the G. Text (“_le
peuple de la cité que sunt apelés_ Tauriz”), with the Latin, and
with Ramusio. All that he means to say is that the people are
called _Tabrízís_. Not recondite information, but ’tis his way.
Just so he tells us in ch. iii. that the people of Hermenia are
called Hermins, and elsewhere that the people of Tebet are called
Tebet. So Hayton thinks it not inappropriate to say that the people
of Catay are called Cataini, that the people of Corasmia are called
Corasmins, and that the people of the cities of Persia are called
Persians.

NOTE 5.—Hamd Allah Mastaufi, the Geographer, not long after Polo’s
time, gives an account of Tabriz, quoted in Barbier de Meynard’s
_Dict. de la Perse_, p. 132. This also notices the extensive
gardens round the city, the great abundance and cheapness of
fruits, the vanity, insolence, and faithlessness of the Tabrízís,
etc. (p. 132 _seqq._). Our cut shows a relic of the Mongol Dynasty
at Tabriz.

CHAPTER XII.

OF THE MONASTERY OF ST. BARSAMO ON THE BORDERS OF TAURIS.

On the borders of (the territory of) Tauris there is a monastery called
after Saint Barsamo, a most devout Saint. There is an Abbot, with many
Monks, who wear a habit like that of the Carmelites, and these to
avoid idleness are continually knitting woollen girdles. These they
place upon the altar of St. Barsamo during the service, and when they
go begging about the province (like the Brethren of the Holy Spirit)
they present them to their friends and to the gentlefolks, for they are
excellent things to remove bodily pain; wherefore every one is devoutly
eager to possess them.{1}

NOTE 1.—Barsauma (“The Son of Fasting”) was a native of Samosata,
and an Archimandrite of the Asiatic Church. He opposed the
Nestorians, but became himself still more obnoxious to the orthodox
as a spreader of the Monophysite Heresy. He was condemned by the
Council of Chalcedon (451), and died in 458. He is a Saint of fame
in the Jacobite and Armenian Churches, and several monasteries
were dedicated to him; but by far the most celebrated, and
doubtless that meant here, was near Malatia. It must have been
famous even among the Mahomedans, for it has an article in Bákúi’s
Geog. Dictionary. (_Dír-Barsúma_, see _N. et Ext._ II. 515.) This
monastery possessed relics of Barsauma and of St. Peter, and
was sometimes the residence of the Jacobite Patriarch and the
meeting-place of the Synods.

A more marvellous story than Marco’s is related of this monastery
by Vincent of Beauvais: “There is in that kingdom (Armenia) a place
called St. Brassamus, at which there is a monastery for 300 monks.
And ’tis said that if ever an enemy attacks it, the defences of the
monastery move of themselves, and shoot back the shot against the
besieger.”

(_Assemani_ in vol. ii. _passim; Tournefort_, III. 260; _Vin. Bell.
Spec. Historiale_, Lib. XXX. c. cxlii.; see also _Mar. Sanut._ III.
xi. c. 16.)

CHAPTER XIII.

OF THE GREAT COUNTRY OF PERSIA; WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF THE
THREE KINGS.

Persia is a great country, which was in old times very illustrious and
powerful; but now the Tartars have wasted and destroyed it.

In Persia is the city of SABA, from which the Three Magi set out when
they went to worship Jesus Christ; and in this city they are buried,
in three very large and beautiful monuments, side by side. And above
them there is a square building, carefully kept. The bodies are still
entire, with the hair and beard remaining. One of these was called
Jaspar, the second Melchior, and the third Balthasar. Messer Marco Polo
asked a great many questions of the people of that city as to those
Three Magi, but never one could he find that knew aught of the matter,
except that these were three kings who were buried there in days of
old. However, at a place three days’ journey distant he heard of what I
am going to tell you. He found a village there which goes by the name
of CALA ATAPERISTAN,{1} which is as much as to say, “The Castle of the
Fire-worshippers.” And the name is rightly applied, for the people
there do worship fire, and I will tell you why.

They relate that in old times three kings of that country went away
to worship a Prophet that was born, and they carried with them three
manner of offerings, Gold, and Frankincense, and Myrrh; in order to
ascertain whether that Prophet were God, or an earthly King, or a
Physician. For, said they, if he take the Gold, then he is an earthly
King; if he take the Incense he is God; if he take the Myrrh he is a
Physician.

So it came to pass when they had come to the place where the Child
was born, the youngest of the Three Kings went in first, and found the
Child apparently just of his own age; so he went forth again marvelling
greatly. The middle one entered next, and like the first he found
the Child seemingly of his own age; so he also went forth again and
marvelled greatly. Lastly, the eldest went in, and as it had befallen
the other two, so it befell him. And he went forth very pensive. And
when the three had rejoined one another, each told what he had seen;
and then they all marvelled the more. So they agreed to go in all three
together, and on doing so they beheld the Child with the appearance of
its actual age, to wit, some thirteen days.{2} Then they adored, and
presented their Gold and Incense and Myrrh. And the Child took all the
three offerings, and then gave them a small closed box; whereupon the
Kings departed to return into their own land.

NOTE 1.—_Kala’ Atishparastán_, meaning as in the text. (_Marsden_.)

NOTE 2.—According to the Collectanea ascribed to Bede, Melchior was
a hoary old man; Balthazar in his prime, with a beard; Gaspar young
and beardless. (_Inchofer, Tres Magi Evangelici_, Romae, 1639.)

CHAPTER XIV.

WHAT BEFELL WHEN THE THREE KINGS RETURNED TO THEIR OWN
COUNTRY.

And when they had ridden many days they said they would see what the
Child had given them. So they opened the little box, and inside it they
found a stone. On seeing this they began to wonder what this might be
that the Child had given them, and what was the import thereof. Now the
signification was this: when they presented their offerings, the Child
had accepted all three, and when they saw that they had said within
themselves that He was the True God, and the True King, and the True
Physician.{1} And what the gift of the stone implied was that this
Faith which had begun in them should abide firm as a rock. For He well
knew what was in their thoughts. Howbeit, they had no understanding at
all of this signification of the gift of the stone; so they cast it
into a well. Then straightway a fire from Heaven descended into that
well wherein the stone had been cast.

And when the Three Kings beheld this marvel they were sore amazed, and
it greatly repented them that they had cast away the stone; for well
they then perceived that it had a great and holy meaning. So they took
of that fire, and carried it into their own country, and placed it in
a rich and beautiful church. And there the people keep it continually
burning, and worship it as a god, and all the sacrifices they offer are
kindled with that fire. And if ever the fire becomes extinct they go to
other cities round about where the same faith is held, and obtain of
that fire from them, and carry it to the church. And this is the reason
why the people of this country worship fire. They will often go ten
days’ journey to get of that fire.{2}

Such then was the story told by the people of that Castle to Messer
Marco Polo; they declared to him for a truth that such was their
history, and that one of the three kings was of the city called
SABA, and the second of AVA, and the third of that very Castle where
they still worship fire, with the people of all the country round
about.{3}

Having related this story, I will now tell you of the different
provinces of Persia, and their peculiarities.

NOTE 1.—“_Mire_.” This was in old French the popular word for a
Leech; the politer word was _Physicien_. (_N. et E._ V. 505.)

Chrysostom says that the Gold, Myrrh, and Frankincense were mystic
gifts indicating King, Man, God; and this interpretation was the
usual one. Thus Prudentius:—

“Regem, Deumque adnunciant
Thesaurus et fragrans odor
Thuris Sabaei, at myrrheus
Pulvis sepulchrum praedocet.” (_Hymnus Epiphanius_.)

And the Paris Liturgy:—

“Offert Aurum _Caritas_,
Et Myrrham _Austeritas_,
Et Thus _Desiderium_.
Auro _Rex_ agnoscitur,
_Homo_ Myrrha, colitur
Thure _Deus_ gentium.”

And in the “Hymns, Ancient and Modern”:—

“Sacred gifts of mystic meaning:
Incense doth their God disclose,
Gold the King of Kings proclaimeth,
Myrrh His sepulchre foreshows.”

NOTE 2.—“Feruntque (Magi), si justum est credi, etiam ignem
caelitus lapsum apud se sempiternis foculis custodire, cujus
portionem exiguam, ut faustam praeisse quondam Asiaticis Regibus
dicunt.” (_Ammian. Marcell._ XXIII. 6.)

NOTE 3.—Saba or Sava still exists as SÁVAH, about 50 miles S.W. of
Tehrân. It is described by Mr. Consul Abbott, who visited it in
1849, as the most ruinous town he had ever seen, and as containing
about 1000 families. The people retain a tradition, mentioned by
Hamd Allah Mastaufi, that the city stood on the shores of a Lake
which dried up miraculously at the birth of Mahomed. Sávah is
said to have possessed one of the greatest Libraries in the East,
until its destruction by the Mongols on their first invasion of
Persia. Both Sávah and Ávah (or Ábah) are mentioned by Abulfeda
as cities of Jibal. We are told that the two cities were always
at loggerheads, the former being Sunni and the latter Shiya. [We
read in the _Travels_ of Thévenot, a most intelligent traveller,
“qu’il n’a rien écrit de l’ancienne ville de Sava qu’il trouva sur
son chemin, et où il a marqué lui-même que son esprit de curiosité
l’abandonna.” (_Voyages_, éd. 1727, vol. v. p. 343. He died a
few days after at Miana, in Armenia, 28th November, 1667). (_MS.
Note._—H. Y.)]

As regards the position of AVAH, Abbott says that a village still
stands upon the site, about 16 miles S.S.E. of Sávah. He did not
visit it, but took a bearing to it. He was told there was a mound
there on which formerly stood a Gueber Castle. At Sávah he could
find no trace of Marco Polo’s legend. Chardin, in whose time Sávah
was not quite so far gone to decay, heard of an alleged tomb of
Samuel, at 4 leagues from the city. This is alluded to by Hamd
Allah.

Keith Johnston and Kiepert put Ávah some 60 miles W.N.W. of Sávah,
on the road between Kazvin and Hamadan. There seems to be some
great mistake here.

Friar Odoric puts the locality of the Magi at _Kashan_, though one
of the versions of Ramusio and the Palatine MS. (see Cordier’s
Odoric, pp. xcv. and 41 of his Itinerary), perhaps corrected in
this, puts it at _Saba_.—H. Y. and H. C.

We have no means of fixing the _Kala’ Atishparastán_. It is
probable, however, that the story was picked up on the homeward
journey, and as it seems to be implied that this castle was reached
three days _after leaving_ Sávah, I should look for it between
Sávah and Abher. Ruins to which the name _Kila’-i-Gabr_, “Gueber
Castle,” attaches are common in Persia.

As regards the Legend itself, which shows such a curious mixture of
Christian and Parsi elements, it is related some 350 years earlier
by Mas’udi: “In the Province of Fars they tell you of a Well called
the Well of Fire, near which there was a temple built. When the
Messiah was born the King Koresh sent three messengers to him, the
first of whom carried a bag of Incense, the second a bag of Myrrh,
and the third a bag of Gold. They set out under the guidance of the
Star which the king had described to them, arrived in Syria, and
found the Messiah with Mary His Mother. This story of the three
messengers is related by the Christians with sundry exaggerations;
it is also found in the Gospel. Thus they say that the Star
appeared to Koresh at the moment of Christ’s birth; that it went on
when the messengers went on, and stopped when they stopped. More
ample particulars will be found in our Historical Annals, where we
have given the versions of this legend as current among the Guebers
and among the Christians. It will be seen that Mary gave the king’s
messengers a round loaf, and this, after different adventures, they
hid under a rock in the province of Fars. The loaf disappeared
underground, and there they dug a well, on which they beheld two
columns of fire to start up flaming at the surface; in short, all
the details of the legend will be found in our Annals.” The Editors
say that Mas’udi had carried the story to Fars by mistaking _Shíz_
in Azerbaiján (the Atropatenian Ecbatana of Sir H. Rawlinson) for
_Shiraz_. A rudiment of the same legend is contained in the Arabic
Gospel of the Infancy. This says that Mary gave the Magi one of the
bands in which the Child was swathed. On their return they cast
this into their sacred fire; though wrapt in the flame it remained
unhurt.

We may add that there was a Christian tradition that the Star
descended into a well between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Gregory
of Tours also relates that in a certain well, at Bethlehem, from
which Mary had drawn water, the Star was sometimes seen, by devout
pilgrims who looked carefully for it, to pass from one side to the
other. But only such as merited the boon could see it.

(See _Abbott_ in _J. R. G. S._ XXV. 4–6; _Assemani_, III. pt. 2,
750; _Chardin_, II. 407; _N. et Ext._ II. 465; _Dict. de la Perse_,
2, 56, 298; _Cathay_, p. 51; _Mas’udi_, IV. 80; _Greg. Turon. Libri
Miraculorum_, Paris, 1858, I. 8.)

Several of the fancies that legend has attached to the brief story
of the Magi in St. Matthew, such as the royal dignity of the
persons; their location, now in Arabia, now (as here) at Saba in
Persia, and again (as in Hayton and the Catalan Map) in Tarsia or
Eastern Turkestan; the notion that one of them was a Negro, and so
on, probably grew out of the arbitrary application of passages in
the Old Testament, such as: “_Venient legati ex Aegypto_: AETHIOPIA
_praevenit manus ejus Deo_” (Ps. lxviii. 31). This produced
the Negro who usually is painted as one of the Three. “_Reges_
THARSIS _et Insulae munera offerent: Reges_ ARABUM _et_ SABA _dona
adducent_” (lxxii. 10). This made the Three into Kings, and fixed
them in Tarsia, Arabia, and Sava. “_Mundatio Camelorum operiet te,
dromedarii Madian et_ EPHA: _omnes de_ SABA _venient aurum et thus
deferentes et laudem Domino annunciantes_” (Is. lx. 6). Here were
Ava and Sava coupled, as well as the gold and frankincense.

One form of the old Church Legend was that the Three were buried at
_Sessania Adrumetorum_ (Hadhramaut) in Arabia, whence the Empress
Helena had the bodies conveyed to Constantinople, [and later to
Milan in the time of the Emperor Manuel Comnenus. After the fall of
Milan (1162), Frederic Barbarossa gave them to Archbishop Rainald
of Dassel (1159–1167), who carried them to Cologne (23rd July,
1164).—H. C.]

The names given by Polo, Gaspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, have been
accepted from an old date by the Roman Church; but an abundant
variety of other names has been assigned to them. Hyde quotes a
Syriac writer who calls them Aruphon, Hurmon, and Tachshesh, but
says that some call them Gudphorbus, Artachshasht, and Labudo;
whilst in Persian they were termed Amad, Zad-Amad, Drust-Amad,
_i.e._ _Venit, Cito Venit, Sincerus Venit_. Some called them in
Greek, Apellius, Amerus, and Damascus, and in Hebrew, Magaloth,
Galgalath, and Saracia, but otherwise Ator, Sator, and Petatoros!
The Armenian Church used the same names as the Roman, but in
Chaldee they were Kaghba, Badadilma, Badada Kharida. (_Hyde, Rel.
Vet. Pers._ 382–383; _Inchofer, ut supra; J. As._ sér. VI. IX.
160.)

[Just before going to press we have read Major Sykes’ new book on
_Persia_. Major Sykes (ch. xxiii.) does not believe that Marco
visited Baghdád, and he thinks that the Venetians entered Persia
near Tabriz, and travelled to Sultania, Kashán, and Yezd. Thence
they proceeded to Kerman and Hormuz. We shall discuss this question
in the Introduction.—H. C.]

CHAPTER XV.

OF THE EIGHT KINGDOMS OF PERSIA, AND HOW THEY
ARE NAMED.

Now you must know that Persia is a very great country, and contains
eight kingdoms. I will tell you the names of them all.

The first kingdom is that at the beginning of Persia, and it is called
CASVIN; the second is further to the south, and is called CURDISTAN;
the third is LOR; the fourth [SUOLSTAN]; the fifth ISTANIT; the sixth
SERAZY; the seventh SONCARA; the eighth TUNOCAIN, which is at the
further extremity of Persia. All these kingdoms lie in a southerly
direction except one, to wit, Tunocain; that lies towards the east, and
borders on the (country of the) Arbre Sol.{1}

In this country of Persia there is a great supply of fine horses;
and people take them to India for sale, for they are horses of great
price, a single one being worth as much of their money as is equal to
200 livres Tournois; some will be more, some less, according to the
quality.{2} Here also are the finest asses in the world, one of them
being worth full 30 marks of silver, for they are very large and fast,
and acquire a capital amble. Dealers carry their horses to Kisi and
Curmosa, two cities on the shores of the Sea of India, and there they
meet with merchants who take the horses on to India for sale.

In this country there are many cruel and murderous people, so that no
day passes but there is some homicide among them. Were it not for the
Government, which is that of the Tartars of the Levant, they would do
great mischief to merchants; and indeed, maugre the Government, they
often succeed in doing such mischief. Unless merchants be well armed
they run the risk of being murdered, or at least robbed of everything;
and it sometimes happens that a whole party perishes in this way when
not on their guard. The people are all Saracens, _i.e._ followers of
the Law of Mahommet.{3}

In the cities there are traders and artizans who live by their labour
and crafts, weaving cloths of gold, and silk stuffs of sundry kinds.
They have plenty of cotton produced in the country; and abundance of
wheat, barley, millet, panick, and wine, with fruits of all kinds.

[Some one may say, “But the Saracens don’t drink wine, which is
prohibited by their law.” The answer is that they gloss their text in
this way, that if the wine be boiled, so that a part is dissipated
and the rest becomes sweet, they may drink without breach of the
commandment; for it is then no longer called wine, the name being
changed with the change of flavour.{4}]

NOTE 1.—The following appear to be Polo’s Eight Kingdoms:—

I. KAZVÍN; then a flourishing city, though I know not why he calls
it a kingdom. Persian ’Irák, or the northern portion thereof, seems
intended. Previous to Hulaku’s invasion Kazvín seems to have been
in the hands of the Ismailites or Assassins.

II. KURDISTAN. I do not understand the difficulties of Marsden,
followed by Lazari and Pauthier, which lead them to put forth that
Kurdistan is not Kurdistan but something else. The boundaries of
Kurdistan according to Hamd Allah were Arabian ’Irák, Khuzistán,
Persian ’Irák, Azerbaijan and Diarbekr. (_Dict. de la P._ 480.)
[Cf. Curzon, _Persia pass._—H. C.] Persian Kurdistan, in modern
as in mediæval times, extends south beyond Kermanshah to the
immediate border of Polo’s next kingdom, viz.:

III. LÚR or Lúristán. [On Lúristán, see Curzon, _Persia_, II.
pp. 273–303, with the pedigree of the Ruling Family of the Feili
Lurs (Pusht-i-Kuh), p. 278.—H. C.] This was divided into two
principalities, Great Lúr and Little Lúr, distinctions still
existing. The former was ruled by a Dynasty called the _Faslúyah_
Atabegs, which endured from about 1155 to 1424, [when it was
destroyed by the Timurids; it was a Kurd Dynasty, founded by Emad
ed-din Abu Thaher (1160–1228), and the last prince of which was
Ghiyas ed-din (1424). In 1258 the general Kitubuka (Hulagu’s _Exp.
to Persia_, Bretschneider, _Med. Res._ I. p. 121) is reported
to have reduced the country of Lúr or Lúristán and its Atabeg
Teghele.—H. C.]. Their territory lay in the mountainous district
immediately west of Ispahan, and extended to the River of Dizfúl,
which parted it from Little Lúr. The stronghold of the Atabegs was
the extraordinary hill fort of Mungasht, and they had a residence
also at Aidhej or Mal-Amir in the mountains south of Shushan, where
Ibn Batuta visited the reigning Prince in 1327. Sir H. Rawlinson
has described Mungasht, and Mr. Layard and Baron de Bode have
visited other parts, but the country is still very imperfectly
known. Little Lúristán lay west of the R. Dizfúl, extending nearly
to the Plain of Babylonia. Its Dynasty, called Kurshid, [was
founded in 1184 by the Kurd Shodja ed-din Khurshid, and existed
till Shah-Werdy lost his throne in 1593.—H. C.].

The Lúrs are akin to the Kurds, and speak a Kurd dialect, as do all
those Ilyáts, or nomads of Persia, who are not of Turkish race.
They were noted in the Middle Ages for their agility and their
dexterity in thieving. The tribes of Little Lúr “do not affect the
slightest veneration for Mahomed or the Koran; their only general
object of worship is their great Saint Baba Buzurg,” and particular
disciples regard with reverence little short of adoration holy men
looked on as living representatives of the Divinity. (_Ilchan._ I.
70 _seqq._; _Rawlinson_ in _J. R. G. S._ IX.; _Layard_ in _Do._
XVI. 75, 94; _Ld. Strangford_ in _J. R. A. S._ XX. 64; _N. et E._
XIII. i. 330, _I. B._ II. 31; _D’Ohsson_, IV. 171–172.)

IV. SHÚLISTÁN, best represented by Ramusio’s _Suolstan_, whilst
the old French texts have _Cielstan_ (_i.e._ Shelstán); the name
applied to the country of the _Shúls_, or _Shauls_, a people who
long occupied a part of Lúristán, but were expelled by the Lúrs
in the 12th century, and settled in the country between Shíráz
and Khuzistán (now that of the Mamaseni, whom Colonel Pelly’s
information identifies with the Shúls), their central points being
Naobanján and the fortress called Kala’ Safed or “White Castle.”
Ibn Batuta, going from Shiraz to Kazerun, encamped the first
day in the country of the Shúls, “a Persian desert tribe which
includes some pious persons.” (_Q. R._ p. 385; _N. et E._ XIII. i.
332–333; _Ilch._ I. 71; _J. R. G. S._ XIII. Map; _I. B._ II. 88.)
[“Adjoining the Kuhgelus on the East are the tents of the Mamasenni
(qy. Mohammed Huseini) Lúrs, occupying the country still known as
Shúlistán, and extending as far east and south-east as Fars and the
Plain of Kazerun. This tribe prides itself on its origin, claiming
to have come from Seistán, and to be directly descended from
Rustam, whose name is still borne by one of the Mamasenni clans.”
(Curzon, _Persia_, II. p. 318.)—H. C.]

V. ISPAHAN? The name is in Ramusio _Spaan_, showing at least that
he or some one before him had made this identification. The unusual
combination _ff_, _i.e._ sf, in manuscript would be so like the
frequent one _ft_, _i.e._ st, that the change from Isfan to Istan
would be easy. But why Istan_it_?

VI. SHÍRÁZ [(_Shir_ = milk, or _Shir_ = lion)—H. C.] representing
the province of Fars or Persia Proper, of which it has been for
ages the chief city. [It was founded after the Arab conquest in
694 A.D., by Mohammed, son of Yusuf Kekfi. (Curzon, _Persia_, II.
pp. 93–110.)—H. C.] The last Dynasty that had reigned in Fars
was that of the Salghur Atabegs, founded about the middle of the
12th century. Under Abubakr (1226–1260) this kingdom attained
considerable power, embracing Fars, Kermán, the islands of the
Gulf and its Arabian shores; and Shíráz then flourished in arts
and literature; Abubakr was the patron of Saadi. From about 1262,
though a Salghurian princess, married to a son of Hulaku, had the
nominal title of Atabeg, the province of Fars was under Mongol
administration. (_Ilch. passim_.)

VII. SHAWÁNKÁRA or Shabánkára. The G. T. has _Soucara_, but the
Crusca gives the true reading _Soncara_. It is the country of the
Shawánkárs, a people coupled with the Shúls and Lúrs in mediæval
Persian history, and like them of Kurd affinities. Their princes,
of a family Faslúyah, are spoken of as influential before the
Mahomedan conquest, but the name of the people comes prominently
forward only during the Mongol era of Persian history. [Shabánkára
was taken in 1056 from the Buyid Dynasty, who ruled from the
10th century over a great part of Persia, by Fazl ibn Hassan
(Fazluïeh-Hasunïeh). Under the last sovereign, Ardeshir, Shabánkára
was taken in 1355 by the Modhafferians, who reigned in ’Irák, Fars,
and Kermán, one of the Dynasties established at the expense of
the Mongol Ilkhans after the death of Abu Saïd (1335), and were
themselves subjugated by Timur in 1392.—H. C.] Their country lay
to the south of the great salt lake east of Shíráz, and included
Niriz and Darábjird, Fassa, Forg, and Tárum. Their capital was
I′g or I′j, called also Irej, about 20 miles north-west of Daráb,
with a great mountain fortress; it was taken by Hulaku in 1259.
The son of the prince was continued in nominal authority, with
Mongol administrators. In consequence of a rebellion in 1311 the
Dynasty seems to have been extinguished. A descendant attempted
to revive their authority about the middle of the same century.
The latest historical mention of the name that I have found is in
Abdurrazzák’s _History of Shah Rukh_, under the year H. 807 (1404).
(See _Jour. As._ 3d. s. vol. ii. 355.) But a note by Colonel Pelly
informs me that the name Shabánkára is still applied (1) to the
district round the towns of Runiz and Gauristan near Bandar Abbas;
(2) to a village near Maiman, in the old country of the tribe; (3)
to a _tribe_ and district of Dashtistan, 38 farsakhs west of Shíráz.

With reference to the form in the text, _Soncara_, I may notice
that in two passages of the _Masálak-ul-Absár_, translated by
Quatremère, the name occurs as _Shankárah_. (_Q. R._ pp. 380, 440
_seqq._; _N. et E._ XIII.; _Ilch._ I. 71 and _passim; Ouseley’s
Travels_, II. 158 _seqq._)

VIII. TÚN-O-KÁIN, the eastern Kuhistán or Hill country of Persia,
of which Tún and Káin are chief cities. The practice of indicating
a locality by combining two names in this way is common in the
East. Elsewhere in this book we find _Ariora-Keshemur_ and
_Kes-macoran_ (Kij-Makrán). Upper Sind is often called in India by
the Sepoys _Rori-Bakkar_, from two adjoining places on the Indus;
whilst in former days, Lower Sind was often called _Diul-Sind.
Karra-Mánikpúr, Uch-Multán, Kunduz-Baghlán_ are other examples.

The exact expression _Tún-o-Káin_ for the province here in
question is used by Baber, and evidently also by some of Hammer’s
authorities. (_Baber_, pp. 201, 204; see _Ilch._ II. 190; I. 95,
104, and _Hist. de l’Ordre des Assassins_, p. 245.)

[We learn from (Sir) C. Macgregor’s (1875) _Journey through
Khorasan_ (I. p. 127) that the same territory including Gháín
or Kaïn is now called by the analogous name of Tabas-o-Tún. Tún
and Kaïn (Gháín) are both described in their modern state, by
Macgregor. (_Ibid._ pp. 147 and 161.)—H. C.]

Note that the identification of _Suolstan_ is due to Quatremère
(see _N. et E._ XIII. i. _circa_ p. 332); that of _Soncara_ to
Defréméry (_J. As._ sér. IV. tom. xi. p. 441); and that of
_Tunocain_ to Malte-Brun. (_N. Ann. des V._ xviii. p. 261.) I may
add that the _Lúrs_, the _Shúls_, and the _Shabánkáras_ are the
subjects of three successive sections in the _Masálak-al-Absár_
of _Shihábuddin Dimishki_, a work which reflects much of Polo’s
geography. (See _N. et E._ XIII. i. 330–333; Curzon, _Persia_, II.
pp. 248 and 251.)

NOTE 2.—The horses exported to India, of which we shall hear more
hereafter, were probably the same class of “Gulf Arabs” that are
now carried thither. But the Turkman horses of Persia are also
very valuable, especially for endurance. Kinneir speaks of one
accomplishing 900 miles in eleven days, and Ferrier states a still
more extraordinary feat from his own knowledge. In that case one of
those horses went from Tehran to Tabriz, returned, and went again
to Tabriz, within twelve days, including two days’ rest. The total
distance is about 1100 miles.

The _livre tournois_ at this period was equivalent to a little over
18 francs of modern French silver. But in bringing the value to our
modern gold standard we must add one-third, as the ratio of silver
to gold was then 1:12 instead of 1:16. Hence the equivalent in gold
of the livre tournois is very little less than 1_l._ sterling, and
the price of the horse would be about 193_l._[1]

Mr. Wright quotes an ordinance of Philip III. of France (1270–1285)
fixing the maximum price that might be given for a palfrey at
60 _livres tournois_, and for a squire’s _roncin_ at 20 livres.
Joinville, however, speaks of a couple of horses presented to St.
Lewis in 1254 by the Abbot of Cluny, which he says would at the
time of his writing (1309) have been worth 500 livres (the pair, it
would seem). Hence it may be concluded in a general way that the
_ordinary_ price of imported horses in India approached that of the
highest class of horses in Europe. (_Hist. of Dom. Manners_, p.
317; _Joinville_, p. 205.)

About 1850 a very fair Arab could be purchased in Bombay for
60_l._, or even less; but prices are much higher now.

With regard to the donkeys, according to Tavernier, the fine ones
used by merchants in Persia were imported from Arabia. The mark
of silver was equivalent to about 44_s._ of our silver money, and
allowing as before for the lower relative value of gold, 30 marks
would be equivalent to 88_l._ sterling.

_Kisi_ or Kish we have already heard of. _Curmosa_ is Hormuz, of
which we shall hear more. With a Pisan, as Rusticiano was, the
sound of _c_ is purely and strongly aspirate. Giovanni d’Empoli, in
the beginning of the 16th century, another Tuscan, also calls it
_Cormus_. (See _Archiv. Stor. Ital._ Append. III. 81.)

NOTE 3.—The character of the nomad and semi-nomad tribes of Persia
in those days—Kurds, Lúrs, Shúls, Karaunahs, etc.—probably deserved
all that Polo says, and it is not changed now. Take as an example
Rawlinson’s account of the Bakhtyáris of Luristán: “I believe them
to be individually brave, but of a cruel and savage character; they
pursue their blood feuds with the most inveterate and exterminating
spirit.... It is proverbial in Persia that the Bakhtiyaris have
been compelled to forego altogether the reading of the _Fatihah_
or prayer for the dead, for otherwise they would have no other
occupation. They are also most dextrous and notorious thieves.”
(_J. R. G. S._ IX. 105.)

NOTE 4.—The Persians have always been lax in regard to the
abstinence from wine.

According to Athenaeus, Aristotle, in his _Treatise on Drinking_
(a work lost, I imagine, to posterity), says, “If the wine be
moderately boiled it is less apt to intoxicate.” In the preparation
of some of the sweet wines of the Levant, such as that of Cyprus,
the must is boiled, but I believe this is not the case _generally_
in the East. Baber notices it as a peculiarity among the Kafirs
of the Hindu Kush. Tavernier, however, says that at Shíráz,
besides the wine for which that city was so celebrated, a good
deal of _boiled wine_ was manufactured, and used among the poor
and by travellers. No doubt what is meant is the sweet liquor or
syrup called _Dúsháb_, which Della Valle says is just the Italian
_Mostocotto_, but better, clearer, and not so mawkish (I. 689).
(_Yonge’s Athen._ X. 34; _Baber_, p. 145; _Tavernier_, Bk. V. ch.
xxi.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The _Encyc. Britann._, article “Money,” gives the livre tournois of
this period as 18.17 francs. A French paper in _Notes and Queries_
(4th S. IV. 485) gives it under St. Lewis and Philip III. as
equivalent to 18.24 fr., and under Philip IV. to 17.95. And lastly,
experiment at the British Museum, made by the kind intervention of
my friend, Mr. E. Thomas, F.R.S., gave the weights of the _sols_ of
St. Lewis (1226–1270) and Philip IV. (1285–1314) respectively as 63
grains and 61½ grains of remarkably pure silver. These trials would
give the _livres_ (20 sols) as equivalent to 18.14 fr. and 17.70 fr.
respectively.

CHAPTER XVI.

CONCERNING THE GREAT CITY OF YASDI.

Yasdi also is properly in Persia; it is a good and noble city, and has
a great amount of trade. They weave there quantities of a certain silk
tissue known as _Yasdi_, which merchants carry into many quarters to
dispose of. The people are worshippers of Mahommet.{1}

When you leave this city to travel further, you ride for seven days
over great plains, finding harbour to receive you at three places only.
There are many fine woods [producing dates] upon the way, such as one
can easily ride through; and in them there is great sport to be had in
hunting and hawking, there being partridges and quails and abundance
of other game, so that the merchants who pass that way have plenty of
diversion. There are also wild asses, handsome creatures. At the end of
those seven marches over the plain you come to a fine kingdom which is
called Kerman.{2}

NOTE 1.—YEZD, an ancient city, supposed by D’Anville to be the
_Isatichae_ of Ptolemy, is not called by Marco a kingdom, though
having a better title to the distinction than some which he classes
as such. The atabegs of Yezd dated from the middle of the 11th
century, and their Dynasty was permitted by the Mongols to continue
till the end of the 13th, when it was extinguished by Ghazan, and
the administration made over to the Mongol Diwan.

Yezd, in pre-Mahomedan times, was a great sanctuary of the Gueber
worship, though now it is a seat of fanatical Mahomedanism. It is,
however, one of the few places where the old religion lingers.
In 1859 there were reckoned 850 families of Guebers in Yezd and
fifteen adjoining villages, but they diminish rapidly.

[Heyd (_Com. du Levant_, II. p. 109) says the inhabitants of Yezd
wove the finest silk of Taberistan.—H. C.] The silk manufactures
still continue, and, with other weaving, employ a large part of
the population. The _Yazdi_, which Polo mentions, finds a place
in the Persian dictionaries, and is spoken of by D’Herbelot as
_Ḳumásh-i-Yezdi_, “Yezd stuff.” [“He [Nadir Shah] bestowed upon the
ambassador [Hakeem Ataleek, the prime minister of Abulfiez Khan,
King of Bokhara] a donation of a thousand mohurs of Hindostan,
twenty-five pieces of _Yezdy_ brocade, a rich dress, and a horse
with silver harness....” (_Memoirs of Khojah Abdulkurreem, a
Cashmerian of distinction ... transl. from the original Persian_,
by Francis Gladwin ... Calcutta, 1788, 8vo, p. 36.)—H. C.]

Yezd is still a place of important trade, and carries on a thriving
commerce with India by Bandar Abbási. A visitor in the end of 1865
says: “The external trade appears to be very considerable, and the
merchants of Yezd are reputed to be amongst the most enterprising
and respectable of their class in Persia. Some of their agents have
lately gone, not only to Bombay, but to the Mauritius, Java, and
China.”

(_Ilch._ I. 67–68; _Khanikoff, Mém._ p. 202; _Report by Major R. M.
Smith_, R.E.)

Friar Odoric, who visited Yezd, calls it the third best city of
the Persian Emperor, and says (_Cathay_, I. p. 52): “There is very
great store of victuals and all other good things that you can
mention; but especially is found there great plenty of figs; and
raisins also, green as grass and very small, are found there in
richer profusion than in any other part of the world.” [He also
gives from the smaller version of Ramusio’s an awful description of
the Sea of Sand, one day distant from Yezd. (Cf. Tavernier, 1679,
I. p. 116.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—I believe Della Valle correctly generalises when he says
of Persian travelling that “you always travel in a plain, but you
always have mountains on either hand” (I. 462). [Compare Macgregor,
I. 254: “I really cannot describe the road. Every road in Persia as
yet seems to me to be exactly alike, so ... my readers will take
it for granted that the road went over a waste, with barren rugged
hills in the distance, or near; no water, no houses, no people
passed.”—H. C.] The distance from Yezd to Kermán is, according to
Khanikoff’s survey, 314 _kilomètres_, or about 195 miles. Ramusio
makes the time eight days, which is probably the better reading,
giving a little over 24 miles a day. Westergaard in 1844, and
Khanikoff in 1859, took _ten_ days; Colonel Goldsmid and Major
Smith in 1865 _twelve_. [“The distance from Yezd to Kermán by the
present high road, 229 miles, is by caravans, generally made in
nine stages; persons travelling with all comforts do it in twelve
stages; travellers whose time is of some value do it easily in
_seven_ days.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ pp. 490–491.)—H. C.]

Khanikoff observes on this chapter: “This notice of woods easy to
ride through, covering the plain of Yezd, is very curious. Now
you find it a plain of great extent indeed from N.W. to S.E., but
narrow and arid; indeed I saw in it only thirteen inhabited spots,
counting two caravanserais. Water for the inhabitants is brought
from a great distance by subterraneous conduits, a practice which
may have tended to desiccate the soil, for every trace of wood has
completely disappeared.”

Abbott travelled from Yezd to Kermán in 1849, by a road through
Báfk, _east_ of the usual road, which Khanikoff followed,
and parallel to it; and it is worthy of note that he found
circumstances more accordant with Marco’s description. Before
getting to Báfk he says of the plain that it “extends to a great
distance north and south, and is probably 20 miles in breadth;”
whilst Báfk “is remarkable for its _groves of date-trees_, in the
midst of which it stands, and which occupy a considerable space.”
Further on he speaks of “wild tufts and bushes growing abundantly,”
and then of “thickets of the _Ghez_ tree.” He heard of the wild
asses, but did not see any. In his report to the Foreign Office,
alluding to Marco Polo’s account, he says: “It is still true that
wild asses and other game are found in the _wooded spots_ on the
road.” The ass is the _Asinus Onager_, the _Gor Khar_ of Persia,
or _Kulan_ of the Tartars. (_Khan. Mém._ p. 200; _Id. sur Marco
Polo_, p. 21; _J. R. G. S._ XXV. 20–29; _Mr. Abbott’s MS. Report in
Foreign office_.) [The difficulty has now been explained by General
Houtum-Schindler in a valuable paper published in the _Jour. Roy.
As. Soc._ N.S. XIII., October, 1881, p. 490. He says: “Marco Polo
travelled from Yazd to Kermán _viâ_ Báfk. His description of the
road, seven days over great plains, harbour at three places only,
is perfectly exact. The fine woods, producing dates, are at Báfk
itself. (The place is generally called Báft.) Partridges and quails
still abound; wild asses I saw several on the western road, and I
was told that there were a great many on the Báfk road. Travellers
and caravans now always go by the eastern road _viâ_ Anár and
Bahrámábád. Before the Sefavíehs (_i.e._ before A.D. 1500) the
Anár road was hardly, if ever, used; travellers always took the
Báfk road. The country from Yazd to Anár, 97 miles, seems to have
been totally uninhabited before the Sefavíehs. Anár, as late as
A.D. 1340, is mentioned as the frontier place of Kermán to the
north, on the confines of the Yazd desert. When Sháh Abbás had
caravanserais built at three places between Yazd and Anár (Zein
ud-dín, Kermán-sháhán, and Shamsh), the eastern road began to be
neglected.” (Cf. Major Sykes’ _Persia_, ch. xxiii.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XVII.

CONCERNING THE KINGDOM OF KERMAN.

Kerman is a kingdom which is also properly in Persia, and formerly
it had a hereditary prince. Since the Tartars conquered the country
the rule is no longer hereditary, but the Tartar sends to administer
whatever lord he pleases.{1} In this kingdom are produced the stones
called turquoises in great abundance; they are found in the mountains,
where they are extracted from the rocks.{2} There are also plenty of
veins of steel and _Ondanique_.{3} The people are very skilful in
making harness of war; their saddles, bridles, spurs, swords, bows,
quivers, and arms of every kind, are very well made indeed according
to the fashion of those parts. The ladies of the country and their
daughters also produce exquisite needlework in the embroidery of silk
stuffs in different colours, with figures of beasts and birds, trees
and flowers, and a variety of other patterns. They work hangings for
the use of noblemen so deftly that they are marvels to see, as well as
cushions, pillows quilts, and all sorts of things.{4}

In the mountains of Kerman are found the best falcons in the world.
They are inferior in size to the Peregrine, red on the breast, under
the neck, and between the thighs; their flight so swift that no bird
can escape them.{5}

On quitting the city you ride on for seven days, always finding towns,
villages, and handsome dwelling-houses, so that it is very pleasant
travelling; and there is excellent sport also to be had by the way in
hunting and hawking. When you have ridden those seven days over a plain
country, you come to a great mountain; and when you have got to the top
of the pass you find a great descent which occupies some two days to
go down. All along you find a variety and abundance of fruits; and in
former days there were plenty of inhabited places on the road, but now
there are none; and you meet with only a few people looking after their
cattle at pasture. From the city of Kerman to this descent the cold in
winter is so great that you can scarcely abide it, even with a great
quantity of clothing.{6}

NOTE 1.—Kermán is mentioned by Ptolemy, and also by Ammianus
amongst the cities of the country so called (_Carmania_): “_inter
quas nitet_ Carmana _omnium mater_.” (XXIII. 6.)

M. Pauthier’s supposition that _Sirján_ was in Polo’s time the
capital, is incorrect. (See _N. et E._ XIV. 208, 290.) Our Author’s
Kermán is the city still so called; and its proper name would seem
to have been _Kuwáshír_. (See _Reinaud, Mém. sur l’Inde_, 171; also
_Sprenger P. and R. R._ 77.) According to Khanikoff it is 5535 feet
above the sea.

Kermán, on the fall of the Beni Búya Dynasty, in the middle of the
11th century, came into the hands of a branch of the Seljukian
Turks, who retained it till the conquests of the Kings of Khwarizm,
which just preceded the Mongol invasion. In 1226 the Amir Borák,
a Kara Khitaian, who was governor on behalf of Jaláluddin of
Khwarizm, became independent under the title of Kutlugh Sultan.
[He died in 1234.] The Mongols allowed this family to retain the
immediate authority, and at the time when Polo returned from China
the representative of the house was a lady known as the _Pádishah
Khátún_ [who reigned from 1291], the wife successively of the
Ilkhans Abaka and Kaikhatu; an ambitious, clever, and masterful
woman, who put her own brother Siyurgutmish to death as a rival,
and was herself, after the decease of Kaikhatu, put to death by
her brother’s widow and daughter [1294]. The Dynasty continued,
nominally at least, to the reign of the Ilkhan Khodabanda
(1304–13), when it was extinguished. [See Major Sykes’ _Persia_,
chaps, v. and xxiii.]

Kermán was a Nestorian see, under the Metropolitan of Fars. (_Ilch.
passim; Weil_, III. 454; _Lequien_, II. 1256.)

[“There is some confusion with regard to the names of Kermán both
as a town and as a province or kingdom. We have the names Kermán,
Kuwáshír, Bardshír. I should say the original name of the whole
country was Kermán, the ancient Karamania. A province of this was
called Kúreh-i-Ardeshír, which, being contracted, became Kuwáshír,
and is spoken of as the province in which Ardeshír Bábekán, the
first Sassanian monarch, resided. A part of Kúreh-i-Ardeshír was
called Bardshír, or Bard-i-Ardeshír, now occasionally Bardsír,
and the present city of Kermán was situated at its north-eastern
corner. This town, during the Middle Ages, was called Bardshír.
On a coin of Qara Arslán Beg, King of Kermán, of A.H. 462, Mr.
Stanley Lane Poole reads Yazdashír instead of Bardshír. Of Al
Idrísí’s Yazdashír I see no mention in histories; Bardshír was
the capital and the place where most of the coins were struck.
Yazdashír, if such a place existed, can only have been a place of
small importance. It is, perhaps, a clerical error for Bardshír;
without diacritical points, both words are written alike. Later,
the name of the city became Kermán, the name Bardshír reverting
to the district lying south-west of it, with its principal place
Mashíz. In a similar manner Mashíz was often, and is so now,
called Bardshír. Another old town sometimes confused with Bardshír
was Sírján or Shírján, once more important than Bardshír; it is
spoken of as the capital of Kermán, of Bardshír, and of Sardsír.
Its name now exists only as that of a district, with principal
place S’aídábád. The history of Kermán, ’Agd-ul-’Olá, plainly
says Bardshír is the capital of Kermán, and from the description
of Bardshír there is no doubt of its having been the present town
Kermán. It is strange that Marco Polo does not give the name of
the city. In Assemanni’s _Bibliotheca Orientalis_ Kuwáshír and
Bardashír are mentioned as separate cities, the latter being
probably the old Mashíz, which as early as A.H. 582 (A.D. 1186)
is spoken of in the _History of Kermán_ as an important town.
The Nestorian bishop of the province Kermán, who stood under the
Metropolitan of Fars, resided at Hormúz.” (_Houtum-Schindler_,
_l.c._ pp. 491–492.)

There does not seem any doubt as to the identity of Bardashir with
the present city of Kermán. (See _The Cities of Kirmān in the
time of Hamd-Allah Mustawfi and Marco Polo_, by Guy le Strange,
_Jour. R. As. Soc._ April, 1901, pp. 281, 290.) Hamd-Allah is
the author of the Cosmography known as the _Nuzhat-al-Kūlūb_ or
“Heart’s Delight.” (Cf. Major Sykes’ _Persia_, chap. xvi., and the
_Geographical Journal_ for February, 1902, p. 166.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—A MS. treatise on precious stones cited by Ouseley mentions
_Shebavek_ in Kermán as the site of a Turquoise mine. This is
probably _Shahr-i-Babek_, about 100 miles west of the city of
Kermán, and not far from _Párez_, where Abbott tells us there is
a mine of these stones, now abandoned. Goebel, one of Khanikoff’s
party, found a deposit of turquoises at Taft, near Yezd.
(_Ouseley’s Travels_, I. 211; _J. R. G. S._ XXVI. 63–65; _Khan.
Mém._ 203.)

[“The province Kermán is still rich in turquoises. The mines of
Páríz or Párez are at Chemen-i-mó-aspán, 16 miles from Páríz on the
road to Bahrámábád (principal place of Rafsinján), and opposite
the village or garden called Gód-i-Ahmer. These mines were worked
up to a few years ago; the turquoises were of a pale blue. Other
turquoises are found in the present Bardshír plain, and not far
from Mashíz, on the slopes of the Chehel tan mountain, opposite
a hill called the Bear Hill (tal-i-Khers). The Shehr-i-Bábek
turquoise mines are at the small village Kárík, a mile from
Medvár-i-Bálá, 10 miles north of Shehr-i-Bábek. They have two
shafts, one of which has lately been closed by an earthquake, and
were worked up to about twenty years ago. At another place, 12
miles from Shehr-i-Bábek, are seven old shafts now not worked for
a long period. The stones of these mines are also of a very pale
blue, and have no great value.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ 1881,
p. 491.)

The finest turquoises came from Khorasan; the mines were near
Maaden, about 48 miles to the north of Nishapūr. (Heyd, _Com. du
Levant_, II. p. 653; Ritter, _Erdk._ pp. 325–330.)

It is noticeable that Polo does not mention indigo at Kermán.—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—Edrisi says that excellent iron was produced in the “cold
mountains” N.W. of Jiruft, _i.e._ somewhere south of the capital;
and _Jihán Numá_, or Great Turkish Geography, that the steel mines
of Niriz, on the borders of Kermán, were famous. These are also
spoken of by Teixeira. Major St. John enables me to indicate their
position, in the hills east of Niriz. (_Edrisi_, vol. i. p. 430;
_Hammer, Mém. sur la Perse_, p. 275; _Teixeira, Relaciones_, p.
378; and see Map of Itineraries, No. II.)

[“Marco Polo’s steel mines are probably the Parpa iron mines on
the road from Kermán to Shíráz, called even to-day M’aden-i-fúlád
(steel mine); they are not worked now. Old Kermán weapons, daggers,
swords, old stirrups, etc., made of steel, are really beautiful,
and justify Marco Polo’s praise of them” (_Houtum-Schindler_,
_l.c._ p. 491.)—H. C.]

_Ondanique_ of the Geog. Text, _Andaine_ of Pauthier’s, _Andanicum_
of the Latin, is an expression on which no light has been thrown
since Ramusio’s time. The latter often asked the Persian merchants
who visited Venice, and they all agreed in stating that it was a
sort of steel of such surpassing value and excellence, that in the
days of yore a man who possessed a mirror, or sword, of _Andanic_
regarded it as he would some precious jewel. This seems to me
excellent evidence, and to give the true clue to the meaning of
_Ondanique_. I have retained the latter form because it points
most distinctly to what I believe to be the real word, viz.
_Hundwáníy_, “Indian Steel.”[1] (See _Johnson’s Pers. Dict._ and
_De Sacy’s Chrestomathie Arabe_, II. 148.) In the _Vocabulista
Arabico_, of about A.D. 1200 (Florence, 1871, p. 211), _Hunduwán_
is explained by _Ensis_. Vüllers explains _Hundwán_ as “anything
peculiar to India, especially swords,” and quotes from Firdúsi,
“_Khanjar-i-Hundwán_,” a hanger of Indian steel.

The like expression appears in the quotation from Edrisi below
as _Hindiah_, and found its way into Spanish in the shapes of
_Alhinde, Alfinde, Alinde_, first with the meaning of _steel_, then
assuming, that of _steel mirror_, and finally that of metallic
foil of a glass mirror. (See _Dozy_ and _Engelmann_, 2d ed. pp.
144–145.) _Hint_ or _Al-hint_ is used in Berber also for steel.
(See _J. R. A. S._ IX. 255.)

The sword-blades of India had a great fame over the East, and
Indian steel, according to esteemed authorities, continued to be
imported into Persia till days quite recent. Its fame goes back
to very old times. Ctesias mentions two wonderful swords of such
material that he got from the king of Persia and his mother. It
is perhaps the _ferrum candidum_ of which the Malli and Oxydracae
sent a 100 talents weight as a present to Alexander.[2] Indian
Iron and Steel (σíδηρος Ἰνδικòς καì στóμωμα) are mentioned in the
_Periplus_ as imports into the Abyssinian ports. _Ferrum Indicum_
appears (at least according to one reading) among the Oriental
_species_ subject to duty in the Law of Marcus Aurelius and
Commodus on that matter. Salmasius notes that among surviving Greek
chemical treatises there was one περì βαφῆς Ἰνδικοῦ σιδήρου, “On
the Tempering of Indian Steel.” Edrisi says on this subject: “The
Hindus excel in the manufacture of iron, and in the preparation of
those ingredients along with which it is fused to obtain that kind
of soft Iron which is usually styled _Indian Steel_ (HINDIAH).[3]
They also have workshops wherein are forged the most famous sabres
in the world.... It is impossible to find anything to surpass the
edge that you get from Indian Steel (_al-hadíd al-Hindí_).”

Allusions to the famous sword-blades of India would seem to be
frequent in Arabic literature. Several will be found in Hamása’s
collection of ancient Arabic poems translated by Freytag. The old
commentator on one of these passages says: “_Ut optimos gladios
significet_ ... Indicos _esse dixit_,” and here the word used in
the original is _Hundwániyah_. In Manger’s version of Arabshah’s
_Life of Timur_ are several allusions of the same kind; one, a
quotation from _Antar_, recalls the _ferrum candidum_ of Curtius:

“Albi (gladii) Indici _meo in sanguine abluuntur_.”

In the histories, even of the Mahomedan conquest of India, the
Hindu infidels are sent to _Jihannam_ with “the well-watered blade
of the Hindi sword”; or the sword is personified as “a Hindu of
good family.” Coming down to later days, Chardin says of the steel
of Persia: “They combine it with Indian steel, which is more
tractable ... and is much more esteemed.” Dupré, at the beginning
of this century, tells us: “I used to believe ... that the steel
for the famous Persian sabres came from certain mines in Khorasan.
But according to all the information I have obtained, I can assert
that no mine of steel exists in that province. What is used for
these blades comes in the shape of disks from Lahore.” Pottinger
names _steel_ among the imports into Kermán from India. Elphinstone
the Accurate, in his _Caubul_, confirms Dupré: “Indian Steel [in
Afghanistan] is most prized for the material; but the best swords
are made in Persia and in Syria;” and in his _History of India_, he
repeats: “The steel of India was in request with the ancients; it
is celebrated in the oldest Persian poem, and is still the material
of the scimitars of Khorasan and Damascus.”[4]

Klaproth, in his _Asia Polyglotta_, gives _Andun_ as the Ossetish
and _Andan_ as the Wotiak, for Steel. Possibly these are
essentially the same with _Hundwáníy_ and _Alhinde_, pointing to
India as the original source of supply. [In the _Sikandar Nāma,e
Bará_ (or “Book of Alexander the Great,” written A.D. 1200, by Abū
Muhammad bin Yusuf bin Mu,Ayyid-i-Nizāmu-’d-Dīn), translated by
Captain H. Wilberforce Clarke (Lond., 1881, large 8vo), steel is
frequently mentioned: Canto xix. 257, p. 202; xx. 12, p. 211; xlv.
38, p. 567; lviii. 32, pp. 695, 42, pp. 697, 62, 66, pp. 699; lix.
28, p. 703.—H. C.]

Avicenna, in his fifth book _De Animâ_, according to Roger Bacon,
distinguishes three very different species of iron: “1st. Iron
which is good for striking or bearing heavy strokes, and for being
forged by hammer and fire, but not for cutting-tools. Of this
hammers and anvils are made, and this is what we commonly call
_Iron_ simply. 2nd. That which is purer, has more heat in it, and
is better adapted to take an edge and to form cutting-tools, but is
not so malleable, viz. _Steel_. And the 3rd is that which is called
ANDENA. This is less known among the Latin nations. Its special
character is that like silver it is malleable and ductile under a
very low degree of heat. In other properties it is intermediate
between iron and steel.” (_Fr. R. Baconis Opera Inedita_, 1859,
pp. 382–383.) The same passage, apparently, of Avicenna is quoted
by Vincent of Beauvais, but with considerable differences. (See
_Speculum Naturale_, VII. ch. lii. lx., and _Specul. Doctrinale_,
XV. ch. lxiii.) The latter author writes _Alidena_, and I have not
been able to refer to Avicenna, so that I am doubtful whether his
_Andena_ is the same term with the _Andaine_ of Pauthier and our
_Ondanique_.

The popular view, at least in the Middle Ages, seems to have
regarded _Steel_ as a distinct natural species, the product of
a necessarily different _ore_, from iron; and some such view
is, I suspect, still common in the East. An old Indian officer
told me of the reply of a native friend to whom he had tried
to explain the conversion of iron into steel—“What! You would
have me believe that if I put an ass into the furnace it will
come forth a horse.” And Indian Steel again seems to have been
regarded as a distinct natural species from ordinary steel. It is
in fact made by a peculiar but simple process, by which the iron
is converted _directly_ into cast-steel, without passing through
any intermediate stage analogous to that of _blister-steel_. When
specimens were first examined in England, chemists concluded that
the steel was made direct from the _ore_. The _Ondanique_ of
Marco no doubt was a fine steel resembling the Indian article.
(_Müller’s Ctesias_, p. 80; _Curtius_, IX. 24; _Müller’s Geog. Gr.
Min._ I. 262; _Digest. Novum_, Lugd. 1551, Lib. XXXIX. Tit. 4;
_Salmas. Ex. Plinian._ II. 763; _Edrisi_, I. 65–66; _J. R. S. A._
A. 387 _seqq._; _Hamasae Carmina_, I. 526; _Elliot_, II. 209, 394;
_Reynolds’s Utbi_, p. 216.)

[Illustration: Texture, with Animals, etc., from a Cashmere Scarf in
the Indian Museum.

“=De deverses maineres laborés à bestes et ausiaus mout
richement.=”]

NOTE 4.—Paulus Jovius in the 16th century says, I know not on
what authority, that Kermán was then celebrated for the fine temper
of its steel in scimitars and lance-points. These were eagerly
bought at high prices by the Turks, and their quality was such that
one blow of a Kermán sabre would cleave an European helmet without
turning the edge. And I see that the phrase, “Kermání blade” is
used in poetry by Marco’s contemporary Amír Khusrú of Delhi. (_P.
Jov. Hist. of his own Time_, Bk. XIV.; _Elliot_, III. 537.)

There is, or was in Pottinger’s time, still a great manufacture
of _matchlocks_ at Kermán; but rose-water, shawls, and carpets
are the staples of the place now. Polo says nothing that points
to shawl-making, but it would seem from Edrisi that some such
manufacture already existed in the adjoining district of Bamm. It
is possible that the “hangings” spoken of by Polo may refer to
the carpets. I have seen a genuine Kermán carpet in the house of
my friend, Sir Bartle Frere. It is of very short pile, very even
and dense; the design, a combination of vases, birds, and floral
tracery, closely resembling the illuminated frontispiece of some
Persian MSS.

The shawls are inferior to those of Kashmir in exquisite softness,
but scarcely in delicacy of texture and beauty of design. In
1850, their highest quality did not exceed 30 _tomans_ (14_l._)
in price. About 2200 looms were employed on the fabric. A good
deal of Kermán wool called _Kurk_, goes _viâ_ Bandar Abbási and
Karáchi to Amritsar, where it is mixed with the genuine Tibetan
wool in the shawl manufacture. Several of the articles named in the
text, including _pardahs_ (“cortines”) are woven in shawl-fabric.
I scarcely think, however, that Marco would have confounded woven
shawl with needle embroidery. And Mr. Khanikoff states that the
silk embroidery, of which Marco speaks, is still performed with
great skill and beauty at Kermán. Our cut illustrates the textures
figured with animals, already noticed at p. 66.

The Guebers were numerous here at the end of last century, but they
are rapidly disappearing now. The Musulman of Kermán is, according
to Khanikoff, an epicurean gentleman, and even in regard to wine,
which is strong and plentiful, his divines are liberal. “In other
parts of Persia you find the scribblings on the walls of Serais to
consist of philosophical axioms, texts from the Koran, or abuse
of local authorities. From Kermán to Yezd you find only rhymes in
praise of fair ladies or good wine.”

(_Pottinger’s Travels_; _Khanik. Mém._ 186 _seqq._, and _Notice_,
p. 21; _Major Smith’s Report_; _Abbott’s MS. Report_ in F. O.;
_Notes by Major O. St. John_, R.E.)

NOTE 5.—Parez is famous for its falcons still, and so are the
districts of Aktár and Sirján. Both Mr. Abbott and Major Smith were
entertained with hawking by Persian hosts in this neighbourhood.
The late Sir O. St. John identifies the bird described as the
_Sháhín_ (Falco _Peregrinator_), one variety of which, the _Fársi_,
is abundant in the higher mountains of S. Persia. It is now little
used in that region, the _Terlán_ or goshawk being most valued, but
a few are caught and sent for sale to the Arabs of Oman. (_J. R. G.
S._ XXV. 50, 63, and _Major St. John’s Notes_.)

[“The fine falcons, ‘with red breasts and swift of flight,’ come
from Páríz. They are, however, very scarce, two or three only
being caught every year. A well-trained Páríz falcon costs from
30 to 50 tomans (12_l._ to 20_l._), as much as a good horse.”
(_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ p. 491.) Major Sykes, _Persia_, ch.
xxiii., writes: “Marco Polo was evidently a keen sportsman, and his
description of the _Sháhin_, as it is termed, cannot be improved
upon.” Major Sykes has a list given him by a Khán of seven hawks of
the province, all black and white, except the _Sháhin_, which has
yellow eyes, and is the third in the order of size.—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—We defer geographical remarks till the traveller reaches
Hormuz.

[1] A learned friend objects to Johnson’s _Hundwáníy_ = “Indian Steel,”
as too absolute; some word for _steel_ being wanted. Even if it
be so, I observe that in three places where Polo uses _Ondanique_
(here, ch. xxi., and ch. xlii.), the phrase is always “_steel
and ondanique_.” This looks as if his mental expression were
_Púlád-i-Hundwáni_, rendered by an idiom like Virgil’s _pocula et
aurum_.

[2] Kenrick suggests that the “bright iron” mentioned by Ezekiel among
the wares of Tyre (ch. xxvii. 19) can hardly have been anything else
than Indian Steel, because named with cassia and _calamus_.

[3] Literally rendered by Mr. Redhouse: “The Indians do well the
combining of mixtures of the chemicals with which they (smelt and)
cast the soft iron, and it becomes _Indian_ (steel), being referred
to India (in this expression).”

[4] In _Richardson’s Pers. Dict._, by Johnson, we have a word _Rohan,
Rohina_ (and other forms). “The finest Indian steel, of which the
most excellent swords are made; also the swords made of that steel.”

CHAPTER XVIII.

OF THE CITY OF CAMADI AND ITS RUINS; ALSO TOUCHING THE
CARAUNA ROBBERS.

After you have ridden down hill those two days, you find yourself in a
vast plain, and at the beginning thereof there is a city called CAMADI,
which formerly was a great and noble place, but now is of little
consequence, for the Tartars in their incursions have several times
ravaged it. The plain whereof I speak is a very hot region; and the
province that we now enter is called REOBARLES.

The fruits of the country are dates, pistachioes, and apples of
Paradise, with others of the like not found in our cold climate. [There
are vast numbers of turtledoves, attracted by the abundance of fruits,
but the Saracens never take them, for they hold them in abomination.]
And on this plain there is a kind of bird called francolin, but
different from the francolin of other countries, for their colour is
a mixture of black and white, and the feet and beak are vermilion
colour.{1}

The beasts also are peculiar; and first I will tell you of their oxen.
These are very large, and all over white as snow; the hair is very
short and smooth, which is owing to the heat of the country. The horns
are short and thick, not sharp in the point; and between the shoulders
they have a round hump some two palms high. There are no handsomer
creatures in the world. And when they have to be loaded, they kneel
like the camel; once the load is adjusted, they rise. Their load is a
heavy one, for they are very strong animals. Then there are sheep here
as big as asses; and their tails are so large and fat, that one tail
shall weigh some 30 lbs. They are fine fat beasts, and afford capital
mutton.{2}

In this plain there are a number of villages and towns which have
lofty walls of mud, made as a defence against the banditti,{3} who are
very numerous, and are called CARAONAS. This name is given them because
they are the sons of Indian mothers by Tartar fathers. And you must
know that when these Caraonas wish to make a plundering incursion, they
have certain devilish enchantments whereby they do bring darkness over
the face of day, insomuch that you can scarcely discern your comrade
riding beside you; and this darkness they will cause to extend over a
space of seven days’ journey. They know the country thoroughly, and
ride abreast, keeping near one another, sometimes to the number of
10,000, at other times more or fewer. In this way they extend across
the whole plain that they are going to harry, and catch every living
thing that is found outside of the towns and villages; man, woman, or
beast, nothing can escape them! The old men whom they take in this way
they butcher; the young men and the women they sell for slaves in other
countries; thus the whole land is ruined, and has become well-nigh a
desert.

The King of these scoundrels is called NOGODAR. This Nogodar had gone
to the Court of Chagatai, who was own brother to the Great Kaan, with
some 10,000 horsemen of his, and abode with him; for Chagatai was
his uncle. And whilst there this Nogodar devised a most audacious
enterprise, and I will tell you what it was. He left his uncle who
was then in Greater Armenia, and fled with a great body of horsemen,
cruel unscrupulous fellows, first through BADASHAN, and then through
another province called PASHAI-DIR, and then through another called
ARIORA-KESHEMUR. There he lost a great number of his people and of
his horses, for the roads were very narrow and perilous. And when he
had conquered all those provinces, he entered India at the extremity
of a province called DALIVAR. He established himself in that city and
government, which he took from the King of the country, ASEDIN SOLDAN
by name, a man of great power and wealth. And there abideth Nogodar
with his army, afraid of nobody, and waging war with all the Tartars in
his neighbourhood.{4}

Now that I have told you of those scoundrels and their history, I
must add the fact that Messer Marco himself was all but caught by
their bands in such a darkness as that I have told you of; but, as it
pleased God, he got off and threw himself into a village that was hard
by, called CONOSALMI. Howbeit he lost his whole company except seven
persons who escaped along with him. The rest were caught, and some of
them sold, some put to death.{5}

NOTE 1.—Ramusio has “Adam’s apple” for apples of Paradise. This was
some kind of _Citrus_, though Lindley thinks it impossible to say
precisely what. According to Jacques de Vitry it was a beautiful
fruit of the Citron kind, in which the bite of human teeth was
plainly discernible. (Note to _Vulgar Errors_, II. 211; _Bongars_,
I. 1099.) Mr. Abbott speaks of this tract as “the districts (of
Kermán) lying towards the South, which are termed the Ghermseer
or Hot Region, where the temperature of winter resembles that of
a charming spring, and where the palm, orange, and lemon-tree
flourish.” (_MS. Report_; see also _J. R. G. S._ XXV. 56.)

[“Marco Polo’s apples of Paradise are more probably the fruits of
the Konár tree. There are no plantains in that part of the country.
Turtle doves, now as then, are plentiful, and as they are seldom
shot, and are said by the people to be unwholesome food, we can
understand Marco Polo’s saying that the people do not eat them.”
(_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ pp. 492–493.)—H. C.]

The Francolin here spoken of is, as Major Smith tells me, the
_Darráj_ of the Persians, the _Black Partridge_ of English
sportsmen, sometimes called the Red-legged Francolin. The Darráj
is found in some parts of Egypt, where its peculiar call is
interpreted by the peasantry into certain Arabic words, meaning
“Sweet are the corn-ears! Praised be the Lord!” In India, Baber
tells us, the call of the Black Partridge was (less piously)
rendered “_Shír dáram shakrak_,” “I’ve got milk and sugar!” The
bird seems to be the ἀτταγὰς of Athenaeus, a fowl “speckled like
the partridge, but larger,” found in Egypt and Lydia. The Greek
version of its cry is the best of all: “τρìς τοῖς κακούργοις κακά”
(“Threefold ills to the ill-doers!”). This is really like the
call of the black partridge in India as I recollect it. [_Tetrao
francolinus_.—H. C.]

(_Chrestomathie Arabe_, II. 295; _Baber_, 320; _Yonge’s Atken._ IX.
39.)

NOTE 2.—Abbott mentions the humped (though small) oxen in this part
of Persia, and that in some of the neighbouring districts they are
taught to kneel to receive the load, an accomplishment which seems
to have struck Mas’udi (III. 27), who says he saw it exhibited by
oxen at Rai (near modern Tehran). The Aín Akbari also ascribes it
to a very fine breed in Bengal. The whimsical name _Zebu_, given to
the humped or Indian ox in books of Zoology, was taken by Buffon
from the exhibitors of such a beast at a French Fair, who probably
invented it. That the humped breeds of oxen existed in this part of
Asia in ancient times is shown by sculptures at Kouyunjik. (See cut
below.)

A letter from Agassiz, printed in the Proc. As. Soc. Bengal (1865),
refers to wild “zebus,” and calls the species a small one. There is
no wild “zebu,” and some of the breeds are of enormous size.

[“White oxen, with short thick horns and a round hump between the
shoulders, are now very rare between Kermán and Bender ’Abbás. They
are, however, still to be found towards Belúchistán and Mekrán,
and they kneel to be loaded like camels. The sheep which I saw had
fine large tails; I did not, however, hear of any having so high a
weight as thirty pounds.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ p. 493.)—H. C.]

The fat-tailed sheep is well known in many parts of Asia and part
of Africa. It is mentioned by Ctesias, and by Ælian, who says
the shepherds used to extract the tallow from the live animal,
sewing up the tail again; exactly the same story is told by the
Chinese Pliny, Ma Twan-lin. Marco’s statements as to size do not
surpass those of the admirable Kämpfer: “In size they so much
surpass the common sheep that it is not unusual to see them as
tall as a donkey, whilst all are much more than three feet; and
as to the tail I shall not exceed the truth, though I may exceed
belief, if I say that it sometimes reaches 40 lbs. in weight.”
Captain Hutton was assured by an Afghan sheep-master that tails
had occurred in his flocks weighing 12 Tabriz _mans_, upwards of
76 lbs.! The Afghans use the fat as an aperient, swallowing a
dose of 4 to 6 lbs! Captain Hutton’s friend testified that trucks
to bear the sheep-tails were sometimes used among the Taimúnis
(north of Herat). This may help to locate that ancient and slippery
story. Josafat Barbaro says he had seen the thing, but is vague
as to place. (_Ælian Nat. An._ III. 3, IV. 32; _Amoen. Exoticae;
Ferrier_, H. of Afghans, p. 294; _J. A. S._ B. XV. 160.)

[Illustration: Humped Oxen from the Assyrian Sculptures at
Koyunjik.]

[Rabelais says (Bk. I. ch. xvi.): “Si de ce vous efmerveillez,
efmerveillez vous d’advantage de la queue des béliers de la
Scythie, qui pesait plus de trente livres; et des moutons de Surie,
esquels fault (si Tenaud, dict vray) affuster une charrette au cul,
pour la porter tant qu’elle est longue et pesante.” (See G. Capus,
_A travers le roy. de Tamerlan_, pp. 21–23, on the fat sheep.)—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The word rendered _banditti_ is in Pauthier _Carans_, in G.
Text _Caraunes_, in the Latin “_a_ scaranis _et malandrinis_.” The
last is no doubt correct, standing for the old Italian _Scherani_,
bandits. (See _Cathay_, p. 287, note.)

NOTE 4.—This is a knotty subject, and needs a long note.

The ḲARAUNAHS are mentioned often in the histories of the Mongol
regime in Persia, first as a Mongol tribe forming a _Tuman_, _i.e._
a division or corps of 10,000 in the Mongol army (and I suspect it
was the phrase the _Tuman of the Ḳaraunahs_ in Marco’s mind that
suggested his repeated use of the number 10,000 in speaking of
them); and afterwards as daring and savage freebooters, scouring
the Persian provinces, and having their headquarters on the Eastern
frontiers of Persia. They are described as having had their
original seats on the mountains north of the Chinese wall near
_Ḳaraún Jidun_ or _Khidun_; and their special accomplishment in war
was the use of Naphtha Fire. Rashiduddin mentions the _Ḳaránut_ as
a branch of the great Mongol tribe of the Kunguráts, who certainly
had their seat in the vicinity named, so these may possibly be
connected with the Ḳaraunahs. The same author says that the Tuman
of the Ḳaraunahs formed the _Injú_ or _peculium_ of Arghún Khan.

Wassáf calls them “a kind of goblins rather than human beings, the
most daring of all the Mongols”; and Mirkhond speaks in like terms.

Dr. Bird of Bombay, in discussing some of the Indo-Scythic coins
which bear the word _Korano_ attached to the prince’s name,
asserts this to stand for the name of the Ḳaraunah, “who were
a Græco-Indo-Scythic tribe of robbers in the Punjab, who are
mentioned by Marco Polo,” a somewhat hasty conclusion which
Pauthier adopts. There is, Quatremère observes, no mention of the
Ḳaraunahs before the Mongol invasion, and this he regards as the
great obstacle to any supposition of their having been a people
previously settled in Persia. Reiske, indeed, with no reference
to the present subject, quotes a passage from Hamza of Ispahan, a
writer of the 10th century, in which mention is made of certain
troops called _Ḳaráunahs_. But it seems certain that in this and
other like cases the real reading was _Kazáwinah_, people of
Kazvin. (See _Reiske’s Constant. Porphyrog._ Bonn. ed. II. 674;
_Gottwaldt’s Hamza Ispahanensis_, p. 161; and _Quatremère_ in _J.
A._ sér. V. tom. xv. 173.) Ibn Batuta only once mentions the name,
saying that Tughlak Sháh of Dehli was “one of those Turks called
_Ḳaráunas_ who dwell in the mountains between Sind and Turkestan.”
Hammer has suggested the derivation of the word _Carbine_ from
_Karáwinah_ (as he writes), and a link in such an etymology is
perhaps furnished by the fact that in the 16th century the word
_Carbine_ was used for some kind of irregular horseman.

(_Gold. Horde_, 214; _Ilch._ I. 17, 344, etc.; _Erdmann_, 168,
199, etc.; _J. A. S._ B. X. 96; _Q. R._ 130; _Not. et Ext._ XIV.
282; _I. B._ III. 201; _Ed. Webbe, his Travailes_, p. 17, 1590.
Reprinted 1868.)

As regards the account given by Marco of the origin of the
Caraonas, it seems almost necessarily a mistaken one. As Khanikoff
remarks, he might have confounded them with the Biluchis, whose
Turanian aspect (at least as regards the Brahuis) shows a strong
infusion of Turki blood, and who might be rudely described as
a cross between Tartars and Indians. It is indeed an odd fact
that the word _Karáni_ (vulgo _Cranny_) is commonly applied in
India at this day to the mixed race sprung from European fathers
and Native mothers, and this might be cited in corroboration of
Marsden’s reference to the Sanskrit _Karana_, but I suspect the
coincidence arises in another way. _Karana_ is the name applied
to a particular class of mixt blood, whose special occupation was
writing and accounts. But the prior sense of the word seems to have
been “clever, skilled,” and hence a writer or scribe. In this sense
we find _Karáni_ applied in Ibn Batuta’s day to a ship’s clerk,
and it is used in the same sense in the _Aín Akbari_. Clerkship is
also the predominant occupation of the East-Indians, and hence the
term Karáni is applied to them from their business, and not from
their mixt blood. We shall see hereafter that there is a Tartar
term _Arghún_, applied to fair children born of a Mongol mother
and _white_ father; it is possible that there may have been a
correlative word like _Ḳaráun_ (from _Ḳará_, black) applied to dark
children born of Mongol father and black mother, and that this led
Marco to a false theory.

[Major Sykes (_Persia_) devotes a chapter (xxiv.) to _The Karwán
Expedition_ in which he says: “Is it not possible that the Karwánis
are the Caraonas of Marco Polo? They are distinct from the
surrounding Baluchis, and pay no tribute.”—H. C.]

[Illustration: Portrait of a Hazára.]

Let us turn now to the name of Nogodar. Contemporaneously with the
Ḳaraunahs we have frequent mention of predatory bands known as
_Nigúdaris_, who seem to be distinguished from the Ḳaraunahs, but
had a like character for truculence. Their headquarters were about
Sijistán, and Quatremère seems disposed to look upon them as a
tribe indigenous in that quarter. Hammer says they were originally
the troops of Prince Nigudar, grandson of Chaghatai, and that they
were a rabble of all sorts, Mongols, Turkmans, Kurds, Shúls, and
what not. We hear of their revolts and disorders down to 1319,
under which date Mirkhond says that there had been one-and-twenty
fights with them in four years. Again we hear of them in 1336 about
Herat, whilst in Baber’s time they turn up as _Nukdari_, fairly
established as tribes in the mountainous tracts of Karnúd and Ghúr,
west of Kabul, and coupled with the Hazáras, who still survive
both in name and character. “Among both,” says Baber, “there are
some who speak the Mongol language.” Hazáras and _Takdaris_ (read
_Nukdaris_) again occur coupled in the _History of Sind_. (See
_Elliot_, I. 303–304.) [On the struggle against Timur of Toumen,
veteran chief of the Nikoudrians (1383–84), see Major David Price’s
_Mahommedan History_, London, 1821, vol. iii. pp. 47–49, H. C.]
In maps of the 17th century, as of Hondius and Blaeuw, we find
the mountains north of Kabul termed _Nochdarizari_, in which we
cannot miss the combination Nigudar-Hazárah, whencesoever it was
got. The Hazáras are eminently Mongol in feature to this day,
and it is very probable that they or some part of them are the
descendants of the Ḳaráunahs or the Nigudaris, or of both, and that
the origination of the bands so called, from the scum of the Mongol
inundation, is thus in degree confirmed. The Hazáras generally are
said to speak an old dialect of Persian. But one tribe in Western
Afghanistan retains both the name of Mongols and a language of
which six-sevenths (judging from a vocabulary published by Major
Leech) appear to be Mongol. Leech says, too, that the Hazáras
generally are termed _Moghals_ by the Ghilzais. It is worthy of
notice that Abu’l Fázl, who also mentions the Nukdaris among the
nomad tribes of Kabul, says the Hazáras were the remains of the
Chaghataian army which Mangu Kaan sent to the aid of Hulaku, under
the command of Nigudar Oghlan. (_Not. et Ext._ XIV. 284; _Ilch._ I.
284, 309, etc,; _Baber_, 134, 136, 140; _J. As._ sér. IV. tom. iv.
98; _Ayeen Akbery_, II. 192–193.)

So far, excepting as to the doubtful point of the relation between
Ḳaráunahs and Nigudaris, and as to the origin of the former, we
have a general accordance with Polo’s representations. But it
is not very easy to identify with certainty the inroad on India
to which he alludes, or the person intended by Nogodar, nephew
of Chaghatai. It seems as if two persons of that name had each
contributed something to Marco’s history.

We find in Hammer and D’Ohsson that one of the causes which led
to the war between Barka Khan and Hulaku in 1262 (see above,
_Prologue_, ch. ii.) was the violent end that had befallen three
princes of the House of Juji, who had accompanied Hulaku to Persia
in command of the contingent of that House. When war actually
broke out, the contingent made their escape from Persia. One party
gained Kipchak by way of Derbend; another, in greater force, led
by NIGUDAR and Onguja, escaped to Khorasan, pursued by the troops
of Hulaku, and thence eastward, where they seized upon Ghazni and
other districts bordering on India.

But again: Nigudar Aghul, or Oghlan, son of (the younger) Juji, son
of _Chaghatai_, was the leader of the Chaghataian contingent in
Hulaku’s expedition, and was still attached to the Mongol-Persian
army in 1269, when Borrak Khan, of the House of Chaghatai, was
meditating war against his kinsman, Abaka of Persia. Borrak sent to
the latter an ambassador, who was the bearer of a secret message to
Prince Nigudar, begging him not to serve against the head of his
own House. Nigudar, upon this, made a pretext of retiring to his
own headquarters in _Georgia_, hoping to reach Borrak’s camp by
way of Derbend. He was, however, intercepted, and lost many of his
people. With 1000 horse he took refuge in Georgia, but was refused
an asylum, and was eventually captured by Abaka’s commander on that
frontier. His officers were executed, his troops dispersed among
Abaka’s army, and his own life spared under surveillance. I find
no more about him. In 1278 Hammer speaks of him as dead, and of
the Nigudarian bands as having been formed out of his troops. But
authority is not given.

The second Nigudar is evidently the one to whom Abu’l Fázl alludes.
Khanikoff assumes that the Nigudar who went off towards India
about 1260 (he puts the date earlier) was Nigudar, the grandson of
Chaghatai, but he takes no notice of the second story just quoted.

In the former story we have bands under _Nigudar_ going off by
Ghazni, _and conquering country on the Indian frontier_. In the
latter we have _Nigudar, a descendant of Chaghatai_, trying to
escape from his camp _on the frontier of Great Armenia_. Supposing
the Persian historians to be correct, it looks as if Marco had
rolled two stories into one.

Some other passages may be cited before quitting this part of
the subject. A chronicle of Herat, translated by Barbier de
Meynard, says, under 1298: “The King Fakhruddin (of Herat) had the
imprudence to authorise _the Amir Nigudar_ to establish himself
in a quarter of the city, with 300 adventurers from ’Irák. This
little troop made frequent raids in Kuhistan, Sijistan, Farrah,
etc., spreading terror. Khodabanda, at the request of his brother
Ghazan Khan, came from Mazanderan to demand the immediate surrender
of these brigands,” etc. And in the account of the tremendous
foray of the Chaghataian Prince Kotlogh Shah, on the east and south
of Persia in 1299, we find one of his captains called _Nigudar_
Bahadur. (_Gold. Horde_, 146, 157, 164; _D’Ohsson_, IV. 378 _seqq._,
433 _seqq._, 513 _seqq._; _Ilch._ I. 216, 261, 284; II. 104; _J. A._
sér. V. tom. xvii. 455–456, 507; _Khan. Notice_, 31.)

As regards the route taken by Prince Nogodar in his incursion into
India, we have no difficulty with BADAKHSHAN. PASHAI-DIR is a
copulate name; the former part, as we shall see reason to believe
hereafter, representing the country between the Hindu Kush and
the Kabul River (see _infra_, ch. xxx.); the latter (as Pauthier
already has pointed out), DIR, the chief town of Panjkora, in the
hill country north of Peshawar. In _Ariora-Keshemur_ the first
portion only is perplexing. I will mention the most probable of
the solutions that have occurred to me, and a second, due to
that eminent archæologist, General A. Cunningham. (1) _Ariora_
may be some corrupt or Mongol form of _Aryavartta_, a sacred
name applied to the Holy Lands of Indian Buddhism, of which
Kashmir was eminently one to the Northern Buddhists. _Oron_, in
Mongol, is a Region or Realm, and may have taken the place of
_Vartta_, giving _Aryoron_ or Ariora. (2) “_Ariora_,” General
Cunningham writes, “I take to be the _Harhaura_ of Sanscrit—_i.e._
the Western Panjáb. Harhaura was the North-Western Division of
the _Nava-Khanda_, or Nine Divisions of Ancient India. It is
mentioned between _Sindhu-Sauvira_ in the west (_i.e._ Sind), and
_Madra_ in the north (_i.e._the Eastern Panjáb, which is still
called _Madar-Des_). The name of Harhaura is, I think, preserved
in the Haro River. Now, the Sind-Sagor Doab formed a portion
of the kingdom of Kashmir, and the joint names, like those of
Sindhu-Sauvira, describe only one State.” The names of the Nine
Divisions in question are given by the celebrated astronomer,
Varaha Mihira, who lived in the beginning of the 6th century, and
are repeated by Al Biruni. (See _Reinaud, Mém. sur l’Inde_, p.
116.) The only objection to this happy solution seems to lie in
Al Biruni’s remark, that the names in question were in general no
longer used even in his time (A.D. 1030).

There can be no doubt that _Asidin Soldan_ is, as Khanikoff has
said, Ghaiassuddin Balban, Sultan of Delhi from 1266 to 1286, and
for years before that a man of great power in India, and especially
in the Panjáb, of which he had in the reign of Ruknuddin (1236)
held independent possession.

Firishta records several inroads of Mongols in the Panjáb during
the reign of Ghaiassuddin, in withstanding one of which that
King’s eldest son was slain; and there are constant indications of
their presence in Sind till the end of the century. But we find
in that historian no hint of the chief circumstances of this part
of the story, viz., the conquest of Kashmir and the occupation of
_Dalivar_ or _Dilivar_ (G. T.), evidently (whatever its identity)
in the plains of India. I do find, however, in the history of
Kashmir, as given by Lassen (III. 1138), that in the end of
1259, Lakshamana Deva, King of Kashmir, was killed in a campaign
against the _Turushka_ (Turks or Tartars), and that their leader,
who is called Kajjala, got hold of the country and held it till
1287.[1] It is difficult not to connect this both with Polo’s story
and with the escapade of Nigudar about 1260, noting also that
this occupation of Kashmir extended through the whole reign of
Ghaiassuddin.

We seem to have a memory of Polo’s story preserved in one of
Elliot’s extracts from Wassáf, which states that in 708 (A.D.
1308), after a great defeat of a Mongol inroad which had passed the
Ganges, Sultan Ala’uddin Khilji ordered a pillar of Mongol heads to
be raised before the Badáun gate, “_as was done with the_ Nigudari
_Moghuls_” (III. 48).

We still have to account for the occupation and locality of
_Dalivar_; Marsden supposed it to be _Lahore_; Khanikoff considers
it to be _Diráwal_, the ancient desert capital of the Bhattis,
properly (according to Tod) _Deoráwal_, but by a transposition
common in India, as it is in Italy, sometimes called _Diláwar_,
in the modern State of Bháwalpúr. But General Cunningham
suggests a more probable locality in DILÁWAR on the west bank
of the Jelam, close to Dárápúr, and opposite to Mung. These two
sites, Diláwar-Dárápúr on the west bank, and Mung on the east,
are identified by General Cunningham (I believe justly) with
Alexander’s Bucephala and Nicaea. The spot, which is just opposite
the battlefield of Chiliánwála, was visited (15th December, 1868)
at my request, by my friend Colonel R. Maclagan, R.E. He writes:
“The present village of Diláwar stands a little above the town of
Dárápúr (I mean on higher ground), looking down on Dárápúr and on
the river, and on the cultivated and wooded plain along the river
bank. The remains of the Old Diláwar, in the form of quantities
of large bricks, cover the low round-backed spurs and knolls of
the broken rocky hills around the present village, but principally
on the land side. They cover a large area of very irregular
character, and may clearly be held to represent a very considerable
town. There are no indications of the form of buildings, ... but
simply large quantities of large bricks, which for a long time
have been carried away and used for modern buildings.... After
rain coins are found on the surface.... There can be no doubt of
a very large extent of ground, of very irregular and uninviting
character, having been covered at some time with buildings. The
position on the Jelam would answer well for the Diláwar which the
Mongol invaders took and held.... The strange thing is that the
name should not be mentioned (I believe it is not) by any of the
well-known Mahomedan historians of India. So much for Diláwar....
The people have no traditions. But there are the remains; and
there is the name, borne by the existing village on part of the
old site.” I had come to the conclusion that this was almost
certainly Polo’s Dalivar, and had mapped it as such, before I
read certain passages in the _History of Zíyáuddín Barni_, which
have been translated by Professor Dowson for the third volume of
Elliot’s _India_. When the comrades of Ghaiassuddin Balban urged
him to conquests, the Sultan pointed to the constant danger from
the Mongols,[2] saying: “These accursed wretches have heard of
the wealth and condition of Hindustan, and have set their hearts
upon conquering and plundering it. _They have taken and plundered
Lahor within my territories, and no year passes that they do not
come here and plunder the villages_.... They even talk about the
conquest and sack of Delhi.” And under a later date the historian
says: “The Sultan ... marched to Lahor, and ordered the rebuilding
of the fort which the Mughals had destroyed in the reigns of the
sons of Shamsuddin. The towns and villages of Lahor which the
Mughals had devastated and laid waste he repeopled.” Considering
these passages, and the fact that Polo had no personal knowledge of
Upper India, I now think it probable that Marsden was right, and
that _Dilivar_ is really a misunderstanding of “_Città_ di Livar”
for _Lahàwar_ or Lahore.

The _Magical darkness_ which Marco ascribes to the evil arts of
the Karaunas is explained by Khanikoff from the phenomenon of _Dry
Fog_, which he has often experienced in Khorasan, combined with the
_Dust Storm_ with which we are familiar in Upper India. In Sind
these phenomena often produce a great degree of darkness. During a
battle fought between the armies of Sindh and Kachh in 1762, such a
fog came on, obscuring the light of day for some six hours, during
which the armies were intermixed with one another and fighting
desperately. When the darkness dispersed they separated, and the
consternation of both parties was so great at the events of the day
that both made a precipitate retreat. In 1844 this battle was still
spoken of with wonder. (_J. Bomb. Br. R. A. S._ I. 423.)

Major St. John has given a note on his own experience of these
curious Kermán fogs (see _Ocean Highways_, 1872, p. 286): “Not a
breath of air was stirring, and the whole effect was most curious,
and utterly unlike any other fog I have seen. No deposit of
dust followed, and the feeling of the air was decidedly damp. I
unfortunately could not get my hygrometer till the fog had cleared
away.”

[_General Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ p. 493, writes: “The magical
darkness might, as Colonel Yule supposes, be explained by
the curious dry fogs or dust storms, often occurring in the
neighbourhood of Kermán, but it must be remarked that Marco Polo
was caught in one of these storms down in Jíruft, where, according
to the people I questioned, such storms now never occur. On the
29th of September, 1879, at Kermán, a high wind began to blow from
S.S.W. at about 5 P.M. First there came thick heavy clouds of dust
with a few drops of rain. The heavy dust then settled down, the
lighter particles remained in the air, forming a dry fog of such
density that large objects, like houses, trees, etc., could not
even faintly be distinguished at a distance of a hundred paces. The
barometers suffered no change, the three I had with me remained
in _statu quo_.” “The heat is over by the middle of September,
and after the autumnal equinox, there are a few days of what is
best described as a dense dry fog. This was undoubtedly the haze
referred to by Marco Polo.” (_Major Sykes_, ch. iv.)—H. C.]

Richthofen’s remarkable exposition of the phenomena of the _löss_
in North China, and of the sub-aerial deposits of the steppes and
of Central Asia throws some light on this. But this hardly applies
to St John’s experience of “no deposit of dust.” (See Richthofen,
_China_, pp. 96–97 s. _MS. Note_, H. Y.)

The belief that such opportune phenomena were produced by
enchantment was a thoroughly Tartar one. D’Herbelot relates (art.
_Giagathai_) that in an action with a rebel called Mahomed Tarabi,
the Mongols were encompassed by a dust storm which they attributed
to enchantment on the part of the enemy, and it so discouraged them
that they took to flight.

NOTE 5.—The specification that only _seven_ were saved from Marco’s
company is peculiar to Pauthier’s Text, not appearing in the G. T.

Several names compounded of _Salm_ or _Salmi_ occur on the dry
lands on the borders of Kermán. Edrisi, however (I. p. 428), names
a place called ḲANÁT-UL-SHÁM as the first march in going from
Jíruft to Walashjird. Walashjird is, I imagine, represented by
_Galashkird_, Major R. Smith’s third march from Jíruft (see my Map
of Routes from Kermán to Hormuz); and as such an indication agrees
with the view taken below of Polo’s route, I am strongly disposed
to identify Ḳanát-ul-Shám with his _castello_ or walled village of
_Canosalmi_.

[“Marco Polo’s Conosalmi, where he was attacked by robbers and lost
the greater part of his men, is perhaps the ruined town or village
Kamasal (Kahn-i-asal = the honey canal), near Kahnúj-i-pancheh
and Vakílábád in Jíruft. It lies on the direct road between
Shehr-i-Daqíánús (Camadi) and the Nevergún Pass. The road goes in
an almost due southerly direction. The Nevergún Pass accords with
Marco Polo’s description of it; it is very difficult, on account
of the many great blocks of sandstone scattered upon it. Its
proximity to the Bashakird mountains and Mekrán easily accounts for
the prevalence of robbers, who infested the place in Marco Polo’s
time. At the end of the Pass lies the large village Shamíl, with
an old fort; the distance thence to the site of Hormúz or Bender
’Abbás (lying more to the west) is 52 miles, two days’ march. The
climate of Bender ’Abbás is very bad, strangers speedily fall sick,
two of my men died there, all the others were seriously ill.”
(_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ pp. 495–496.) Major Sykes (ch. xxiii.)
says: “Two marches from Camadi was Kahn-i-Panchur, and a stage
beyond it lay the ruins of Fariáb or Pariáb, which was once a great
city, and was destroyed by a flood, according to local legend.
It may have been Alexander’s Salmous, as it is about the right
distance from the coast, and if so, could not have been Marco’s
_Cono Salmi_. Continuing on, Galashkird mentioned by Edrisi, is the
next stage.”—H. C.]

The raids of the Mekranis and Biluchis long preceded those of the
Karaunas, for they were notable even in the time of Mahmud of
Ghazni, and they have continued to our own day to be prosecuted
nearly on the same stage and in the same manner. About 1721, 4000
horsemen of this description plundered the town of Bander Abbási,
whilst Captain Alex. Hamilton was in the port; and Abbott, in 1850,
found the dread of Bilúch robbers to extend almost to the gates
of Ispahan. A striking account of the Bilúch robbers and their
characteristics is given by General Ferrier. (See _Hamilton_, I.
109; _J. R. G. S._ XXV.; _Khanikoff’s Mémoire; Macd. Kinneir_, 196;
_Caravan Journeys_, p. 437 seq.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Khajlak_ is mentioned as a leader of the Mongol raids in India by
the poet Amir Khusrú (A.D. 1289; see _Elliot_ III. 527).

[2] Professor Cowell compares the Mongol inroads in the latter part
of the 13th and beginning of the 14th century, in their incessant
recurrence, to the incursions of the Danes in England. A passage
in Wassáf (_Elliot_, III. 38) shows that the Mongols were, _circa_
1254–55, already in occupation of Sodra on the Chenab, and districts
adjoining.

CHAPTER XIX.

OF THE DESCENT TO THE CITY OF HORMOS.

The Plain of which we have spoken extends in a southerly direction
for five days’ journey, and then you come to another descent some
twenty miles in length, where the road is very bad and full of peril,
for there are many robbers and bad characters about. When you have
got to the foot of this descent you find another beautiful plain
called the PLAIN OF FORMOSA. This extends for two days’ journey; and
you find in it fine streams of water with plenty of date-palms and
other fruit-trees. There are also many beautiful birds, francolins,
popinjays, and other kinds such as we have none of in our country.
When you have ridden these two days you come to the Ocean Sea, and on
the shore you find a city with a harbour which is called HORMOS.{1}
Merchants come thither from India, with ships loaded with spicery and
precious stones, pearls, cloths of silk and gold, elephants’ teeth, and
many other wares, which they sell to the merchants of Hormos, and which
these in turn carry all over the world to dispose of again. In fact,
’tis a city of immense trade. There are plenty of towns and villages
under it, but it is the capital. The King is called RUOMEDAM AHOMET. It
is a very sickly place, and the heat of the sun is tremendous. If any
foreign merchant dies there, the King takes all his property.

In this country they make a wine of dates mixt with spices, which is
very good. When any one not used to it first drinks this wine, it
causes repeated and violent purging, but afterwards he is all the
better for it, and gets fat upon it. The people never eat meat and
wheaten bread except when they are ill, and if they take such food
when they are in health it makes them ill. Their food when in health
consists of dates and salt-fish (tunny, to wit) and onions, and this
kind of diet they maintain in order to preserve their health.{2}

Their ships are wretched affairs, and many of them get lost; for they
have no iron fastenings, and are only stitched together with twine made
from the husk of the Indian nut. They beat this husk until it becomes
like horse-hair, and from that they spin twine, and with this stitch
the planks of the ships together. It keeps well, and is not corroded
by the sea-water, but it will not stand well in a storm. The ships are
not pitched, but are rubbed with fish-oil. They have one mast, one
sail, and one rudder, and have no deck, but only a cover spread over
the cargo when loaded. This cover consists of hides, and on the top of
these hides they put the horses which they take to India for sale. They
have no iron to make nails of, and for this reason they use only wooden
trenails in their shipbuilding, and then stitch the planks with twine
as I have told you. Hence ’tis a perilous business to go a voyage in
one of those ships, and many of them are lost, for in that Sea of India
the storms are often terrible.{3}

The people are black, and are worshippers of Mahommet. The residents
avoid living in the cities, for the heat in summer is so great that
it would kill them. Hence they go out (to sleep) at their gardens in
the country, where there are streams and plenty of water. For all that
they would not escape but for one thing that I will mention. The fact
is, you see, that in summer a wind often blows across the sands which
encompass the plain, so intolerably hot that it would kill everybody,
were it not that when they perceive that wind coming they plunge into
water up to the neck, and so abide until the wind have ceased.{4} [And
to prove the great heat of this wind, Messer Mark related a case that
befell when he was there. The Lord of Hormos, not having paid his
tribute to the King of Kerman the latter resolved to claim it at the
time when the people of Hormos were residing away from the city. So he
caused a force of 1600 horse and 5000 foot to be got ready, and sent
them by the route of Reobarles to take the others by surprise. Now,
it happened one day that through the fault of their guide they were
not able to reach the place appointed for their night’s halt, and were
obliged to bivouac in a wilderness not far from Hormos. In the morning
as they were starting on their march they were caught by that wind, and
every man of them was suffocated, so that not one survived to carry the
tidings to their Lord. When the people of Hormos heard of this they
went forth to bury the bodies lest they should breed a pestilence. But
when they laid hold of them by the arms to drag them to the pits, the
bodies proved to be so _baked_, as it were, by that tremendous heat,
that the arms parted from the trunks, and in the end the people had to
dig graves hard by each where it lay, and so cast them in.]{5}

The people sow their wheat and barley and other corn in the month of
November, and reap it in the month of March. The dates are not gathered
till May, but otherwise there is no grass nor any other green thing,
for the excessive heat dries up everything.

When any one dies they make a great business of the mourning, for
women mourn their husbands four years. During that time they mourn at
least once a day, gathering together their kinsfolk and friends and
neighbours for the purpose, and making a great weeping and wailing.
[And they have women who are mourners by trade, and do it for hire.]

Now, we will quit this country. I shall not, however, now go on to tell
you about India; but when time and place shall suit we shall come round
from the north and tell you about it. For the present, let us return
by another road to the aforesaid city of Kerman, for we cannot get at
those countries that I wish to tell you about except through that city.

I should tell you first, however, that King Ruomedam Ahomet of Hormos,
which we are leaving, is a liegeman of the King of Kerman.{6}

On the road by which we return from Hormos to Kerman you meet with some
very fine plains, and you also find many natural hot baths; you find
plenty of partridges on the road; and there are towns where victual
is cheap and abundant, with quantities of dates and other fruits. The
wheaten bread, however, is so bitter, owing to the bitterness of the
water, that no one can eat it who is not used to it. The baths that I
mentioned have excellent virtues; they cure the itch and several other
diseases.{7}

Now, then, I am going to tell you about the countries towards the
north, of which you shall hear in regular order. Let us begin.

NOTE 1.—Having now arrived at HORMUZ, it is time to see what can be
made of the Geography of the route from Kermán to that port.

The port of Hormuz, [which had taken the place of Kish as the most
important market of the Persian Gulf (H. C.),] stood upon the
mainland. A few years later it was transferred to the island which
became so famous, under circumstances which are concisely related
by Abulfeda:—“Hormuz is the port of Kermán, a city rich in palms,
and very hot. One who has visited it in our day tells me that the
ancient Hormuz was devastated by the incursions of the Tartars, and
that its people transferred their abode to an island in the sea
called Zarun, near the continent, and lying west of the old city.
At Hormuz itself no inhabitants remain, but some of the lowest
order.” (In _Büsching_, IV. 261–262.) Friar Odoric, about 1321,
found Hormuz “on an island some 5 miles distant from the main.”
Ibn Batuta, some eight or nine years later, discriminates between
Hormuz or Moghistan on the mainland, and New Hormuz on the Island
of Jeraun, but describes only the latter, already a great and rich
city.

The site of the Island Hormuz has often been visited and described;
but I could find no published trace of any traveller having
verified the site of the more ancient city, though the existence of
its ruins was known to John de Barros, who says that a little fort
called _Cuxstac_ (_Kuhestek_ of P. della Valle, II. p. 300) stood
on the site. An application to Colonel Pelly, the very able British
Resident at Bushire, brought me from his own personal knowledge
the information that I sought, and the following particulars are
compiled from the letters with which he has favoured me:—

“The ruins of Old Hormuz, well known as such, stand several miles
up a creek, and in the centre of the present district of Minao.
They are extensive (though in large part obliterated by long
cultivation over the site), and the traces of a long pier or Bandar
were pointed out to Colonel Pelly. They are about 6 or 7 miles from
the fort of Minao, and the Minao river, or its stony bed, winds
down towards them. The creek is quite traceable, but is silted up,
and to embark goods you have to go a farsakh towards the sea, where
there is a custom-house on that part of the creek which is still
navigable. Colonel Pelly collected a few bricks from the ruins.
From the mouth of the Old Hormuz creek to the New Hormuz town, or
town of Turumpak on the island of Hormuz, is a sail of about three
farsakhs. It may be a trifle more, but any native tells you at once
that it is three farsakhs from Hormuz Island to the creek where
you land to go up to Minao. _Hormuzdia_ was the name of the region
in the days of its prosperity. Some people say that Hormuzdia was
known as _Jerunia_, and Old Hormuz town as _Jerun_.” (In this I
suspect tradition has gone astray.) “The town and fort of Minao
lie to the N.E. of the ancient city, and are built upon the lowest
spur of the Bashkurd mountains, commanding a gorge through which
the Rudbar river debouches on the plain of Hormuzdia.” In these new
and interesting particulars it is pleasing to find such precise
corroboration both of Edrisi and of Ibn Batuta. The former, writing
in the 12th century, says that Hormuz stood on the banks of a canal
or creek from the Gulf, by which vessels came up to the city. The
latter specifies the breadth of sea between Old and New Hormuz as
_three farsakhs_. (_Edrisi_, I. 424; _I. B._ II. 230.)

I now proceed to recapitulate the main features of Polo’s Itinerary
from Kermán to Hormuz. We have:—

Marches.
1. From Kermán across a plain to the top of a
mountain-pass, where _extreme cold was
experienced_ . . . . . . . . 7

2. A descent, occupying . . . . . . . 2

3. A great plain, called _Reobarles_, in a much warmer
climate, abounding in francolin partridge, and in
dates and tropical fruit, with a ruined city of former
note, called _Camadi_, near the head of the plain,
which extends for . . . . . . . . 5

4. A second very bad pass, descending for 20 miles, say . 1

5. A well-watered fruitful plain, which is crossed to
_Hormuz_, on the shores of the Gulf . . . . 2
——
Total 17

No European traveller, so far as I know, has described the most
direct road from Kermán to Hormuz, or rather to its nearest modern
representative Bander Abbási,—I mean the road by Báft. But a line
to the eastward of this, and leading through the plain of Jíruft,
was followed partially by Mr. Abbott in 1850, and completely by
Major R. M. Smith, R.E., in 1866. The details of this route, except
in one particular, correspond closely in essentials with those
given by our author, and form an excellent basis of illustration
for Polo’s description.

Major Smith (accompanied at first by Colonel Goldsmid, who diverged
to Mekran) left Kermán on the 15th of January, and reached Bander
Abbási on the 3rd of February, but, as three halts have to be
deducted, his total number of marches was exactly the same as
Marco’s, viz. 17. They divide as follows:—

Marches.
1. From Kermán to the caravanserai of Deh Bakri in the
pass so called. “The ground as I ascended became
covered with snow, and the weather bitterly cold”
(_Report_) . . . . . . . . . 6

2. Two miles _over very deep snow_ brought him to the
top of the pass; he then descended 14 miles to his
halt. Two miles to the south of the crest he passed a
second caravanserai: “The two are evidently built so
near one another to afford shelter to travellers who may
be unable to cross the ridge during heavy snow-storms.”
The next march continued the descent for 14 miles, and
then carried him 10 miles along the banks of the
Rudkhanah-i-Shor. The approximate height of the pass
above the sea is estimated at 8000 feet. We have thus
for the descent the greater part of . . . . 2

3. “Clumps of date-palms growing near the village showed
that I had now reached a totally different climate.”
(_Smith’s Report_.) And Mr. Abbott says of the same
region: “Partly wooded ... and with thickets of reeds
abounding with francolin and _Jirufti_ partridge....
The lands yield grain, millet, pulse, French- and
horse-beans, rice, cotton, henna, Palma Christi, and
dates, and in part are of great fertility.... Rainy
season from January to March, after which a luxuriant
crop of grass.” Across this plain (districts of Jíruft
and Rudbar), the height of which above the sea, is
something under 2000 feet . . . . . . 6

4. 6½ hours, “nearly the whole way over a most difficult
mountain-pass,” called the Pass of Nevergun . . 1

5. Two long marches over a plain, part of which is
described as “continuous cultivation for some 16
miles,” and the rest as a “most uninteresting plain” 2
——
Total as before . . . 17

In the previous edition of this work I was inclined to identify
Marco’s route _absolutely_ with this Itinerary. But a communication
from Major St. John, who surveyed the section from Kermán towards
Deh Bakri in 1872, shows that this first section does not answer
well to the description. The road is not all plain, for it crosses
a mountain pass, though not a formidable one. Neither is it through
a thriving, populous tract, for, with the exception of two large
villages, Major St. John found the whole road to Deh Bakri from
Kermán as desert and dreary as any in Persia. On the other hand,
the more direct route to the south, which is that always used
except in seasons of extraordinary severity (such as that of Major
Smith’s journey, when this route was impassable from snow), answers
better, as described to Major St. John by muleteers, to Polo’s
account. The first _six days_ are occupied by a gentle ascent
through the districts of Bardesir and Kairat-ul-Arab, which are the
best-watered and most fertile uplands of Kermán. From the crest
of the pass reached in those six marches (which is probably more
than 10,000 feet above the sea, for it was closed by snow on 1st
May, 1872), an easy descent of _two days_ leads to the Garmsir.
This is traversed in four days, and then a very difficult pass is
crossed to reach the plains bordering on the sea. The cold of this
route is much greater than that of the Deh Bakri route. Hence the
correspondence with Polo’s description, as far as the descent to
the Garmsir, or Reobarles, seems decidedly better by this route.
It is admitted to be quite possible that on reaching this plain
the two routes coalesced. We shall assume this provisionally, till
some traveller gives us a detailed account of the Bardesir route.
Meantime all the remaining particulars answer well.

[General Houtum-Schindler (_l.c._ pp. 493–495), speaking of the
Itinerary from Kermán to Hormúz and back, says: “Only two of the
many routes between Kermán and Bender ’Abbás coincide more or less
with Marco Polo’s description. These two routes are the one over
the Deh Bekrí Pass [see above, Colonel Smith], and the one _viâ_
Sárdú. The latter is the one, I think, taken by Marco Polo. The
more direct roads to the west are for the greater part through
mountainous country, and have not twelve stages in plains which we
find enumerated in Marco Polo’s Itinerary. The road _viâ_ Báft,
Urzú, and the Zendán Pass, for instance, has only four stages in
plains; the road, _viâ_ Ráhbur, Rúdbár and the Nevergún Pass only
six; and the road _viâ_ Sírján also only six.”

Marches.
The Sárdú route, which seems to me to be the one
followed by Marco Polo, has five stages through fertile
and populous plains to Sarvízan . . . . . 5

One day’s march ascends to the top of the Sarvízan Pass . 1

Two days’ descent to Ráhjird, a village close to the
ruins of old Jíruft, now called Shehr-i-Daqíánús . . 2

Six days’ march over the “vast plain” of Jírúft and Rúdbár
to Faríáb, joining the Deh Bekrí route at Kerímábád, one
stage south of the Shehr-i-Daqíánús . . . . 6

One day’s march through the Nevergún Pass to Shamíl,
descending . . . . . . . . . 1

Two days’ march through the plain to Bender ’Abbás or
Hormúz . . . . . . . . . . 2
——
In all . . . . . . 17

The Sárdú road enters the Jíruft plain at the ruins of the old
city, the Deh Bekrí route does so at some distance to the eastward.
The first six stages performed by Marco Polo in seven days go
through fertile plains and past numerous villages. Regarding the
cold, “which you can scarcely abide,” Marco Polo does not speak of
it as existing on the mountains only; he says, “From the city of
Kermán to this descent the cold in winter is very great,” that is,
from Kermán to near Jíruft. The winter at Kermán itself is fairly
severe; from the town the ground gradually but steadily rises,
the absolute altitudes of the passes crossing the mountains to
the south varying from 8000 to 11,000 feet. These passes are up
to the month of March always very cold; in one it froze slightly
in the beginning of June. The Sárdú Pass lies lower than the
others. The name is Sárdú, not Sardú from sard, “cold.” Major
Sykes (_Persia_, ch. xxiii.) comes to the same conclusion: “In
1895, and again in 1900, I made a tour partly with the object of
solving this problem, and of giving a geographical existence to
Sárdu, which appropriately means the ‘Cold Country.’ I found that
there was a route which exactly fitted Marco’s conditions, as
at Sarbizan the Sárdu plateau terminates in a high pass of 9200
feet, from which there is a most abrupt descent to the plain of
Jíruft, Komádin being about 35 miles, or two days’ journey from
the top of the pass. Starting from Kermán, the stages would be as
follows:—I. Jupár (small town); 2. Bahrámjird (large village); 3.
Gudar (village); 4. Ráin (small town).... Thence to the Sarbizan
pass is a distance of 45 miles, or three desert stages, thus
constituting a total of 110 miles for the seven days. This is the
camel route to the present day, and absolutely fits in with the
description given.... The question to be decided by this section of
the journey may then, I think, be considered to be finally and most
satisfactorily settled, the route proving to lie between the two
selected by Colonel Yule, as being the most suitable, although he
wisely left the question open.”—H. C.]

In the abstract of Major Smith’s Itinerary as we have given it,
we do not find Polo’s city of _Camadi_. Major Smith writes to
me, however, that this is probably to be sought in “the ruined
city, the traces of which I observed in the plain of Jíruft
near Kerimabad. The name of the city is now apparently lost.”
It is, however, known to the natives as the _City of Dakiánús_,
as Mr. Abbott, who visited the site, informs us. This is a name
analogous only to the Arthur’s ovens or Merlin’s caves of our own
country, for all over Mahomedan Asia there are old sites to which
legend attaches the name of _Dakianus_ or the Emperor Decius, the
persecuting tyrant of the Seven Sleepers. “The spot,” says Abbott,
“is an elevated part of the plain on the right bank of the Hali
Rúd, and is thickly strewn with kiln-baked bricks, and shreds of
pottery and glass.... After heavy rain the peasantry search amongst
the ruins for ornaments of stone, and rings and coins of gold,
silver, and copper. The popular tradition concerning the city is
that it was destroyed by a flood long before the birth of Mahomed.”

[General Houtum-Schindler, in a paper in the _Jour. R. As. Soc._,
Jan. 1898, p. 43, gives an abstract of Dr. Houtsma’s (of Utrecht)
memoir, _Zur Geschichte der Saljuqen von Kerman_, and comes to the
conclusion that “from these statements we can safely identify Marco
Polo’s Camadi with the suburb Qumādīn, or, as I would read it,
Qamādīn, of the city of Jíruft.”—(Cf. _Major Sykes’ Persia_, chap.
xxiii.: “Camadi was sacked for the first time, after the death of
Toghrul Shah of Kermán, when his four sons reduced the province to
a condition of anarchy.”)

Major P. Molesworth Sykes, _Recent Journeys in Persia_ (_Geog.
Journal_, X. 1897, p. 589), says: “Upon arrival in Rudbar, we
turned northwards and left the Farman Farma, in order to explore
the site of Marco Polo’s ‘Camadi.’... We came upon a huge area
littered with yellow bricks eight inches square, while not even a
broken wall is left to mark the site of what was formerly a great
city, under the name of the Sher-i-Jiruft.”—H. C.] The actual
distance from Bamm to the City of Dakianus is, by Abbott’s Journal,
about 66 miles.

The name of REOBARLES, which Marco applies to the plain
intermediate between the two descents, has given rise to many
conjectures. Marsden pointed to _Rúdbár_, a name frequently
applied in Persia to a district on a river, or intersected by
streams—a suggestion all the happier that he was not aware of
the fact that there is a district of RUDBAR exactly in the
required position. The last syllable still requires explanation.
I ventured formerly to suggest that it was the Arabic _Laṣṣ_,
or, as Marco would certainly have written it, _Les_, a robber.
Reobarles would then be RUDBAR-I-LAṢṢ, “Robber’s River District.”
The appropriateness of the name Marco has amply illustrated; and
it appeared to me to survive in that of one of the rivers of the
plain, which is mentioned by both Abbott and Smith under the title
of _Rúdkhánah-i-Duzdi_, or Robbery River, a name also applied to
a village and old fort on the banks of the stream. This etymology
was, however, condemned as an inadmissible combination of Persian
and Arabic by two very high authorities both as travellers and
scholars—Sir H. Rawlinson and Mr. Khanikoff. The _Les_, therefore,
has still to be explained.[1]

[Major Sykes (_Geog. Journal_, 1902, p. 130) heard of robbers, some
five miles from Mináb, and he adds: “However, nothing happened, and
after crossing the Gardan-i-Pichal, we camped at Birinti, which is
situated just above the junction of Rudkhána Duzdi, or ‘River of
Theft,’ and forms part of the district of Rudán, in Fars.”

“The Jíruft and Rúdbár plains belong to the germsír (hot region),
dates, pistachios, and konars (apples of Paradise) abound in them.
Reobarles is Rúdbár or Rüdbáris.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ 1881,
p. 495.)—H. C.]

We have referred to Marco’s expressions regarding the great cold
experienced on the pass which formed the first descent; and it is
worthy of note that the title of “The Cold Mountains” is applied
by Edrisi to these very mountains. Mr. Abbott’s MS. Report also
mentions in this direction, _Sardu_, said to be a cold country (as
its name seems to express [see above,—H. C.]), which its population
(Iliyáts) abandon in winter for the lower plains. It is but
recently that the importance of this range of mountains has become
known to us. Indeed the _existence_ of the chain, as extending
continuously from near Kashán, was first indicated by Khanikoff in
1862. More recently Major St. John has shown the magnitude of this
range, which rises into summits of 15,000 feet in altitude, and
after a course of 550 miles terminates in a group of volcanic hills
some 50 miles S.E. of Bamm. Yet practically this chain is ignored
on all our maps!

Marco’s description of the “Plain of Formosa” does not apply,
now at least, to the _whole_ plain, for towards Bander Abbási it
is barren. But to the eastward, about Minao, and therefore about
Old Hormuz, it has not fallen off. Colonel Pelly writes: “The
district of Minao is still for those regions singularly fertile.
Pomegranates, oranges, pistachio-nuts, and various other fruits
grow in profusion. The source of its fertility is of course the
river, and you can walk for miles among lanes and cultivated
ground, partially sheltered from the sun.” And Lieutenant
Kempthorne, in his notes on that coast, says of the same tract: “It
is termed by the natives the Paradise of Persia. It is certainly
most beautifully fertile, and abounds in orange-groves, and
orchards containing apples, pears, peaches, and apricots; with
vineyards producing a delicious grape, from which was at one time
made a wine called _amber-rosolli_”—a name not easy to explain.
_’Ambar-i-Rasúl_, “The Prophet’s Bouquet!” would be too bold a name
even for Persia, though names more sacred are so profaned at Naples
and on the Moselle. Sir H. Rawlinson suggests _’Ambar-’asali_,
“Honey Bouquet,” as possible.

When Nearchus beached his fleet on the shore of _Harmozeia_ at the
mouth of the _Anamis_ (the River of Minao), Arrian tells us he
found the country a kindly one, and very fruitful in every way
except that there were no olives. The weary mariners landed and
enjoyed this pleasant rest from their toils. (_Indica_, 33; _J. R.
G. S._ V. 274.)

[Illustration: MARCO POLO’S ITINERARIES Nᵒ. II.

Kerman to Hormuz (Bᵏ. I. Ch. 19.)

Approximate Section from Yazd to Hormuz]

The name Formosa is probably only Rusticiano’s misunderstanding of
_Harmuza_, aided, perhaps, by Polo’s picture of the beauty of the
plain. We have the same change in the old _Mafomet_ for Mahomet,
and the converse one in the Spanish _hermosa_ for _formosa_.
Teixeira’s Chronicle says that the city of Hormuz was founded by Xa
Mahamed Dranku, _i.e._ Shah Mahomed Dirhem-Ko, in “a plain of the
same name.”

The statement in Ramusio that Hormuz stood upon an island, is, I
doubt not, an interpolation by himself or some earlier transcriber.

When the ships of Nearchus launched again from the mouth of the
Anamis, their first day’s run carried them past a certain desert
and bushy island to another which was large and inhabited. The
desert isle was called _Organa_; the large one by which they
anchored _Oaracta_. (_Indica_, 37.) Neither name is quite lost; the
latter greater island is Kishm or _Brakht_; the former _Jerún_,[2]
perhaps in old Persian _Gerún_ or _Gerán_, now again desert though
no longer bushy, after having been for three centuries the site
of a city which became a poetic type of wealth and splendour. An
Eastern saying ran, “Were the world a ring, Hormuz would be the
jewel in it.”

[“The _Yüan shi_ mentions several seaports of the Indian Ocean as
carrying on trade with China; Hormuz is not spoken of there. I may,
however, quote from the Yüan History a curious statement which
perhaps refers to this port. In ch. cxxiii., biography of Arsz-lan,
it is recorded that his grandson Hurdutai, by order of Kubilai
Khan, accompanied _Bu-lo no-yen_ on his mission to the country of
_Ha-rh-ma-sz_. This latter name may be intended for Hormuz. I do
not think that by the Noyen _Bulo_, M. Polo could be meant, for the
title Noyen would hardly have been applied to him. But Rashid-eddin
mentions a distinguished Mongol, by name _Pulad_, with whom he was
acquainted in Persia, and who furnished him with much information
regarding the history of the Mongols. This may be the _Bu-lo
no-yen_ of the Yüan History.” (Bretschneider, _Med. Res._ II. p.
132.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—A spirit is still distilled from dates in Persia, Mekran,
Sind, and some places in the west of India. It is mentioned by
Strabo and Dioscorides, according to Kämpfer, who says it was in
his time made under the name of a medicinal stomachic; the rich
added _Radix Chinae_, ambergris, and aromatic spices; the poor,
liquorice and Persian absinth. (_Sir B. Frere_; _Amoen. Exot._ 750;
_Macd. Kinneir_, 220.)

[“The _date_ wine with spices is not now made at Bender ’Abbás.
Date arrack, however, is occasionally found. At Kermán a sort of
wine or arrack is made with spices and alcohol, distilled from
sugar; it is called Má-ul-Háyát (water of life), and is recommended
as an aphrodisiac. Grain in the Shamíl plain is harvested in April,
dates are gathered in August.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ p. 496.)

See “Remarks on the Use of Wine and Distilled Liquors among the
Mohammedans of Turkey and Persia,” pp. 315–330 of _Narrative of a
Tour through Armenia, Kurdistan, Persia, and Mesopotamia_.... By
the Rev. Horatio Southgate,... London, 1840, vol. ii.—H. C.]

[Sir H. Yule quotes, in a MS. note, these lines from Moore’s _Light
of the Harem_:

“Wine, too, of every clime and hue,
Around their liquid lustre threw
_Amber Rosolli_[3]—the bright dew
From vineyards of the Green Sea gushing.”] See above, p. 114.

[Illustration: The Double or Latin Rudder, as shown in the
Navicella of Giotto. (From Eastlake.)]

The date and dry-fish diet of the Gulf people is noticed by most
travellers, and P. della Valle repeats the opinion about its being
the only wholesome one. Ibn Batuta says the people of Hormuz had
a saying, “_Khormá wa máhí lút-i-Pádshahi_,” _i.e._ “Dates and fish
make an Emperor’s dish!” A fish, exactly like the tunny of the
Mediterranean in general appearance and habits, is one of the
great objects of fishery off the Sind and Mekran coasts. It comes
in pursuit of shoals of anchovies, very much like the Mediterranean
fish also. (_I. B._ II. 231; _Sir B. Frere_.)

[Friar Odoric (_Cathay_, I. pp. 55–56) says: “And there you find
(before arriving at Hormuz) people who live almost entirely on
dates, and you get forty-two pounds of dates for less than a groat;
and so of many other things.”]

NOTE 3.—The stitched vessels of Kermán (πλοιάρια ῥαπτὰ) are noticed
in the _Periplus_. Similar accounts to those of our text are given
of the ships of the Gulf and of Western India by Jordanus and John
of Montecorvino. (_Jord._ p. 53; _Cathay_, p. 217.) “Stitched
vessels,” Sir B. Frere writes, “are still used. I have seen them
of 200 tons burden; but they are being driven out by iron-fastened
vessels, as iron gets cheaper, except where (as on the Malabar and
Coromandel coasts) the pliancy of a stitched boat is useful in a
surf. Till the last few years, when steamers have begun to take all
the best horses, the Arab horses bound to Bombay almost all came
in the way Marco Polo describes.” Some of them do still, standing
over a date cargo, and the result of this combination gives rise to
an extraordinary traffic in the Bombay bazaar. From what Colonel
Pelly tells me, the stitched build in the Gulf is _now_ confined to
fishing-boats, and is disused for sea-going craft.

[Friar Odoric (_Cathay_, I. p. 57) mentioned these vessels: “In
this country men make use of a kind of vessel which they call
_Jase_, which is fastened only with stitching of twine. On one of
these vessels I embarked, and I could find no iron at all therein.”
_Jase_ is for the Arabic _Djehaz_.—H. C.]

The fish-oil used to rub the ships was whale-oil. The old Arab
voyagers of the 9th century describe the fishermen of Siraf in the
Gulf as cutting up the whale-blubber and drawing the oil from it,
which was mixed with other stuff, and used to rub the joints of
ships’ planking. (_Reinaud_, I. 146.)

Both Montecorvino and Polo, in this passage, specify _one rudder_,
as if it was a peculiarity of these ships worth noting. The fact
is that, in the Mediterranean at least, the double rudders of the
ancients kept their place to a great extent through the Middle
Ages. A Marseilles MS. of the 13th century, quoted in Ducange,
says: “A ship requires three rudders, two in place, and one to
spare.” Another: “Every two-ruddered bark shall pay a groat each
voyage; every one-ruddered bark shall,” etc. (See Duc. under
_Timonus_ and _Temo_.) Numerous proofs of the use of two rudders in
the 13th century will be found in “_Documenti inediti riguardanti
le due Crociate di S. Ludovico IX., Re di Francia_, etc., da _L. T.
Belgrano_, Genova, 1859.” Thus in a specification of ships to be
built at Genoa for the king (p. 7), each is to have “_Timones duo_,
affaiticos, grossitudinis palmorum viiii et dimidiae, longitudinis
cubitorum xxiiii.” Extracts given by Capmany, regarding the
equipment of galleys, show the same thing, for he is probably
mistaken in saying that one of the _dos timones_ specified was a
spare one. Joinville (p. 205) gives incidental evidence of the
same: “Those Marseilles ships have each two rudders, with each a
tiller (? _tison_) attached to it in such an ingenious way that
you can turn the ship right or left as fast as you would turn a
horse. So on the Friday the king was sitting upon one of these
tillers, when he called me and said to me,” etc.[4] Francesco da
Barberino, a poet of the 13th century, in the 7th part of his
_Documenti d’Amore_ (printed at Rome in 1640), which instructs the
lover to whose lot it may fall to escort his lady on a sea-voyage
(instructions carried so far as to provide even for the case of her
death at sea!), alludes more than once to these plural rudders.
Thus—

“———— se vedessi avenire
Che vento ti rompesse
_Timoni_ ...
In luogo di timoni
Fa spere[5] e in aqua poni.” (P. 272–273.)

And again, when about to enter a port, it is needful to be on
the alert and ready to run in case of a hostile reception, so the
galley should enter stern foremost—a movement which he reminds his
lover involves the reversal of the ordinary use of the two rudders:—

“_L’un timon leva suso
L’altro leggier tien giuso_,
Ma convien levar mano
Non mica com soleàno,
Ma per contraro, e face
Cosi ’l guidar verace.” (P. 275.)

[Illustration:

12th Century Illumination. (After Pertz.)
Seal of Winchelsea.
12th Century Illumination (After Pertz.)
From Leaning Tower. (After Jal.)
After Spinello Aretini at Siena.
From Monument of St. Peter Martyr.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE DOUBLE RUDDER OF THE MIDDLE AGES.]

A representation of a vessel over the door of the Leaning Tower
at Pisa shows this arrangement, which is also discernible in the
frescoes of galley-fights by Spinello Aretini, in the Municipal
Palace at Siena.

[Godinho de Eredia (1613), describing the smaller vessels of
Malacca which he calls _bâlos_ in ch. 13, _De Embarcaçôes_, says:
“At the poop they have two rudders, one on each side to steer
with.” E por poupa dos bâllos, tem 2 lêmes, hum en cada lado pera o
governo. (_Malacca, l’ Inde mérid. et le Cathay_, Bruxelles, 1882,
4to, f. 26.)—H. C.]

The midship rudder seems to have been the more usual in the western
seas, and the double quarter-rudders in the Mediterranean. The
former are sometimes styled _Navarresques_ and the latter _Latins_.
Yet early seals of some of the Cinque Ports show vessels with the
double rudder; one of which (that of Winchelsea) is given in the
cut.

In the Mediterranean the latter was still in occasional use late in
the 16th century. Captain Pantero Pantera in his book, _L’ Armata
Navale_ (Rome, 1614, p. 44), says that the Galeasses, or great
galleys, had the helm _alla Navarresca_, but also a great oar on
each side of it to assist in turning the ship. And I observe that
the great galeasses which precede the Christian line of battle at
Lepanto, in one of the frescoes by Vasari in the Royal Hall leading
to the Sistine Chapel, have the quarter-rudder very distinctly.

The Chinese appear occasionally to employ it, as seems to be
indicated in a woodcut of a vessel of war which I have traced from
a Chinese book in the National Library at Paris. (See above, p.
37.) [For the Chinese words for _rudder_, see p. 126 of J. Edkins’
article on _Chinese Names for Boats and Boat Gear, Jour. N. China
Br. R. As. Soc._ N.S. XI. 1876.—H. C.] It is also used by certain
craft of the Indian Archipelago, as appears from Mr. Wallace’s
description of the Prau in which he sailed from Macassar to the
Aru Islands. And on the Caspian, it is stated in Smith’s “Dict. of
Antiquities” (art. _Gubernaculum_), the practice remained in force
till late times. A modern traveller was nearly wrecked on that sea,
because the two rudders were in the hands of two pilots who spoke
different languages, and did not understand each other!

(Besides the works quoted see _Jal, Archéologie Navale_, II.
437–438, and _Capmany, Memorias_, III. 61.)

[Major Sykes remarks (_Persia_, ch. xxiii.): “Some unrecorded
event, probably the sight of the unseaworthy craft, which had not
an ounce of iron in their composition, made our travellers decide
that the risks of the sea were too great, so that we have the
pleasure of accompanying them back to Kermán and thence northwards
to Khorasán.”—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—So also at Bander Abbási Tavernier says it was so unhealthy
that foreigners could not stop there beyond March; everybody left
it in April. Not a hundredth part of the population, says Kämpfer,
remained in the city. Not a beggar would stop for any reward! The
rich went to the towns of the interior or to the cool recesses
of the mountains, the poor took refuge in the palm-groves at the
distance of a day or two from the city. A place called ’Ishin, some
12 miles north of the city, was a favourite resort of the European
and Hindu merchants. Here were fine gardens, spacious baths, and a
rivulet of fresh and limpid water.

The custom of lying in water is mentioned also by Sir John
Maundevile, and it was adopted by the Portuguese when they occupied
Insular Hormuz, as P. della Valle and Linschoten relate. The custom
is still common during great heats, in Sind and Mekran (Sir B. F.).

An anonymous ancient geography (_Liber Junioris Philosophi_) speaks
of a people in India who live in the Terrestrial Paradise, and
lead the life of the Golden Age.... The sun is so hot _that they
remain all day in the river!_

The heat in the Straits of Hormuz drove Abdurrazzak into an
anticipation of a verse familiar to English schoolboys: “Even the
bird of rapid flight was burnt up in the heights of heaven, as
well as the fish in the depths of the sea!” (_Tavern._ Bk. V. ch.
xxiii.; _Am. Exot._ 716, 762; _Müller, Geog. Gr. Min._ II. 514;
_India in XV. Cent._ p. 49.)

NOTE 5.—A like description of the effect of the _Simúm_ on the
human body is given by Ibn Batuta, Chardin, A. Hamilton, Tavernier,
Thévenot, etc.; and the first of these travellers speaks specially
of its prevalence in the desert near Hormuz, and of the many graves
of its victims; but I have met with no reasonable account of its
poisonous action. I will quote Chardin, already quoted at greater
length by Marsden, as the most complete parallel to the text: “The
most surprising effect of the wind is not the mere fact of its
causing death, but its operation on the bodies of those who are
killed by it. It seems as if they became decomposed without losing
shape, so that you would think them to be merely asleep, when they
are not merely dead, but in such a state that if you take hold of
any part of the body it comes away in your hand. And the finger
penetrates such a body as if it were so much dust.” (III. 286.)

Burton, on his journey to Medina, says: “The people assured me
that this wind never killed a man in their Allah-favoured land. I
doubt the fact. At Bir Abbas the body of an Arnaut was brought in
swollen, and decomposed rapidly, the true diagnosis of death by
the poison-wind.” Khanikoff is very distinct as to the immediate
fatality of the desert wind at Khabis, near Kermán, but does not
speak of the effect on the body after death. This Major St. John
does, describing a case that occurred in June, 1871, when he was
halting, during intense heat, at the post-house of Pasangan, a few
miles south of Kom. The bodies were brought in of two poor men, who
had tried to start some hours before sunset, and were struck down
by the poisonous blast within half-a-mile of the post-house. “It
was found impossible to wash them before burial.... Directly the
limbs were touched they separated from the trunk.” (_Oc. Highways,
ut. sup._) About 1790, when Timúr Sháh of Kabul sent an army under
the Sirdár-i-Sirdárán to put down a revolt in Meshed, this force
on its return was struck by Simúm in the Plain of Farrah, and the
Sirdár perished, with a great number of his men. (_Ferrier, H. of
the Afghans_, 102; _J. R. G. S._ XXVI. 217; _Khan. Mém._ 210.)

NOTE 6.—The History of Hormuz is very imperfectly known. What
I have met with on the subject consists of—(1) An abstract by
Teixeira of a chronicle of Hormuz, written by Thurán Sháh, who
was himself sovereign of Hormuz, and died in 1377; (2) some
contemporary notices by Wassáf, which are extracted by Hammer in
his History of the Ilkhans; (3) some notices from Persian sources
in the 2nd Decade of De Barros (ch. ii.). The last do not go
further back than Gordun Sháh, the father of Thurán Sháh, to whom
they erroneously ascribe the first migration to the Island.

One of Teixeira’s Princes is called _Ruknuddin Mahmud_, and with
him Marsden and Pauthier have identified Polo’s Ruomedam Acomet,
or as he is called on another occasion in the Geog. Text, _Maimodi
Acomet_. This, however, is out of the question, for the death of
Ruknuddin is assigned to A.H. 675 (A.D. 1277), whilst there can, I
think, be no doubt that Marco’s account refers to the period of his
return from China, viz. 1293 or thereabouts.

We find in Teixeira that the ruler who succeeded in 1290 was _Amir
Masa’úd_, who obtained the Government by the murder of his brother
Saifuddin Nazrat. Masa’úd was cruel and oppressive; most of the
influential people withdrew to Baháuddin Ayaz, whom Saifuddin had
made Wazir of Kalhát on the Arabian coast. This Wazir assembled a
force and drove out Masa’úd after he had reigned three years. He
fled to Kermán and died there some years afterwards.

Baháuddin, who had originally been a slave of Saifuddin Nazrat’s,
succeeded in establishing his authority. But about 1300 great
bodies of Turks (_i.e._ Tartars) issuing from Turkestan ravaged
many provinces of Persia, including Kermán and Hormuz. The people,
unable to bear the frequency of such visitations, retired first
to the island of Kishm, and then to that of Jerún, on which
last was built the city of New Hormuz, afterwards so famous.
This is Teixeira’s account from Thurán Sháh, so far as we are
concerned with it. As regards the transfer of the city it agrees
substantially with Abulfeda’s, which we have already quoted
(_supra_, note 1).

Hammer’s account from Wassáf is frightfully confused, chiefly I
should suppose from Hammer’s own fault; for among other things he
assumes that Hormuz was always on an island, and he distinguishes
between the Island of Hormuz and the Island of Jerún! We gather,
however, that Hormuz before the Mongol time formed a government
subordinate to the Salghur Atabegs of Fars (see note 1, ch. xv.),
and when the power of that Dynasty was falling, the governor
Mahmúd Kalháti, established himself as Prince of Hormuz, and
became the founder of a petty dynasty, being evidently identical
with Teixeira’s Ruknuddin Mahmud above-named, who is represented
as reigning from 1246 to 1277. In Wassáf we find, as in Teixeira,
Mahmúd’s son Masa’úd killing his brother Nazrat, and Baháuddin
expelling Masa’úd. It is true that Hammer’s surprising muddle makes
Nazrat kill Masa’úd; however, as a few lines lower we find Masa’úd
alive and Nazrat dead, we may safely venture on this correction.
But we find also that Masa’úd appears as _Ruknuddin_ Masa’úd, and
that Baháuddin does not assume the princely authority himself,
but proclaims that of _Fakhruddin Ahmed_ Ben Ibrahim At-Thaibi, a
personage who does not appear in Teixeira at all. A MS. history,
quoted by Ouseley, _does_ mention Fakhruddin, and ascribes to him
the transfer to Jerún. Wassáf seems to allude to Baháuddin as a
sort of Sea Rover, occupying the islands of Larek and Jerún, whilst
Fakhruddin reigned at Hormuz. It is difficult to understand the
relation between the two.

It is _possible_ that Polo’s memory made some confusion between the
names of RUKNUDDIN Masa’úd and Fakhruddin AHMED, but I incline to
think the latter is his RUOMEDAN AHMED. For Teixeira tells us that
Masa’úd took refuge at the court of Kermán, and Wassáf represents
him as supported in his claims by the Atabeg of that province,
whilst we see that Polo seems to represent Ruomedan Acomat as in
hostility with that prince. To add to the imbroglio I find in a
passage of Wassáf Malik Fakhruddin Ahmed at-Thaibi sent by Ghazan
Khan in 1297 as ambassador to Khanbalig, staying there some years,
and dying off the Coromandel coast on his return in 1305. (Elliot,
iii. pp. 45–47.)

Masa’úd’s seeking help from Kermán to reinstate him is not the
first case of the same kind that occurs in Teixeira’s chronicle, so
there may have been some kind of colour for Marco’s representation
of the Prince of Hormuz as the vassal of the Atabeg of Kermán
(“_l’homme de cest roy de Creman;_” see _Prologue_, ch. xiv.
note 2). M. Khanikoff denies the _possibility_ of the existence
of any _royal dynasty_ at Hormuz at this period. That there
_was_ a dynasty of _Maliks_ of Hormuz, however, at this period
we must believe on the concurring testimony of Marco, of Wassáf,
and of Thurán Sháh. There was also, it would seem, another
_quasi_-independent principality in the Island of Kais. (_Hammer’s
Ilch._ II. 50, 51; _Teixeira, Relacion de los Reyes de Hormuz;
Khan. Notice_, p. 34.)

The ravages of the Tartars which drove the people of Hormuz from
their city may have begun with the incursions of the Nigudaris and
Karaunahs, but they probably came to a climax in the great raid in
1299 of the Chaghataian Prince Kotlogh Shah, son of Dua Khan, a
part of whose bands besieged the city itself, though they are said
to have been repulsed by Baháuddin Ayas.

[The Dynasty of Hormuz was founded about 1060 by a Yemen chief
Mohammed Dirhem Ko, and remained subject to Kermán till 1249,
when Rokn ed-din Mahmúd III. Kalháti (1242–1277) made himself
independent. The immediate successors of Rokn ed-din were Saif
ed-din Nazrat (1277–1290), Masa’úd (1290–1293), Bahad ed-din Ayaz
Sayfin (1293–1311). Hormuz was captured by the Portuguese in 1510
and by the Persians in 1622.—H. C.]

NOTE 7.—The indications of this alternative route to Kermán are
very vague, but it may probably have been that through Finn,
Tárum, and the Sírján district, passing out of the plain of Hormuz
by the eastern flank of the Ginao mountain. This road would pass
near the hot springs at the base of the said mountain, Sarga,
Khurkhu, and Ginao, which are described by Kämpfer. Being more or
less sulphureous they are likely to be useful in skin-diseases:
indeed, Hamilton speaks of their efficacy in these. (I. 95.) The
salt-streams are numerous on this line, and dates are abundant. The
bitterness of the bread was, however, more probably due to another
cause, as Major Smith has kindly pointed out to me: “Throughout
the mountains in the south of Persia, which are generally covered
with dwarf oak, the people are in the habit of making bread of the
acorns, or of the acorns mixed with wheat or barley. It is dark in
colour, and very hard, bitter, and unpalatable.”

Major St. John also noticed the bitterness of the bread in Kermán,
but his servants attributed it to the presence in the wheat-fields
of a bitter leguminous plant, with a yellowish white flower, which
the Kermánis were too lazy to separate, so that much remained in
the thrashing, and imparted its bitter flavour to the grain (surely
the _Tare_ of our Lord’s Parable!).

[General Houtum-Schindler says (_l.c._ p. 496): “Marco Polo’s
return journey was, I am inclined to think, _viâ_ Urzú and Báft,
the shortest and most direct road. The road _viâ_ Tárum and Sírján
is very seldom taken by travellers intending to go to Kermán; it
is only frequented by the caravans going between Bender ’Abbás
and Bahrámábád, three stages west of Kermán. Hot springs, ‘curing
itch,’ I noticed at two places on the Urzú-Báft road. There
were some near Qal’ah Asgher and others near Dashtáb; they were
frequented by people suffering from skin-diseases, and were highly
sulphureous; the water of those near Dashtáb turned a silver ring
black after two hours’ immersion. Another reason of my advocating
the Urzú road is that the bitter bread spoken of by Marco Polo
is only found on it, viz. at Báft and in Bardshír. In Sírján, to
the west, and on the roads to the east, the bread is sweet. The
bitter taste is from the Khúr, a bitter leguminous plant, which
grows among the wheat, and whose grains the people are too lazy
to pick out. There is not a single oak between Bender ’Abbás and
Kermán; none of the inhabitants seemed to know what an acorn was.
A person at Báft, who had once gone to Kerbelá _viâ_ Kermánsháh
and Baghdád, recognised my sketch of tree and fruit immediately,
having seen oak and acorn between Kermánsháh and Qasr-i-Shírín on
the Baghdád road.” Major Sykes writes (ch. xxiii.): “The above
description undoubtedly refers to the main winter route, which
runs _viâ_ Sírján. This is demonstrated by the fact that under
the Kuh-i-Ginao, the summer station of Bandar Abbás, there is a
magnificent sulphur spring, which, welling from an orifice 4 feet
in diameter, forms a stream some 30 yards wide. Its temperature
at the source is 113 degrees, and its therapeutic properties are
highly appreciated. As to the bitterness of the bread, it is
suggested in the notes that it was caused by being mixed with
acorns, but, to-day at any rate, there are no oak forests in this
part of Persia, and I would urge that it is better to accept our
traveller’s statement, that it was due to the bitterness of the
water.”—However, I prefer Gen. Houtum-Schindler’s theory.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] It is but fair to say that scholars so eminent as Professors
Sprenger and Blochmann have considered the original suggestion
lawful and probable. Indeed, Mr. Blochmann says in a letter: “After
studying a language for years, one acquires a natural feeling for
anything un-idiomatic; but I must confess I see nothing un-Persian
in _rúdbár-i-duzd_, nor in _rúdbár-i-lass_.... How common _lass_
is, you may see from one fact, that it occurs in children’s
reading-books.” We must not take _Reobarles_ in Marco’s French
as rhyming to (French) _Charles_; every syllable sounds. It is
remarkable that _Lăs_, as the name of a small State near our Sind
frontier, is said to mean, “in the language of the country,” _a
level plain_. (_J. A. S. B._ VIII. 195.) It is not clear what is
meant by the language of the country. The chief is a Brahui, the
people are Lumri or Numri Bilúchis, who are, according to Tod, of
Jat descent.

[2] Sir Henry Rawlinson objects to this identification (which is the
same that Dr. Karl Müller adopts), saying that _Organa_ is more
probably “Angan, formerly Argan.” To this I cannot assent. Nearchus
sails 300 stadia from the mouth of Anamis to Oaracta, and _on his
way_ passes Organa. Taking 600 stadia to the degree (Dr. Müller’s
value), I make it just 300 stadia from the mouth of the Hormuz
creek to the eastern point of Kishm. Organa must have been either
Jerún or Lárek; Angan (_Hanjám_ of Mas’udi) is out of the question.
And as a straight run must have passed quite close to Jerún, not to
Lárek, I find the former most probable. Nearchus next day proceeds
200 stadia along Oaracta, and anchors in sight of another island
(Neptune’s) which was separated by 40 stadia from Oaracta. _This_
was Angan; no other island answers, and for this the distances
answer with singular precision.

[3] Moore refers to _Persian Tales_.

[4] This _tison_ can be seen in the cuts from the tomb of St. Peter
Martyr and the seal of Winchelsea.

[5] _Spere_, bundles of spars, etc., dragged overboard.

CHAPTER XX.

OF THE WEARISOME AND DESERT ROAD THAT HAS NOW TO BE
TRAVELLED.

On departing from the city of Kerman you find the road for seven days
most wearisome; and I will tell you how this is.{1} The first three
days you meet with no water, or next to none. And what little you do
meet with is bitter green stuff, so salt that no one can drink it; and
in fact if you drink a drop of it, it will set you purging ten times
at least by the way. It is the same with the salt which is made from
those streams; no one dares to make use of it, because of the excessive
purging which it occasions. Hence it is necessary to carry water for
the people to last these three days; as for the cattle, they must needs
drink of the bad water I have mentioned, as there is no help for it,
and their great thirst makes them do so. But it scours them to such
a degree that sometimes they die of it. In all those three days you
meet with no human habitation; it is all desert, and the extremity of
drought. Even of wild beasts there are none, for there is nothing for
them to eat.{2}

After those three days of desert [you arrive at a stream of fresh water
running underground, but along which there are holes broken in here and
there, perhaps undermined by the stream, at which you can get sight of
it. It has an abundant supply, and travellers, worn with the hardships
of the desert, here rest and refresh themselves and their beasts.]{3}

You then enter another desert which extends for four days; it is very
much like the former except that you do see some wild asses. And at the
termination of these four days of desert the kingdom of Kerman comes to
an end, and you find another city which is called Cobinan.

NOTE 1. [“The present road from Kermán to Kúbenán is to Zerend
about 50 miles, to the Sár i Benán 15 miles, thence to Kúbenán 30
miles—total 95 miles. Marco Polo cannot have taken the direct road
to Kúbenán, as it took him seven days to reach it. As he speaks of
waterless deserts, he probably took a circuitous route to the east
of the mountains, _viâ_ Kúhpáyeh and the desert lying to the north
of Khabis.” (_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ pp. 496–497.) (Cf. _Major
Sykes_, ch. xxiii.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—This description of the Desert of Kermán, says Mr.
Khanikoff, “is very correct. As the only place in the Desert of Lút
where water is found is the dirty, salt, bitter, and green water
of the rivulet called _Shor-Rúd_ (the Salt River), we can have no
doubt of the direction of Marco Polo’s route from Kermán so far.”
Nevertheless I do not agree with Khanikoff that the route lay N.E.
in the direction of Ambar and Kain, for a reason which will appear
under the next chapter. I imagine the route to have been nearly
due north from Kermán, in the direction of Tabbas or of Tún. And
even such a route would, according to Khanikoff’s own map, pass the
Shor-Rúd, though at a higher point.

I extract a few lines from that gentleman’s narrative: “In
proportion as we got deeper into the desert, the soil became more
and more arid; at daybreak I could still discover a few withered
plants of _Caligonum_ and _Salsola_, and not far from the same spot
I saw a lark and another bird of a whitish colour, the last living
things that we beheld in this dismal solitude.... The desert had
now completely assumed the character of a land accursed, as the
natives call it. Not the smallest blade of grass, no indication of
animal life vivified the prospect; no sound but such as came from
our own caravan broke the dreary silence of the void.” (_Mém._ p.
176.)

[Major P. Molesworth Sykes (_Geog. Jour._ X. p. 578) writes: “At
Tun, I was on the northern edge of the great Dash-i-Lut (Naked
Desert), which lay between us and Kerman, and which had not been
traversed, in this particular portion, since the illustrious Marco
Polo crossed it, in the opposite direction, when travelling from
Kerman to ‘Tonocain’ _viâ_ Cobinan.” Major Sykes (_Persia_, ch.
iii.) seems to prove that geographers have, without sufficient
grounds, divided the great desert of Persia into two regions, that
to the north being termed Dasht-i-Kavir, and that further south
the Dasht-i-Lut—and that Lut is the one name for the whole desert,
Dash-i-Lut being almost a redundancy, and that _Kavir_ (the Arabic
_Kafr_) is applied to every saline swamp. “This great desert
stretches from a few miles out of Tehrán practically to the British
frontier, a distance of about 700 miles.”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—I can have no doubt of the genuineness of this passage
from Ramusio. Indeed some such passage is necessary; otherwise why
distinguish between three days of desert and four days more of
desert? The underground stream was probably a subterraneous canal
(called _Kanát_ or _Kárez_), such as is common in Persia; often
conducted from a great distance. Here it may have been a relic of
abandoned cultivation. Khanikoff, on the road between Kermán and
Yezd, not far west of that which I suppose Marco to be travelling,
says: “At the fifteen inhabited spots marked upon the map, they
have water which has been brought from a great distance, and at
considerable cost, by means of subterranean galleries, to which
you descend by large and deep wells. Although the water flows at
some depth, its course is tracked upon the surface by a line of
more abundant vegetation.” (_Ib._ p. 200.) Elphinstone says he has
heard of such subterranean conduits 36 miles in length. (I. 398.)
Polybius speaks of them: “There is no sign of water on the surface;
but there are many underground channels, and these supply tanks in
the desert, that are known only to the initiated.... At the time
when the Persians got the upper hand in Asia, they used to concede
to such persons as brought spring-water to places previously
destitute of irrigation, the usufruct for five generations. And
Taurus being rife with springs, they incurred all the expense and
trouble that was needed to form these underground channels to great
distances, insomuch that in these days even the people who make use
of the water don’t know where the channels begin, or whence the
water comes.” (X. 28.)

CHAPTER XXI.

CONCERNING THE CITY OF COBINAN AND THE THINGS THAT ARE
MADE THERE.

Cobinan is a large town.{1} The people worship Mahommet. There is much
Iron and Steel and _Ondanique_, and they make steel mirrors of great
size and beauty. They also prepare both _Tutia_ (a thing very good for
the eyes) and _Spodium_; and I will tell you the process.

They have a vein of a certain earth which has the required quality,
and this they put into a great flaming furnace, whilst over the
furnace there is an iron grating. The smoke and moisture, expelled
from the earth of which I speak, adhere to the iron grating, and
thus form _Tutia_, whilst the slag that is left after burning is the
_Spodium_.{2}

NOTE 1.—KUH-BANÁN is mentioned by Moḳaddasi (A.D. 985) as one of
the cities of Bardesír, the most northerly of the five circles into
which he divides Kermán. (See _Sprenger, Post-und Reise-routen
des Orients_, p. 77.) It is the subject of an article in the Geog.
Dictionary of Yáḳút, though it has been there mistranscribed into
_Kubiyán_ and _Kukiyán_. (See Leipzig ed. 1869, iv. p. 316, and
_Barbier de Meynard_, _Dict. de la Perse_, p. 498.) And it is also
indicated by Mr. Abbott (_J. R. G. S._ XXV. 25) as the name of a
district of Kermán, lying some distance to the east of his route
when somewhat less than half-way between Yezd and Kermán. It would
thus, I apprehend, be on or near the route between Kermán and
Tabbas; one which I believe has been traced by no modern traveller.
We may be certain that there is now no place at Kuh-Banán deserving
the title of _une cité grant_, nor is it easy to believe that
there was in Polo’s time; he applies such terms too profusely. The
meaning of the name is perhaps “Hill of the Terebinths, or Wild
Pistachioes,” “a tree which grows abundantly in the recesses of
bleak, stony, and desert mountains, _e.g._ about Shamákhi, about
Shiraz, and in the deserts of Luristan and Lar.” (_Kämpfer_, 409,
413.)

[“It is strange that Marco Polo speaks of Kúbenán only on his
return journey from Kermán; on the down journey he must have been
told that Kúbenán was in close proximity; it is even probable that
he passed there, as Persian travellers of those times, when going
from Kermán to Yazd, and _vice versá_, always called at Kúbenán.”
(_Houtum-Schindler_, _l.c._ p. 490.) In all histories this name is
written Kúbenán, not Kúhbenán; the pronunciation to-day is Kóbenán
and Kobenún.—H. C.]

I had thought my identification of _Cobinan_ original, but a
communication from Mr. Abbott, and the opportunity which this
procured me of seeing his MS. Report already referred to, showed
that he had anticipated me many years ago. The following is an
extract: “_Districts of Kerman * * * Kooh Benan_. This is a
hilly district abounding in fruits, such as grapes, peaches,
pomegranates, _sinjid_ (sweet-willow), walnuts, melons. A great
deal of madder and some asafœtida is produced there. _This is
no doubt the country alluded to by Marco Polo, under the name of
Cobinam_, as producing iron, brass, and tutty, and which is still
said to produce iron, copper, and tootea.” There appear to be
lead mines also in the district, as well as asbestos and sulphur.
Mr. Abbott adds the names of nine villages, which he was not able
to verify by comparison. These are Púz, Tarz, Gújard, Aspaj,
Kuh-i-Gabr, Dahnah, Búghín, Bassab, Radk. The position of Kuh Banán
is stated to lie between Bahabád (a place also mentioned by Yáḳút
as producing _Tutia_) and Ráví, but this does not help us, and
for approximate position we can only fall back on the note in Mr.
Abbott’s field-book, as published in the _J. R. G. S._, viz. that
the _District_ lay in the mountains E.S.E. from a caravanserai 10
miles S.E. of Gudran. To get the seven marches of Polo’s Itinerary
we must carry the _Town_ of Kuh Banán as far north as this
indication can possibly admit, for Abbott made only five and a half
marches from the spot where this observation was made to Kermán.
Perhaps Polo’s route deviated for the sake of the fresh water.
That a district, such as Mr. Abbott’s Report speaks of, should lie
unnoticed, in a tract which our maps represent as part of the Great
Desert, shows again how very defective our geography of Persia
still is.

[“During the next stage to Darband, we passed ruins that I believe
to be those of Marco Polo’s ‘Cobinan’ as the modern Kúhbenán does
not at all fit in with the great traveller’s description, and it
is just as well to remember that in the East the caravan routes
seldom change.” (Captain P. M. Sykes, _Geog. Jour._ X. p. 580.—See
_Persia_, ch. xxiii.)

Kuh Banán has been visited by Mr. E. Stack, of the Indian Civil
Service. (_Six Months in Persia_, London, 1882, I. 230.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—_Tutty_ (_i.e._ Tutia) is in modern English an impure
oxide of zinc, collected from the flues where brass is made; and
this appears to be precisely what Polo describes, unless it be
that in his account the production of tutia from an ore of zinc
is represented as the object and not an accident of the process.
What he says reads almost like a condensed translation of Galen’s
account of _Pompholyx_ and _Spodos_: “Pompholyx is produced in
copper-smelting as _Cadmia_ is; and it is also produced from
Cadmia (carbonate of zinc) when put in the furnace, as is done
(for instance) in Cyprus. The master of the works there, having no
copper ready for smelting, ordered some pompholyx to be prepared
from cadmia in my presence. Small pieces of cadmia were thrown into
the fire in front of the copper-blast. The furnace top was covered,
with no vent at the crown, and intercepted the soot of the roasted
cadmia. This, when collected, constitutes _Pompholyx_, whilst that
which falls on the hearth is called _Spodos_, a great deal of which
is got in copper-smelting.” Pompholyx, he adds, is an ingredient in
salves for eye discharges and pustules. (_Galen, De Simpl. Medic._,
p. ix. in Latin ed., Venice, 1576.) Matthioli, after quoting this,
says that Pompholyx was commonly known in the laboratories by the
Arabic name of _Tutia_. I see that pure oxide of zinc is stated to
form in modern practice a valuable eye-ointment.

Teixeira speaks of tutia as found only in Kermán, in a range of
mountains twelve parasangs from the capital. The ore got here was
kneaded with water, and set to bake in crucibles in a potter’s
kiln. When well baked, the crucibles were lifted and emptied, and
the _tutia_ carried in boxes to Hormuz for sale. This corresponds
with a modern account in Milburne, which says that the tutia
imported to India from the Gulf is made from an argillaceous ore of
zinc, which is moulded into tubular cakes, and baked to a moderate
hardness. The accurate Garcia da Horta is wrong for once in saying
that the tutia of Kermán is no mineral, but the ash of a certain
tree called _Goan_.

(_Matth. on Dioscorides_, Ven. 1565, pp. 1338–40; _Teixeira,
Relacion de Persia_, p. 121; _Milburne’s Or. Commerce_, I. 139;
_Garcia_, f. 21 v.; _Eng. Cyc._, art. _Zinc_.)

[General A. Houtum-Schindler (_Jour. R. As. Soc._ N.S. XIII.
October, 1881, p. 497) says: “The name Tútíá for collyrium is
now not used in Kermán. Tútíá, when the name stands alone, is
sulphate of copper, which in other parts of Persia is known as
Kát-i-Kebúd; Tútíá-i-sabz (green Tútíá) is sulphate of iron, also
called Záj-i-síyah. A piece of Tútíá-i-zard (yellow Tútíá) shown
to me was alum, generally called Záj-i-safíd; and a piece of
Tútíá-í-safíd (white Tútíá) seemed to be an argillaceous zinc ore.
Either of these may have been the earth mentioned by Marco Polo
as being put into the furnace. The lampblack used as collyrium is
always called Surmah. This at Kermán itself is the soot produced
by the flame of wicks, steeped in castor oil or goat’s fat, upon
earthenware saucers. In the high mountainous districts of the
province, Kúbenán, Páríz, and others, Surmah is the soot of the
Gavan plant (Garcia’s goan). This plant, a species of Astragalus,
is on those mountains very fat and succulent; from it also exudes
the Tragacanth gum. The soot is used dry as an eye-powder, or,
mixed with tallow, as an eye-salve. It is occasionally collected on
iron gratings.

“Tútíá is the Arabicised word dúdhá, Persian for smokes.

“The Shems-ul-loghát calls Tútíá a medicine for eyes, and a
stone used for the fabrication of Surmah. The Tohfeh says Tútíá
is of three kinds—yellow and blue mineral Tútíá, Tútíá-i-qalam
(collyrium) made from roots, and Tútíá resulting from the process
of smelting copper ore. ‘The best Tútíá-i-qalam comes from Kermán.’
It adds, ‘Some authors say Surmah is sulphuret of antimony,
others say it is a composition of iron’; I should say any _black_
composition used for the eyes is Surmah, be it lampblack, antimony,
iron, or a mixture of all.

“Teixeira’s Tútíá was an impure oxide of zinc, perhaps the
above-mentioned Tútíá-i-safíd, baked into cakes; it was probably
the East India Company’s Lapis Tútíá, also called Tutty. The
Company’s Tutenague and Tutenage, occasionally confounded with
Tutty, was the so-called ‘Chinese Copper,’ an alloy of copper,
zinc, and iron, brought from China.”

Major Sykes (ch. xxiii.) writes: “I translated Marco’s description
of _tutia_ (which is also the modern Persian name), to a khán of
Kubenán, and he assured me that the process was the same to-day;
spodium he knew nothing about, but the sulphate of zinc is found in
the hills to the east of Kubenán.”

Heyd (_Com._ II. p. 675) says in a note: “Il résulte de l’ensemble
de ce passage que les matières désignées par Marco Polo sous le nom
de ‘espodie’ (spodium) étaient des scories métalliques; en général,
le mot spodium désigne les résidus de la combustion des matières
végétales ou des os (de l’ivoire).”—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXII.

OF A CERTAIN DESERT THAT CONTINUES FOR EIGHT DAYS’ JOURNEY.

When you depart from this City of Cobinan, you find yourself again in a
Desert of surpassing aridity, which lasts for some eight days; here are
neither fruits nor trees to be seen, and what water there is is bitter
and bad, so that you have to carry both food and water. The cattle
must needs drink the bad water, will they nill they, because of their
great thirst. At the end of those eight days you arrive at a Province
which is called TONOCAIN. It has a good many towns and villages, and
forms the extremity of Persia towards the North.{1} It also contains an
immense plain on which is found the ARBRE SOL, which we Christians call
the _Arbre Sec_; and I will tell you what it is like. It is a tall and
thick tree, having the bark on one side green and the other white; and
it produces a rough husk like that of a chestnut, but without anything
in it. The wood is yellow like box, and very strong, and there are no
other trees near it nor within a hundred miles of it, except on one
side, where you find trees within about ten miles’ distance. And there,
the people of the country tell you, was fought the battle between
Alexander and King Darius.{2}

The towns and villages have great abundance of everything good, for the
climate is extremely temperate, being neither very hot nor very cold.
The natives all worship Mahommet, and are a very fine-looking people,
especially the women, who are surpassingly beautiful.

NOTE 1.—All that region has been described as “a country divided
into deserts that are salt, and deserts that are not salt.”
(_Vigne_, I. 16.) _Tonocain_, as we have seen (ch. xv. note 1), is
the Eastern Kuhistan of Persia, but extended by Polo, it would seem
to include the whole of Persian Khorasan. No city in particular
is indicated as visited by the traveller, but the view I take of
the position of the _Arbre Sec_, as well as his route through
Kuh-Banán, would lead me to suppose that he reached the Province of
TUN-O-KAIN about Tabbas.

[“Marco Polo has been said to have traversed a portion of (the
Dash-i-Kavir, great Salt Desert) on his supposed route from
Tabbas to Damghan, about 1272; although it is more probable that
he marched further to the east, and crossed the northern portion
of the Dash-i-Lut, Great Sand Desert, separating Khorasan in the
south-east from Kermán, and occupying a sorrowful parallelogram
between the towns of Neh and Tabbas on the north, and Kermán and
Yezd on the south.” (Curzon, _Persia_, II. pp. 248 and 251.) Lord
Curzon adds in a note (p. 248): “The Tunogan of the text which was
originally mistaken for Damghan, is correctly explained by Yule
as Tun-o- (_i.e._ and) Káin.” Major Sykes writes (ch. xxiii.): “The
section of the Lut has not hitherto been rediscovered, but I know
that it is desert throughout, and it is practically certain that
Marco ended these unpleasant experiences at Tabas, 150 miles from
Kubenán. To-day the district is known as Tun-o-Tabas, Káin being
independent of it.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—This is another subject on which a long and somewhat
discursive note is inevitable.

One of the Bulletins of the Soc. de Géographie (sér. III. tom. iii.
p. 187) contains a perfectly inconclusive endeavour, by M. Roux
de Rochelle, to identify the _Arbre Sec_ or _Arbre Sol_ with a
manna-bearing oak alluded to by Q. Curtius as growing in Hyrcania.
There can be no doubt that the tree described is, as Marsden points
out, a _Chínár_ or Oriental Plane. Mr. Ernst Meyer, in his learned
_Geschichte der Botanik_ (Königsberg, 1854–57, IV. 123), objects
that Polo’s description of the _wood_ does not answer to that
tree. But, with due allowance, compare with his whole account that
which Olearius gives of the Chinar, and say if the same tree be
not meant. “The trees are as tall as the pine, and have very large
leaves, closely resembling those of the vine. The fruit looks like
a chestnut, but has no kernel, so it is not eatable. The wood is of
a very brown colour, and full of veins; the Persians employ it for
doors and window-shutters, and when these are rubbed with oil they
are incomparably handsomer than our walnut-wood joinery.” (I. 526.)
The Chinar-wood is used in Kashmir for gunstocks.

The whole tenor of the passage seems to imply that some eminent
_individual_ Chinar is meant. The appellations given to it vary
in the different texts. In the G. T. it is styled in this passage,
“The _Arbre Seule_ which the Christians call the _Arbre Sec_,”
whilst in ch. cci. of the same (_infra_, Bk. IV. ch. v.) it is
called “_L’Arbre Sol_, which in the Book of Alexander is called
_L’Arbre Seche_.” Pauthier has here “_L’Arbre Solque_, que nous
appelons _L’Arbre Sec_,” and in the later passage “_L’Arbre Seul_,
que le Livre Alexandre appelle _Arbre Sec_;” whilst Ramusio has
here “_L’Albero del Sole_ che si chiama per i Cristiani _L’Albor
Secco_,” and does not contain the later passage. So also I think
all the old Latin and French printed texts, which are more or less
based on Pipino’s version, have “The _Tree of the Sun_, which the
Latins call the _Dry Tree_.”

[G. Capus says (_A travers le roy. de Tamerlan_, p. 296) that he
found at Khodjakent, the remains of an enormous plane-tree or
_Chinar_, which measured no less than 48 metres (52 yards) in
circumference at the base, and 9 metres diameter inside the rotten
trunk; a dozen tourists from Tashkent one day feasted inside, and
were all at ease.—H. C.]

Pauthier, building as usual on the reading of his own text
(_Solque_), endeavours to show that this odd word represents
_Thoulk_, the Arabic name of a tree to which Forskal gave the
title of _Ficus Vasta_, and this Ficus Vasta he will have to be
the same as the Chinar. _Ficus Vasta_ would be a strange name
surely to give to a Plane-tree, but Forskal may be acquitted of
such an eccentricity. The _Tholaḳ_ (for that seems to be the proper
vocalisation) is a tree of Arabia Felix, very different from the
Chinar, for it is the well-known Indian Banyan, or a closely-allied
species, as may be seen in Forskal’s description. The latter
indeed says that the Arab botanists called it _Delb_, and that (or
_Dulb_) is really a synonym for the Chinar. But De Sacy has already
commented upon this supposed application of the name Delb to the
_Tholaḳ_ as erroneous. (See _Flora Aegyptiaco-Arabica_, pp. cxxiv.
and 179; _Abdallatif, Rel. de l’Egypte_, p. 80; _J. R. G. S._ VIII.
275; _Ritter_, VI. 662, 679.)

The fact is that the _Solque_ of M. Pauthier’s text is a mere
copyist’s error in the reduplication of the pronoun _que_. In his
chief MS. which he cites as A (No. 10,260 of Bibl. Nationale, now
_Fr_. 5631) we can even see how this might easily happen, for one
line ends with _Solque_ and the next begins with _que_. The true
reading is, I doubt not, that which this MS. points to, and which
the G. Text gives us in the second passage quoted above, viz.
_Arbre_ SOL, occurring in Ramusio as _Albero del_ SOLE. To make
this easier of acceptation I must premise two remarks: first, that
_Sol_ is “the Sun” in both Venetian and Provençal; and, secondly,
that in the French of that age the prepositional sign is not
_necessary_ to the genitive. Thus, in Pauthier’s own text we find
in one of the passages quoted above, “_Le Livre Alexandre_, _i.e._
Liber Alexandri;” elsewhere, “_Cazan le fils Argon_,” “_à la mère
sa femme_,” “_Le corps Monseigneur Saint Thomas si est en ceste
Province_;” in Joinville, “_le commandemant Mahommet_”, “_ceux de
la_ Haulequa _estoient logiez entour les héberges le soudanc, et
establiz pour le cors le soudanc garder_;” in Baudouin de Sebourc,
“_De l’amour Bauduin esprise et enflambée_.”

Moreover it is the TREE OF THE SUN that is prominent in the
legendary History of Alexander, a fact sufficient in itself to rule
the reading. A character in an old English play says:—

“_Peregrine_. Drake was a didapper to Mandevill:
Candish and Hawkins, Frobisher, all our Voyagers
Went short of Mandevil. But had he reached
To this place—here—yes, here—this wilderness,
And seen the _Trees of the Sun and Moon_, that speak
And told King Alexander of his death;
He then
Had left a passage ope to Travellers
That now is kept and guarded by Wild Beasts.”
(_Broome’s Antipodes_, in _Lamb’s Specimens_.)

The same trees are alluded to in an ancient Low German poem in
honour of St. Anno of Cologne. Speaking of the Four Beasts of
Daniel’s Vision:—

“The third beast was a Libbard;
Four Eagle’s Wings he had;
This signified the Grecian Alexander,
Who with four Hosts went forth to conquer lands
Even to the World’s End,
Known by its Golden Pillars.
In India he the Wilderness broke through
_With Trees twain he there did speak_,” etc.
(In _Schilteri Thesaurus Antiq. Teuton._ tom. i.[1])

These oracular Trees of the Sun and Moon, somewhere on the confines
of India, appear in all the fabulous histories of Alexander, from
the Pseudo-Callisthenes downwards. Thus Alexander is made to
tell the story in a letter to Aristotle: “Then came some of the
towns-people and said, ‘We have to show thee something passing
strange, O King, and worth thy visiting; for we can show thee trees
that talk with human speech.’ So they led me to a certain park, in
the midst of which were the Sun and Moon, and round about them a
guard of priests of the Sun and Moon. And there stood the two trees
of which they had spoken, like unto cypress trees; and round about
them were trees like the myrobolans of Egypt, and with similar
fruit. And I addressed the two trees that were in the midst of the
park, the one which was male in the Masculine gender, and the one
that was female in the Feminine gender. And the name of the Male
Tree was the Sun, and of the female Tree the Moon, names which
were in that language _Muthu_ and _Emaūsae_.[2] And the stems were
clothed with the skins of animals; the male tree with the skins of
he-beasts, and the female tree with the skins of she-beasts.... And
at the setting of the Sun, a voice, speaking in the Indian tongue,
came forth from the (Sun) Tree; and I ordered the Indians who were
with me to interpret it. But they were afraid and would not,” etc.
(_Pseudo-Callisth._ ed. Müller, III. 17.)

The story as related by Firdusi keeps very near to the Greek as
just quoted, but does not use the term “Tree of the Sun.” The
chapter of the Sháh Námeh containing it is entitled _Dídan Sikandar
dirakht-i-goyárá_, “Alexander’s interview with the Speaking Tree.”
(_Livre des Rois_, V. 229.) In the _Chanson d’Alixandre_ of Lambert
le Court and Alex. de Bernay, these trees are introduced as
follows:—

“‘Signor,’ fait Alixandre, ‘je vus voel demander,
Se des merveilles d’Inde me saves rien conter.’
Cil li ont respondu: ‘Se tu vius escouter
Ja te dirons merveilles, s’es poras esprover.
La sus en ces desers pues ii Arbres trover
Qui c pies ont de haut, et de grossor sunt per.
Li Solaus et La Lune les ont fait si serer
Que sevent tous langages et entendre et parler.’”
(Ed. 1861 (Dinan), p. 357.)

Maundevile informs us precisely where these trees are: “A 15
journeys in lengthe, goynge be the Deserts of the tother side of
the Ryvere Beumare,” if one could only tell where that is![3] A
mediæval chronicler also tells us that Ogerus the Dane (_temp.
Caroli Magni_) conquered all the parts beyond sea from Hierusalem
to the Trees of the Sun. In the old Italian romance also of
_Guerino detto il Meschino_, still a chapbook in S. Italy, the Hero
(ch. lxiii.) visits the Trees of the Sun and Moon. But this is mere
imitation of the Alexandrian story, and has nothing of interest.
(_Maundevile_, pp. 297–298; _Fasciculus Temporum_ in _Germ. Script.
Pistorii Nidani_, II.)

It will be observed that the letter ascribed to Alexander describes
the two oracular trees as resembling two cypress-trees. As such the
Trees of the Sun and Moon are represented on several extant ancient
medals, _e.g._ on two struck at Perga in Pamphylia in the time of
Aurelian. And Eastern story tells us of two vast cypress-trees,
sacred among the Magians, which grew in Khorasan, one at Kashmar
near Turshiz, and the other at Farmad near Tuz, and which were said
to have risen from shoots that Zoroaster brought from Paradise. The
former of these was sacrilegiously cut down by the order of the
Khalif Motawakkil, in the 9th century. The trunk was despatched to
Baghdad on rollers at a vast expense, whilst the branches alone
formed a load for 1300 camels. The night that the convoy reached
within one stage of the palace, the Khalif was cut in pieces by his
own guards. This tree was said to be 1450 years old, and to measure
33¾ cubits in girth. The locality of _this_ “Arbor Sol” we see
was in Khorasan, and possibly its fame may have been transferred
to a representative of another species. The plane, as well as the
cypress, was one of the distinctive trees of the Magian Paradise.

In the Peutingerian Tables we find in the N.E. of Asia the rubric
“_Hic Alexander Responsum accepit_,” which looks very like an
allusion to the tale of the Oracular Trees. If so, it is remarkable
as a suggestion of the antiquity of the Alexandrian Legends, though
the rubric may of course be an interpolation. The Trees of the Sun
and Moon appear as located in India Ultima to the east of Persia,
in a map which is found in MSS. (12th century) of the _Floridus_
of _Lambertus_; and they are indicated more or less precisely in
several maps of the succeeding centuries. (_Ouseley’s Travels_, I.
387; _Dabistan_, I. 307–308; _Santarem, H. de la Cosmog._ II. 189,
III. 506–513, etc.)

Nothing could show better how this legend had possessed men in
the Middle Ages than the fact that Vincent of Beauvais discerns
an allusion to these Trees of the Sun and Moon in the blessing of
Moses on Joseph (as it runs in the Vulgate), “_de pomis fructuum
Solis ac Lunae_.” (Deut. xxxiii. 14.)

Marco has mixt up this legend of the Alexandrian Romance, on the
authority, as we shall see reason to believe, of some of the
recompilers of that Romance, with a famous subject of _Christian_
Legend in that age, the ARBRE SEC or Dry Tree, one form of which
is related by Maundevile and by Johan Schiltberger. “A lytille fro
Ebron,” says the former, “is the Mount of Mambre, of the whyche
the Valeye taketh his name. And there is a Tree of Oke that the
Saracens clepen _Dirpe_, that is of Abraham’s Tyme, the which men
clepen THE DRYE TREE.” [Schiltberger adds that the heathen call it
_Kurru Thereck_, _i.e._ (Turkish) _Ḳúrú Dirakht_ = Dry Tree.] “And
theye seye that it hathe ben there sithe the beginnynge of the
World; and was sumtyme grene and bare Leves, unto the Tyme that
Oure Lord dyede on the Cros; and thanne it dryede; and so dyden
alle the Trees that weren thanne in the World. And summe seyn be
hire Prophecyes that a Lord, a Prynce of the West syde of the
World, shalle wynnen the Lond of Promyssioun, _i.e._ the Holy Lond,
withe Helpe of Cristene Men, and he schalle do synge a Masse under
that Drye Tree, and than the Tree shall wexen grene and bere both
Fruyt and Leves. And thorghe that Myracle manye Sarazines and Jewes
schulle ben turned to Cristene Feithe. And, therefore, they dou
gret Worschipe thereto, and kepen it fulle besyly. And alle be it
so that it be drye, natheless yit he berethe great vertue,” etc.

The tradition seems to have altered with circumstances, for a
traveller of nearly two centuries later (Friar Anselmo, 1509)
describes the oak of Abraham at Hebron as a tree of dense and
verdant foliage: “The Saracens make their devotions at it, and
hold it in great veneration, for it has remained thus green from
the days of Abraham until now; and they tie scraps of cloth on its
branches inscribed with some of their writing, and believe that if
any one were to cut a piece off that tree he would die within the
year.” Indeed even before Maundevile’s time Friar Burchard (1283)
had noticed that though the famous old tree was dry, another had
sprung from its roots. And it still has a representative.

As long ago as the time of Constantine a fair was held under the
Terebinth of Mamre, which was the object of many superstitious
rites and excesses. The Emperor ordered these to be put a stop to,
and a church to be erected at the spot. In the time of Arculph (end
of 7th century) the dry trunk still existed under the roof of this
church; just as the immortal Banyan-tree of Prág exists to this day
in a subterranean temple in the Fort of Allahabad.

It is evident that the story of the Dry Tree had got a great vogue
in the 13th century. In the _Jus du Pelerin_, a French drama of
Polo’s age, the Pilgrim says:—

“S’ai puis en maint bon lieu et à maint saint esté,
S’ai esté au _Sec-Arbre_ et dusc’à Duresté.”

And in another play of slightly earlier date (_Le Jus de St.
Nicolas_), the King of Africa, invaded by the Christians, summons
all his allies and feudatories, among whom appear the Admirals of
Coine (_Iconium_) and Orkenie (_Hyrcania_), and the _Amiral d’outre
l’Arbre-Sec_ (as it were of “the Back of Beyond”) in whose country
the only current coin is millstones! Friar Odoric tells us that he
heard at Tabriz that the _Arbor Secco_ existed in a mosque of that
city; and Clavijo relates a confused story about it in the same
locality. Of the _Dürre Baum_ at Tauris there is also a somewhat
pointless legend in a Cologne MS. of the 14th century, professing
to give an account of the East. There are also some curious verses
concerning a mystical _Dürre Bom_ quoted by Fabricius from an old
Low German Poem; and we may just allude to that other mystic _Arbor
Secco_ of Dante—

—“una pianta dispogliata
Di fiori e d’altra fronda in ciascun ramo,”

though the dark symbolism in the latter case seems to have a
different bearing.

(_Maundevile_, p. 68; _Schiltberger_, p. 113; Anselm. in _Canisii
Thesaurus_, IV. 781; _Pereg. Quat._ p. 81; _Niceph. Callist._ VIII.
30; _Théâtre Français au Moyen Age_, pp. 97, 173; _Cathay_, p. 48;
_Clavijo_, p. 90; _Orient und Occident_, Göttingen, 1867, vol.
i.; _Fabricii Vet. Test. Pseud._, etc., I. 1133; _Dante, Purgat._
xxxii. 35.)

But why does Polo bring this _Arbre Sec_ into connection with the
Sun Tree of the Alexandrian Legend? I cannot answer this to my own
entire satisfaction, but I can show that such a connection had been
imagined in his time.

Paulin Paris, in a notice of MS. No. 6985. (_Fonds Ancien_) of
the National Library, containing a version of the _Chansons de
Geste d’Alixandre_, based upon the work of L. Le Court and Alex.
de Bernay, but with additions of later date, notices amongst these
latter the visit of Alexander to the Valley Perilous, where he
sees a variety of wonders, among others the _Arbre des Pucelles_.
Another tree at a great distance from the last is called the ARBRE
SEC, and reveals to Alexander the secret of the fate which attends
him in Babylon. (_Les MSS. Français de la Bibl. du Roi_, III.
105.)[4] Again the English version of _King Alisaundre_, published
in Weber’s Collection, shows clearly enough that in _its_ French
original the term _Arbre Sec_ was applied to the Oracular Trees,
though the word has been miswritten, and misunderstood by Weber.
The King, as in the Greek and French passages already quoted,
meeting two old churls, asks if they know of any marvel in those
parts:—

“‘Ye, par ma fay,’ quoth heo,
‘A great merveille we wol telle the;
That is hennes in even way
The mountas of ten daies journey,
Thou shalt find trowes[5] two:
Seyntes and holy they buth bo;
Higher than in othir countray all.
ARBESET men heom callith.’
* * * * *
‘Sire Kyng,’ quod on, ‘by myn eyghe
Either Trough is an hundrod feet hygh,
They stondith up into the skye;
That on to the _Sonne_, sikirlye;
That othir, we tellith the nowe,
Is sakret in the _Mone_ vertue.’”
(_Weber_, I. 277.)

Weber’s glossary gives “_Arbeset_ = Strawberry Tree, _arbous,
arbousier, arbutus_”; but that is nonsense.

Further, in the French Prose Romance of Alexander, which is
contained in the fine volume in the British Museum known as the
Shrewsbury Book (Reg. XV. e. 6), though we do not find the Arbre
Sec so named, we find it described and pictorially represented.
The Romance (fol. xiiii. v.) describes Alexander and his chief
companions as ascending a certain mountain by 2500 steps which were
attached to a golden chain. At the top they find the golden Temple
of the Sun and an old man asleep within. It goes on:—

“Quant le viellart les vit si leur demanda s’ils vouloient veoir
les Arbres sacrez de la Lune et du Soleil que nous annuncent les
choses qui sont à avenir. Quant Alexandre ouy ce si fut rempli de
mult grant ioye. Si lui respondirent, ‘Ouye sur, nous les voulons
veoir.’ Et cil lui dist, ‘Se tu es nez de prince malle et de
femelle il te convient entrer en celui lieu.’ Et Alexandre lui
respondi, ‘Nous somes nez de compagne malle et de femelle.’ Dont
se leve le viellart du lit ou il gesoit, et leur dist, ‘Hostez
vos vestemens et vos chauces.’ Et Tholomeus et Antigonus et
Perdiacas le suivrent. Lors comencèrent à aler parmy la forest qui
estoit enclose en merveilleux labour. Illec trouvèrent les arbres
semblables à loriers et oliviers. Et estoient de cent pies de
haults, et decouroit d’eulz incens ypobaume[6] à grant quantité.
Après entrèrent plus avant en la forest, et trouvèrent _une arbre
durement hault qui n’avoit ne fueille ne fruit_. Si seoit sur cet
arbre une grant oysel qui avoit en son chief une creste qui estoit
semblable au paon, et les plumes du col resplendissants come fin
or. Et avoit la couleur de rose. Dont lui dist le viellart, ‘Cet
oysel dont vous vous merveillez est appelés Fenis, lequel n’a
nul pareil en tout le monde.’ Dont passèrent outre, et allèrent
aux Arbres du Soleil et de la Lune. Et quant ils y furent venus,
si leur dist le viellart, ‘Regardez en haut, et pensez en votre
coeur ce que vous vouldrez demander, et ne le dites de la bouche.’
Alisandre luy demanda en quel language donnent les Arbres response
aux gens. Et il lui respondit, ‘L’Arbre du Soleil commence à
parler Indien.’ Dont baisa Alexandre les arbres, et comença en son
ceur à penser s’il conquesteroit tout le monde et retourneroit en
Macedonie atout son ost. Dont lui respondit l’Arbre du Soleil,
‘Alexandre tu seras Roy de tout le monde, mais Macedonie tu ne
verras jamais,’” etc.

The appearance of the Arbre Sec in Maps of the 15th century,
such as those of Andrea Bianco (1436) and Fra Mauro (1459), may
be ascribed to the influence of Polo’s own work; but a more
genuine evidence of the prevalence of the legend is found in the
celebrated Hereford Map constructed in the 13th century by Richard
de Haldingham. This, in the vicinity of India and the Terrestrial
Paradise, exhibits a Tree with the rubric “_Albor Balsami est Arbor
Sicca_.”

The legends of the Dry Tree were probably spun out of the words
of the Vulgate in Ezekiel xvii. 24: “_Humiliavi lignum sublime et
exaltavi lignum humile; et siccavi lignum viride_ et frondescere
feci lignum aridum.” Whether the _Rue de l’Arbre Sec_ in Paris
derives its name from the legend I know not. [The name of the
street is taken from an old sign-board; some say it is derived
from the gibbet placed in the vicinity, but this is more than
doubtful.—H. C.]

[Illustration: =Comment les arbres du soleil et De la lune
prophetiserent la mort alixandre.=]

The actual tree to which Polo refers in the text was probably
one of those so frequent in Persia, to which age, position, or
accident has attached a character of sanctity, and which are styled
_Dirakht-i-Fazl_, Trees of Excellence or Grace, and often receive
titles appropriate to Holy Persons. Vows are made before them, and
pieces torn from the clothes of the votaries are hung upon the
branches or nailed to the trunks. To a tree of such a character,
imposing in decay, Lucan compares Pompey:

“Stat magni nominis umbra.
Qualis frugifero quercus sublimis in agro,
_Exuvias veteres populi sacrataque gestans
Dona ducum_ * * * * *
—Quamvis primo nutet casura sub Euro,
Tot circum silvae firmo se robore tollant,
Sola tamen colitur.”
(_Pharsalia_, I. 135.)

The Tree of Mamre was evidently precisely one of this class; and
those who have crossed the Suez Desert before railway days will
remember such a _Dirakht-i-Fazl_, an aged mimosa, a veritable
_Arbre Seul_ (could we accept that reading), that stood just
half-way across the Desert, streaming with the _exuviae veteres_ of
Mecca Pilgrims. The majority of such holy trees in Persia appear
to be Plane-trees. Admiration for the beauty of this tree seems to
have occasionally risen into superstitious veneration from a very
old date. Herodotus relates that the Carians, after their defeat
by the Persians on the Marsyas, rallied in the sacred grove of
Plane-trees at Labranda. And the same historian tells how, some
years later, Xerxes on his march to Greece decorated a beautiful
Chinar with golden ornaments. Mr. Hamilton, in the same region,
came on the remains of a giant of the species, which he thought
might possibly be the very same. Pliny rises to enthusiasm in
speaking of some noble Plane-trees in Lycia and elsewhere. Chardin
describes one grand and sacred specimen, called King Hosain’s
Chinar, and said to be more than 1000 years old, in a suburb of
Ispahan, and another hung with amulets, rags, and tapers in a
garden at Shiraz.[7] One sacred tree mentioned by the Persian
geographer Hamd Allah as distinguishing the grave of a holy man at
Bostam in Khorasan (the species is not named, at least by Ouseley,
from whom I borrow this) comes into striking relation with the
passage in our text. The story went that it had been the staff of
Mahomed; as such it had been transmitted through many generations,
until it was finally deposited in the grave of Abu Abdallah
Dásitáni, where it struck root and put forth branches. And it is
explicitly called _Dirakht-i-Khushk_, _i.e._ literally _L’ARBRE
SEC_.

This last legend belongs to a large class. The staff of Adam,
which was created in the twilight of the approaching Sabbath, was
bestowed on him in Paradise and handed down successively to Enoch
and the line of Patriarchs. After the death of Joseph it was set
in Jethro’s garden, and there grew untouched, till Moses came and
got his rod from it. In another form of the legend it is Seth who
gets a branch of the Tree of Life, and from this Moses afterwards
obtains his rod of power. These Rabbinical stories seem in later
times to have been developed into the Christian legends of the wood
destined to form the Cross, such as they are told in the Golden
Legend or by Godfrey of Viterbo, and elaborated in Calderon’s
_Sibila del Oriente_. Indeed, as a valued friend who has consulted
the latter for me suggests, probably all the Arbre Sec Legends of
Christendom bore mystic reference to the Cross. In Calderon’s play
the Holy Rood, seen in vision, is described as a Tree:—

————“cuyas hojas,
Secas mustias y marchitas,
Desnudo el tronco dejaban
Que, entre mil copas floridas
De los árboles, el solo
Sin pompa y sin bizaria
Era cadáver del prado.”

There are several Dry-Tree stories among the wonders of Buddhism;
one is that of a sacred tree visited by the Chinese pilgrims to
India, which had grown from the twig which Sakya, in Hindu fashion,
had used as a tooth-brush; and I think there is a like story in our
own country of the Glastonbury Thorn having grown from the staff of
Joseph of Arimathea.

[“St Francis’ Church is a large pile, neere which, yet a little
without the Citty, growes a tree which they report in their legend
grew from the Saint’s Staff, which on going to sleepe he fixed
in the ground, and at his waking found it had grown a large tree.
They affirm that the wood of its decoction cures sundry diseases.”
(_Evelyn’s Diary_, October, 1644.)—H. C.]

In the usual form of the mediæval legend, Adam, drawing near his
end, sends Seth to the gate of Paradise, to seek the promised Oil
of Mercy. The Angel allows Seth to put his head in at the gate.
Doing so (as an old English version gives it)—

————“he saw a fair Well,
Of whom all the waters on earth cometh, as the Book us doth tell;
Over the Well stood a Tree, with bowës broad and lere
Ac it _ne bare leaf ne rind, but as it for-olded were_;
A nadder it had beclipt about, all naked withouten skin,
That was the Tree and the Nadder that first made Adam do sin!”

The Adder or Serpent is coiled about the denuded stem; the upper
branches reach to heaven, and bear at the top a new-born wailing
infant, swathed in linen, whilst (here we quote a French version)—

“Les larmes qui de lui issoient
Contreval l’Arbre en avaloient;
Adonc regarda l’enfant Seth
Tout contreval de L’ARBRE SECQ;
Les rachines qui le tenoient
Jusques en Enfer s’en aloient,
Les larmes qui de lui issirent
Jusques dedans Enfer cheïrent.”

The Angel gives Seth three kernels from the fruit of the Tree.
Seth returns home and finds his father dead. He buries him in _the
valley of Hebron_, and places the three grains under his tongue. A
triple shoot springs up of Cedar, Cypress, and Pine, symbolising
the three Persons of the Trinity. The three eventually unite into
one stem, and this tree survives in various forms, and through
various adventures in connection with the Scripture History, till
it is found at the bottom of the Pool of Bethesda, to which it had
imparted healing Virtue, and is taken thence to form the Cross on
which Our Lord suffered.

The English version quoted above is from a MS. of the 14th century
in the Bodleian, published by Dr. Morris in his collection of
_Legends of the Holy Rood_. I have modernised the spelling of the
lines quoted, without altering the words. The French citation is
from a MS. in the Vienna Library, from which extracts are given
by Sign. Adolfo Mussafia in his curious and learned tract (_Sulla
Legenda del Legno della Croce_, Vienna, 1870), which gives a full
account of the fundamental legend and its numerous variations. The
examination of these two works, particularly Sign. Mussafia’s,
gives an astonishing impression of the copiousness with which such
Christian Mythology, as it may fairly be called, was diffused and
multiplied. There are in the paper referred to notices of between
fifty and sixty different _works_ (not MSS. or _copies_ of works
merely) containing this legend in various European languages.

(_Santarem_, III. 380, II. 348; _Ouseley_, I. 359 _seqq._ and
391; _Herodotus_, VII. 31; _Pliny_, XII. 5; _Chardin_, VII.
410, VIII. 44 and 426; _Fabricius_, _Vet. Test. Pseud._ I. 80
_seqq._; _Cathay_, p. 365; _Beal’s Fah-Hian_, 72 and 78; _Pèlerins
Bouddhistes_, II. 292; _Della Valle_, II. 276–277.)

He who injured the holy tree of Bostam, we are told, perished the
same day: a general belief in regard to those _Trees of Grace_, of
which we have already seen instances in regard to the sacred trees
of Zoroaster and the Oak of Hebron. We find the same belief in
Eastern Africa, where certain trees, regarded by the natives with
superstitious reverence, which they express by driving in votive
nails and suspending rags, are known to the European residents
by the vulgar name of _Devil Trees_. Burton relates a case of
the verification of the superstition in the death of an English
merchant who had cut down such a tree, and of four members of his
household. It is the old story which Ovid tells; and the tree which
Erisichthon felled was a _Dirakht-i-Fazl_:

“Vittae mediam, memoresque tabellae
Sertaque cingebant, voti argumenta potentis.”
(_Metamorph._ VIII. 744.)

[Illustration: Chinar, or Oriental Plane.]

Though the coincidence with our text of Hamd Allah’s Dry Tree is
very striking, I am not prepared to lay stress on it as an argument
for the geographical determination of Marco’s _Arbre Sec_. His use
of the title more than once to characterise the whole frontier of
Khorasan can hardly have been a mere whim of his own: and possibly
some explanation of that circumstance will yet be elicited from the
Persian historians or geographers of the Mongol era.

Meanwhile it is in the vicinity of Bostam or Damghan that I
should incline to place this landmark. If no one _very_ cogent
reason points to this, a variety of minor ones do so; such as the
direction of the traveller’s journey from Kermán through Kuh Banán;
the apparent vicinity of a great Ismailite fortress, as will be
noticed in the next chapter; the connection twice indicated (see
_Prologue_, ch. xviii. note 6, and Bk. IV. ch. v.) of the Arbre Sec
with the headquarters of Ghazan Khan in watching the great passes,
of which the principal ones debouche at Bostam, at which place
also buildings erected by Ghazan still exist; and the statement
that the decisive battle between Alexander and Darius was placed
there by local tradition. For though no such battle took place in
that region, we know that Darius was murdered near Hecatompylos.
Some place this city west of Bostam, near Damghan; others east of
it, about Jah Jerm; Ferrier has strongly argued for the vicinity
of Bostam itself. Firdusi indeed places the final battle on the
confines of Kermán, and the death of Darius within that province.
But this could not have been the tradition Polo met with.

I may add that the temperate climate of Bostam is noticed in words
almost identical with Polo’s by both Fraser and Ferrier.

The Chinar abounds in Khorasan (as far as any tree can be said to
_abound_ in Persia), and even in the Oases of Tun-o-Kain wherever
there is water. Travellers quoted by Ritter notice Chinars of great
size and age at Shahrúd, near Bostam, at Meyomid, and at Mehr,
west of Sabzawar, which last are said to date from the time of
Naoshirwan (7th century). There is a town to the N.W. of Meshid
called _Chinárán_, “The Planes.” P. Della Valle, we may note, calls
Tehran “la città dei platani.”

The following note by De Sacy regarding the Chinar has already been
quoted by Marsden, and though it may be doubtful whether the term
Arbre Sec had any relation to the idea expressed, it seems to me
too interesting to be omitted: “Its sterility seems to have become
proverbial among certain people of the East. For in a collection
of sundry moral sentences pertaining to the Sabaeans or Christians
of St. John ... we find the following: ‘The vainglorious man is
like a showy Plane Tree, rich in boughs but producing nothing, and
affording no fruit to its owner.’” The same reproach of sterility
is cast at the Plane by Ovid’s Walnut:—

“At postquam platanis, _sterilem praebentibus umbram_,
Uberior quâvis arbore venit honos;
Nos quoque fructiferae, si nux modo ponor in illis,
Coepimus in patulas luxuriare comas.” (_Nux_, 17–20.)

I conclude with another passage from Khanikoff, though put forward
in special illustration of what I believe to be a mistaken reading
(_Arbre Seul_): “Where the Chinar is of spontaneous growth, or
occupies the centre of a vast and naked plain, this tree is even
in our own day invested with a quite exceptional veneration, and
the locality often comes to be called ‘The Place of the Solitary
Tree.’” (_J. R. G. S._ XXIX. 345; _Ferrier_, 69–76; _Fraser_, 343;
_Ritter_, VIII. 332, XI. 512 _seqq._; _Della Valle_, I. 703; _De
Sacy’s Abdallatif_, p. 81; _Khanikoff_, _Not._ p. 38.)

[See in Fr. Zarncke, _Der Priester Johannes_, II., in the chap.
_Der Baum des Seth_, pp. 127–128, from MS. (14th century) from
Cambridge, this curious passage (p. 128): “Tandem rogaverunt eum,
ut arborem siccam, de qua multum saepe loqui audierant, liceret
videre. Quibus dicebat: ‘Non est appellata arbor sicca recto
nomine, sed arbor Seth, quoniam Seth, filius Adae, primi patris
nostri, eam plantavit.’ Et ad arborem Seth fecit eos ducere,
prohibens eos, ne arborem transmearent, sed [si?] ad patriam suam
redire desiderarent. Et cum appropinquassent, de pulcritudine
arboris mirati sunt; erat enim magnae immensitatis et miri decoris.
Omnium enim colorum varietas inerat arbori, condensitas foliorum
et fructuum diversorum; diversitas avium omnium, quae sub coelo
sunt. Folia vero invicem se repercutientia dulcissimae melodiae
modulamine resonabant, et aves amoenos cantus ultra quam credi
potest promebant; et odor suavissimus profudit eos, ita quod
paradisi amoenitate fuisse. Et cum admirantes tantam pulcritudinem
aspicerent, unus sociorum aliquo eorum maior aetate, cogitans
[cogitavit?] intra se, quod senior esset et, si inde rediret, cito
aliquo casu mori posset. Et cum haec secum cogitasset, coepit
arborem transire, et cum transisset, advocans socios, iussit eos
post se ad locum amoenissimum, quem ante se videbat plenum deliciis
sibi paratum [paratis?] festinare. At illi retrogressi sunt ad
regem, scilicet presbiterum Iohannem. Quos donis amplis ditavit, et
qui cum eo morari voluerunt libenter et honorifice detinuit. Alii
vero ad patriam reversi sunt.”—In common with Marsden and Yule, I
have no doubt that the _Arbre Sec_ is the _Chínár_. Odoric places
it at Tabriz and I have given a very lengthy dissertation on the
subject in my edition of this traveller (pp. 21–29), to which I
must refer the reader, to avoid increasing unnecessarily the size
of the present publication.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] “Daz dritte Dier was ein Lebarte
Vier arin Vederich her havite;
Der beceichnote den Criechiskin Alexanderin,
Der mit vier Herin vür aftir Landin,
Unz her die Werilt einde,
Bi guldinin Siulin bikante.
In India her die Wusti durchbrach,
_Mit zwein Boumin her sich da gesprach_,” etc.

[2] It is odd how near the word _Emaūsae_ comes to the E. African
_Mwezi_; and perhaps more odd that “the elders of U-nya-Mwezi
(‘the Land of the Moon’) declare that their patriarchal ancestor
became after death the first Tree, and afforded shade to his
children and descendants. According to the Arabs the people still
perform pilgrimage to a holy tree, and believe that the penalty
of sacrilege in cutting off a twig would be visited by sudden and
mysterious death.” (_Burton_ in _F. R. G. S._ XXIX. 167–168.)

[3] “The River _Buemar_, in the furthest forests of India,” appears to
come up in one of the versions of Alexander’s Letter to Aristotle,
though I do not find it in Müller’s edition. (See Zacher’s
_Pseudo-Callisthenes_, p. 160.) ’Tis perhaps Ab-i-Ámú!

[4] It is right to notice that there may be some error in the
_reference_ of Paulin Paris; at least I could not trace the _Arbre
Sec_ in the MS. which he cites, nor in the celebrated Bodleian
Alexander, which appears to contain the same version of the story.
[The fact is that Paulin Paris refers to the _Arbre_, but without
the word _sec_, at the top of the first column of fol. 79 _recto_
of the MS. No. _Fr._ 368 (late 6985).—H. C.]

[5] Trees.

[6] Opobalsamum.

[7] A recent traveler in China gives a perfectly similar description of
sacred trees in Shansi. Many bore inscriptions in large letters.
“If you pray, you will certainly be heard.”—_Rev. A. Williamson_,
_Journeys in N. China_, I. 163, where there is a cut of such a
tree near Taiyuanfu. (See this work, I. ch. xvi.) Mr. Williamson
describes such a venerated tree, an ancient acacia, known as the
Acacia of the T’ang, meaning that it existed under that Dynasty
(7th to 10th century). It is renowned for its healing virtues, and
every available spot on its surface was crowded with votive tablets
and inscriptions. (_Ib._ 303.)

CHAPTER XXIII.

CONCERNING THE OLD MAN OF THE MOUNTAIN.

Mulehet is a country in which the Old Man of the Mountain dwelt in
former days; and the name means “_Place of the Aram_.” I will tell you
his whole history as related by Messer Marco Polo, who heard it from
several natives of that region.

The Old Man was called in their language ALOADIN. He had caused a
certain valley between two mountains to be enclosed, and had turned
it into a garden, the largest and most beautiful that ever was seen,
filled with every variety of fruit. In it were erected pavilions and
palaces the most elegant that can be imagined, all covered with
gilding and exquisite painting. And there were runnels too, flowing
freely with wine and milk and honey and water; and numbers of ladies
and of the most beautiful damsels in the world, who could play on all
manner of instruments, and sung most sweetly, and danced in a manner
that it was charming to behold. For the Old Man desired to make his
people believe that this was actually Paradise. So he had fashioned it
after the description that Mahommet gave of his Paradise, to wit, that
it should be a beautiful garden running with conduits of wine and milk
and honey and water, and full of lovely women for the delectation of
all its inmates. And sure enough the Saracens of those parts believed
that it _was_ Paradise!

Now no man was allowed to enter the Garden save those whom he intended
to be his ASHISHIN. There was a Fortress at the entrance to the Garden,
strong enough to resist all the world, and there was no other way to
get in. He kept at his Court a number of the youths of the country,
from 12 to 20 years of age, such as had a taste for soldiering, and to
these he used to tell tales about Paradise, just as Mahommet had been
wont to do, and they believed in him just as the Saracens believe in
Mahommet. Then he would introduce them into his garden, some four, or
six, or ten at a time, having first made them drink a certain potion
which cast them into a deep sleep, and then causing them to be lifted
and carried in. So when they awoke, they found themselves in the
Garden.{1}

NOTE 1.—Says the venerable Sire de Joinville: “_Le Vieil de la
Montaingne ne créoit pas en Mahommet, ainçois créoit en la Loi
de Haali, qui fu Oncle Mahommet._” This is a crude statement,
no doubt, but it has a germ of truth. Adherents of the family
of ’Ali as the true successors of the Prophet existed from the
tragical day of the death of Husain, and among these, probably
owing to the secrecy with which they were compelled to hold their
allegiance, there was always a tendency to all manner of strange
and mystical doctrines; as in one direction to the glorification
of ’Ali as a kind of incarnation of the Divinity, a character
in which his lineal representatives were held in some manner to
partake; in another direction to the development of Pantheism, and
release from all positive creed and precepts. Of these Aliites,
eventually called _Shiáhs_, a chief sect, and parent of many
heretical branches, were the Ismailites, who took their name, from
the seventh Imam, whose return to earth they professed to expect
at the end of the World. About A.D. 1090 a branch of the Ismaili
stock was established by Hassan, son of Sabah, in the mountainous
districts of Northern Persia; and, before their suppression by the
Mongols, 170 years later, the power of the quasi-spiritual dynasty
which Hassan founded had spread over the Eastern Kohistan, at
least as far as Ḳáïn. Their headquarters were at Alamút (“Eagle’s
Nest”), about 32 miles north-east of Ḳazwin, and all over the
territory which they held they established fortresses of great
strength. De Sacy seems to have proved that they were called
_Hashíshíya_ or _Hashíshín_, from their use of the preparation
of hemp called _Hashísh_; and thence, through their system of
murder and terrorism, came the modern application of the word
Assassin. The original aim of this system was perhaps that of a
kind of _Vehmgericht_, to punish or terrify orthodox persecutors
who were too strong to be faced with the sword. I have adopted
in the text one of the readings of the G. Text _Asciscin_, as
expressing the original word with the greatest accuracy that
Italian spelling admits. In another author we find it as _Chazisii_
(see _Bollandists_, May, vol. ii. p. xi.); Joinville calls
them _Assacis_; whilst Nangis and others corrupt the name into
_Harsacidae_, and what not.

The explanation of the name MULEHET as it is in Ramusio, or
_Mulcete_ as it is in the G. Text (the last expressing in
Rusticiano’s Pisan tongue the strongly aspirated _Mulhĕtĕ_), is
given by the former: “This name of Mulehet is as much as to say
in the Saracen tongue ‘_The Abode of Heretics_,’” the fact being
that it does represent the Arabic term _Mulhid_, pl. _Muláhidah_,
“Impii, heretici,” which is in the Persian histories (as of
Rashíduddín and Wassáf) the title most commonly used to indicate
this community, and which is still applied by orthodox Mahomedans
to the Nosairis, Druses, and other sects of that kind, more or
less kindred to the Ismaili. The writer of the _Tabakat-i-Násiri_
calls the sectarians of Alamút _Muláhidat-ul-maut_, “Heretics
of Death.”[1] The curious reading of the G. Text which we have
preserved “_vaut à dire des_ Aram,” should be read as we have
rendered it. I conceive that Marco was here unconsciously using one
Oriental term to explain another. For it seems possible to explain
_Aram_ only as standing for _Harám_, in the sense of “wicked” or
“reprobate.”

In Pauthier’s Text, instead of _des aram_, we find “_veult dire en
françois_ Diex Terrien,” or Terrestrial God. This may have been
substituted, in the correction of the original rough dictation,
from a perception that the first expression was unintelligible. The
new phrase does not indeed convey the meaning of _Muláhidah_, but
it expresses a main characteristic of the heretical doctrine. The
correction was probably made by Polo himself; it is certainly of
very early date. For in the romance of Bauduin de Sebourc, which I
believe dates early in the 14th century, the Caliph, on witnessing
the extraordinary devotion of the followers of the Old Man (see
note 1, ch. xxiv.), exclaims:

“Par Mahon ...
Vous estes _Diex en terre_, autre coze n’i a!” (I. p. 360.)

So also Fr. Jacopo d’Aqui in the _Imago Mundi_, says of the
Assassins: “Dicitur iis quod sunt in Paradiso magno _Dei
Terreni_”—expressions, no doubt, taken in both cases from Polo’s
book.

Khanikoff, and before him J. R. Forster, have supposed that the
name _Mulehet_ represents _Alamút_. But the resemblance is much
closer and more satisfactory to _Mulhid_ or _Muláhidah_. _Mulhet_
is precisely the name by which the kingdom of the Ismailites is
mentioned in Armenian history, and _Mulihet_ is already applied
in the same way by Rabbi Benjamin in the 12th century, and by
Rubruquis in the 13th. The Chinese narrative of Hulaku’s expedition
calls it the kingdom of _Mulahi_. (_Joinville_, p. 138; _J. As._
sér. II., tom. xii. 285; _Benj. Tudela_, p. 106; _Rub._ p. 265;
_Rémusat_, _Nouv. Mélanges_, I. 176; _Gaubil_, p. 128; _Pauthier_,
pp. cxxxix.–cxli.; _Mon. Hist. Patr. Scriptorum_, III. 1559,
Turin, 1848.) [Cf. on _Mulehet_, _melahideh_, Heretics, plural
of _molhid_, Heretic, my note, pp. 476–482 of my ed. of Friar
Odoric.—H. C.]

“Old Man of the Mountain” was the title applied by the Crusaders
to the chief of that branch of the sect which was settled in the
mountains north of Lebanon, being a translation of his popular
Arabic title _Shaikh-ul-Jibal_. But according to Hammer this title
properly belonged, as Polo gives it, to the Prince of Alamút,
who never called himself Sultan, Malik, or Amir; and this seems
probable, as his territory was known as the _Balad-ul-Jibal_. (See
_Abulf._ in _Büsching_, V. 319.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Elliot, II. 290.

CHAPTER XXIV.

HOW THE OLD MAN USED TO TRAIN HIS ASSASSINS.

When therefore they awoke, and found themselves in a place so charming,
they deemed that it was Paradise in very truth. And the ladies and
damsels dallied with them to their hearts’ content, so that they had
what young men would have; and with their own good will they never
would have quitted the place.

Now this Prince whom we call the Old One kept his Court in grand and
noble style, and made those simple hill-folks about him believe firmly
that he was a great Prophet. And when he wanted one of his _Ashishin_
to send on any mission, he would cause that potion whereof I spoke to
be given to one of the youths in the garden, and then had him carried
into his Palace. So when the young man awoke, he found himself in the
Castle, and no longer in that Paradise; whereat he was not over well
pleased. He was then conducted to the Old Man’s presence, and bowed
before him with great veneration as believing himself to be in the
presence of a true Prophet. The Prince would then ask whence he came,
and he would reply that he came from Paradise! and that it was exactly
such as Mahommet had described it in the Law. This of course gave the
others who stood by, and who had not been admitted, the greatest desire
to enter therein.

So when the Old Man would have any Prince slain, he would say to such a
youth: “Go thou and slay So and So; and when thou returnest my Angels
shall bear thee into Paradise. And shouldst thou die, natheless even so
will I send my Angels to carry thee back into Paradise.” So he caused
them to believe; and thus there was no order of his that they would
not affront any peril to execute, for the great desire they had to get
back into that Paradise of his. And in this manner the Old One got his
people to murder any one whom he desired to get rid of. Thus, too,
the great dread that he inspired all Princes withal, made them become
his tributaries in order that he might abide at peace and amity with
them.{1}

I should also tell you that the Old Man had certain others under him,
who copied his proceedings and acted exactly in the same manner. One
of these was sent into the territory of Damascus, and the other into
Curdistan.{2}

NOTE 1.—Romantic as this story is, it seems to be precisely the
same that was current over all the East. It is given by Odoric at
length, more briefly by a Chinese author, and again from an Arabic
source by Hammer in the _Mines de l’Orient_.

The following is the Chinese account as rendered by Rémusat: “The
soldiers of this country (Mulahi) are veritable brigands. When
they see a lusty youth, they tempt him with the hope of gain, and
bring him to such a point that he will be ready to kill his father
or his elder brother with his own hand. After he is enlisted,
they intoxicate him, and carry him in that state into a secluded
retreat, where he is charmed with delicious music and beautiful
women. All his desires are satisfied for several days, and then
(in sleep) he is transported back to his original position. When
he awakes, they ask what he has seen. He is then informed that
if he will become an Assassin, he will be rewarded with the same
felicity. And with the texts and prayers that they teach him they
heat him to such a pitch that whatever commission be given him he
will brave death without regret in order to execute it.”

The Arabic narrative is too long to extract. It is from a kind
of historical romance called _The Memoirs of Hakim_, the date of
which Hammer unfortunately omits to give. Its close coincidence in
substance with Polo’s story is quite remarkable. After a detailed
description of the Paradise, and the transfer into it of the
aspirant under the influence of _bang_, on his awaking and seeing
his chief enter, he says, “O chief! am I awake or am I dreaming?”
To which the chief: “O such an One, take heed that thou tell not
the dream to any stranger. Know that Ali thy Lord hath vouchsafed
to show thee the place destined for thee in Paradise.... Hesitate
not a moment therefore in the service of the Imam who thus deigns
to intimate his contentment with thee,” and so on.

William de Nangis thus speaks of the Syrian Shaikh, who alone was
known to the Crusaders, though one of their historians (_Jacques
de Vitry_, in _Bongars_, I. 1062) shows knowledge that the
headquarters of the sect was in Persia: “He was much dreaded far
and near, by both Saracens and Christians, because he so often
caused princes of both classes indifferently to be murdered by his
emissaries. For he used to bring up in his palace youths belonging
to his territory, and had them taught a variety of languages, and
above all things to fear their Lord and obey him unto death, which
would thus become to them an entrance into the joys of Paradise.
And whosoever of them thus perished in carrying out his Lord’s
behests was worshipped as an angel.” As an instance of the implicit
obedience rendered by the _Fidáwí_ or devoted disciples of the
Shaikh, Fra Pipino and Marino Sanuto relate that when Henry Count
of Champagne (titular King of Jerusalem) was on a visit to the Old
Man of Syria, one day as they walked together they saw some lads
in white sitting on the top of a high tower. The Shaikh, turning
to the Count, asked if he had any subjects as obedient as his own?
and without giving time for reply made a sign to two of the boys,
who immediately leapt from the tower, and were killed on the spot.
The same story is told in the _Cento Novelle Antiche_, as happening
when the Emperor Frederic was on a visit (imaginary) to the Veglio.
And it is introduced likewise as an incident in the Romance of
Bauduin de Sebourc:

“Vollés veioir merveilles? dist li Rois Seignouris”

to Bauduin and his friends, and on their assenting he makes the
signal to one of his men on the battlements, and in a twinkling

“Quant le vinrent en l’air salant de tel avis,
Et aussi liément, et aussi esjois,
Qu’il deust conquester mil livres de parisis!
Ains qu’il venist a tière il fut mors et fenis,
Sur les roches agues desrompis corps et pis,”[1] etc.

(_Cathay_, 153; _Rémusat, Nouv. Mél._ I. 178; _Mines de l’Orient_,
III. 201 _seqq._; _Nangis_ in _Duchesne_, V. 332; _Pipino_ in
_Muratori_, IX. 705; _Defrémery_ in _J. As._ sér. V. tom. v. 34
_seqq._; _Cent. Nov. Antiche_, Firenze, 1572, p. 91; _Bauduin de
Sebourc_, I. 359.)

The following are some of the more notable murders or attempts at
murder ascribed to the Ismailite emissaries either from Syria or
from Persia:—

A.D. 1092. Nizum-ul-Mulk, formerly the powerful minister of Malik
Shah, Seljukian sovereign of Persia, and a little later his two
sons. 1102. The Prince of Homs, in the chief Mosque of that city.
1113. Maudúd, Prince of Mosul, in the chief Mosque of Damascus.
About 1114. Abul Muzafar ’Ali, Wazir of Sanjár Shah, and Chakar
Beg, grand-uncle of the latter. 1116. Ahmed Yel, Prince of Maragha,
at Baghdad, in the presence of Mahomed, Sultan of Persia. 1121.
The Amir Afdhal, the powerful Wazir of Egypt, at Cairo. 1126.
Kasim Aksonkor, Prince of Mosul and Aleppo, in the Great Mosque at
Mosul. 1127. Moyin-uddin, Wazir of Sanjár Shah of Persia. 1129.
Amír Billah, Khalif of Egypt. 1131. Taj-ul Mulúk Buri, Prince of
Damascus. 1134. Shams-ul-Mulúk, son of the preceding. 1135–38.
The Khalif Mostarshid, the Khalif Rashíd, and Daùd, Seljukian
Prince of Azerbaijan. 1149. Raymond, Count of Tripoli. 1191. Kizil
Arzlan, Prince of Azerbaijan. 1192. Conrad of Montferrat, titular
King of Jerusalem; a murder which King Richard has been accused of
instigating. 1217. Oghulmish, Prince of Hamadán.

And in 1174 and 1176 attempts to murder the great Saladin. 1271.
Attempt to murder Ala’uddin Juwaini, Governor of Baghdad, and
historian of the Mongols. 1272. The attempt to murder Prince Edward
of England at Acre.

In latter years the _Fidáwí_ or Ismailite adepts appear to have
let out their services simply as hired assassins. Bibars, in a
letter to his court at Cairo, boasts of using them when needful. A
Mahomedan author ascribes to Bibars the instigation of the attempt
on Prince Edward. (_Makrizi_, II. 100; _J. As._ XI. 150.)

NOTE 2.—Hammer mentions as what he chooses to call “Grand Priors”
under the Shaikh or “Grand Master” at Alamút, the chief, in Syria,
one in the Kuhistan of E. Persia (Tun-o-Kaïn), one in Kumis (the
country about Damghan and Bostam), and one in ’Irák; he does not
speak of any in Kurdistan. Colonel Monteith, however, says,
though without stating authority or particulars, “There were
several divisions of them (the Assassins) scattered throughout
Syria, _Kurdistan_ (near the Lake of Wan), and Asia Minor, but
all acknowledging as Imaum or High Priest the Chief residing at
Alamut.” And it may be noted that Odoric, a generation after Polo,
puts the Old Man at _Millescorte_, which looks like _Malasgird_,
north of Lake Van. (_H. des Assass._ p. 104; _J. R. G. S._ III. 16;
_Cathay_, p. ccxliii.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This story has been transferred to Peter the Great, who is alleged
to have exhibited the docility of his subjects in the same way to
the King of Denmark, by ordering a Cossack to jump from the Round
Tower at Copenhagen, on the summit of which they were standing.

CHAPTER XXV.

HOW THE OLD MAN CAME BY HIS END.

Now it came to pass, in the year of Christ’s Incarnation, 1252, that
Alaü, Lord of the Tartars of the Levant, heard tell of these great
crimes of the Old Man, and resolved to make an end of him. So he took
and sent one of his Barons with a great Army to that Castle, and they
besieged it for three years, but they could not take it, so strong was
it. And indeed if they had had food within it never would have been
taken. But after being besieged those three years they ran short of
victual, and were taken. The Old Man was put to death with all his men
[and the Castle with its Garden of Paradise was levelled with the
ground]. And since that time he has had no successor; and there was an
end to all his villainies.{1}

Now let us go back to our journey.

NOTE 1.—The date in Pauthier is 1242; in the G. T. and in Ramusio
1262. Neither is right, nor certainly could Polo have meant the
former.

When Mangku Kaan, after his enthronement (1251), determined at a
great _Kurultai_ or Diet, on perfecting the Mongol conquests, he
entrusted his brother Kúblái with the completion of the subjugation
of China and the adjacent countries, whilst his brother Hulaku
received the command of the army destined for Persia and Syria. The
complaints that came from the Mongol officers already in Persia
determined him to commence with the reduction of the Ismailites,
and Hulaku set out from Karakorum in February, 1254. He proceeded
with great deliberation, and the Oxus was not crossed till January,
1256. But an army had been sent long in advance under “one of
his Barons,” Kitubuka Noyan, and in 1253 it was already actively
engaged in besieging the Ismailite fortresses. In 1255, during the
progress of the war, ALA’UDDIN MAHOMED, the reigning Prince of
the Assassins (mentioned by Polo as Alaodin), was murdered at the
instigation of his son Ruknuddin Khurshah, who succeeded to the
authority. A year later (November, 1256) Ruknuddin surrendered to
Hulaku. [Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ II. p. 109) says that Alamút
was taken by Hulaku, 20th December, 1256.—H. C.] The fortresses
given up, all well furnished with provisions and artillery engines,
were 100 in number. Two of them, however, Lembeser and Girdkuh,
refused to surrender. The former fell after a year; the latter
is stated to have held out for _twenty years_—actually, as it
would seem, about fourteen, or till December, 1270. Ruknuddin was
well treated by Hulaku, and despatched to the Court of the Kaan.
The accounts of his death differ, but that most commonly alleged,
according to Rashiduddin, is that Mangku Kaan was irritated at
hearing of his approach, asking why his post-horses should be
fagged to no purpose, and sent executioners to put Ruknuddin
to death on the road. Alamút had been surrendered without any
substantial resistance. Some survivors of the sect got hold of
it again in 1275–1276, and held out for a time. The dominion was
extinguished, but the sect remained, though scattered indeed and
obscure. A very strange case that came before Sir Joseph Arnould
in the High Court at Bombay in 1866 threw much new light on the
survival of the Ismailis.

Some centuries ago a _Dai_ or Missionary of the Ismailis, named
Sadruddín, made converts from the Hindu trading classes in Upper
Sind. Under the name of _Khojas_ the sect multiplied considerably
in Sind, Kach’h, and Guzerat, whence they spread to Bombay and
to Zanzibar. Their numbers in Western India are now probably not
less than 50,000 to 60,000. Their doctrine, or at least the books
which they revere, appear to embrace a strange jumble of Hindu
notions with Mahomedan practices and Shiah mysticism, but the main
characteristic endures of deep reverence, if not worship, of the
person of their hereditary Imám. To his presence, when he resided
in Persia, numbers of pilgrims used to betake themselves, and large
remittances of what we may call _Ismail’s Pence_ were made to him.
Abul Hassan, the last Imám but one of admitted lineal descent from
the later Shaikhs of Alamút, and claiming (as they did) descent
from the Imám Ismail and his great ancestor ’Ali Abu Tálib, had
considerable estates at Meheláti, between Kúm and Hamadán, and at
one time held the Government of Kermán. His son and successor,
Shah Khalilullah, was killed in a brawl at Yezd in 1818. Fatteh
’Ali Sháh, fearing Ismailite vengeance, caused the homicide to be
severely punished, and conferred gifts and honours on the young
Imám, Agha Khan, including the hand of one of his own daughters. In
1840 Agha Khan, who had raised a revolt at Kermán, had to escape
from Persia. He took refuge in Sind, and eventually rendered good
service both to General Nott at Kandahár and to Sir C. Napier in
Sind, for which he receives a pension from our Government.

For many years this genuine Heir and successor of the _Viex de la
Montaingne_ has had his headquarters at Bombay, where he devotes,
or for a long time did devote, the large income that he receives
from the faithful to the maintenance of a racing stable, being the
chief patron and promoter of the Bombay Turf!

A schism among the Khojas, owing apparently to the desire of part
of the well-to-do Bombay community to sever themselves from the
peculiarities of the sect and to set up as respectable Sunnis, led
in 1866 to an action in the High Court, the object of which was to
exclude Agha Khan from all rights over the Khojas, and to transfer
the property of the community to the charge of Orthodox Mahomedans.
To the elaborate addresses of Mr. Howard and Sir Joseph Arnould,
on this most singular process before an English Court, I owe the
preceding particulars. The judgment was entirely in favour of the
Old Man of the Mountain.

[Illustration: H. H. Agha Khán Meheláti, late Representative of the
Old Man of the Mountain.

“=Le Seigneur Viel, que je vous ai dit si tient sa court ... et
fait à croire à cele simple gent qui li est entour que il est un
grant prophete.=”]

[Sir Bartle Frere writes of Agha Khan in 1875: “Like his ancestor,
the Old One of Marco Polo’s time, he keeps his court in grand and
noble style. His sons, popularly known as ‘The Persian Princes,’
are active sportsmen, and age has not dulled the Agha’s enjoyment
of horse-racing. Some of the best blood of Arabia is always to be
found in his stables. He spares no expense on his racers, and no
prejudice of religion or race prevents his availing himself of
the science and skill of an English trainer or jockey when the
races come round. If tidings of war or threatened disturbance
should arise from Central Asia or Persia, the Agha is always one
of the first to hear of it, and seldom fails to pay a visit to the
Governor or to some old friend high in office to hear the news and
offer the services of a tried sword and an experienced leader to
the Government which has so long secured him a quiet refuge for
his old age.” Agha Khan died in April, 1881, at the age of 81. He
was succeeded by his son Agha Ali Sháh, one of the members of the
Legislative Council. (See _The Homeward Mail, Overland Times of
India_, of 14th April, 1881.)]

The _Bohras_ of Western India are identified with the
Imámí-Ismáilís in some books, and were so spoken of in the first
edition of this work. This is, however, an error, originally
due, it would seem, to Sir John Malcolm. The nature of their
doctrine, indeed, seems to be very much alike, and the Bohras,
like the Ismáilís, attach a divine character to their _Mullah_
or chief pontiff, and make a pilgrimage to his presence once in
life. But the _persons_ so reverenced are quite different; and the
Bohras recognise all the 12 Imáms of ordinary Shiahs. Their first
appearance in India was early, the date which they assign being
A.H. 532 (A.D. 1137–1138). Their chief seat was in Yemen, from
which a large emigration to India took place on its conquest by the
Turks in 1538. Ibn Batuta seems to have met with Bohras at Gandár,
near Baroch, in 1342. (_Voyages_, IV. 58.)

A Chinese account of the expedition of Hulaku will be found in
Rémusat’s _Nouveaux Mélanges_ (I.), and in Pauthier’s Introduction.
(_Q. R._ 115–219, esp. 213; _Ilch._ vol. i.; _J. A. S. B._ VI. 842
_seqq._) [A new and complete translation has been given by Dr. E.
Bretschneider, _Med. Res._ I. 112 _seqq._—H. C.]

There is some account of the rock of Alamút and its exceedingly
slender traces of occupancy, by Colonel Monteith, in _J. R. G.
S._ III. 15, and again by Sir Justin Sheil in vol. viii. p. 431.
There does not seem to be any specific authority for assigning the
Paradise of the Shaikh to Alamút; and it is at least worthy of note
that another of the castles of the Muláhidah, destroyed by Hulaku,
was called _Firdús_, _i.e._ Paradise. In any case, I see no reason
to suppose that Polo visited Alamút, which would have been quite
out of the road that he is following.

It is possible that “the Castle,” to which he alludes at the
beginning of next chapter, and which set him off upon this
digression, was _Girdkuh_.[1] It has not, as far as I know, been
identified by modern travellers, but it stood within 10 or 12
miles of Damghan (to the west or north-west). It is probably the
_Tigado_ of Hayton, of which he thus speaks: “The Assassins had
an impregnable castle called Tigado, which was furnished with all
necessaries, and was so strong that it had no fear of attack on any
side. Howbeit, Haloön commanded a certain captain of his that he
should take 10,000 Tartars who had been left in garrison in Persia,
and with them lay siege to the said castle, and not leave it till
he had taken it. Wherefore the said Tartars continued besieging
it for seven whole years, winter and summer, without being able
to take it. At last the Assassins surrendered, from sheer want of
clothing, but not of victuals or other necessaries.” So Ramusio;
other copies read “27 years.” In any case it corroborates the
fact that Girdkuh was said to have held out for an extraordinary
length of time. If Rashiduddin is right in naming 1270 as the date
of surrender, this would be quite a recent event when the Polo
party passed, and draw special attention to the spot. (_J. As._
sér. IV. tom. xiii. 48; _Ilch._ I. 93, 104, 274; _Q. R._ p. 278;
_Ritter_, VIII. 336.) A note which I have from _Djihan Numa_ (I.
259) connects Girdkuh with a district called _Chinar_. This may be
a clue to the term _Arbre Sec_; but there are difficulties.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] [Ghirdkuh means “round mountain”; it was in the district of Kumis,
three parasangs west of Damghan. Under the year 1257, the _Yüan
shi_ mentions the taking of the fortress of _Ghi-rh-du-kie_ by
_K’ie-di-bu-hua_. (_Bretschneider, Med. Res._ I. p. 122; II.
110.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXVI.

CONCERNING THE CITY OF SAPURGAN.

On leaving the Castle, you ride over fine plains and beautiful
valleys, and pretty hill-sides producing excellent grass pasture, and
abundance of fruits, and all other products. Armies are glad to take
up their quarters here on account of the plenty that exists. This kind
of country extends for six days’ journey, with a goodly number of
towns and villages, in which the people are worshippers of Mahommet.
Sometimes also you meet with a tract of desert extending for 50 or 60
miles, or somewhat less, and in these deserts you find no water, but
have to carry it along with you. The beasts do without drink until you
have got across the desert tract and come to watering places.

So after travelling for six days as I have told you, you come to a city
called SAPURGAN. It has great plenty of everything, but especially of
the very best melons in the world. They preserve them by paring them
round and round into strips, and drying them in the sun. When dry
they are sweeter than honey, and are carried off for sale all over
the country. There is also abundance of game here, both of birds and
beasts.{1}

NOTE 1.—SAPURGAN may closely express the pronunciation of the
name of the city which the old Arabic writers call _Sabúrḳán_
and _Shabúrḳán_, now called _Shibrgán_, lying some 90 miles west
of Balkh; containing now some 12,000 inhabitants, and situated
in a plain still richly cultivated, though on the verge of the
desert.[1] But I have seen no satisfactory solution of the
difficulties as to the time assigned. This in the G. T. and in
Ramusio is clearly six days. The point of departure is indeed
uncertain, but even if we were to place that at Sharakhs on the
extreme verge of cultivated Khorasan, which would be quite
inconsistent with other data, it would have taken the travellers
something like double the time to reach Shibrgán. Where I have
followed the G. T. in its reading “_quant l’en a chevauchés six
jornée tel che je vos ai contés, adunc treuve l’en une cité_,”
etc., Pauthier’s text has “_Et quant l’en a chevauchié_ les vi
cités, _si treuve l’en une cité qui a nom Sapurgan_,” and to this
that editor adheres. But I suspect that _cités_ is a mere lapsus
for _journées_, as in the reading in one of his three MSS. What
could be meant by “_chevauchier les_ vi _cités_”?

Whether the true route be, as I suppose, by Nishapúr and Meshid,
or, as Khanikoff supposes, by Herat and Badghis, it is strange
that no one of those famous cities is mentioned. And we feel
constrained to assume that something has been misunderstood in
the dictation, or has dropt out of it. As a _probable_ conjecture
I should apply the six days to the extent of pleasing country
described in the first lines of the chapter, and identify it with
the tract between Sabzawur and the cessation of fertile country
beyond Meshid. The distance would agree well, and a comparison
with Fraser or Ferrier will show that even now the description,
allowing for the compression of an old recollection, would be well
founded; _e.g._ on the first march beyond Nishapúr: “Fine villages,
with plentiful gardens full of trees, that bear fruit of the
highest flavour, may be seen all along the foot of the hills, and
in the little recesses formed by the ravines whence issues the
water that irrigates them. It was a rich and pleasing scene, and
out of question by far the most populous and cultivated tract that
I had seen in Persia.... Next morning we quitted Derrood ... by a
very indifferent but interesting road, the glen being finely wooded
with walnut, mulberry, poplar, and willow-trees, and fruit-tree
gardens rising one above the other upon the mountain-side, watered
by little rills.... These gardens extended for several miles up the
glen; beyond them the bank of the stream continued to be fringed
with white sycamore, willow, ash, mulberry, poplar, and woods that
love a moist situation,” and so on, describing a style of scenery
not common in Persia, and expressing diffusely (as it seems to me)
the same picture as Polo’s two lines. In the valley of Nishapúr,
again (we quote Arthur Conolly): “‘This is Persia!’ was the vain
exclamation of those who were alive to the beauty of the scene;
‘this is Persia!’ _Bah! Bah!_ What grass, what grain, what water!
_Bah! Bah!_

[‘If there be a Paradise on the face of the Earth,
This is it! This is it! This is it!’]”—(I. 209.)

(See _Fraser_, 405, 432–433, 434, 436.)

With reference to the dried melons of Shibrgán, Quatremère cites
a history of Herat, which speaks of them almost in Polo’s words.
Ibn Batuta gives a like account of the melons of Khárizm: “The
surprising thing about these melons is the way the people have of
slicing them, drying them in the sun, and then packing them in
baskets, just as Malaga figs are treated in our part of the world.
In this state they are sent to the remotest parts of India and
China. There is no dried fruit so delicious, and all the while
I lived at Delhi, when the travelling dealers came in, I never
missed sending for these dried strips of melon.” (_Q. R._ 169;
_I. B._ III. 15.) Here, in the 14th century, we seem to recognise
the Afghan dealers arriving in the cities of Hindustan with their
annual camel-loads of dried fruits, just as we have seen them in
our own day.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The oldest form of the name is _Asapuragán_, which Rawlinson thinks
traceable to its being an ancient seat of the _Asa_ or _Asagartii_.
(_J. R. A. S._ XI. 63.)

CHAPTER XXVII.

OF THE CITY OF BALC.

Balc is a noble city and a great, though it was much greater in former
days. But the Tartars and other nations have greatly ravaged and
destroyed it. There were formerly many fine palaces and buildings of
marble, and the ruins of them still remain. The people of the city tell
that it was here that Alexander took to wife the daughter of Darius.

Here, you should be told, is the end of the empire of the Tartar
Lord of the Levant. And this city is also the limit of Persia in the
direction between east and north-east.{1}

Now, let us quit this city, and I will tell you of another country
called DOGANA.{2}

When you have quitted the city of which I have been speaking, you ride
some 12 days between north-east and east, without finding any human
habitation, for the people have all taken refuge in fastnesses among
the mountains, on account of the Banditti and armies that harassed
them. There is plenty of water on the road, and abundance of game;
there are lions too. You can get no provisions on the road, and must
carry with you all that you require for these 12 days.{3}

NOTE 1.—BALKH, “the mother of cities,” suffered mercilessly from
Chinghiz. Though the city had yielded without resistance, the whole
population was marched by companies into the plain, on the usual
Mongol pretext of counting them, and then brutally massacred. The
city and its gardens were fired, and all buildings capable of
defence were levelled. The province long continued to be harried
by the Chaghataian inroads. Ibn Batuta, sixty years after Marco’s
visit, describes the city as still in ruins, and as uninhabited:
“The remains of its mosques and colleges,” he says, “are still
to be seen, and the painted walls traced with azure.” It is no
doubt the Vaeq (_Valq_) of Clavijo, “very large, and surrounded by
a broad earthen wall, thirty paces across, but breached in many
parts.” He describes a large portion of the area within as sown
with cotton. The account of its modern state in Burnes and Ferrier
is much the same as Ibn Batuta’s, except that they found some
population; two separate towns within the walls according to the
latter. Burnes estimates the circuit of the ruins at 20 miles. The
bulk of the population has been moved since 1858 to Takhtapul, 8
miles east of Balkh, where the Afghan Government is placed.

(_Erdmann_, 404–405; _I. B._ III. 59; _Clavijo_, p. 117; _Burnes_,
II. 204–206; _Ferrier_, 206–207.)

According to the legendary history of Alexander, the beautiful
Roxana was the daughter of Darius, and her father in a dying
interview with Alexander requested the latter to make her his wife:—

“Une fille ai mult bele; se prendre le voles.
Vus en seres de l’mont tout li mius maries,” etc.
(_Lambert Le Court_, p. 256.)

NOTE 2.—The country called _Dogana_ in the G. Text is a puzzle. In
the former edition I suggested _Juzgána_, a name which till our
author’s time was applied to a part of the adjoining territory,
though not to that traversed in quitting Balkh for the east. Sir H.
Rawlinson is inclined to refer the name to _Dehgán_, or “villager,”
a term applied in Bactria, and in Kabul, to Tajik peasantry[1]. I
may also refer to certain passages in Baber’s “Memoirs,” in which
he speaks of a place, and apparently a district, called _Dehánah_,
which seems from the context to have lain in the vicinity of the
Ghori, or Aksarai River. There is still a village in the Ghori
territory, called _Dehánah_. Though this is worth mentioning, where
the true solution is so uncertain, I acknowledge the difficulty of
applying it. I may add also that Baber calls the River of Ghori
or Aksarai, the _Dogh_-ábah. (_Sprenger, P. und R. Routen_, p. 39
and Map; _Anderson_ in _J. A. S. B._ XXII. 161; _Ilch._ II. 93;
_Baber_, pp. 132, 134, 168, 200, also 146.)

NOTE 3.—Though Burnes speaks of the part of the road that we
suppose necessarily to have been here followed from Balkh towards
Taican, as barren and dreary, he adds that the ruins of _aqueducts_
and houses proved that the land had at one time been peopled,
though now destitute of water, and consequently of inhabitants. The
country would seem to have reverted at the time of Burnes’ journey,
from like causes, nearly to the state in which Marco found it after
the Mongol devastations.

_Lions_ seem to mean here the real king of beasts, and not tigers,
as hereafter in the book. Tigers, though found on the S. and W.
shores of the Caspian, do not seem to exist in the Oxus valley.
On the other hand, Rashiduddin tells us that, when Hulaku was
reviewing his army after the passage of the river, several lions
were started, and two were killed. The lions are also mentioned by
Sidi ’Ali, the Turkish Admiral, further down the valley towards
Hazárasp: “We were obliged to fight with the lions day and night,
and no man dared to go alone for water.” Moorcroft says of the
plain between Kunduz and the Oxus: “Deer, foxes, wolves, hogs, and
_lions_ are numerous, the latter resembling those in the vicinity
of Hariana” (in Upper India). Wood also mentions lions in Kuláb,
and at Kila’chap on the Oxus. Q. Curtius tells how Alexander killed
a great lion in the country north of the Oxus towards Samarkand. [A
similar story is told of Timur in _The Mulfuzat Timūry_, translated
by Major Charles Stewart, 1830 (p. 69): “During the march ‘(near
Balkh)’ two lions made their appearance, one of them a male, the
other a female. I (Timur) resolved to kill them myself, and having
shot them both with arrows, I considered this circumstance as a
lucky omen.”—H. C.] (_Burnes_, II. 200; _Q. R._ 155; _Ilch._ I.
90; _J. As._ IX. 217; _Moorcroft_, II. 430; _Wood_, ed. 1872, pp.
259,260; _Q. C._ VII. 2.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] It may be observed that the careful Elphinstone distinguishes from
this general application of Dehgán or Dehkán, the name _Deggán_
applied to a tribe “once spread over the north-east of Afghanistan,
but now as a separate people only in Kunar and Laghman.”

CHAPTER XXVIII.

OF TAICAN, AND THE MOUNTAINS OF SALT. ALSO OF THE
PROVINCE OF CASEM.

After those twelve days’ journey you come to a fortified place called
TAICAN, where there is a great corn market.{1} It is a fine place, and
the mountains that you see towards the south are all composed of salt.
People from all the countries round, to some thirty days’ journey, come
to fetch this salt, which is the best in the world, and is so hard that
it can only be broken with iron picks. ’Tis in such abundance that it
would supply the whole world to the end of time. [Other mountains there
grow almonds and pistachioes, which are exceedingly cheap.]{2}

When you leave this town and ride three days further between north-east
and east, you meet with many fine tracts full of vines and other
fruits, and with a goodly number of habitations, and everything to be
had very cheap. The people are worshippers of Mahommet, and are an evil
and a murderous generation, whose great delight is in the wine shop;
for they have good wine (albeit it be boiled), and are great topers; in
truth, they are constantly getting drunk. They wear nothing on the head
but a cord some ten palms long twisted round it. They are excellent
huntsmen, and take a great deal of game; in fact they wear nothing but
the skins of the beasts they have taken in the chase, for they make of
them both coats and shoes. Indeed, all of them are acquainted with the
art of dressing skins for these purposes.{3}

When you have ridden those three days, you find a town called CASEM,{4}
which is subject to a count. His other towns and villages are on the
hills, but through this town there flows a river of some size. There
are a great many porcupines hereabouts, and very large ones too. When
hunted with dogs, several of them will get together and huddle close,
shooting their quills at the dogs, which get many a serious wound
thereby.{5}

This town of Casem is at the head of a very great province, which is
also called Casem. The people have a peculiar language. The peasants
who keep cattle abide in the mountains, and have their dwellings in
caves, which form fine and spacious houses for them, and are made with
ease, as the hills are composed of earth.{6}

After leaving the town of Casem, you ride for three days without
finding a single habitation, or anything to eat or drink, so that you
have to carry with you everything that you require. At the end of those
three days you reach a province called Badashan, about which we shall
now tell you.{7}

NOTE 1.—The _Taican_ of Polo is the still existing TALIKAN in
the province of Kataghan or Kunduz, but it bears the former name
(_Tháîḳán_) in the old Arab geographies. Both names are used by
Baber, who says it lay in the _Ulugh Bágh_, or Great Garden, a
name perhaps acquired by the Plains of Talikan in happier days,
but illustrating what Polo says of the next three days’ march.
The Castle of Talikan resisted Chinghiz for seven months, and met
with the usual fate (1221). [In the Travels of Sidi Ali, son of
Housaïn (_Jour. Asiat._, October, 1826, p. 203), “Talikan, in the
country of Badakhschan” is mentioned.—H. C.] Wood speaks of Talikan
in 1838 as a poor place of some 300 or 400 houses, mere hovels; a
recent account gives it 500 families. Market days are not usual
in Upper India or Kabul, but are universal in Badakhshan and the
Oxus provinces. The bazaars are only open on those days, and the
people from the surrounding country then assemble to exchange
goods, generally by barter. Wood chances to note: “A market was
held at Talikan.... The thronged state of the roads leading into
it soon apprised us that the day was no ordinary one.” (_Abulf._
in _Büsching_, V. 352; _Sprenger_, p. 50; _P. de la Croix_, I. 63;
_Baber_, 38, 130; _Burnes_, III. 8; _Wood_, 156; _Pandit Manphul’s
Report_.)

The distance of Talikan from Balkh is about 170 miles, which gives
very short marches, if twelve days be the correct reading. Ramusio
has _two_ days, which is certainly wrong. XII. is easily miswritten
for VII., which would be a just number.

NOTE 2.—In our day, as I learn from Pandit Manphul, the mines of
rock salt are at Ak Bulák, near the Lataband Pass, and at Darúná,
near the Kokcha, and these supply the whole of Badakhshan, as well
as Kunduz and Chitrál. These sites are due _east_ of Talikan, and
are in Badakhshan. But there is a mine at _Chál_, S.E. or S.S.E.
of Talikan and within the same province. There are also mines
of rock-salt near the famous “stone bridge” in Kuláb, north of
the Oxus, and again on the south of the Alaï steppe. (Papers by
_Manphul_ and by _Faiz Baksh_; also _Notes_ by _Feachenko_.)

Both pistachioes and wild almonds are mentioned by Pandit Manphul;
and see _Wood_ (p. 252) on the beauty and profusion of the latter.

NOTE 3.—Wood thinks that the Tajik inhabitants of Badakhshan and
the adjoining districts are substantially of the same race as the
Kafir tribes of Hindu Kúsh. At the time of Polo’s visit it would
seem that their conversion to Islam was imperfect. They were
probably in that transition state which obtains in our own day
for some of the Hill Mahomedans adjoining the Kafirs on the south
side of the mountains the reproachful title of _Nímchah Musulmán_,
or Half-and-halfs. Thus they would seem to have retained sundry
Kafir characteristics; among others that love of wine which is so
strong among the Kafirs. The boiling of the wine is noted by Baber
(a connoisseur) as the custom of Nijrao, adjoining, if not then
included in, Kafir-land; and Elphinstone implies the continuance
of the custom when he speaks of the Kafirs as having wine of _the
consistence of jelly_, and very strong. The wine of _Kápishí_, the
Greek Kapisa, immediately south of Hindu Kúsh, was famous as early
as the time of the Hindu grammarian Pánini, say three centuries
B.C. The cord twisted round the head was probably also a relic of
Kafir costume: “Few of the Kafirs cover the head, and when they do,
it is with a narrow band or fillet of goat’s hair ... about a yard
or a yard and a half in length, wound round the head.” This style
of head-dress seems to be very ancient in India, and in the Sanchi
sculptures is that of the supposed Dasyas. Something very similar,
_i.e._ a scanty turban cloth twisted into a mere cord, and wound
two or three times round the head, is often seen in the Panjab to
this day.

The _Postín_ or sheepskin coat is almost universal on both sides
of the Hindu Kúsh; and Wood notes: “The shoes in use resemble
half-boots, made of goatskin, and mostly of home manufacture.”
(_Baber_, 145; _J. A. S. B._ XXVIII. 348, 364; _Elphinst._ II. 384;
_Ind. Antiquary_, I. 22; _Wood_, 174, 220; _J. R. A. S._ XIX. 2.)

NOTE 4.—Marsden was right in identifying _Scassem_ or _Casem_ with
the _Kechem_ of D’Anville’s Map, but wrong in confounding the
latter with the _Kishmabad_ of Elphinstone—properly, I believe,
_Kishnabad_—in the Anderab Valley. Kashm, or Keshm, found its way
into maps through Pétis de la Croix, from whom probably D’Anville
adopted it; but as it was ignored by Elphinstone (or by Macartney,
who constructed his map), and by Burnes, it dropped out of our
geography. Indeed, Wood does not notice it except as giving name
to a high hill called the Hill of Kishm, and the position even
of that he omits to indicate. The frequent mention of Kishm in
the histories of Timur and Humayun (_e.g._ _P. de la Croix_, I.
167; _N. et E._ XIV. 223, 491; _Erskine’s Baber and Humayun_, II.
330, 355, etc.) had enabled me to determine its position within
tolerably narrow limits; but desiring to fix it definitely,
application was made through Colonel Maclagan to Pandit Manphul,
C.S.I., a very intelligent Hindu gentleman, who resided for some
time in Badakhshan as agent of the Panjab Government, and from him
arrived a special note and sketch, and afterwards a MS. copy of a
Report,[1] which set the position of Kishm at rest.

KISHM is the _Kilissemo_, _i.e._ Karisma or Krishma, of Hiuen Tsang;
and Sir H. Rawlinson has identified the Hill of Kishm with the
Mount Kharesem of the Zend-Avesta, on which Jamshid placed the
most sacred of all the fires. It is now a small town or large
village on the right bank of the Varsach river, a tributary of the
Kokcha. It was in 1866 the seat of a district ruler under the Mír
of Badakhshan, who was styled the Mír of Kishm, and is the modern
counterpart of Marco’s _Quens_ or Count. The modern caravan-road
between Kunduz and Badakhshan does not pass through Kishm, which is
left some five miles to the right, but through the town of Mashhad,
which stands on the same river. Kishm is the warmest district of
Badakhshan. Its fruits are abundant, and ripen a month earlier
than those at Faizabad, the capital of that country. The Varsach or
Mashhad river is Marco’s “_Flum auques grant_.” Wood (247) calls it
“the largest stream we had yet forded in Badakhshan.”

It is very notable that in Ramusio, in Pipino, and in one passage
of the G. Text, the name is written _Scasem_, which has led some
to suppose the _Ish-Káshm_ of Wood to be meant. That place is much
too far east—in fact, beyond the city which forms the subject of
the next chapter. The apparent hesitation, however, between the
forms _Casem_ and _Scasem_ suggests that the Kishm of our note may
formerly have been termed S’kăshm or Ish-Kăshm, a form frequent
in the Oxus Valley, _e.g._ _Ish-Kimish, Ish-Káshm, Ishtrakh,
Ishpingao_. General Cunningham judiciously suggests (_Ladak_,
34) that this form is merely a vocal corruption of the initial
_S_ before a consonant, a combination which always troubles the
Musulman in India, and converts every Mr. Smith or Mr. Sparks into
Ismit or Ispak Sahib.

[There does not seem to me any difficulty about this note:
“Shibarkhan (Afghan Turkistan), Balkh, Kunduz, Khanabad, Talikan,
Kishm, Badakhshan.” I am tempted to look for Dogana at
Khanabad.—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—The belief that the porcupine _projected_ its quills at
its assailants was an ancient and persistent one—“_cum intendit
cutem missiles_,” says Pliny (VIII. 35, and see also _Aelian. de
Nat. An._ I. 31), and is held by the Chinese as it was held by the
ancients, but is universally rejected by modern zoologists. The
huddling and coiling appears to be a true characteristic, for the
porcupine always tries to shield its head.

NOTE 6.—The description of Kishm as a “very great” province is
an example of a bad habit of Marco’s, which recurs in the next
chapter. What he says of the cave-dwellings may be illustrated by
Burnes’s account of the excavations at Bamian, in a neighbouring
district. These “still form the residence of the greater part of
the population.... The hills at Bamian are formed of indurated
clay and pebbles, which renders this excavation a matter of little
difficulty.” Similar occupied excavations are noticed by Moorcroft
at Heibak and other places towards Khulm.

Curiously, Pandit Manphul says of the districts about the Kokcha:
“Both their hills and plains are productive, the former _being
mostly composed of earth, having very little of rocky substance_.”

NOTE 7.—The capital of Badakhshan is now Faizabad, on the right
bank of the Kokcha, founded, according to Manphul, by Yarbeg, the
first Mír of the present dynasty. When this family was displaced
for a time, by Murad Beg of Kunduz, about 1829, the place was
abandoned for years, but is now re-occupied. The ancient capital
of Badakhshan stood in the Dasht (or Plain) of Bahárak, one of
the most extensive pieces of level in Badakhshan, in which the
rivers Vardoj, Zardeo, and Sarghalan unite with the Kokcha, and
was apparently termed _Jaúzgún_. This was probably the city called
Badakhshan by our traveller.[2] As far as I can estimate, by the
help of Wood and the map I have compiled, this will be from 100 to
110 miles distant from Talikan, and will therefore suit fairly with
the six marches that Marco lays down.

Wood, in 1838, found the whole country between Talikan and Faizabad
nearly as depopulated as Marco found that between Kishm and
Badakhshan. The modern depopulation was due—in part, at least—to
the recent oppressions and _razzias_ of the Uzbeks of Kunduz. On
their decline, between 1840 and 1850, the family of the native
Mírs was reinstated, and these now rule at Faizabad, under an
acknowledgment, since 1859, of Afghan supremacy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Since published in _J. K. G. S._ vol. xlii.

[2] Wilford, in the end of the 18th century, speaks of Faizabad as
“the new capital of Badakhshan, built near the site of the old
one.” The Chinese map (_vide_ _J. R. G. S._ vol. xlii.) represents
the city of _Badakhshan_ to the east of Faizabad. Faiz Bakhsh, in
an unpublished paper, mentions a tradition that the Lady Zobeidah,
dear to English children, the daughter of Al-Mansúr and wife of
Ar-Rashid, delighted to pass the spring at Jaúzgún, and built a
palace there, “the ruins of which are still visible.”

CHAPTER XXIX.

OF THE PROVINCE OF BADASHAN.

Badashan is a Province inhabited by people who worship Mahommet, and
have a peculiar language. It forms a very great kingdom, and the
royalty is hereditary. All those of the royal blood are descended
from King Alexander and the daughter of King Darius, who was Lord of
the vast Empire of Persia. And all these kings call themselves in the
Saracen tongue ZULCARNIAIN, which is as much as to say _Alexander_; and
this out of regard for Alexander the Great.{1}

It is in this province that those fine and valuable gems the Balas
Rubies are found. They are got in certain rocks among the mountains,
and in the search for them the people dig great caves underground, just
as is done by miners for silver. There is but one special mountain that
produces them, and it is called SYGHINAN. The stones are dug on the
king’s account, and no one else dares dig in that mountain on pain of
forfeiture of life as well as goods; nor may any one carry the stones
out of the kingdom. But the king amasses them all, and sends them to
other kings when he has tribute to render, or when he desires to offer
a friendly present; and such only as he pleases he causes to be sold.
Thus he acts in order to keep the Balas at a high value; for if he were
to allow everybody to dig, they would extract so many that the world
would be glutted with them, and they would cease to bear any value.
Hence it is that he allows so few to be taken out, and is so strict in
the matter.{2}

There is also in the same country another mountain, in which azure
is found; ’tis the finest in the world, and is got in a vein like
silver. There are also other mountains which contain a great amount
of silver ore, so that the country is a very rich one; but it is also
(it must be said) a very cold one.{3} It produces numbers of excellent
horses, remarkable for their speed. They are not shod at all, although
constantly used in mountainous country, and on very bad roads. [They go
at a great pace even down steep descents, where other horses neither
would nor could do the like. And Messer Marco was told that not long
ago they possessed in that province a breed of horses from the strain
of Alexander’s horse Bucephalus, all of which had from their birth a
particular mark on the forehead. This breed was entirely in the hands
of an uncle of the king’s; and in consequence of his refusing to let
the king have any of them, the latter put him to death. The widow then,
in despite, destroyed the whole breed, and it is now extinct.{4}]

The mountains of this country also supply Saker falcons of excellent
flight, and plenty of Lanners likewise. Beasts and birds for the chase
there are in great abundance. Good wheat is grown, and also barley
without husk. They have no olive oil, but make oil from sesamé, and
also from walnuts.{5}

[In the mountains there are vast numbers of sheep—400, 500, or 600 in a
single flock, and all of them wild; and though many of them are taken,
they never seem to get aught the scarcer.{6}

Those mountains are so lofty that ’tis a hard day’s work, from morning
till evening, to get to the top of them. On getting up, you find an
extensive plain, with great abundance of grass and trees, and copious
springs of pure water running down through rocks and ravines. In those
brooks are found trout and many other fish of dainty kinds; and the
air in those regions is so pure, and residence there so healthful,
that when the men who dwell below in the towns, and in the valleys
and plains, find themselves attacked by any kind of fever or other
ailment that may hap, they lose no time in going to the hills; and
after abiding there two or three days, they quite recover their health
through the excellence of that air. And Messer Marco said he had proved
this by experience: for when in those parts he had been ill for about a
year, but as soon as he was advised to visit that mountain, he did so
and got well at once.{7}]

[Illustration: Ancient Silver Patera of debased Greek art, formerly in
the possession of the Princes of Badakhshan, now in the India Museum.]

In this kingdom there are many strait and perilous passes, so difficult
to force that the people have no fear of invasion. Their towns and
villages also are on lofty hills, and in very strong positions.{8}
They are excellent archers, and much given to the chase; indeed, most
of them are dependent for clothing on the skins of beasts, for stuffs
are very dear among them. The great ladies, however, are arrayed in
stuffs, and I will tell you the style of their dress! They all wear
drawers made of cotton cloth, and into the making of these some will
put 60, 80, or even 100 ells of stuff. This they do to make themselves
look large in the hips, for the men of those parts think that to be a
great beauty in a woman.{9}

NOTE 1.—“The population of Badakhshan Proper is composed of Tajiks,
Turks, and Arabs, who are all Sunnis, following the orthodox
doctrines of the Mahomedan law, and speak Persian and Turki, whilst
the people of the more mountainous tracts are Tajiks of the Shiá
creed, having separate provincial dialects or languages of their
own, the inhabitants of the principal places combining therewith
a knowledge of Persian. Thus, the _Shighnáni_ [sometimes called
_Shighni_] is spoken in Shignán and Roshán, the _Ishkáshami_ in
Ishkásham, the _Wakhi_ in Wakhán, the _Sanglichì_ in Sanglich and
Zebák, and the _Minjáni_ in Minján. All these dialects materially
differ from each other.” (_Pand. Manphul._) It may be considered
almost certain that Badakhshan Proper also had a peculiar dialect
in Polo’s time. Mr. Shaw speaks of the strong resemblance to
_Kashmírís_ of the Badakhshán people whom he had seen.

The Legend of the Alexandrian pedigree of the Kings of Badakhshan
is spoken of by Baber, and by earlier Eastern authors. This
pedigree is, or was, claimed also by the chiefs of Karátegín,
Darwáz, Roshán, Shighnán, Wakhán, Chitrál, Gilgít, Swát, and
Khapolor in Bálti. Some samples of those genealogies may be seen in
that strange document called “Gardiner’s Travels.”

In Badakhshan Proper the story seems now to have died out. Indeed,
though Wood mentions one of the modern family of Mírs as vaunting
this descent, these are in fact _Sáhibzádahs_ of Samarkand, who
were invited to the country about the middle of the 17th century,
and were in no way connected with the old kings.

The traditional claims to Alexandrian descent were probably due to
a genuine memory of the Græco-Bactrian kingdom, and might have had
an origin analogous to the Sultan’s claim to be “Caesar of Rome”;
for the real ancestry of the oldest dynasties on the Oxus was to
be sought rather among the Tochari and Ephthalites than among the
Greeks whom they superseded.

The cut on p. 159 presents an interesting memorial of the real
relation of Bactria to Greece, as well as of the pretence of the
Badakhshan princes to Grecian descent. This silver patera was sold
by the family of the Mírs, when captives, to the Minister of the
Uzbek chief of Kunduz, and by him to Dr. Percival Lord in 1838. It
is now in the India Museum. On the bottom is punched a word or two
in Pehlvi, and there is also a word incised in Syriac or Uighúr.
It is curious that a _pair_ of paterae were acquired by Dr. Lord
under the circumstances stated. The other, similar in material and
form, but apparently somewhat larger, is distinctly Sassanian,
representing a king spearing a lion.

_Zu-’lḳarnain_, “the Two-Horned,” is an Arabic epithet of
Alexander, with which legends have been connected, but which
probably arose from the horned portraits on his coins. [Capus,
_l.c._ p. 121, says, “Iskandr Zoulcarneïn or Alexander _le Cornu_,
horns being the emblem of strength.”—H. C.] The term appears in
Chaucer (_Troil. and Cress._ III. 931) in the sense of _non plus_:—

“I am, till God me better minde send,
At _dulcarnon_, right at my wittes end.”

And it is said to have still colloquial existence in that sense in
some corners of England. This use is said to have arisen from the
Arabic application of the term (_Bicorne_) to the 47th Proposition
of Euclid. (_Baber_, 13; _N. et E._ XIV. 490; _N. An. des V._ xxvi.
296; _Burnes_, III. 186 _seqq._; _Wood_, 155, 244; _J. A. S. B._
XXII. 300; _Ayeen Akbery_, II. 185; see _N. and Q._ 1st Series,
vol. v.)

NOTE 2.—I have adopted in the text for the name of the country that
one of the several forms in the G. Text which comes nearest to the
correct name, viz. _Badascian_. But _Balacian_ also appears both in
that and in Pauthier’s text. This represents _Balakhshán_, a form
also sometimes used in the East. Hayton has _Balaxcen_, Clavijo
_Balaxia_, the Catalan Map _Baldassia_. From the form _Balakhsh_
the Balas Ruby got its name. As Ibn Batuta says: “The Mountains of
Badakhshan have given their name to the Badakhshi Ruby, vulgarly
called _Al Balaksh_.” Albertus Magnus says the _Balagius_ is the
female of the Carbuncle or Ruby Proper, “and some say it is his
house, and hath thereby got the name, quasi _Palatium_ Carbunculi!”
The Balais or Balas Ruby is, like the Spinel, a kind inferior to
the real Ruby of Ava. The author of the _Masálak al Absár_ says the
finest Balas ever seen in the Arab countries was one presented to
Malek ’Adil Ketboga, at Damascus; it was of a triangular form and
weighed 50 drachms. The prices of _Balasci_ in Europe in that age
may be found in Pegolotti, but the needful problems are hard to
solve.

“No sapphire in Inde, no Rubie rich of price,
There lacked than, nor Emeraud so grene,
_Balès_, Turkès, ne thing to my device.”
(_Chaucer, ‘Court of Love.’_)

“L’altra letizia, che m’era già nota,
Preclara cosa mi si fece in vista,
Qual fin _balascio_ in che lo Sol percuoto.”
(_Paradiso_, ix. 67.)

Some account of the Balakhsh from Oriental sources will be found in
_J. As._ sér V. tom. xi. 109.

(_I. B._ III. 59, 394; _Alb. Mag. de Mineralibus; Pegol._ p. 307;
_N. et E._ XIII. i. 246.)

[“The Mohammedan authors of the Mongol period mention Badakhshan
several times in connection with the political and military events
of that period. Guchluk, the ‘gurkhan of Karakhitai,’ was slain
in Badakhshan in 1218 (_d’Ohsson_, I. 272). In 1221, the Mongols
invaded the country (_l.c._ I. 272). On the same page, d’Ohsson
translates a short account of Badakhshan by Yakut (✛1229), stating
that this mountainous country is famed for its precious stones, and
especially rubies, called _Balakhsh_.” (Bretschneider, _Med. Res._
II. p. 66.)—H. C.]

The account of the royal monopoly in working the mines, etc., has
continued accurate down to our own day. When Murad Beg of Kunduz
conquered Badakhshan some forty years ago, in disgust at the small
produce of the mines, he abandoned working them, and sold nearly
all the population of the place into slavery! They continue still
unworked, unless clandestinely. In 1866 the reigning Mír had one
of them opened at the request of Pandit Manphul, but without much
result.

The locality of the mines is on the right bank of the Oxus, in the
district of Ish Káshm and on the borders of SHIGNAN, the _Syghinan_
of the text. (_P. Manph.; Wood_, 206; _N. Ann. des. V._ xxvi. 300.)

[The ruby mines are really in the Gháran country, which extends
along both banks of the Oxus. Barshar is one of the deserted
villages; the boundary between Gháran and Shignán is the Kuguz
Parin (in Shighai dialect means “holes in the rock”); the Persian
equivalent is “Rafak-i-Somakh.” (Cf. Captain Trotter, _Forsyth’s
Mission_, p. 277.)—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The mines of _Lájwurd_ (whence _l’Azur_ and _Lazuli_)
have been, like the Ruby mines, celebrated for ages. They lie in
the Upper Valley of the Kokcha, called Korán, within the Tract
called _Yamgán_, of which the popular etymology is _Hamah-Kán_, or
“All-Mines,” and were visited by Wood in 1838. The produce now is
said to be of very inferior quality, and in quantity from 30 to 60
_poods_ (36 lbs each) annually. The best quality sells at Bokhara
at 30 to 60 tillas, or 12_l._ to 24_l._ the pood (_Manphul_).
Surely it is ominous when a British agent writing of Badakhshan
products finds it natural to express weights in Russian poods!

The Yamgán Tract also contains mines of iron, lead, alum,
salammoniac, sulphur, ochre, and copper. The last are not worked.
But I do not learn of any silver mines nearer than those of Paryán
in the Valley of Panjshir, south of the crest of the Hindu-Kúsh,
much worked in the early Middle Ages. (See _Cathay_, p. 595.)

NOTE 4.—The Kataghan breed of horses from Badakhshan and Kunduz
has still a high reputation. They do not often reach India, as the
breed is a favourite one among the Afghan chiefs, and the horses
are likely to be appropriated in transit. (_Lumsden, Mission to
Kandahar_, p. 20.)

[The Kirghiz between the Yangi Hissar River and Sirikol are the
only people using the horse generally in the plough, oxen being
employed in the plains, and yaks in Sirikol. (Lieutenant-Colonel
Gordon, p. 222, _Forsyth’s Mission_.)—H. C.]

What Polo heard of the Bucephalid strain was perhaps but another
form of a story told by the Chinese, many centuries earlier, when
speaking of this same region. A certain cave was frequented by a
wonderful stallion of supernatural origin. Hither the people yearly
brought their mares, and a famous breed was derived from the foals.
(_Rém. N. Mél. As._ I. 245.)

NOTE 5.—The huskless barley of the text is thus mentioned by
Burnes in the vicinity of the Hindu-Kúsh: “They rear a barley in
this elevated country which has no husk, and grows like wheat; but
it is barley.” It is not properly _huskless_, but when ripe it
bursts the husk and remains so loosely attached as to be dislodged
from it by a slight shake. It is grown abundantly in Ladak and
the adjoining Hill States. Moorcroft details six varieties of
it cultivated there. The kind mentioned by Marco and Burnes is
probably that named by Royle _Hordeum Ægiceras_, and which has
been sent to England under the name of Tartarian Wheat, though it
is a genuine barley. _Naked barley_ is mentioned by Galen as grown
in Cappadocia; and Matthioli speaks of it as grown in France in his
day (middle of 16th century). It is also known to the Arabs, for
they have a name for it—_Sult_. (_Burnes_, III. 205; _Moorc._ II.
148 _seqq._; _Galen, de Aliment. Facult._ Lat. ed. 13; _Matthioli_,
Ven. 1585, p. 420; _Eng. Cyc._, art. Hordeum.)

Sesamé is mentioned by P. Manphul as one of the products of
Badakhshan; linseed is another, which is also used for oil.
Walnut-trees abound, but neither he nor Wood mention the oil.
We know that walnut oil is largely manufactured in Kashmir.
(_Moorcroft_, II. 148.)

[See on Saker and Lanner Falcons (_F. Sakar_, Briss.; _F.
lanarius_, Schlegel) the valuable paper by Edouard Blanc, _Sur
l’utilisation des Oiseaux de proie en Asie centrale_ in _Rev. des
Sciences natur. appliquées_, 20th June, 1895.

“Hawking is the favourite sport of Central Asian Lords,” says
G. Capus. (_A travers le royaume de Tamerlan_, p. 132. See pp.
132–134.)

The Mirza says (_l.c._ p. 157) that the mountains of Wakhán “are
only noted for producing a breed of hawks or falcons which the
hardy Wâkhânis manage to catch among the cliffs. These hawks are
much esteemed by the chiefs of Badakhshan, Bokhara, etc. They
are celebrated for their swiftness, and known by their white
colour.”—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—These wild sheep are probably the kind called _Kachkár_,
mentioned by Baber, and described by Mr. Blyth in his Monograph
of Wild Sheep, under the name of _Ovis Vignei_. It is extensively
diffused over all the ramifications of Hindu-Kúsh, and westward
perhaps to the Persian Elburz. “It is gregarious,” says Wood,
“congregating in herds of _several hundreds_.” In a later chapter
Polo speaks of a wild sheep apparently different and greater. (See
_J. A. S. B._, X. 858 _seqq._)

NOTE 7.—This pleasant passage is only in Ramusio, but it would be
heresy to doubt its genuine character. Marco’s recollection of the
delight of convalescence in such a climate seems to lend an unusual
enthusiasm and felicity to his description of the scenery. Such a
region as he speaks of is probably the cool Plateau of Shewá, of
which we are told as extending about 25 miles eastward from near
Faizabad, and forming one of the finest pastures in Badakhshan. It
contains a large lake called by the frequent name Sar-i-Kol. No
European traveller in modern times (unless Mr. Gardner) has been on
those glorious table-lands. Burnes says that at Kunduz both natives
and foreigners spoke rapturously of the vales of Badakhshan, its
rivulets, romantic scenes and glens, its fruits, flowers, and
nightingales. Wood is reticent on scenery, naturally, since nearly
all his journey was made in winter. When approaching Faizabad on
his return from the Upper Oxus, however, he says: “On entering the
beautiful lawn at the gorge of its valley I was enchanted at the
quiet loveliness of the scene. Up to this time, from the day we
left Talikan, we had been moving in snow; but now it had nearly
vanished from the valley, and the fine sward was enamelled with
crocuses, daffodils, and snowdrops.” (_P. Manphul; Burnes_, III.
176; _Wood_, 252.)

NOTE 8.—Yet scarcely any country in the world has suffered so
terribly and repeatedly from invasion. “Enduring decay probably
commenced with the wars of Chinghiz, for many an instance in
Eastern history shows the permanent effect of such devastations....
Century after century saw only progress in decay. Even to our own
time the progress of depopulation and deterioration has continued.”
In 1759, two of the Khojas of Kashgar, escaping from the dominant
Chinese, took refuge in Badakhshan; one died of his wounds, the
other was treacherously slain by Sultan Shah, who then ruled the
country. The holy man is said in his dying moments to have invoked
curses on Badakhshan, and prayed that it might be three times
depopulated; a malediction which found ample accomplishment. The
misery of the country came to a climax about 1830, when the Uzbek
chief of Kunduz, Murad Beg Kataghan, swept away the bulk of the
inhabitants, and set them down to die in the marshy plains of
Kunduz. (_Cathay_, p. 542; _Faiz Bakhsh_, etc.)

NOTE 9.—This “bombasticall dissimulation of their garments,” as
the author of _Anthropometamorphosis_ calls such a fashion, is
no longer affected by the ladies of Badakhshan. But a friend in
the Panjab observes that it still survives _there_. “There are
ladies’ trousers here which might almost justify Marco’s very
liberal estimate of the quantity of stuff required to make them;”
and among the Afghan ladies, Dr. Bellew says, the silken trousers
almost surpass crinoline in amplitude. It is curious to find the
same characteristic attaching to female figures on coins of ancient
kings of these regions, such as Agathocles and Pantaleon. (The last
name is appropriate!)

CHAPTER XXX.

OF THE PROVINCE OF PASHAI.

You must know that ten days’ journey to the south of Badashan there is
a Province called PASHAI, the people of which have a peculiar language,
and are Idolaters, of a brown complexion. They are great adepts in
sorceries and the diabolic arts. The men wear earrings and brooches of
gold and silver set with stones and pearls. They are a pestilent people
and a crafty; and they live upon flesh and rice. Their country is very
hot.{1}

Now let us proceed and speak of another country which is seven days’
journey from this one towards the south-east, and the name of which is
KESHIMUR.

NOTE 1.—The name of PASHAI has already occurred (see ch. xviii.)
linked with DIR, as indicating a tract, apparently of very rugged
and difficult character, through which the partizan leader Nigúdar
passed in making an incursion from Badakhshan towards Káshmir. The
difficulty here lies in the name _Pashai_, which points to the
south-west, whilst _Dir_ and all other indications point to the
south-east. But Pashai seems to me the reading to which all texts
tend, whilst it is clearly expressed in the G. T. (_Pasciai_),
and it is contrary to all my experience of the interpretation of
Marco Polo to attempt to torture the name in the way which has been
common with commentators professed and occasional. But dropping
this name for a moment, let us see to what the other indications do
point.

In the meagre statements of this and the next chapter, interposed
as they are among chapters of detail unusually ample for Polo,
there is nothing to lead us to suppose that the Traveller ever
personally visited the countries of which these two chapters treat.
I believe we have here merely an amplification of the information
already sketched of the country penetrated by the Nigudarian bands
whose escapade is related in chapter xviii., information which was
probably derived from a Mongol source. And these countries are in
my belief _both_ regions famous in the legends of the Northern
Buddhists, viz. UDYÁNA and KÁSHMIR.

Udyána lay to the north of Pesháwar on the Swát River, but from the
extent assigned to it by Hiuen Tsang, the name probably covered a
large part of the whole hill-region south of the Hindu-Kúsh from
Chitrál to the Indus, as indeed it is represented in the Map of
Vivien de St. Martin (_Pèlerins Bouddhistes_, II.). It is regarded
by Fahian as the most northerly Province of India, and in his
time the food and clothing of the people were similar to those of
Gangetic India. It was the native country of Padma Sambhava, one
of the chief apostles of Lamaism, _i.e._ of Tibetan Buddhism, and
a great master of enchantments. The doctrines of Sakya, as they
prevailed in Udyána in old times, were probably strongly tinged
with Sivaitic magic, and the Tibetans still regard that locality
as the classic ground of sorcery and witchcraft.

Hiuen Tsang says of the inhabitants: “The men are of a soft
and pusillanimous character, _naturally inclined to craft and
trickery_. They are fond of study, but pursue it with no ardour.
_The science of magical formulae is become a regular professional
business with them_. They generally wear clothes of white cotton,
and rarely use any other stuff. Their spoken language, in spite of
some differences, has a strong resemblance to that of India.”

These particulars suit well with the slight description in our
text, and the Indian atmosphere that it suggests; and the direction
and distance ascribed to Pashai suit well with Chitral, which may
be taken as representing Udyána when approached from Badakhshan.
For it would be quite practicable for a party to reach the town of
Chitrál in ten days from the position assigned to the old capital
of Badakhshan. And from Chitrál the road towards Káshmir would lie
over the high Lahori pass to DIR, which from its mention in chapter
xviii. we must consider an obligatory point. (_Fah-hian_, p. 26;
_Koeppen_, I. 70; _Pèlerins Boud._ II. 131–132.)

[“Tao-lin (a Buddhist monk like Hiuen Tsang) afterwards left the
western regions and changed his road to go to Northern India;
he made a pilgrimage to _Kia-che-mi-louo_ (Káshmir), and then
entered the country of _U-ch’ang-na_ (Udyána)....” (Ed. Chavannes,
_I-tsing_, p. 105.)—H. C.]

We must now turn to the name _Pashai_. The Pashai Tribe are now
Mahomedan, but are reckoned among the aboriginal inhabitants of the
country, which the Afghans are not. Baber mentions them several
times, and counts their language as one of the dozen that were
spoken at Kabul in his time. Burnes says it resembles that of the
Kafirs. A small vocabulary of it was published by Leech, in the
seventh volume of the _J. A. S. B._, which I have compared with
vocabularies of Siah-posh Kafir, published by Raverty in vol.
xxxiii. of the same journal, and by Lumsden in his _Report of the
Mission to Kandahar_, in 1837. Both are Aryan, and seemingly of
Professor Max Müller’s class _Indic_, but not _very_ close to one
another.[1]

Ibn Batuta, after crossing the Hindu-Kúsh by one of the passes
at the head of the Panjshir Valley, reaches the Mountain BASHÁI
(Pashai). In the same vicinity the Pashais are mentioned by Sidi
’Ali, in 1554. And it is still in the neighbourhood of Panjshir
that the tribe is most numerous, though they have other settlements
in the hill-country about Nijrao, and on the left bank of the
Kabul River between Kabul and Jalalabad. _Pasha_ and _Pasha_-gar
is also named as one of the chief divisions of the Kafirs, and it
seems a fair conjecture that it represents those of the Pashais who
resisted or escaped conversion to Islam. (See _Leech’s Reports_ in
Collection pub. at Calcutta in 1839; _Baber_, 140; _Elphinstone_,
I. 411; _J. A. S. B._ VII. 329, 731, XXVIII. 317 _seqq._, XXXIII.
271–272; _I. B._ III. 86; _J. As._ IX. 203, and _J. R. A. S._ N.S.
V. 103, 278.)

The route of which Marco had heard must almost certainly have been
one of those leading by the high Valley of Zebák, and by the Doráh
or the Nuksán Pass, over the watershed of Hindu-Kúsh into Chitrál,
and so to Dir, as already noticed. The difficulty remains as to
how he came to apply the name _Pashai_ to the country south-east
of Badakhshan. I cannot tell. But it is at least possible that
the name of the Pashai tribe (of which the branches even now are
spread over a considerable extent of country) may have once had a
wide application over the southern spurs of the Hindu-Kúsh.[2]
Our Author, moreover, is speaking here from hearsay, and hearsay
geography without maps is much given to generalising. I apprehend
that, along with characteristics specially referable to the Tibetan
and Mongol traditions of Udyána, the term Pashai, as Polo uses
it, vaguely covers the whole tract from the southern boundary of
Badakhshan to the Indus and the Kabul River.

But even by extending its limits to Attok, we shall not get within
seven marches of Káshmir. It is 234 miles by road from Attok to
Srinagar; more than twice seven marches. And, according to Polo’s
usual system, the marches should be counted from Chitrál, or some
point thereabouts.

Sir H. Rawlinson, in his _Monograph on the Oxus_, has indicated
the probability that the name _Pashai_ may have been originally
connected with _Aprasin_ or _Paresín_, the Zendavestian name for
the Indian Caucasus, and which occurs in the Babylonian version
of the Behistun Inscription as the equivalent of Gadára in the
Persian, _i.e._ _Gandhára_, there applied to the whole country
between Bactria and the Indus. (See _J. R. G. S._ XLII. 502.) Some
such traditional application of the term Pashai might have survived.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The Kafir dialect of which Mr. Trumpp collected some particulars
shows in the present tense of the substantive verb these remarkable
forms:— _Ei sŭm_, _Tŭ sis_, _siga sĕ_; _Ima sĭmĭs_, _Wĭ sik_, _Sigĕ
sin_.

[2] In the _Tabakāt-i-Násiri_ (_Elliot_, II. 317) we find mention
of the Highlands of _Pasha-Afroz_, but nothing to define their
position.

CHAPTER XXXI.

OF THE PROVINCE OF KESHIMUR.

Keshimur also is a Province inhabited by a people who are Idolaters and
have a language of their own.{1} They have an astonishing acquaintance
with the devilries of enchantment; insomuch that they make their idols
to speak. They can also by their sorceries bring on changes of weather
and produce darkness, and do a number of things so extraordinary that
no one without seeing them would believe them.{2} Indeed, this country
is the very original source from which Idolatry has spread abroad.{3}

In this direction you can proceed further till you come to the Sea of
India.

The men are brown and lean, but the women, taking them as brunettes,
are very beautiful. The food of the people is flesh, and milk, and
rice. The clime is finely tempered, being neither very hot nor very
cold. There are numbers of towns and villages in the country, but also
forests and desert tracts, and strong passes, so that the people have
no fear of anybody, and keep their independence, with a king of their
own to rule and do justice.{4}

There are in this country Eremites (after the fashion of those parts),
who dwell in seclusion and practise great abstinence in eating and
drinking. They observe strict chastity, and keep from all sins
forbidden in their law, so that they are regarded by their own folk as
very holy persons. They live to a very great age.{5}

There are also a number of idolatrous abbeys and monasteries. [The
people of the province do not kill animals nor spill blood; so if they
want to eat meat they get the Saracens who dwell among them to play the
butcher.{6}] The coral which is carried from our parts of the world has
a better sale there than in any other country.{7}

[Illustration: Ancient Buddhist Temple at Pandrethan in Káshmir.]

Now we will quit this country, and not go any further in the same
direction; for if we did so we should enter India; and that I do not
wish to do at present. For, on our return journey, I mean to tell
you about India: all in regular order. Let us go back therefore to
Badashan, for we cannot otherwise proceed on our journey.

NOTE 1.—I apprehend that in this chapter Marco represents
Buddhism (which is to be understood by his expression _Idolatry_,
not always, but usually) as in a position of greater life and
prosperity than we can believe it to have enjoyed in Káshmir at
the end of the 13th century, and I suppose that his knowledge of
it was derived in great part from tales of the Mongol and Tibetan
Buddhists about its past glories.

I know not if the spelling _Kesciemur_ represents any peculiar
Mongol pronunciation of the name. Plano Carpini, probably the
first modern European to mention this celebrated region, calls it
_Casmir_ (p. 708).

“The Cashmeerians,” says Abu’l Fazl, “have a language of their own,
but their books are written in the Shanskrit tongue, although the
character is sometimes Cashmeerian. They write chiefly upon _Tooz_
[birch-bark], which is the bark of a tree; it easily divides into
leaves, and remains perfect for many years.” (_Ayeen Akbery_, II.
147.) A sketch of Kashmiri Grammar by Mr. Edgeworth will be found
in vol. x. of the _J. A. S. B._, and a fuller one by Major Leech
in vol. xiii. Other contributions on the language are in vol.
xxxv. pt. i. p. 233 (Godwin-Austen); in vol. xxxix. pt. i. p. 95
(Dr. Elmslie); and in _Proceedings_ for 1866, p. 62, _seqq._ (Sir
G. Campbell and Bábú Rájendra Lál Mitra). The language, though in
large measure of Sanskrit origin, has words and forms that cannot
be traced in any other Indian vernacular. (_Campbell_, pp. 67, 68).
The character is a modification of the Panjáb Nagari.

NOTE 2.—The Kashmirian conjurers had made a great impression on
Marco, who had seen them at the Court of the Great Kaan, and he
recurs in a later chapter to their weather sorceries and other
enchantments, when we shall make some remarks. Meanwhile let us
cite a passage from Bernier, already quoted by M. Pauthier. When
crossing the Pír Panjál (the mountain crossed on entering Káshmir
from Lahore) with the camp of Aurangzíb, he met with “an old
Hermit who had dwelt upon the summit of the Pass since the days
of Jehangir, and whose religion nobody knew, although it was said
that he could work miracles, and used at his pleasure to produce
extraordinary thunderstorms, as well as hail, snow, rain, and
wind. There was something wild in his countenance, and in his
long, spreading, and tangled hoary beard. He asked alms fiercely,
allowing the travellers to drink from earthen cups that he had
set out upon a great stone, but signing to them to go quickly by
without stopping. He scolded those who made a noise, ‘for,’ said he
to me (after I had entered his cave and smoothed him down with a
half rupee which I put in his hand with all humility), ‘noise here
raises furious storms. Aurangzíb has done well in taking my advice
and prohibiting it. Shah Jehan always did the like. But Jehangir
once chose to laugh at what I said, and made his drums and trumpets
sound; the consequence was he nearly lost his life.’” (_Bernier_,
Amst. ed. 1699, II. 290.) A successor of this hermit was found on
the same spot by P. Desideri in 1713, and another by Vigne in 1837.

NOTE 3.—Though the earliest entrance of Buddhism into Tibet was
from India Proper, yet Káshmir twice in the history of Tibetan
Buddhism played a most important part. It was in Káshmir that was
gathered, under the patronage of the great King Kanishka, soon
after our era, the Fourth Buddhistic Council, which marks the point
of separation between Northern and Southern Buddhism. Numerous
missionaries went forth from Káshmir to spread the doctrine in
Tibet and in Central Asia. Many of the Pandits who laboured at the
translation of the sacred books into Tibetan were Kashmiris, and
it was even in Káshmir that several of the translations were made.
But these were not the only circumstances that made Káshmir a holy
land to the Northern Buddhists. In the end of the 9th century the
religion was extirpated in Tibet by the Julian of the Lamas, the
great persecutor Langdarma, and when it was restored, a century
later, it was from Káshmir in particular that fresh missionaries
were procured to reinstruct the people in the forgotten Law. (See
_Koeppen_, II. 12–13, 78; _J. As._ sér. VI. tom. vi. 540.)

“The spread of Buddhism to Káshmir is an event of extraordinary
importance in the history of that religion. Thenceforward that
country became a mistress in the Buddhist Doctrine and the
headquarters of a particular school.... The influence of Káshmir
was very marked, especially in the spread of Buddhism beyond India.
From Káshmir it penetrated to Kandahar and Kabul, ... and thence
over Bactria. Tibetan Buddhism also had its essential origin from
Káshmir; ... so great is the importance of this region in the
History of Buddhism.” (_Vassilyev, Der Buddhismus_, I. 44.)

In the account which the Mahawanso gives of the consecration of
the great Tope at Ruanwelli, by Dutthagamini, King of Ceylon (B.C.
157), 280,000 priests (!) come from Káshmir, a far greater number
than is assigned to any other country except one. (_J. A. S. B._
VII. 165.)

It is thus very intelligible how Marco learned from the Mongols and
the Lamas with whom he came in contact to regard Káshmir as “the
very original source from which their Religion had spread abroad.”
The feeling with which they looked to Káshmir must have been nearly
the same as that with which the Buddhists of Burma look to Ceylon.
But this feeling towards Káshmir does not _now_, I am informed,
exist in Tibet. The reverence for the holy places has reverted to
Bahár and the neighbouring “cradle-lands” of Buddhism.

It is notable that the historian Firishta, in a passage quoted
by Tod, uses Marco’s expression in reference to Káshmir, almost
precisely, saying that the Hindoos derived their idolatry from
Káshmir, “the foundry of magical superstition.” (_Rajasthan_, I.
219.)

NOTE 4.—The people of Káshmir retain their beauty, but they are
morally one of the most degraded races in Asia. Long oppression,
now under the Lords of Jamu as great as ever, has no doubt
aggravated this. Yet it would seem that twelve hundred years ago
the evil elements were there as well as the beauty. The Chinese
traveller says: “Their manners are light and volatile, their
characters effeminate and pusillanimous.... They are very handsome,
but their natural bent is to fraud and trickery.” (_Pèl. Boud._ II.
167–168.) Vigne’s account is nearly the same. (II. 142–143.) “They
are as mischievous as monkeys, and far more malicious,” says Mr.
Shaw (p. 292).

[Bernier says: “The women [of Kachemire] especially are very
handsome; and it is from this country that nearly every individual,
when first admitted to the court of the Great Mogul, selects
wives or concubines, that his children may be whiter than the
Indians, and pass for genuine Moguls. Unquestionably, there must
be beautiful women among the higher classes, if we may judge by
those of the lower orders seen in the streets and in the shops.”
(_Travels in the Mogul Empire_, edited by Archibald Constable,
1891, p. 404.)]

NOTE 5.—In the time of Hiuen Tsang, who spent two years studying
in Káshmir in the first half of the 7th century, though there
were many Brahmans in the country, Buddhism was in a flourishing
state; there were 100 convents with about 5000 monks. In the end
of the 11th century a King (Harshadeva, 1090–1102) is mentioned
_exceptionally_ as a protector of Buddhism. The supposition has
been intimated above that Marco’s picture refers to a traditional
state of things, but I must notice that a like picture is presented
in the Chinese account of Hulaku’s war. One of the thirty kingdoms
subdued by the Mongols was “The kingdom of Fo (Buddha) called
_Kishimi_. It lies to the N.W. of India. There are to be seen the
men who are counted the successors of Shakia; their ancient and
venerable air recalls the countenance of Bodi-dharma as one sees
it in pictures. They abstain from wine, and content themselves
with a gill of rice for their daily food, and are occupied only in
reciting the prayers and litanies of Fo.” (_Rém. N. Mél. Asiat._ I.
179.) Abu’l Fazl says that on his third visit with Akbar to Káshmir
he discovered some old men of the religion of Buddha, but none of
them were _literati_. The _Rishis_, of whom he speaks with high
commendation as abstaining from meat and from female society, as
charitable and unfettered by traditions, were perhaps a modified
remnant of the Buddhist Eremites. Colonel Newall, in a paper on the
Rishis of Káshmir, traces them to a number of Shiáh Sayads, who
fled to Káshmir in the time of Timur. But evidently the _genus_ was
of much earlier date, long preceding the introduction of Islam.
(_Vie et V. de H. T._ p. 390; _Lassen_, III. 709; _Ayeen Akb._ II.
147, III. 151; _J. A. S. B._ XXXIX. pt. i. 265.)

We see from the _Dabistan_ that in the 17th century Káshmir
continued to be a great resort of Magian mystics and sages of
various sects, professing great abstinence and credited with
preternatural powers. And indeed Vámbéry tells us that even in
our own day the Kashmiri Dervishes are pre-eminent among their
Mahomedan brethren for cunning, secret arts, skill in exorcisms,
etc. (_Dab._ I. 113 _seqq._ II. 147–148; _Vámb. Sk. of Cent. Asia_,
9.)

NOTE 6.—The first precept of the Buddhist Decalogue, or Ten
Obligations of the Religious Body, is not to take life. But _animal
food_ is not forbidden, though restricted. Indeed it is one of the
circumstances in the Legendary History of Sakya Muni, which looks
as if it _must_ be true, that he is related to have aggravated
his fatal illness by eating a dish of pork set before him by a
hospitable goldsmith. Giorgi says the butchers in Tibet are looked
on as infamous; and people selling sheep or the like will make a
show of exacting an assurance that these are not to be slaughtered.
In Burma, when a British party wanted beef, the owner of the
bullocks would decline to make one over, but would point one out
that might be shot by the foreigners.

In Tibetan history it is told of the persecutor Langdarma that he
compelled members of the highest orders of the clergy to become
hunters and butchers. A Chinese collection of epigrams, dating
from the 9th century, gives a facetious list of _Incongruous
Conditions_, among which we find a poor Parsi, a sick Physician, a
fat Bride, a Teacher who does not know his letters, and _a Butcher
who reads the Scriptures_ (of Buddhism)! (_Alph. Tib._ 445;
_Koeppen_, I. 74; _N. and Q., C. and J._ III. 33.)

NOTE 7.—Coral is still a very popular adornment in the Himalayan
countries. The merchant Tavernier says the people to the north of
the Great Mogul’s territories and in the mountains of Assam and
Tibet were the greatest purchasers of coral. (_Tr. in India_, Bk.
II. ch. xxiii.)

CHAPTER XXXII.

OF THE GREAT RIVER OF BADASHAN.

In leaving Badashan you ride twelve days between east and north-east,
ascending a river that runs through land belonging to a brother of
the Prince of Badashan, and containing a good many towns and villages
and scattered habitations. The people are Mahommetans, and valiant
in war. At the end of those twelve days you come to a province of no
great size, extending indeed no more than three days’ journey in any
direction, and this is called VOKHAN. The people worship Mahommet, and
they have a peculiar language. They are gallant soldiers, and they have
a chief whom they call NONE, which is as much as to say _Count_, and
they are liegemen to the Prince of Badashan.{1}

There are numbers of wild beasts of all sorts in this region. And when
you leave this little country, and ride three days north-east, always
among mountains, you get to such a height that ’tis said to be the
highest place in the world! And when you have got to this height you
find [a great lake between two mountains, and out of it] a fine river
running through a plain clothed with the finest pasture in the world;
insomuch that a lean beast there will fatten to your heart’s content in
ten days. There are great numbers of all kinds of wild beasts; among
others, wild sheep of great size, whose horns are good six palms in
length. From these horns the shepherds make great bowls to eat from,
and they use the horns also to enclose folds for their cattle at night.
[Messer Marco was told also that the wolves were numerous, and killed
many of those wild sheep. Hence quantities of their horns and bones
were found, and these were made into great heaps by the way-side, in
order to guide travellers when snow was on the ground.]

The plain is called PAMIER, and you ride across it for twelve days
together, finding nothing but a desert without habitations or any green
thing, so that travellers are obliged to carry with them whatever they
have need of. The region is so lofty and cold that you do not even see
any birds flying. And I must notice also that because of this great
cold, fire does not burn so brightly, nor give out so much heat as
usual, nor does it cook food so effectually.{2}

Now, if we go on with our journey towards the east-north-east, we
travel a good forty days, continually passing over mountains and hills,
or through valleys, and crossing many rivers and tracts of wilderness.
And in all this way you find neither habitation of man, nor any green
thing, but must carry with you whatever you require. The country is
called BOLOR. The people dwell high up in the mountains, and are savage
Idolaters, living only by the chase, and clothing themselves in the
skins of beasts. They are in truth an evil race.{3}

NOTE 1.—[“The length of Little Pamir, according to Trotter, is 68
miles.... To find the twelve days’ ride in the plain of Marco Polo,
it must be admitted, says Severtsof (_Bul. Soc. Géog._ XI. 1890,
pp. 588–589), that he went down a considerable distance along the
south-north course of the Aksu, in the Aktash Valley, and did not
turn towards Tásh Kurgán, by the Neza Tash Pass, crossed by Gordon
and Trotter. The descent from this pass to Tásh Kurgán finishes
with a difficult and narrow defile, which may well be overflowed at
the great melting of snow, from the end of May till the middle of
June, even to July.

“Therefore he must have left the Aksu Valley to cross the Pass of
Tagharma, about 50 or 60 kilometres to the north of the Neza Tash
Pass; thence to Kashgar, the distance, in a straight line, is about
200 kilometres, and less than 300 by the shortest route which runs
from the Tagharma Pass to little Kara Kul, and from there down to
Yangi Hissar, along the Ghidjik. And Marco Polo assigns _forty_
days for this route, while he allows but _thirty_ for the journey
of 500 kilometres (at least) from Jerm to the foot of the Tagharma
Pass.”

Professor Paquier (_Bul. Soc. Géog._ 6ᵉ Sér. XII. pp. 121–125)
remarks that the Moonshee, sent by Captain Trotter to survey
the Oxus between Ishkashm and Kila Wamár, could not find at the
spot marked by Yule on his map, the mouth of the Shakh-Dara, but
northward 7 or 8 miles from the junction of the Murghab with the
Oxus, he saw the opening of an important water-course, the Suchnan
River, formed by the Shakh-Dara and the Ghund-Dara. Marco arrived
at a place between Northern Wakhán and Shihgnan; from the Central
Pamir, Polo would have taken a route identical with that of the
Mirza (1868–1869) by the Chichiklik Pass. Professor Paquier adds:
“I have no hesitation in believing that Marco Polo was in the
neighbourhood of that great commercial road, which by the _Vallis
Comedarum_ reached the foot of the Imaüs. He probably did not
venture on a journey of fifty marches in an unknown country. At the
top of the Shihgnan Valley, he doubtless found a road marked out
to Little Bukharia. This was the road followed in ancient times
from Bactrian to Serica; and Ptolemy has, so to speak, given us
its landmarks after Marinus of Tyre, by the _Vallis Comedarum_
(Valley of actual Shihgnan); the _Turris Lapidea_ and the _Statio
Mercatorum_, neighbourhood of Tásh Kurgán, capital of the present
province of Sar-i-kol.”

I must say that accepting, as I do, for Polo’s Itinerary, the route
from Wakhán to Kashgar by the Taghdum-Bash Pamir, and Tásh Kurgán,
I do not agree with Professor Paquier’s theory. But though I prefer
Sir H. Yule’s route from Badakhshan, by the River Vardoj, the Pass
of Ishkashm, the Panja, to Wakhán, I do not accept his views for
the Itinerary from Wakhán to Kashgar; see p. 175.—H. C.]

The river along which Marco travels from Badakhshan is no doubt
the upper stream of the Oxus, known locally as the Panja, along
which Wood also travelled, followed of late by the Mirza and Faiz
Bakhsh. It is true that the river is reached from Badaskhshan
Proper by ascending another river (the Vardoj) and crossing the
Pass of Ishkáshm, but in the brief style of our narrative we must
expect such condensation.

WAKHÁN was restored to geography by Macartney, in the able map
which he compiled for Elphinstone’s _Caubul_, and was made known
more accurately by Wood’s journey through it. [The district of
Wakhán “comprises the valleys containing the two heads of the
Panjah branch of the Oxus, and the valley of the Panjah itself,
from the junction at Zung down to Ishkashím. The northern branch
of the Panjah has its principal source in the Lake Victoria in the
Great Pamir, which as well as the Little Pamir, belongs to Wakhán,
the Aktash River forming the well recognized boundary between
Kashgaria and Wakhán.” (Captain Trotter, _Forsyth’s Mission_, p.
275.) The southern branch is the Sarhadd Valley.—H. C.] The lowest
part is about 8000 feet above the sea, and the highest _Kishlak_,
or village, about 11,500. A few willows and poplars are the only
trees that can stand against the bitter blasts that blow down the
valley. Wood estimated the total population of the province at
only 1000 souls, though it might be capable of supporting 5000.[1]
He saw it, however, in the depth of winter. As to the peculiar
language, see note I, ch. xxix. It is said to be a very old dialect
of Persian. A scanty vocabulary was collected by Hayward. (_J.
R. G. S._ XXI. p. 29.) The people, according to Shaw, have Aryan
features, resembling those of the Kashmiris, but harsher.

[Cf. Captain Trotter’s _The Oxus below Wakhan, Forsyth’s Mission_,
p. 276.]

We appear to see in the indications of this paragraph precisely the
same system of government that now prevails in the Oxus valleys.
The central districts of Faizabad and Jerm are under the immediate
administration of the Mír of Badakhshan, whilst fifteen other
districts, such as _Kishm, Rusták, Zebák, Ishkáshm, Wakhán_, are
dependencies “held by the _relations of the Mír_, or by hereditary
rulers, on a feudal tenure, conditional on fidelity and military
service in time of need, the holders possessing supreme authority
in their respective territories, and paying little or no tribute
to the paramount power.” (_Pandit Manphul_.) The first part of
the valley of which Marco speaks as belonging to a brother of the
Prince, may correspond to Ishkáshm, or perhaps to Vardoj; the
second, Wakhán, seems to have had a hereditary ruler; but both
were vassals of the Prince of Badakhshan, and therefore are styled
_Counts_, not kings or _Seigneurs_.

The native title which Marco gives as the equivalent of Count is
remarkable. _Non_ or _None_, as it is variously written in the
texts, would in French form represent _Nono_ in Italian. Pauthier
refers this title to the “_Rao_-nana (or nano) _Rao_” which figures
as the style of Kanerkes in the Indo-Scythic coinage. But Wilson
(_Ariana Antiqua_, p. 358) interprets _Raonano_ as most probably
a genitive plural of Rao, whilst the whole inscription answers
precisely to the Greek one ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΝ ΚΑΝΗΡΚΟΥ, which is
found on other coins of the same prince. General Cunningham, a very
competent authority, adheres to this view, and writes: “I do not
think _None_ or _Non_ can have any connection with the _Nana_ of
the coins.”

It is remarkable, however, that NONO (said to signify “younger,” or
lesser) is in Tibet the title given to a younger brother, deputy,
or subordinate prince. In Cunningham’s _Ladak_ (259) we read:
“_Nono_ is the usual term of respect which is used in addressing
any young man of the higher ranks, and when prefixed to _Kahlon_
it means the younger or deputy minister.” And again (p. 352):
“_Nono_ is the title given to a younger brother. Nono Sungnam was
the younger brother of Chang Raphtan, the Kahlon of Bazgo.” I have
recently encountered the word used independently, and precisely in
Marco’s application of it. An old friend, in speaking of a journey
that he had made in our Tibetan provinces, said incidentally that
he had accompanied the commissioner _to the installation of a new_
NONO (I think in Spiti). The term here corresponds so precisely
with the explanation which Marco gives of _None_ as a Count subject
to a superior sovereign, that it is difficult to regard the
coincidence as accidental. The _Yuechi_ or Indo-Scyths who long
ruled the Oxus countries are said to have been of Tibetan origin,
and Al-Biruni repeats a report that this was so. (_Elliot._ II.
9.)[2] Can this title have been a trace of their rule? Or is it
Indian?

NOTE 2.—This chapter is one of the most interesting in the book,
and contains one of its most splendid anticipations of modern
exploration, whilst conversely Lieutenant John Wood’s narrative
presents the most brilliant confirmation in detail of Marco’s
narrative.

We have very old testimony to the recognition of the great altitude
of the Plateau of PAMIR (the name which Marco gives it and which
it still retains), and to the existence of the lake (or lakes)
upon its surface. The Chinese pilgrims Hwui Seng and Sung Yun,
who passed this way A.D. 518, inform us that these high lands of
the Tsung Ling were commonly said to be midway between heaven and
earth. The more celebrated Hiuen Tsang, who came this way nearly
120 years later (about 644) on his return to China, “after crossing
the mountains for 700 _li_, arrived at the valley of _Pomilo_
(Pamir). This valley is 1000 _li_ (about 200 miles) from east to
west, and 100 _li_ (20 miles) from north to south, and lies between
two snowy ranges in the centre of the Tsung Ling mountains. The
traveller is annoyed by sudden gusts of wind, and the snow-drifts
never cease, spring or summer. As the soil is almost constantly
frozen, you see but a few miserable plants, and no crops can live.
The whole tract is but a dreary waste, without a trace of human
kind. In the middle of the valley is a great lake 300 _li_ (60
miles) from east to west, and 500 _li_ from north to south. This
stands in the centre of Jambudwipa (the Buddhist οἰκουμένη) on a
plateau of prodigious elevation. An endless variety of creatures
peoples its waters. When you hear the murmur and clash of its waves
you think you are listening to the noisy hum of a great market
in which vast crowds of people are mingling in excitement....
The lake discharges to the west, and a river runs out of it in
that direction and joins the _Potsu_ (Oxus).... The lake likewise
discharges to the east, and a great river runs out, which flows
eastward to the western frontier of _Kiesha_ (Káshgar), where it
joins the River Sita, and runs eastward with it into the sea.” The
story of an eastern outflow from the lake is, no doubt, legend,
connected with an ancient Hindu belief (see _Cathay_, p. 347), but
Burnes in modern times heard much the same story. And the Mirza, in
1868, took up the same impression regarding the smaller lake called
Pamir Kul, in which the southern branch of the Panja originates.

“After quitting the (frozen) surface of the river,” says Wood,
“we ... ascended a low hill, which apparently bounded the valley
to the eastward. On surmounting this, at 3 P.M. of the 19th
February, 1838, we stood, to use a native expression, upon the
_Bám-i-Duniah_, or ‘Roof of the World,’ while before us lay
stretched a noble but frozen sheet of water, from whose western
end issued the infant river of the Oxus. This fine lake (Sirikol)
lies in the form of a crescent, about 14 miles long from east
to west, by an average breadth of 1 mile. On three sides it is
bordered by swelling hills about 500 feet high, while along its
southern bank they rise into mountains 3500 feet above the lake, or
19,000 feet above the sea, and covered with perpetual snow, from
which never-failing source the lake is supplied.... Its elevation,
measured by the temperature of boiling water, is 15,600 feet.”

The absence of birds on Pamir, reported by Marco, probably shows
that he passed very late or early in the season. Hiuen Tsang, we
see, gives a different account; Wood was there in the winter, but
heard that in summer the lake swarmed with water-fowl. [Cf. Captain
Trotter, p. 263, in _Forsyth’s Mission_.]

The Pamir Steppe was crossed by Benedict Goës late in the autumn of
1603, and the narrative speaks of the great cold and desolation,
and the difficulty of breathing. We have also an abstract of the
journey of Abdul Mejid, a British Agent, who passed Pamir on
his way to Kokan in 1861:—“Fourteen weary days were occupied in
crossing the steppe; the marches were long, depending on uncertain
supplies of grass and water, which sometimes wholly failed them;
food for man and beast had to be carried with the party, for not a
trace of human habitation is to be met with in those inhospitable
wilds.... The steppe is interspersed with tamarisk jungle and
the wild willow, and in the summer with tracts of high grass.”
(_Neumann_, _Pilgerfahrten Buddh. Priester_, p. 50; _V. et V. de H.
T._ 271–272; _Wood_, 232; _Proc. R. G. S._ X. 150.)

There is nothing absolutely to decide whether Marco’s route from
Wakhán lay by Wood’s Lake “Sirikol,” or Victoria, or by the more
southerly source of the Oxus in Pamir Kul. These routes would unite
in the valley of Táshkurgán, and his road thence to Kashgar was,
I apprehend, nearly the same as the Mirza’s in 1868–1869, by the
lofty Chichiklik Pass and Kin Valley. But I cannot account for the
forty days of wilderness. The Mirza was but thirty-four days _from
Faizabad to Kashgar_, and Faiz Bakhsh only twenty-five.

[Severtsof (_Bul. Soc. Géog._ XI. 1890, p. 587), who accepts
Trotter’s route, by the Pamir Khurd (Little Pamir), says there are
three routes from Wakhán to Little Pamir, going up the Sarhadd: one
during the winter, by the frozen river; the two others available
during the spring and the summer, up and down the snowy chain along
the right bank of the Sarhadd, until the valley widens out into a
plain, where a swelling is hardly to be seen, so flat is it; this
chain is the dividing ridge between the Sarhadd and the Aksu. From
the summit, the traveller, looking towards the west, sees _at his
feet_ the mountains he has crossed; to the east, the Pamir Kul and
the Aksu, the river flowing from it. The pasture grounds around
the Pamir Kul and the sources of the Sarhadd are magnificent; but
lower down, the Aksu valley is arid, _dotted_ only with pasture
grounds of little extent, and few and far between. It is to this
part of Pamir that Marco Polo’s description applies; more than any
other part of this _ensemble_ of high valleys, this line of water
parting, of the Sarhadd and the Aksu, has the aspect of a _Roof of
the World_ (_Bam-i-dunya_, Persian name of Pamir).—H. C.].

[We can trace Marco Polo’s route from Wakhán, on comparing it with
Captain Younghusband’s Itinerary from Kashgar, which he left on the
22nd July, 1891, for Little Pamir: Little Pamir at Bozai-Gumbaz,
joins with the Pamir-i-Wakhán at the Wakhijrui Pass, first explored
by Colonel Lockhart’s mission. Hence the route lies by the old
fort of Kurgan-i-Ujadbai at the junction of the two branches of
the Tagh-dum-bash Pamir (Supreme Head of the Mountains), the
Tagh-dum-bash Pamir, Tásh Kurgán, Bulun Kul, the Gez Defile and
Kashgar. (_Proc. R. G. S._ XIV. 1892, pp. 205–234.)—H. C.]

We may observe that Severtsof asserts _Pamir_ to be a generic term,
applied to all high plateaux in the Thian Shan.[3]

[“The Pámír plateau may be described as a great, broad, rounded
ridge, extending north and south, and crossed by thick mountain
chains, between which lie elevated valleys, open and gently
sloping towards the east, but narrow and confined, with a rapid
fall towards the west. The waters which run in all, with the
exception of the eastern flow from the Tághdúngbásh, collect in the
Oxus; the Áksú from the Little Pámír lake receiving the eastern
drainage, which finds an outlet in the Áktásh Valley, and joining
the Múrgháb, which obtains that from the Alichór and Síríz Pámírs.
As the eastern Tághdúngbásh stream finds its way into the Yarkand
river, the watershed must be held as extending from that Pámír,
down the range dividing it from the Little Pámír, and along the
Neza Tásh mountains to the Kizil Art Pass, leading to the Alái.”
(Colonel Gordon, _Forsyth’s Mission_, p. 231.)

Lieutenant-Colonel Gordon (_Forsyth’s Mission_, p. 231) says also:
“Regarding the name ‘Pámír,’ the meaning appears to be wilderness—a
place depopulated, abandoned, waste, yet capable of habitation.
I obtained this information on the Great Pámír from one of our
intelligent guides, who said in explanation—‘In former days, when
this part was inhabited by Kirghiz, as is shown by the ruins of
their villages and burial-grounds, the valley was not all called
Pámír, as it is now. It was known by its village names, as is the
country beyond Sirikol, which being now occupied by Kirghiz is
not known by one name, but partly as Chárling, Bas Robát, etc. If
deserted it would be Pámír.’” In a note Sir T. D. Forsyth adds that
the same explanation of the word was given to him at Yangi-Hissar,
and that it is in fact a Khokandi-Turki word.—H. C.]

It would seem, from such notices as have been received, that there
is not, strictly speaking, one steppe called Pamir, but a variety
of _Pamirs_, which are lofty valleys between ranges of hills,
presenting luxuriant summer pasture, and with floors more or less
flat, but nowhere more than 5 or 6 miles in width and often much
less.

[This is quite exact; Mr. E. Delmar Morgan writes in the _Scottish
Geog. Mag._ January, 1892, p. 17: “Following the terminology of
Yule adopted by geographers, and now well established, we have (1)
Pamir Alichur; (2) Pamir Khurd (or “Little”); (3) Pamir Kalan (or
“Great”); (4) Pamir Khargosi (“of the hare”); (5) Pamir Sares; (6)
Pamir Rang-kul.”—H. C.]

[Illustration: Horns of _Ovis Poli_.]

Wood speaks of the numerous wolves in this region. And the great
sheep is that to which Blyth, in honour of our traveller, has
given the name of _Ovis Poli_.[4] A pair of horns, sent by Wood to
the Royal Asiatic Society, and of which a representation is given
above, affords the following dimensions:—Length of one horn on the
curve, 4 feet 8 inches; round the base 14¼ inches; distance of tips
apart 3 feet 9 inches. This sheep appears to be the same as the
_Rass_, of which Burnes heard that the horns were so big that a man
could not lift a pair, and that foxes bred in them; also that the
carcass formed a load for two horses. Wood says that these horns
supply shoes for the Kirghiz horses, and also a good substitute
for stirrup-irons. “We saw numbers of horns strewed about in
every direction, the spoils of the Kirghiz hunter. Some of these
were of an astonishingly large size, and belonged to an animal
of a species between a goat and a sheep, inhabiting the steppes
of Pamir. _The ends of the horns projecting above the snow often
indicated the direction of the road_; and wherever they were heaped
in large quantities and disposed in a semicircle, there our escort
recognised the site of a Kirghiz summer encampment.... We came in
sight of a rough-looking building, decked out with the horns of the
wild sheep, and all but buried amongst the snow. It was a Kirghiz
burying-ground.” (Pp. 223, 229, 231.)

[With reference to Wood’s remark that the horns of the _Ovis Poli_
supply shoes for the Kirghiz horses, Mr. Rockhill writes to me that
a Paris newspaper of 24th November, 1894, observes: “Horn shoes
made of the horn of sheep are successfully used in Lyons. They are
especially adapted to horses employed in towns, where the pavements
are often slippery. Horses thus shod can be driven, it is said, at
the most rapid pace over the worst pavement without slipping.”

(Cf. Rockhill, _Rubruck_, p. 69; _Chasses et Explorations dans
la Région des Pamirs_, par le Vte. Ed. de Poncins, Paris, 1897,
8vo.—H. C.).]

In 1867 this great sheep was shot by M. Severtsof, on the Plateau
of Aksai, in the western Thian Shan. He reports these animals to
go in great herds, and to be very difficult to kill. However, he
brought back two specimens. The Narin River is stated to be the
northern limit of the species.[5] Severtsof also states that the
enemies of the _Ovis Poli_ are the wolves, [and Colonel Gordon says
that the leopards and wolves prey almost entirely upon them. (On
the _Ovis Poli_, see Captain Deasy, _In Tibet_, p. 361.)—H. C.]

[Illustration: _Ovis Poli_, the Great Sheep of Pamir. (After
Severtsof.)

“=Il hi a grant moutitude de mouton sauvages qe sunt grandisme, car
ont les cornes bien six paumes=” ...]

Colonel Gordon, the head of the exploring party detached by Sir
Douglas Forsyth, brought away a head of _Ovis Poli_, which quite
bears out the account by its eponymus of horns “good 6 palms in
length,” say 60 inches. This head, as I learn from a letter of
Colonel Gordon’s to a friend, has one horn perfect which measures
65½ inches on the curves; the other, broken at the tip, measures 64
inches; the straight line between the tips is 55 inches.

[Captain Younghusband [1886] “before leaving the Altai Mountains,
picked up several heads of the _Ovis Poli_, called Argali by
the Mongols. They were somewhat different from those which I
afterwards saw at Yarkand, which had been brought in from the
Pamir. Those I found in the Gobi were considerably thicker at the
base, there was a less degree of curve, and a shorter length of
horn.” A full description of the _Ovis Poli_, with a large plate
drawing of the horns, may be seen in Colonel Gordon’s _Roof of the
World_. (See p. 81.) (_Proc. R. G. S._ X. 1888, p. 495.) Some years
later, Captain Younghusband speaks repeatedly of the great sport
of shooting _Ovis Poli_. (_Proc. R. G. S._ XIV. 1892, pp. 205,
234.)—H. C.]

As to the pasture, Timkowski heard that “the pasturage of Pamir is
so luxuriant and nutritious, that if horses are left on it for more
than forty days they die of repletion.” (I. 421.) And Wood: “The
grass of Pamir, they tell you, is so rich that a sorry horse is
here brought into good condition in less than twenty days; and its
nourishing qualities are evidenced in the productiveness of their
ewes, which almost invariably bring forth two lambs at a birth.”
(P. 365.)

With regard to the effect upon fire ascribed to the “great cold,”
Ramusio’s version inserts the expression “_gli fu affermato per
miracolo_,” “it was asserted to him as a wonderful circumstance.”
And Humboldt thinks it so strange that Marco should not have
observed this personally that he doubts whether Polo himself passed
the Pamir. “How is it that he does not say that he himself had seen
how the flames disperse and leap about, as I myself have so often
experienced at similar altitudes in the Cordilleras of the Andes,
especially when investigating the boiling-point of water?” (_Cent.
Asia_, Germ. Transl. I. 588.) But the words quoted from Ramusio
do not exist in the old texts, and they are probably an editorial
interpolation indicating disbelief in the statement.

MM. Huc and Gabet made a like observation on the high passes of
north-eastern Tibet: “The _argols_ gave out much smoke, but would
not burn with any flame”; only they adopted the native idea that
this as well as their own sufferings in respiration was caused by
some pernicious exhalation.

Major Montgomerie, R.E., of the Indian Survey, who has probably
passed more time nearer the heavens than any man living, sends me
the following note on this passage: “What Marco Polo says as to
fire at great altitudes not cooking so effectually as usual is
perfectly correct as far as anything _boiled_ is concerned, but I
doubt if it is as to anything _roasted_. The want of brightness in
a fire at great altitudes is, I think, altogether attributable to
the poorness of the fuel, which consists of either small sticks or
bits of roots, or of _argols_ of dung, all of which give out a good
deal of smoke, more especially the latter if not quite dry; but I
have often seen a capital blaze made with the argols when perfectly
dry. As to cooking, we found that rice, _dál_, and potatoes would
never soften properly, no matter how long they were boiled. This,
of course, was due to the boiling-point being only from 170° to
180°. Our tea, moreover, suffered from the same cause, and was
never good when we were over 15,000 feet. This was very marked.
Some of my natives made dreadful complaints about the rice and dál
that they got from the village-heads in the valleys, and vowed that
they only gave them what was very old and hard, as they could not
soften it!”

NOTE 3.—Bolor is a subject which it would take several pages to
discuss with fulness, and I must refer for such fuller discussion
to a paper in the _J. R. G. S._ vol. xlii. p. 473.

The name _Bolor_ is very old, occurring in Hiuen Tsang’s Travels
(7th century), and in still older Chinese works of like character.
General Cunningham has told us that Balti is still termed _Balor_
by the Dards of Gilghit; and Mr. Shaw, that _Palor_ is an old
name still sometimes used by the Kirghiz for the upper part of
Chitrál. The indications of Hiuen Tsang are in accordance with
General Cunningham’s information; and the fact that Chitrál is
described under the name of Bolor in Chinese works of the last
century entirely justifies that of Mr. Shaw. A Pushtu poem of the
17th century, translated by Major Raverty, assigns the mountains of
_Bilaur_-istán, as the northern boundary of Swát. The collation of
these indications shows that the term Bolor must have been applied
somewhat extensively to the high regions adjoining the southern
margin of Pamir. And a passage in the _Táríkh Rashídí_, written at
Kashgar in the 16th century by a cousin of the great Baber, affords
us a definition of the tract to which, in its larger sense, the
name was thus applied: “_Malaur_ (_i.e._ Balaur or Bolor) ... is a
country with few level spots. It has a circuit of four months’
march. The eastern frontier borders on Kashgar and Yarkand; it has
Badakhshan to the north, Kabul to the west, and Kashmír to the
south.” The writer was thoroughly acquainted with his subject, and
the region which he so defines must have embraced Sirikol and all
the wild country south of Yarkand, Balti, Gilghit, Yasin, Chitrál,
and perhaps Kafiristán. This enables us to understand Polo’s use of
the term.

[Illustration: MARCO POLO’S ITINERARIES Nᵒ. III. Regions on and near
the Upper Oxus]

The name of Bolor in later days has been in a manner a symbol
of controversy. It is prominent in the apocryphal travels of
George Ludwig von ————, preserved in the Military Archives at St.
Petersburg. That work represents a town of Bolor as existing to
the north of Badakhshan, with Wakhán still further to the north.
This geography we now know to be entirely erroneous, but it is in
full accordance with the maps and tables of the Jesuit missionaries
and their pupils, who accompanied the Chinese troops to Kashgar in
1758–1759. The paper in the _Geographical Society’s Journal_, which
has been referred to, demonstrates how these erroneous data must
have originated. It shows that the Jesuit geography was founded
on downright accidental error, and, as a consequence, that the
narratives which profess _de visu_ to corroborate that geography
must be downright forgeries. When the first edition was printed, I
retained the belief in a _Bolor_ where the Jesuits placed it.

[The Chinese traveller, translated by M. Gueluy (_Desc. de la
Chine occid._ p. 53), speaks of Bolor, to the west of Yarkand,
inhabited by Mahomedans who live in huts; the country is sandy
and rather poor. Severtsof says, (_Bul. Soc. Géog._ XI. 1890, p.
591) that he believes that the name of _Bolor_ should be expunged
from geographical nomenclature as a source of confusion and error.
Humboldt, with his great authority, has too definitely attached
this name to an erroneous orographical system. Lieutenant-Colonel
Gordon says that he “made repeated enquiries from Kirghiz and
Wakhis, and from the Mír [of Wakhán], Fatteh Ali Shah, regarding
‘Bólór,’ as a name for any mountain, country, or place, but all
professed perfect ignorance of it.” (_Forsyth’s Mission._)—H. C.]

The _J. A. S. Bengal_ for 1853 (vol. xxii.) contains extracts from
the diary of a Mr. Gardiner in those central regions of Asia.
These read more like the memoranda of a dyspeptic dream than
anything else, and the only passage I can find illustrative of
our traveller is the following; the region is described as lying
twenty days south-west of Kashgar: “The Keiaz tribe live in caves
on the highest peaks, subsist by hunting, keep no flocks, said to
be anthropophagous, but have handsome women; eat their flesh raw.”
(P. 295; _Pèlerins Boud._ III. 316, 421, etc.; _Ladak_, 34, 45, 47;
_Mag. Asiatique_, I. 92, 96–97; _Not. et Ext._ II. 475, XIV. 492;
_J. A. S. B._ XXXI. 279; Mr. R. Shaw in _Geog. Proceedings_, XVI.
246, 400; _Notes regarding Bolor_, etc., _J. R. G. S._ XLII. 473.)

As this sheet goes finally to press we hear of the exploration of
Pamir by officers of Mr. Forsyth’s Mission. [I have made use of the
information collected by them.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] “Yet this barren and inaccessible upland, with its scanty handful
of wild people, finds a place in Eastern history and geography
from an early period, and has now become the subject of serious
correspondence between two great European Governments, and its
name, for a few weeks at least, a household word in London. Indeed,
this is a striking accident of the course of modern history. We
see the Slav and the Englishman—representatives of two great
branches of the Aryan race, but divided by such vast intervals of
space and time from the original common starting-point of their
migration—thus brought back to the lap of Pamir to which so many
quivering lines point as the centre of their earliest seats, there
by common consent to lay down limits to mutual encroachment.”
(_Quarterly Review_, April, 1873, p. 548.)

[2] Ibn Haukal reckons Wakhán as an Indian country. It is a curious
coincidence (it can scarcely be more) that _Nono_ in the Garo
tongue of Eastern Bengal signifies “a younger brother.” (_J. A. S.
B._ XXII. 153, XVIII. 208.)

[3] According to Colonel Tod, the Hindu bard Chand speaks of “Pamer,
chief of mountains.” (I. p. 24.) But one may like and respect
Colonel Tod without feeling able to rely on such quotations of his
unconfirmed.

[4] Usually written _Polii_, which is nonsense.

[5] [“The Tian Shan wild sheep has since been described as the _Ovis
Karelini_, a species somewhat smaller than the true _Ovis Poli_
which frequents the Pamirs.” (Colonel Gordon, _Roof of the World_,
p. 83, note.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXXIII.

OF THE KINGDOM OF CASCAR.

[Illustration: Head of a Native of Kashgar.]

Cascar is a region lying between north-east and east, and constituted
a kingdom in former days, but now it is subject to the Great Kaan.
The people worship Mahommet. There are a good number of towns
and villages, but the greatest and finest is Cascar itself. The
inhabitants live by trade and handicrafts; they have beautiful gardens
and vineyards, and fine estates, and grow a great deal of cotton.
From this country many merchants go forth about the world on trading
journeys. The natives are a wretched, niggardly set of people; they eat
and drink in miserable fashion. There are in the country many Nestorian
Christians, who have churches of their own. The people of the country
have a peculiar language, and the territory extends for five days’
journey.{1}

[Illustration: View of Kashgar. (From Shaw’s “Tartary.”)]

NOTE 1.—[There is no longer any difficulty in understanding how the
travellers, after crossing Pamir, should have arrived at Kashgar if
they followed the route from Táshkurgán through the Gez Defile.

The Itinerary of the Mirza from Badakhshan (Fáizabad) is the
following: Zebák, Ishkashm, on the Panja, which may be considered
the beginning of the Wakhán Valley, Panja Fort, in Wakhán, Raz
Khan, Patur, near Lunghar (commencement of Pamir Steppe), Pamir
Kul, or Barkút Yassin, 13,300 feet, Aktash, Sirikul Táshkurgán,
Shukrab, Chichik Dawan, Akul, Kotul, Chahul Station (road to
Yarkand), Kila Karawal, Aghiz Gah, Yangi-Hissar, Opechan, Yanga
Shahr, Kashgar, where he arrived on the 3rd February, 1869. (Cf.
_Report of “The Mirza’s” Exploration from Caubul to Kashgar_. By
Major T. G. Montgomerie, R.E.... (_Jour. R. Geog. Soc._ XLI. 1871,
pp. 132–192.)

Major Montgomerie (_l.c._ p. 144) says: “The alterations in the
positions of Kashgar and Yarkund in a great measure explains why
Marco Polo, in crossing from Badakhshan to Eastern Turkestan,
went first to Kashgar and then to Yarkund. With the old positions
of Yarkund and Kashgar it appeared that the natural route from
Badakhshan would have led first to Yarkund; with the new positions,
and guided by the light of the Mirza’s route, from which it is seen
that the direct route to Yarkund is not a good one, it is easy to
understand how a traveller might prefer going to Kashgar first, and
then to Yarkund. It is satisfactory to have elicited this further
proof of the general accuracy of the great traveller’s account of
his journey through Central Asia.”

The Itinerary of Lieutenant-Colonel Gordon (_Sirikol, the Pámírs
and Wakhán_, ch. vi. of _Forsyth’s Mission to Yarkund in_ 1873)
runs thus: “Left Káshgar (21st March), Yangi-Hissar, Kaskasú Pass,
descent to Chihil Gumbaz (forty Domes), where the road branches
off to Yárkand (110 miles), Torut Pass, Tangi-Tár (defile), ‘to
the foot of a great elevated slope leading to the Chichiklik Pass,
plain, and lake (14,700 feet), below the Yámbulák and Kok-Moinok
Passes, which are used later in the season on the road between
Yangi-Hissar and Sirikol, to avoid the Tangi-Tár and Shindi
defiles. As the season advances, these passes become free from
snow, while the defiles are rendered dangerous and difficult by
the rush of the melting snow torrents. From the Chichiklik plain
we proceeded down the Shindi ravine, over an extremely bad stony
road, to the Sirikol River, up the banks of which we travelled
to Táshkurgán, reaching it on the tenth day from Yangi-Hissar.
The total distance is 125 miles.’ Then Táshkurgán (ancient name
_Várshídi_): ‘the open part of the Sirikol Valley extends from
about 8 miles below Táshkurgán to apparently a very considerable
distance towards the Kunjút mountain range;’ left Táshkurgán for
Wákhan (2nd April, 1873); leave Sirikol Valley, enter the Shindán
defile, reach the Áktásh Valley, follow the Áktásh stream (called
Áksú by the Kirghiz) through the Little Pamir to the Gházkul
(Little Pamir) Lake or Barkat Yássín, from which it takes its rise,
four days from Táshkurgán. Little Pamir ‘is bounded on the south
by the continuation of the Neza Tásh range, which separates it
from the Tághdúngbásh Pámir,’ west of the lake, Langar, Sarhadd,
30 miles from Langar, and seven days from Sirikol, and Kila Panj,
twelve days from Sirikol.”—H. C.]

[I cannot admit with Professor Paquier (_l.c._ pp. 127–128) that
Marco Polo did not visit Kashgar.—Grenard (II. p. 17) makes the
remark that it took Marco Polo seventy days from Badakhshan to
Kashgar, a distance that, in the Plain of Turkestan, he shall
cross in sixteen days.—The Chinese traveller, translated by M.
Gueluy (_Desc. de la Chine occidentale_, p. 45), says that the name
Kashgar is made of _Kash_, fine colour, and _gar_, brick
house.—H. C.]

Kashgar was the capital, from 1865 to 1877, of Ya’kúb Kúshbegi, a
soldier of fortune, by descent it is said a Tajik of Shighnan, who,
when the Chinese yoke was thrown off, made a throne for himself in
Eastern Turkestan, and subjected the whole basin to his authority,
taking the title of _Atalik Gházi_.

It is not easy to see how Kashgar should have been subject to the
Great Kaan, except in the sense in which all territories under
Mongol rule owed him homage. Yarkand, Polo acknowledges to have
belonged to Kaidu, and the boundary between Kaidu’s territory and
the Kaan’s lay between Karashahr and Komul [Bk. I. ch. xli.], much
further east.

[Bretschneider, _Med. Res._ (II. p. 47), says: “Marco Polo states
with respect to the kingdom of _Cascar_ (I. 189) that it was
subject to the Great Khan, and says the same regarding _Cotan_ (I.
196), whilst _Yarcan_ (I. 195), according to Marco Polo, belonged
to Kaidu. This does not agree with Rashid’s statements about the
boundary between Kaidu’s territory and the Khan’s.”—H. C.]

Kashgar was at this time a Metropolitan See of the Nestorian
Church. (_Cathay_, etc. 275, ccxlv.)

Many strange sayings have been unduly ascribed to our traveller,
but I remember none stranger than this by Colonel Tod: “_Marco Polo
calls Cashgar, where he was in the 6th century_, the birthplace
of the Swedes”! (_Rajasthan_, I. 60.) Pétis de la Croix and Tod
between them are answerable for this nonsense. (See _The Hist. of
Genghizcan the Great_, p. 116.)

On _cotton_, see ch. xxxvi.—On Nestorians, see Kanchau.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

OF THE GREAT CITY OF SAMARCAN.

Samarcan is a great and noble city towards the north-west, inhabited
by both Christians and Saracens, who are subject to the Great Kaan’s
nephew, CAIDOU by name; he is, however, at bitter enmity with the
Kaan.{1} I will tell you of a great marvel that happened at this city.

[Illustration: View of Samarcand. (From a sketch by Mr. Ivanoff.)
“Samarcan est une grandisme cité et noble.”]

It is not a great while ago that SIGATAY, own brother to the Great
Kaan, who was Lord of this country and of many an one besides, became
a Christian.{2} The Christians rejoiced greatly at this, and they
built a great church in the city, in honour of John the Baptist; and
by his name the church was called. And they took a very fine stone
which belonged to the Saracens, and placed it as the pedestal of a
column in the middle of the church, supporting the roof. It came to
pass, however, that Sigatay died. Now the Saracens were full of rancour
about that stone that had been theirs, and which had been set up in
the church of the Christians; and when they saw that the Prince was
dead, they said one to another that now was the time to get back their
stone, by fair means or by foul. And that they might well do, for they
were ten times as many as the Christians. So they gat together and went
to the church and said that the stone they must and would have. The
Christians acknowledged that it was theirs indeed, but offered to pay
a large sum of money and so be quit. Howbeit, the others replied that
they never would give up the stone for anything in the world. And words
ran so high that the Prince heard thereof, and ordered the Christians
either to arrange to satisfy the Saracens, if it might be, with money,
or to give up the stone. And he allowed them three days to do either
the one thing or the other.

What shall I tell you? Well, the Saracens would on no account agree
to leave the stone where it was, and this out of pure despite to the
Christians, for they knew well enough that if the stone were stirred
the church would come down by the run. So the Christians were in
great trouble and wist not what to do. But they did do the best thing
possible; they besought Jesus Christ that he would consider their case,
so that the holy church should not come to destruction, nor the name of
its Patron Saint, John the Baptist, be tarnished by its ruin. And so
when the day fixed by the Prince came round, they went to the church
betimes in the morning, and lo, they found the stone removed from under
the column; the foot of the column was without support, and yet it bore
the load as stoutly as before! Between the foot of the column and the
ground there was a space of three palms. So the Saracens had away their
stone, and mighty little joy withal. It was a glorious miracle, nay, it
_is_ so, for the column still so standeth, and will stand as long as
God pleaseth.{3}

Now let us quit this and continue our journey.

NOTE 1.—Of Kaidu, Kúblái Kaan’s kinsman and rival, and their long
wars, we shall have to speak later. He had at this time a kind
of joint occupancy of SAMARKAND and Bokhara with the Khans of
Chagatai, his cousins.

[On Samarkand generally see: _Samarqand_, by W. Radloff, translated
into French by L. Leger, _Rec. d’Itin. dans l’Asie Centrale_, École
des Langues Orient., Paris, 1878, p. 284 et seq.; _A travers le
royaume de Tamerlan (Asie Centrale)_ ... par Guillaume Capus ...
Paris, 1892, 8vo.—H. C.]

Marco evidently never was at Samarkand, though doubtless it was
visited by his Father and Uncle on their first journey, when we
know they were long at Bokhara. Having, therefore, little to say
descriptive of a city he had not seen, he tells us a story:—

“So geographers, in Afric maps,
With savage pictures fill their gaps,
And o’er unhabitable downs
Place elephants for want of towns.”

As regards the Christians of Samarkand who figure in the preceding
story, we may note that the city had been one of the Metropolitan
Sees of the Nestorian Church since the beginning of the 8th
century, and had been a bishopric perhaps two centuries earlier.
Prince Sempad, High Constable of Armenia, in a letter written
from Samarkand in 1246 or 1247, mentions several circumstances
illustrative of the state of things indicated in this story: “I
tell you that we have found many Christians scattered all over
the East, and many fine churches, lofty, ancient, and of good
architecture, which have been spoiled by the Turks. Hence, the
Christians of this country came to the presence of the reigning
Kaan’s grandfather (_i.e._ Chinghiz); he received them most
honourably, and granted them liberty of worship, and issued orders
to prevent their having any just cause of complaint by word or
deed. _And so the Saracens, who used to treat them with contempt,
have now the like treatment in double measure._”

Shortly after Marco’s time, viz. in 1328, Thomas of Mancasola, a
Dominican, who had come from Samarkand with a Mission to the Pope
(John XXII.) from Ilchigadai, Khan of Chagatai, was appointed Latin
Bishop of that city. (_Mosheim_, p. 110, etc.; _Cathay_, p. 192.)

NOTE 2.—CHAGATAI, here called Sigatay, was Uncle, not Brother, to
the Great Kaan (Kúblái). Nor was Kaidu either Chagatai’s son or
Kúblái’s nephew, as Marco here and elsewhere represents him to
be. (See Bk. IV. ch. i.) The term used to describe Chagatai’s
relationship is _frère charnel_, which excludes ambiguity,
cousinship, or the like (such as is expressed by the Italian
_fratello cugíno_), and corresponds, I believe, to the _brother
german_ of Scotch law documents.

NOTE 3.—One might say, These things be an allegory! We take the
fine stone that belongs to the Saracens (or Papists) to build our
church on, but the day of reckoning comes at last, and our (Irish
Protestant) Christians are afraid that the Church will come about
their ears. May it stand, and better than that of Samarkand has
done!

There is a story somewhat like this in D’Herbelot, about the
Karmathian Heretics carrying off the Black Stone from Mecca, and
being obliged years after to bring it back across the breadth
of Arabia; on which occasion the stone conducted itself in a
miraculous manner.

There _is_ a remarkable Stone at Samarkand, the _Kok-Tash_ or
Green Stone, on which Timur’s throne was set. Tradition says that,
big as it is, it was brought by him from Brusa;—but tradition may
be wrong. (See _Vámbéry’s Travels_, p. 206.) [Also _H. Moser, A
travers l’Asie centrale_, 114–115.—H. C.]

[The Archimandrite Palladius (_Chinese Recorder_, VI. p. 108)
quotes from the _Chi shun Chin-kiang chi_ (Description of
Chin-Kiang), 14th century, the following passage regarding the
pillar: “There is a temple (in Samarcand) supported by four
enormous wooden pillars, each of them 40 feet high. One of these
pillars is in a hanging position, and stands off from the floor
more than a foot.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXXV.

OF THE PROVINCE OF YARCAN.

Yarcan is a province five days’ journey in extent. The people follow
the Law of Mahommet, but there are also Nestorian and Jacobite
Christians. They are subject to the same Prince that I mentioned, the
Great Kaan’s nephew. They have plenty of everything, [particularly
of cotton. The inhabitants are also great craftsmen, but a large
proportion of them have swoln legs, and great crops at the throat,
which arises from some quality in their drinking-water.] As there is
nothing else worth telling we may pass on.{1}

NOTE 1.—Yarkan or Yarken seems to be the general pronunciation of
the name to this day, though we write YARKAND.

[A Chinese traveller, translated by M. Gueluy (_Desc. de la Chine
occidentale_, p. 41), says that the word _Yarkand_ is made of
_Iar_, earth, and _Kiang_ (_Kand?_), large, vast, but this
derivation is doubtful. The more probable one is that Yarkand is
made up of _Yar_, new, and _Kand, Kend_, or _Kent_, city.—H. C.]

Mir ’Izzat Ullah in modern days speaks of the prevalence of goitre
at Yarkand. And Mr. Shaw informs me that during his recent visit to
Yarkand (1869) he had numerous applications for iodine as a remedy
for that disease. The theory which connects it with the close
atmosphere of valleys will not hold at Yarkand. (_J. R. A. S._ VII.
303.)

[Dr. Sven Hedin says that three-fourths of the population of
Yarkand are suffering from goitre; he ascribes the prevalence of
the disease to the bad quality of the water, which is kept in large
basins, used indifferently for bathing, washing, or draining. Only
Hindu and “Andijdanlik” merchants, who drink well water, are free
from goitre.

Lieutenant Roborovsky, the companion of Pievtsov, in 1889, says:
“In the streets one meets many men and women with large goitres, a
malady attributed to the bad quality of the water running in the
town conduits, and drunk by the inhabitants in its natural state.
It appears in men at the age of puberty, and in women when they
marry.” (_Proc. R. G. S._ 2 ser. XII. 1890, p. 36.)

Formerly the Mirza (_J. R. G. S._ 1871, p. 181) said: “Goitre is
very common in the city [of Yarkund], and in the country round, but
it is unknown in Kashgar.”

General Pievtsov gives to the small oasis of Yarkand (264 square
miles) a population of 150,000, that is, 567 inhabitants per square
mile. He, after Prjevalsky’s death, started, with V. L. Roborovsky
(botanist) and P. K. Kozlov (zoologist), who were later joined
by K. I. Bogdanovich (geologist), on his expedition to Tibet
(1889–1890). He followed the route Yarkand, Khotan, Kiria, Nia, and
Charchan.—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXXVI.

OF A PROVINCE CALLED COTAN.

Cotan is a province lying between north-east and east, and is eight
days’ journey in length. The people are subject to the Great Kaan,{1}
and are all worshippers of Mahommet.{2} There are numerous towns and
villages in the country, but Cotan, the capital, is the most noble of
all, and gives its name to the kingdom. Everything is to be had there
in plenty, including abundance of cotton, [with flax, hemp, wheat,
wine, and the like]. The people have vineyards and gardens and estates.
They live by commerce and manufactures, and are no soldiers.{3}

NOTE 1.—[The Buddhist Government of Khotan was destroyed by Boghra
Khân (about 980–990); it was temporarily restored by the Buddhist
Kutchluk Khân, chief of the Naïmans, who came from the banks of
the Ili, destroyed the Mahomedan dynasty of Boghra Khân (1209), but
was in his turn subjugated by Chinghiz Khan.

The only Christian monument discovered in Khotan is a bronze cross
brought back by Grenard (III. pp. 134–135); see also Devéria,
_Notes d’Epigraphie Mongole_, p. 80.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“_Aourent Mahommet_”. Though this is Marco’s usual formula
to define Mahomedans, we can scarcely suppose that he meant it
literally. But in other cases it was _very_ literally interpreted.
Thus in _Baudouin de Sebourc_, the Dame de Pontieu, a passionate
lady who renounces her faith before Saladin, says:—

“‘Et je renoië Dieu, et le pooir qu’il a;
Et Marie, sa Mère, qu’on dist qui le porta;
_Mahom voel aourer_, aportez-le-moi chà!’
* * * * Li Soudans commanda
_Qu’on aportast Mahom; et celle l’aoura_.” (I. p. 72.)

The same romance brings in the story of the Stone of Samarkand,
adapted from ch. xxxiv., and accounts for its sanctity in Saracen
eyes because it had long formed a pedestal for Mahound!

And this notion gave rise to the use of _Mawmet_ for an idol in
general; whilst from the _Mahommerie_ or place of Islamite worship
the name of _mummery_ came to be applied to idolatrous or unmeaning
rituals; both very unjust etymologies. Thus of mosques in _Richard
Cœur-de-Lion_:

“Kyrkes they made of Crystene Lawe,
And her _Mawmettes_ lete downe drawe.” (_Weber_, II. 228.)

So Correa calls a golden idol, which was taken by Da Gama in a ship
of Calicut, “an image of Mahomed” (372). Don Quixote too, who ought
to have known better, cites with admiration the feat of Rinaldo in
carrying off, in spite of forty Moors, a golden image of Mahomed.

NOTE 3.—800 _li_ (160 miles) east of _Chokiuka_ or Yarkand, Hiuen
Tsang comes to _Kiustanna_ (Kustána) or KHOTAN. “The country
chiefly consists of plains covered with stones and sand. The
remainder, however, is favourable to agriculture, and produces
everything abundantly. From this country are got woollen carpets,
fine felts, well woven taffetas, white and black jade.” Chinese
authors of the 10th century speak of the abundant grapes and
excellent wine of Khotan.

Chinese annals of the 7th and 8th centuries tell us that the people
of Khotan had chronicles of their own, a glimpse of a lost branch
of history. Their writing, laws, and literature were modelled upon
those of India.

Ilchi, the modern capital, was visited by Mr. Johnson, of the
Indian Survey, in 1865. The country, after the revolt against the
Chinese in 1863, came first under the rule of Habíb-ullah, an aged
chief calling himself _Khán Bádshah_ of Khotan; and since the
treacherous seizure and murder of Habíb-ullah by Ya’kub Beg of
Kashgar in January 1867, it has formed a part of the kingdom of the
latter.

Mr. Johnson says: “The chief grains of the country are Indian corn,
wheat, barley of two kinds, _bájra, jowár_ (two kinds of _holcus_),
buckwheat and rice, all of which are superior to the Indian grains,
and are of a very fine quality.... The country is certainly
superior to India, and in every respect equal to Kashmir, over
which it has the advantage of being less humid, and consequently
better suited to the growth of fruits. _Olives_ (?), pears, apples,
peaches, apricots, mulberries, grapes, currants, and melons, all
exceedingly large in size and of a delicious flavour, are produced
in great variety and abundance.... Cotton of valuable quality, and
raw silk, are produced in very large quantities.”

[Khotan is the chief place of Turkestan for cotton manufactures;
its _khàm_ is to be found everywhere. This name, which means raw in
Persian, is given to a stuff made with cotton thread, which has not
undergone any preparation; they manufacture also two other cotton
stuffs: _alatcha_ with blue and red stripes, and _tchekmen_, very
thick and coarse, used to make dresses and sacks; if _khàm_ is
better at Khotan, _alatcha_ and _tchekmen_ are superior at Kashgar.
(_Grenard_, II. pp. 191–192.)

Grenard (II. pp. 175–177), among the fruits, mentions apricots
(_ourouk_), ripe in June, and so plentiful that to keep them they
are dried up to be used like garlic against mountain sickness;
melons (_koghoun_); water-melons (_tarbouz_, the best are from
Hami); vine (_tâl_)—the best grapes (_uzum_) come from Boghâz
langar, near Keria; the best dried grapes are those from Turfan;
peaches (_shaptâlou_); pomegranates (_anár_, best from Kerghalyk),
etc.; the best apples are those of Nia and Sadju; pears are very
bad; cherries and strawberries are unknown. Grenard (II. p. 106)
also says that grapes are very good, but that Khotan wine is
detestable, and tastes like vinegar.

The Chinese traveller, translated by M. Gueluy (_Desc. de la Chine
occidentale_, p. 45), says that all the inhabitants of Khotan are
seeking for precious stones, and that melons and fruits are more
plentiful than at Yarkand.—H. C.]

Mr. Johnson reports the whole country to be rich in soil and very
much under-peopled. Ilchi, the capital, has a population of about
40,000, and is a great place for manufactures. The chief articles
produced are silks, felts, carpets (both silk and woollen), coarse
cotton cloths, and paper from the mulberry fibre. The people are
strict Mahomedans, and speak a Turki dialect. Both sexes are
good-looking, with a slightly Tartar cast of countenance. (_V. et
V. de H. T._ 278; _Rémusat, H. de la V. de Khotan_, 37, 73–84;
_Chin. Repos._ IX. 128; _J. R. G. S._ XXXVII. 6 _seqq._)

[In 1891, Dutreuil de Rhins and Grenard at the small village of
Yotkàn, about 8 miles to the west of the present Khotan, came
across what they considered the most important and probably the
most ancient city of southern Chinese Turkestan. The natives say
that Yotkàn is the site of the old Capital. (Cf. _Grenard_, III. p.
127 _et seq._ for a description and drawings of coins and objects
found at this place.)

The remains of the ancient capital of Khotan were accidentally
discovered, some thirty-five years ago, at Yotkàn, a village of
the Borazân Tract. A great mass of highly interesting finds of
ancient art pottery, engraved stones, and early Khotan coins with
Kharoṣṭhi-Chinese legends, coming from this site, have recently
been thoroughly examined in Dr. Hoernle’s Report on the “British
Collection of Central Asian Antiquities.” _Stein_.—(See _Three
further Collections of Ancient Manuscripts from Central Asia_, by
Dr. A. F. R. Hoernle ... Calcutta, 1897, 8vo.)

“The sacred sites of Buddhist Khotan which Hiuen Tsang and
Fa-hian describe, can be shown to be occupied now, almost without
exception, by Mohamedan shrines forming the object of popular
pilgrimages.” (M. A. Stein, _Archæological Work about Khotan,
Jour. R. As. Soc._, April, 1901, p. 296.)

It may be justly said that during the last few years numerous
traces of Hindu civilisation have been found in Central Asia,
extending from Khotan, through the Takla-Makan, as far as Turfan,
and perhaps further up.

Dr. Sven Hedin, in the year 1896, during his second journey through
Takla-Makan from Khotan to Shah Yar, visited the ruins between the
Khotan Daria and the Kiria Daria, where he found the remains of the
city of Takla-Makan now buried in the sands. He discovered figures
of Buddha, a piece of papyrus with unknown characters, vestiges of
habitations. This Asiatic Pompei, says the traveller, at least ten
centuries old, is anterior to the Mahomedan invasion led by Kuteïbe
Ibn-Muslim, which happened at the beginning of the 8th century. Its
inhabitants were Buddhist, and of Aryan race, probably originating
from Hindustan.—Dutreuil de Rhins and Grenard discovered in the
Kumâri grottoes, in a small hill on the right bank of the Karakash
Daria, a manuscript written on birch bark in _K_harosḥ_t_hi
characters; these grottoes of Kumâri are mentioned in Hiuen Tsang.
(II. p. 229.)

Dr. Sven Hedin followed the route Kashgar, Yangi-Hissar, Yarkand
to Khotan, in 1895. He made a stay of nine days at Ilchi, the
population of which he estimated at 5500 inhabitants (5000
Musulmans, 500 Chinese).

(See also Sven Hedin, _Die Geog. wissenschaft. Ergebnisse meiner
Reisen in Zentralasien_, 1894–1897. _Petermann’s Mitt._, Ergänz.
XXVIII. (Hft. 131), Gotha, 1900.—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXXVII.

OF THE PROVINCE OF PEIN.

Pein is a province five days in length, lying between east and
north-east. The people are worshippers of Mahommet, and subjects of the
Great Kaan. There are a good number of towns and villages, but the most
noble is PEIN, the capital of the kingdom.{1} There are rivers in this
country, in which quantities of Jasper and Chalcedony are found.{2}
The people have plenty of all products, including cotton. They live by
manufactures and trade. But they have a custom that I must relate. If
the husband of any woman go away upon a journey and remain away for
more than 20 days, as soon as that term is past the woman may marry
another man, and the husband also may then marry whom he pleases.{3}

I should tell you that all the provinces that I have been speaking of,
from Cascar forward, and those I am going to mention [as far as the
city of Lop] belong to GREAT TURKEY.

NOTE 1.—“In old times,” says the _Haft Iklím._, “travellers used
to go from Khotan to Cathay in 14 (?) days, and found towns and
villages all along the road [excepting, it may be presumed,
on the terrible Gobi], so that there was no need to travel in
caravans. In later days the fear of the Kalmaks caused this line
to be abandoned, and the circuitous one occupied 100 days.” This
directer route between Khotan and China must have been followed by
Fa-hian on his way to India; by Hiuen Tsang on his way back; and
by Shah Rukh’s ambassadors on their return from China in 1421. The
circuitous route alluded to appears to have gone north from Khotan,
crossed the Tarimgol, and fallen into the road along the base of
the Thian Shan, eventually crossing the Desert southward from Komul.

Former commentators differed very widely as to the position of
Pein, and as to the direction of Polo’s route from Khotan. The
information acquired of late years leaves the latter no longer open
to doubt. It must have been nearly coincident with that of Hiuen
Tsang.

The perusal of Johnson’s Report of his journey to Khotan, and the
Itineraries attached to it, enabled me to feel tolerable certainty
as to the position of Charchan (see next chapter), and as to the
fact that Marco followed a direct route from Khotan to the vicinity
of Lake Lop. Pein, then, was identical with PIMA,[1] which was the
first city reached by Hiuen Tsang on his return to China after
quitting Khotan, and which lay 330 _li_ east of the latter city.[2]
Other notices of Pima appear in Rémusat’s history of Khotan; some
of these agree exactly as to the distance from the capital, adding
that it stood on the banks of a river flowing from the East and
entering the sandy Desert; whilst one account seems to place it
at 500 _li_ from Khotan. And in the Turkish map of Central Asia,
printed in the _Jahán Numá_, as we learn from Sir H. Rawlinson,
the town of _Pím_ is placed a little way north of Khotan. Johnson
found Khotan rife with stories of former cities overwhelmed by the
shifting sands of the Desert, and these sands appear to have been
advancing for ages; for far to the north-east of Pima, even in the
7th century, were to be found the deserted and ruined cities of the
ancient kingdoms of _Tuholo_ and _Shemathona_. “Where anciently
were the seats of flourishing cities and prosperous communities,”
says a Chinese author speaking of this region, “is nothing now to
be seen but a vast desert; all has been buried in the sands, and
the wild camel is hunted on those arid plains.”

Pima cannot have been very far from _Kiria_, visited by Johnson.
This is a town of 7000 houses, lying east of Ilchi, and about 69
miles distant from it. The road for the most part lies through
a highly cultivated and irrigated country, flanked by the sandy
desert at three or four miles to the left. After passing _eastward_
by Kiria it is said to make a great elbow, turning north; and
within this elbow lie the sands that have buried cities and fertile
country. Here Mr. Shaw supposes Pima lay (perhaps upon the river
of Kiria). At Pima itself, in A.D. 644, there was a story of the
destruction of a city lying further north, a judgment on the luxury
and impiety of the people and their king, who, shocked at the
eccentric aspect of a holy man, had caused him to be buried in sand
up to the mouth.

(_N. et E._ XIV. 477; _H. de la Ville de Khotan_, 63–66; _Klap.
Tabl. Historiques_, p. 182; _Proc. R. G. S._ XVI. 243.)

[Dutreuil de Rhins and Grenard took the road from Khotan to
Charchan; they left Khotan on the 4th May, 1893, passed Kiria,
Nia, and instead of going direct to Charchan through the desert,
they passed Kara Say at the foot of the Altyn tâgh, a route three
days longer than the other, but one which was less warm, and where
water, meat, milk, and barley could be found. Having passed Kapa,
they crossed the Karamuren, and went up from Achan due north to
Charchan, where they stayed three months. Nowhere do they mention
Pein, or Pima, for it appears to be _Kiria itself_, which is the
only real town between Khotan and the Lobnor. Grenard says in
a note (p. 54, vol. ii.): “_Pi-mo_ (Keria) recalls the Tibetan
_byé-ma_, which is pronounced _Péma_, or _Tchéma_, and which means
_sand_. Such is perhaps also the origin of _Pialma_, a village
near Khotan, and of the old name of Charchan, _Tché-mo-to-na_, of
which the two last syllables would represent _grong_ (pronounce
_tong_ = town), or _kr’om_ (_t’om_ = bazaar). Now, not only would
this etymology be justified because these three places are indeed
surrounded with sand remarkably deep, but as they were the first
three important places with which the Tibetans met coming into the
desert of Gobi, either by the route of Gurgutluk and of Polor, or
by Karakoram and Sandju, or by Tsadam, and they had thus as good a
pretext to call them ‘towns of sand’ as the Chinese had to give
to T’un-hwang the name of _Shachau_, viz. City of Sand. Kiria is
called _Ou-mi_, under the Han, and the name of Pi-mo is found for
the first time in Hiuen Tsang, that is to say, before the Tibetan
invasions of the 8th century. It is not possible to admit that the
incursion of the Tu-ku-hun in the 5th century could be the cause of
this change of name. The hypothesis remains that Pi-mo was really
the ancient name forced by the first Tibetan invaders spoken of
by legend, that _Ou-mi_ was either another name of the town, or a
fancy name invented by the Chinese, like Yu-t’ien for Khotan, Su-lo
for Kashgar....” Sir T. D. Forsyth (_J. R. G. S._, XLVII., 1877, p.
3) writes: “I should say that Peim or Pima must be identical with
Kiria.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—The Jasper and Chalcedony of our author are probably only
varieties of the semi-precious mineral called by us popularly
_Jade_, by the Chinese _Yü_, by the Eastern Turks _Kásh_, by the
Persians _Yashm_, which last is no doubt the same word with ἴασπις,
and therefore with _Jasper_. The Greek Jaspis was in reality,
according to Mr. King, a green Chalcedony.

The Jade of Turkestan is largely derived from water-rolled boulders
fished up by divers in the rivers of Khotan, but it is also got
from mines in the valley of the Karákásh River. “Some of the
Jade,” says Timkowski, “is as white as snow, some dark green, like
the most beautiful emerald (?), others yellow, vermilion, and
jet black. The rarest and most esteemed varieties are the white
speckled with red and the green veined with gold.” (I. 395.) The
Jade of Khotan appears to be first mentioned by Chinese authors in
the time of the Han Dynasty under Wu-ti (B.C. 140–86). In A.D. 541
an image of Buddha sculptured in Jade was sent as an offering from
Khotan; and in 632 the process of fishing for the material in the
rivers of Khotan, as practised down to modern times, is mentioned.
The importation of Jade or _Yü_ from this quarter probably gave the
name of _Kia-yü Kwan_ or “Jade Gate” to the fortified Pass looking
in this direction on the extreme N.W. of China Proper, between
Shachau and Suhchau. Since the detachment from China the Jade
industry has ceased, the Musulmans having no taste for that kind of
_virtù_. (_H. de la V. de Khotan_, 2, 17, 23; also see _J. R. G.
S._ XXXVI. 165, and _Cathay_, 130, 564; _Ritter_, II. 213; _Shaw’s
High Tartary_, pp. 98, 473.)

[On the 11th January, 1895, Dr. Sven Hedin visited one of the
chief places where Jade is to be found. It is to the north-east of
Khotan, in the old bed of the Yurun Kash. The bed of the river is
divided into _claims_ like gold-fields; the workmen are Chinese for
the greater part, some few are Musulmans.

Grenard (II. pp. 186–187) says that the finest Jade comes from the
high Karákásh (black Jade) River and Yurungkásh (white Jade); the
Jade River is called Su-tásh. At Khotan, Jade is polished up by
sixty or seventy individuals belonging to twenty-five workshops.

“At 18 miles from Su-chau, Kia-yu-kwan, celebrated as one of the
gates of China, and as the fortress guarding the extreme north-west
entrance into the empire, is passed.” (_Colonel M. S. Bell, Proc.
R. G. S._ XII. 1890, p. 75.)

According to the Chinese characters, the name of Kia-yü Kwan does
not mean “Jade Gate,” and as Mr. Rockhill writes to me, it can only
mean something like “barrier of the pleasant Valley.”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—Possibly this may refer to the custom of temporary
marriages which seems to prevail in most towns of Central Asia
which are the halting-places of caravans, and the morals of which
are much on a par with those of seaport towns, from analogous
causes. Thus at Meshid, Khanikoff speaks of the large population of
young and pretty women ready, according to the accommodating rules
of Shiah Mahomedanism, to engage in marriages which are perfectly
lawful, for a month, a week, or even twenty-four hours. Kashgar is
also noted in the East for its _chaukans_, young women with whom
the traveller may readily form an alliance for the period of his
stay, be it long or short. (_Khan. Mém._ p. 98; _Russ. in Central
Asia_, 52; _J. A. S. B._ XXVI. 262; _Burnes_, III. 195; Vigne, II.
201.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Pein_ may easily have been miscopied for _Pem_, which is indeed the
reading of some MSS. Ramusio has _Peym_.

[2] M. Vivien de St. Martin, in his map of Hiuen Tsang’s travels,
places Pima to the _west_ of Khotan. Though one sees how the
mistake originated, there is no real ground for this in either
of the versions of the Chinese pilgrim’s journey. (See _Vie et
Voyages_, p. 288, and _Mémoires_, vol. ii. 242–243.)

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

OF THE PROVINCE OF CHARCHAN.

Charchan is a Province of Great Turkey, lying between north-east
and east. The people worship Mahommet. There are numerous towns and
villages, and the chief city of the kingdom bears its name, Charchan.
The Province contains rivers which bring down Jasper and Chalcedony,
and these are carried for sale into Cathay, where they fetch great
prices. The whole of the Province is sandy, and so is the road all the
way from Pein, and much of the water that you find is bitter and bad.
However, at some places you do find fresh and sweet water. When an army
passes through the land, the people escape with their wives, children,
and cattle a distance of two or three days’ journey into the sandy
waste; and knowing the spots where water is to be had, they are able to
live there, and to keep their cattle alive, whilst it is impossible to
discover them; for the wind immediately blows the sand over their track.

Quitting Charchan, you ride some five days through the sands, finding
none but bad and bitter water, and then you come to a place where the
water is sweet. And now I will tell you of a province called Lop, in
which there is a city, also called LOP, which you come to at the end of
those five days. It is at the entrance of the great Desert, and it is
here that travellers repose before entering on the Desert.{1}

NOTE 1.—Though the _Lake_ of Lob or Lop appears on all our maps,
from Chinese authority, the latter does not seem to have supplied
information as to a town so called. We have, however, indications
of the existence of such a place, both mediæval and recent. The
History of Mirza Haidar, called the Táríkh-i-Rashídí, already
referred to, in describing the Great Basin of Eastern Turkestan,
says: “Formerly there were several large cities in this plain;
the names of two have survived—_Lob_ and _Kank_, but of the rest
there is no trace or tradition; all is buried under the sand.”
[Forsyth (_J. R. G. S._ XLVII. 1877, p. 5) says that he thinks
that this Kank is probably the Katak mentioned by Mirza Haidar.—H.
C.] In another place the same history says that a boy heir of the
house of Chaghatai, to save him from a usurper, was sent away to
Sárígh Uighúr and _Lob-Kank_, far in the East. Again, in the short
notices of the cities of Turkestan which Mr. Wathen collected at
Bombay from pilgrims of those regions on their way to Mecca, we
find the following: “_Lopp_.—Lopp is situated at a great distance
from Yarkand. The inhabitants are principally Chinese; but a few
Uzbeks reside there. Lopp is remarkable for a salt-water lake in
its vicinity.” Johnson, speaking of a road from Tibet into Khotan,
says: “This route ... leads not only to Ilchi and Yarkand, but
also _viâ_ _Lob_ to the large and important city of Karashahr.”
And among the routes attached to Mr. Johnson’s original Report, we
have:—

“Route No. VII. _Kiria_ (see note 1 to last chapter) to CHACHAN and
LOB (_from native information_).”

This first revealed to me the continued existence of Marco’s
Charchan; for it was impossible to doubt that in the CHACHAN and
LOB of this Itinerary we had his Charchan and Lop; and his route to
the verge of the Great Desert was thus made clear.

Mr. Johnson’s information made the journey from Kiria to Charchan
to be 9 marches, estimated by him to amount to 154 miles, and
adding 69 miles from Ilchi to Kiria (which he actually traversed)
we have 13 marches or 223 miles for the distance from Ilchi to
Charchan. Mr. Shaw has since obtained a route between Ilchi and Lob
on very good authority. This makes the distance to Charchan, or
_Charchand_, as it is called, 22 marches, which Mr. Shaw estimates
at 293 miles. Both give 6 marches from Charchand to Lob, which is
in fair accordance with Polo’s 5, and Shaw estimates the whole
distance from Ilchi to Lob at 373, or by another calculation at
384 miles, say roundly 380 miles. This higher estimate is to be
preferred to Mr. Johnson’s for a reason which will appear under
next chapter.

Mr. Shaw’s informant, Rozi of Khotan, who had lived twelve years
at Charchand, described the latter as a small town with a district
extending on both sides of a stream which flows to Lob, _and which
affords Jade_. The people are Musulmans. They grow wheat, Indian
corn, pears, and apples, etc., but no cotton or rice. It stands in
a great plain, but the mountains are not far off. The nature of the
products leads Mr. Shaw to think it must stand a good deal higher
than Ilchi (4000), perhaps at about 6000 feet. I may observe that
the Chinese hydrography of the Kashgar Basin, translated by Julien
in the _N. An. des Voyages_ for 1846 (vol. iii.), seems to imply
that mountains from the south approach within some 20 miles of the
Tarim River, between the longitude of Shayar and Lake Lop. The
people of Lob are Musulman also, but very uncivilised. The Lake is
salt. The hydrography calls it about 200 _li_ (say 66 miles) from
E. to W. and half that from N. to S., and expresses the old belief
that it forms the subterranean source of the Hwang-Ho. Shaw’s
Itinerary shows “salt pools” at six of the stations between Kiria
and Charchand, so Marco’s memory in this also was exact.

_Nia_, a town two marches from Kiria according to Johnson, or
four according to Shaw, is probably the ancient city of Ni-jang
of the ancient Chinese Itineraries, which lay 30 or 40 miles on
the China side of Pima, in the middle of a great marsh, and formed
the eastern frontier of Khotan bordering on the Desert. (_J. R. G.
S._ XXXVII. pp. 13 and 44; also Sir H. Rawlinson in XLII. p. 503;
_Erskine’s Baber and Humayun_, I. 42; _Proc. R. G. S._ vol. xvi.
pp. 244–249; _J. A. S. B._ IV. 656; _H. de la V. de Khotan_, u.s.)

[The Charchan of Marco Polo seems to have been built to the west
of the present oasis, a little south of the road to Kiria, where
ruined houses have been found. It must have been destroyed before
the 16th century, since Mirza Haidar does not mention it. It was
not anterior to the 7th century, as it did not exist at the time of
Hiuen Tsang. (Cf. _Grenard_, III. p. 146.)

Grenard says (pp. 183–184) that he examined the remains of what
is called the old town of Charchan, traces of the ancient canal,
ruins of dwellings deep into the sand, of which the walls built
of large and solid-baked bricks, are pretty well preserved. Save
these bricks, “I found hardly anything, the inhabitants have
pillaged everything long ago. I attempted some excavating, which
turned out to be without result, as far as I was concerned; but
the superstitious natives declared that they were the cause of a
violent storm which took place soon after. There are similar ruins
in the environs, at Yantak Koudouk, at Tatrang, one day’s march
to the north, and at Ouadjchahari at five days to the north-east,
which corresponds to the position assigned to Lop by Marco Polo.”
(See _Grenard’s Haute Asie_ on _Nia_.)

Palladius is quite mistaken (_l.c._ p. 3) in saying that the
“Charchan” of Marco Polo is to be found in the present province of
Karashar. (Cf. _T. W. Kingsmill’s Notes on Marco Polo’s Route from
Khoten to China_, _Chinese Recorder_, VII. pp. 338–343; _Notes on
Doctor Sven Hedin’s Discoveries in the Valley of the Tarim, its
Cities and Peoples_, _China Review_, XXIV. No. II. pp. 59–64.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XXXIX.

OF THE CITY OF LOP AND THE GREAT DESERT.

Lop is a large town at the edge of the Desert, which is called the
Desert of Lop, and is situated between east and north-east. It belongs
to the Great Kaan, and the people worship Mahommet. Now, such persons
as propose to cross the Desert take a week’s rest in this town to
refresh themselves and their cattle; and then they make ready for
the journey, taking with them a month’s supply for man and beast. On
quitting this city they enter the Desert.

The length of this Desert is so great that ’tis said it would take a
year and more to ride from one end of it to the other. And here, where
its breadth is least, it takes a month to cross it. ’Tis all composed
of hills and valleys of sand, and not a thing to eat is to be found
on it. But after riding for a day and a night you find fresh water,
enough mayhap for some 50 or 100 persons with their beasts, but not for
more. And all across the Desert you will find water in like manner,
that is to say, in some 28 places altogether you will find good water,
but in no great quantity; and in four places also you find brackish
water.{1}

Beasts there are none; for there is nought for them to eat. But there
is a marvellous thing related of this Desert, which is that when
travellers are on the move by night, and one of them chances to lag
behind or to fall asleep or the like, when he tries to gain his company
again he will hear spirits talking, and will suppose them to be his
comrades. Sometimes the spirits will call him by name; and thus shall a
traveller ofttimes be led astray so that he never finds his party. And
in this way many have perished. [Sometimes the stray travellers will
hear as it were the tramp and hum of a great cavalcade of people away
from the real line of road, and taking this to be their own company
they will follow the sound; and when day breaks they find that a cheat
has been put on them and that they are in an ill plight.{2}] Even
in the day-time one hears those spirits talking. And sometimes you
shall hear the sound of a variety of musical instruments, and still
more commonly the sound of drums. [Hence in making this journey ’tis
customary for travellers to keep close together. All the animals too
have bells at their necks, so that they cannot easily get astray. And
at sleeping-time a signal is put up to show the direction of the next
march.]

So thus it is that the Desert is crossed.{3}

NOTE 1.—LOP appears to be the _Napopo_, _i.e._ _Navapa_, of Hiuen
Tsang, called also the country of _Leulan_, in the Desert. (_Mém._
II. p. 247.) _Navapa_ looks like Sanskrit. If so, this carries
ancient Indian influence to the verge of the great Gobi. [See
_supra_, p. 190.] It is difficult to reconcile with our maps the
statement of a thirty days’ journey across the Desert from Lop
to Shachau. Ritter’s extracts, indeed, regarding this Desert,
show that the constant occurrence of sandhills and deep drifts
(our traveller’s “hills and valleys of sand”) makes the passage
extremely difficult for carts and cattle. (III. 375.) But I suspect
that there is some material error in the longitude of Lake Lop as
represented in our maps, and that it should be placed _something
like three degrees_ more to the westward than we find it (_e.g._)
in Kiepert’s Map of Asia. By that map Khotan is not far short of
600 miles from the western extremity of Lake Lop. By Johnson’s
Itinerary (including his own journey to Kiria) it is only 338 miles
from Ilchi to Lob. Mr. Shaw, as we have seen, gives us a little
more, but it is only even then 380. Polo unfortunately omits his
usual estimate for the extent of the “Province of Charchan,” so he
affords us no complete datum. But his distance between Charchan and
Lob agrees fairly, as we have seen, with that both of Johnson and
of Shaw, and the elbow on the road from Kiria to Charchan (_supra_,
p. 192) necessitates our still further abridging the longitude
between Khotan and Lop. (See Shaw’s remarks in _Proc. R. G. S._
XVI. 243.)

[This desert was known in China of old by the name of _Lew-sha_,
_i.e._ “Quicksand,” or literally, “Flowing sands.” (_Palladius,
Jour. N. China B. R. As. Soc._ N.S. X. 1875, p. 4.)

A most interesting problem is connected with the situation of
Lob-nor which led to some controversy between Baron von Richthofen
and Prjevalsky. The latter placed the lake one degree more to the
south than the Chinese did, and found that its water was sweet.
Richthofen agreed with the Chinese Topographers and wrote in a
letter to Sir Henry Yule: “I send you two tracings; one of them is
a true copy of the Chinese map, the other is made from a sketch
which I constructed to-day, and on which I tried to put down the
Chinese Topography together with that of Prjevalsky. It appears
evident—(1) That Prjevalsky travelled by the ancient road to a
point south of the true Lop-noor; (2) that long before he reached
this point he found the river courses quite different from what
they had been formerly; and (3) that following one of the new
rivers which flows due south by a new road, he reached the two
sweet-water lakes, one of which answers to the ancient Khas-omo.
I use the word ‘new’ merely by way of comparison with the state
of things in Kien-long’s time, when the map was made. It appears
that the Chinese map shows the Khas Lake too far north to cover the
Kara-Koshun. The bifurcation of the roads south of the lake nearly
resembles that which is marked by Prjevalsky.” (Preface of E. D.
Morgan’s transl. of _From Kulja across the Tian Shan to Lob-nor_,
by Colonel N. Prjevalsky, London, 1879, p. iv.) In this same volume
Baron von Richthofen’s remarks are given (pp. 135–159, with a
map, p. 144), showing comparison between Chinese and Prjevalsky’s
Geography from tracings by Baron von Richthofen and (pp. 160–165) a
translation of Prjevalsky’s replies to the Baron’s criticisms.

Now the Swedish traveller, Dr. Sven Hedin, claims to have settled
this knotty point. Going from Korla, south-west of Kara-shahr, by
a road at the foot of the Kurugh-tagh and between these mountains
and the Koncheh Daria, he discovered the ruins of two fortresses,
and a series of milestones (potaïs). These tall pyramids of clay
and wood, indicating distances in _lis_, show the existence at an
ancient period of a road with a large traffic between Korla and
an unknown place to the south-east, probably on the shores of the
Chinese Lob-nor. Prjevalsky, who passed between the Lower Tarim and
the Koncheh Daria, could not see a lake or the remains of a lake
to the east of this river. The Koncheh Daria expands into a marshy
basin, the Malta Kul, from which it divides into two branches, the
Kuntiekkich Tarim (East River) and the Ilek (river) to the E.S.E.
Dr. Sven Hedin, after following the course of the Ilek for three
days (4th April, 1896) found a large sheet of water in the valley
at the very place marked by the Chinese Topographers and Richthofen
for the Lob-nor. This mass of water is divided up by the natives
into Avullu Kul, Kara Kul, Tayek Kul, and Arka Kul, which are
actually almost filled up with reeds. Dr. Sven Hedin afterwards
visited the Lob-nor of Prjevalsky, and reached its western
extremity, the Kara-buran (black storm) on the 17th April. In 1885,
Prjevalsky had found the Lob-nor an immense lake; four years later
Prince Henri d’Orléans saw it greatly reduced in size, and Dr. Sven
Hedin discovered but pools of water. In the meantime, since 1885,
the northern (Chinese) Lob-nor has gradually filled up, so the lake
is somewhat vagrant. Dr. Sven Hedin says that from his observations
he can assert that Prjevalsky’s lake is of recent formation.

So Marco Polo’s Lob-nor should be the northern or Chinese lake.

Another proof of this given by Dr. Sven Hedin is that the Chinese
give the name of Lob to the region between Arghan and Tikkenlik,
unknown in the country of the southern lake. The existence of two
lakes shows what a quantity of water from the Thian Shan, the
Eastern Pamir, and Northern Tibet flows into the basin of the
Tarim. The Russian Lieutenant K. P. Kozlov has tried since to prove
that the Chinese Lob-nor is the Kara-Koshun (Black district),
which is a second lake formed by the Tarim, which discharges
into and issues from the lake Kara-buran. Kozlov’s arguments are
published in the _Isvestia_ of the Russian Geographical Society,
and in a separate pamphlet. _The Geog. Jour._ (June, 1898, pp.
652–658) contains _The Lob-nor Controversy_, a full statement
of the case, summarising Kozlov’s pamphlet. Among the documents
relating to the controversy, Kozlov “quotes passages from the
Chinese work _Si-yui-shui-dao-tsi_, published in 1823, relative to
the region, and gives a reduced copy of the Chinese Map published
by Dr. Georg Wegener in 1863, upon which map Richthofen and Sven
Hedin based their arguments.” Kozlov’s final conclusions (_Geog.
Jour._ _l.c._ pp. 657–658) are the following: “The Koncheh-daria,
since very remote times till the present day, has moved a long way.
The spot Gherelgan may be taken as a spot of relative permanence
of its bed, while the basis of its delta is a line traced from the
farthest northern border of the area of salt clays surrounding the
Lob-nor to the Tarim. At a later period the Koncheh-daria mostly
influenced the lower Tarim, and each time a change occurred in the
latter’s discharge, the Koncheh took a more westward course, to
the detriment of its old eastern branch (Ilek). Always following
the gradually receding humidity, the vegetable life changed too,
while moving sands were taking its place, conquering more and more
ground for the desert, and marking their conquest by remains of old
shore-lines....

“The facts noticed by Sven Hedin have thus another meaning—the
desert to the east of the lakes, which he discovered, was formed,
not by Lob-nor, which is situated 1° southwards, but by the
Koncheh-daria, in its unremitted deflection to the west. The old
bed Ilek, lake-shaped in places, and having a belt of salt lagoons
and swamps along its eastern shores, represents remains of waters
belonging, not to Lob-nor, but to the shifting river which has
abandoned this old bed.

“These facts and explanations refute the second point of the
arguments which were brought forward by Sven Hedin in favour of his
hypothesis, asserting the existence of some other Lob-nor.

“I accept the third point of his objections, namely, that the
grandfathers of the present inhabitants of the Lob-nor lived by
a lake whose position was more to the north of Lob-nor; that was
mentioned already by Pievtsov, and the lake was Uchu-Kul.

“Why Marco Polo never mentioned the Lob-nor, I leave to more
competent persons to decide.

“The only inference which I can make from the preceding account is
that the Kara-Koshun-Kul is not only the Lob-nor of my lamented
teacher, N. M. Prjevalsky, but also _the ancient, the historical,
and the true Lob-nor_ of the Chinese geographers. So it was during
the last thousand years, and so will it remain, if ‘the river of
time’ in its running has not effaced it from the face of the Earth.”

To Kozlov’s query: “Why Marco Polo never mentioned the Lob-nor,
I leave to more competent persons to decide,” I have little
hesitation in replying that he did not mention the Lob-nor because
he did not see it. From Charchan, he followed, I believe, neither
Prjevalsky’s nor Pievtsov’s route, but the old route from Khotan to
Si-ngan fu, in the old bed of the Charchan daria, above and almost
parallel to the new bed, to the Tarim,—then between Sven Hedin’s
and Prjevalsky’s lakes, and across the desert to Shachau to join
the ancient Chinese road of the Han Dynasty, partly explored by M.
Bonin from Shachau.

There is no doubt as to the discovery of Prjevalsky’s Lob-nor, but
this does not appear to be the old Chinese Lob-nor; in fact, there
may have been several lakes co-existent; probably there was one to
the east of the mass of water described by Dr. Sven Hedin, near
the old route from Korla to Shachau; there is no fixity in these
waterspreads and the soil of this part of Asia, and in the course
of a few years some discrepancies will naturally arise between the
observations of different travellers. But as I think that Marco
Polo did not see one of the Lob-nor, but travelled between them,
there is no necessity to enlarge on this question, fully treated of
in this note.

See besides the works mentioned above: _Nord—Tibet und Lob-nur
Gebiet_.... herausg. von Dr. G. Wegener. Berlin, 1893. (Sep. abd.
_Zeit. Ges. f. Erdk._)—_Die Geog. wiss. Ergebnisse meiner Reisen in
Zentralasien_, 1894–1897, von Dr. Sven Hedin, Gotha, J. Perthes,
1900.

Bonvalot and Prince Henri d’Orléans (_De Paris au Tonkin, à
travers le Tibet inconnu_, Paris, 1892) followed this Itinerary:
Semipalatinsk, Kulja, Korla, Lob-nor, Charkalyk, Altyn Tagh,
almost a straight line to Tengri Nor, then to Batang, Ta Tsien lu,
Ning-yuan, Yun-nan-fu, Mong-tsŭ, and Tung-King.

Bonvalot (28th October, 1889) describes Lob in this manner: “The
village of Lob is situated at some distance from [the Charchan
daria]; its inhabitants come to see us; they are miserable,
hungry, _étiques_; they offer us for sale smoked fish, duck taken
with _lacet_. Some small presents soon make friends of them.
They apprize us that news has spread that Pievtsov, the Russian
traveller, will soon arrive” (_l.c._ p. 75). From Charkalyk, Prince
Henri d’Orléans and Father Dedeken visited Lob-nor (_l.c._ p.
77 _et seq._), but it was almost dry; the water had receded since
Prjevalsky’s visit, thirteen years before. The Prince says the
Lob-nor he saw was not Prjevalsky’s, nor was the latter’s lake the
mass of water on Chinese maps; an old sorceress gave confirmation
of the fact to the travellers. According to a tradition known from
one generation to another, there was at this place a large inland
sea without reeds, and the elders had seen in their youth large
ponds; they say that the earth impregnated with saltpetre absorbs
the water. The Prince says, according to tradition, _Lob_ is a
local name meaning “wild animals,” and it was given to the country
at the time it was crossed by Kalmuk caravans; they added to the
name _Lob_ the Mongol word _Nor_ (Great Lake). The travellers (p.
109) note that in fact the name Lob-nor does not apply to a Lake,
but to the whole marshy part of the country watered by the Tarim,
from the village of Lob to end of the river.

The Pievtsov expedition “visited the Lob-nor (2650 feet) and the
Tarim, whose proper name is Yarkend-daria (_tarim_ means ‘a tilled
field’ in Kashgarian). The lake is rapidly drying up, and a very
old man, 110 years old, whom Pievtsov spoke to (his son, 52 years
old, was the only one who could understand the old man), said
that he would not have recognized the land if he had been absent
all this time. Ninety years ago there was only a narrow strip of
rushes in the south-west part of the lake, and the Yarkend-daria
entered it 2½ miles to the west of its present mouth, where now
stands the village of Abdal. The lake was then much deeper, and
several villages, now abandoned, stood on its shores. There was
also much more fish, and otters, which used to live there, but
have long since disappeared. As to the Yarkend-daria, tradition
says that two hundred years ago it used to enter another smaller
lake, Uchukul, which was connected by a channel with the Lob-nor.
This old bed, named Shirga-chapkan, can still be traced by the
trees which grew along it. The greater previous extension of the
Lob-nor is also confirmed by the freshwater molluscs (_Limnaea
uricularia_, var. _ventricosa_, _L. stagnalis_, _L. peregra_, and
_Planorbis sibiricus_), which are found at a distance from its
present banks. Another lake, 400 miles in circumference, Kara-boyön
(_black isthmus_), lies, as is known, 27 miles to the south-west
of Lob-nor. To the east of the lake, a salt desert stretches for a
seven days’ march, and further on begin the Kum-tagh sands, where
wild camels live.” (_Geog. Jour._ IX. 1897, p. 552.)

Grenard (III. pp. 194–195) discusses the Lob-nor question and the
formation of four new lakes by the Koncheh-daria called by the
natives beginning at the north; Kara Kul, Tayek Kul, Sugut Kul,
Tokum Kul. He does not accept Baron v. Richthofen’s theory, and
believes that the old Lob is the lake seen by Prjevalsky.

He says (p. 149): “Lop must be looked for on the actual road from
Charchan to Charkalyk. Ouash Shahri, five days from Charchan,
and where small ruins are to be found, corresponds well to the
position of Lop according to Marco Polo, a few degrees of the
compass near. But the stream which passes at this spot could
never be important enough for the wants of a considerable centre
of habitation and the ruins of Ouash Shahri are more of a hamlet
than of a town. Moreover, Lop was certainly the meeting point of
the roads of Kashgar, Urumtsi, Shachau, L’Hasa, and Khotan, and it
is to this fact that this town, situated in a very poor country,
owed its relative importance. Now, it is impossible that these
roads crossed at Ouash Shahri. I believe that Lop was built on the
site of Charkalyk itself. The Venetian traveller gives five days’
journey between Charchan and Lop, whilst Charkalyk is really seven
days from Charchan; but the objection does not appear sufficient to
me: Marco Polo may well have made a mistake of two days.” (III. pp.
149–150.)

The Chinese Governor of Urumtsi found some years ago to the
north-west of the Lob-nor, on the banks of the Tarim, and within
five days of Charkalyk, a town bearing the same name, though not on
the same site as the Lop of Marco Polo.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“The waste and desert places of the Earth are, so to speak,
the characters which sin has visibly impressed on the outward
creation; its signs and symbols there.... Out of a true feeling
of this, men have ever conceived of the Wilderness as the haunt
of evil spirits. In the old Persian religion Ahriman and his evil
Spirits inhabit the steppes and wastes of Turan, to the north of
the happy Iran, which stands under the dominion of Ormuzd; exactly
as with the Egyptians, the evil Typhon is the Lord of the Libyan
sand-wastes, and Osiris of the fertile Egypt.” (_Archbp. Trench,
Studies in the Gospels_, p. 7.) Terror, and the seeming absence of
a beneficent Providence, are suggestions of the Desert which must
have led men to associate it with evil spirits, rather than the
figure with which this passage begins; no spontaneous conception
surely, however appropriate as a moral image.

“According to the belief of the nations of Central Asia,” says
I. J. Schmidt, “the earth and its interior, as well as the
encompassing atmosphere, are filled with Spiritual Beings, which
exercise an influence, partly beneficent, partly malignant, on
the whole of organic and inorganic nature.... Especially are
Deserts and other wild or uninhabited tracts, or regions in
which the influences of nature are displayed on a gigantic and
terrible scale, regarded as the chief abode or rendezvous of evil
Spirits.... And hence the steppes of Turan, and in particular
the great sandy Desert of Gobi have been looked on as the
dwelling-place of malignant beings, from days of hoar antiquity.”

The Chinese historian Ma Twan-lin informs us that there were two
roads from China into the Uighúr country (towards Karashahr). The
longest but easiest road was by Kamul. The other was much shorter,
and apparently corresponded, as far as Lop, to that described in
this chapter. “By this you have to cross a plain of sand, extending
for more than 100 leagues. You see nothing in any direction but
the sky and the sands, without the slightest trace of a road; and
travellers find nothing to guide them but the bones of men and
beasts and the droppings of camels. During the passage of this
wilderness you hear sounds, sometimes of singing, sometimes of
wailing; and it has often happened that travellers going aside to
see what those sounds might be have strayed from their course and
been entirely lost; for they were voices of spirits and goblins.
’Tis for these reasons that travellers and merchants often prefer
the much longer route by Kamul.” (_Visdelou_, p. 139.)

“In the Desert” (this same desert), says Fa-hian, “there are a
great many evil demons; there are also sirocco winds, which kill
all who encounter them. There are no birds or beasts to be seen;
but so far as the eye can reach, the route is marked out by the
bleached bones of men who have perished in the attempt to cross.”

[“The Lew-sha was the subject of various most exaggerated stories.
We find more trustworthy accounts of it in the _Chow shu_; thus it
is mentioned in that history, that there sometimes arises in this
desert a ‘burning wind,’ pernicious to men and cattle; in such
cases the old camels of the caravan, having a presentiment of its
approach, flock shrieking to one place, lie down on the ground and
hide their heads in the sand. On this signal, the travellers also
lie down, close nose and mouth, and remain in this position until
the hurricane abates. Unless these precautions are taken, men and
beasts inevitably perish.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 4.)

A friend writes to me that he thinks that the accounts of strange
noises in the desert would find a remarkable corroboration in the
narratives of travellers through the central desert of Australia.
They conjecture that they are caused by the sudden falling of
cliffs of sand as the temperature changes at night time.—H. C.]

Hiuen Tsang, in his passage of the Desert, both outward and
homeward, speaks of visual illusions; such as visions of troops
marching and halting with gleaming arms and waving banners,
constantly shifting, vanishing, and reappearing, “imagery created
by demons.” A voice behind him calls, “Fear not! fear not!”
Troubled by these fantasies on one occasion, he prays to Kwan-yin
(a Buddhist divinity); still he could not entirely get rid of them;
but as soon as he had pronounced a few words from the _Prajna_ (a
holy book), they vanished in the twinkling of an eye.

These Goblins are not peculiar to the Gobi, though that appears
to be their most favoured haunt. The awe of the vast and solitary
Desert raises them in all similar localities. Pliny speaks of the
phantoms that appear and vanish in the deserts of Africa; Aethicus,
the early Christian cosmographer, speaks, though incredulous, of
the stories that were told of the voices of singers and revellers
in the desert; Mas’udi tells of the _Ghúls_, which in the deserts
appear to travellers by night and in lonely hours; the traveller,
taking them for comrades, follows and is led astray. But the wise
revile them and the Ghúls vanish. Thus also Apollonius of Tyana
and his companions, in a desert near the Indus by moonlight, see
an _Empusa_ or Ghúl taking many forms. They revile it, and it goes
off uttering shrill cries. Mas’udi also speaks of the mysterious
voices heard by lone wayfarers in the Desert, and he gives a
rational explanation of them. Ibn Batuta relates a like legend of
the Western Sahara: “If the messenger be solitary, the demons sport
with him and fascinate him, so that he strays from his course and
perishes.” The Afghan and Persian wildernesses also have their
_Ghúl-i-Beában_ or Goblin of the Waste, a gigantic and fearful
spectre which devours travellers; and even the Gael of the West
Highlands have the _Direach Ghlinn Eitidh_, the Desert Creature
of Glen Eiti, which, one-handed, one-eyed, one-legged, seems
exactly to answer to the Arabian Nesnás or _Empusa_. Nicolò Conti
in the Chaldaean desert is aroused at midnight by a great noise,
and sees a vast multitude pass by. The merchants tell him that
these are demons who are in the habit of traversing the deserts.
(_Schmidt’s San. Setzen_, p. 352; _V. et V. de H. T._ 23, 28, 289;
_Pliny_, VII. 2; _Philostratus_, Bk. II. ch. iv.; _Prairies d’Or_,
III. 315, 324; _Beale’s Fahian_; _Campbell’s Popular Tales of the
W. Highlands_, IV. 326; _I. B._ IV. 382; _Elphinstone_, I. 291;
_Chodzko’s Pop. Poetry of Persia_, p. 48; _Conti_, p. 4; _Forsyth,
J. R. G. S._ XLVII. 1877, p. 4.)

The sound of musical instruments, chiefly of drums, is a phenomenon
of another class, and is really produced in certain situations
among sandhills when the sand is disturbed. [See _supra_.] A
very striking account of a phenomenon of this kind regarded as
supernatural is given by Friar Odoric, whose experience I fancy I
have traced to the _Reg Ruwán_ or “Flowing Sand” north of Kabul.
Besides this celebrated example, which has been described also by
the Emperor Baber, I have noted that equally well-known one of the
_Jibal Naḳús_, or “Hill of the Bell,” in the Sinai Desert; Wadi
Hamade, in the vicinity of the same Desert; the _Jibal-ul-Thabúl_,
or “Hill of the Drums,” between Medina and Mecca; one on the
Island of Eigg, in the Hebrides, discovered by Hugh Miller; one
among the Medanos or Sandhills of Arequipa, described to me by Mr.
C. Markham; the Bramador or rumbling mountain of Tarapaca; one
in hills between the Ulba and the Irtish, in the vicinity of the
Altai, called the Almanac Hills, because the sounds are supposed
to prognosticate weather-changes; and a remarkable example near
Kolberg on the shore of Pomerania. A Chinese narrative of the 10th
century mentions the phenomenon as known near Kwachau, on the
eastern border of the Lop Desert, under the name of the “Singing
Sands”; and Sir F. Goldsmid has recently made us acquainted with
a second _Reg Ruwán_, on a hill near the Perso-Afghan frontier,
a little to the north of Sístán. The place is frequented in
pilgrimage. (See _Cathay_, pp. ccxliv. 156, 398; _Ritter_, II. 204;
_Aus der Natur_, Leipzig, No. 47 [of 1868], p. 752; _Rémusat, H. de
Khotan_, p. 74; _Proc. R. G. S._ XVII. 91.)

NOTE 3.—[We learn from Joseph Martin, quoted by Grenard, p. 170
(who met this unfortunate French traveller at Khotan, on his way
from Peking to Marghelan, where he died), that from Shachau to
Abdal, on the Lob-nor, there are twelve days of desert, sandy
only during the first two days, stony afterwards. Occasionally a
little grass is to be found for the camels; water is to be found
everywhere. M. Bonin went from Shachau to the north-west towards
the Kara-nor, then to the west, but lack of water compelled him to
go back to Shachau. Along this road, every five _lis_, are to be
found towers built with clay, and about 30 feet high, abandoned by
the Chinese, who do not seem to have kept a remembrance of them
in the country; this route seems to be a continuation of the Kan
Suh Imperial highway. A wall now destroyed connected these towers
together. “There is no doubt,” writes M. Bonin, “that all these
remains are those of the great route, vainly sought after till now,
which, under the Han Dynasty, ran to China through Bactria, Pamir,
Eastern Turkestan, the Desert of Gobi, and Kan Suh: it is in part
the route followed by Marco Polo, when he went from Charchan to
Shachau, by the city of Lob.” The route of the Han has been also
looked for, more to the south, and it was believed that it was
the same as that of the Astyn Tagh, followed by Mr. Littledale in
1893, who travelled one month from Abdal (Lob-nor) to Shachau; M.
Bonin, who explored also this route, and was twenty-three days from
Shachau to Lob-nor, says it could not be a commercial road. Dr.
Sven Hedin saw four or five towers eastward of the junction of the
Tarim and the Koncheh-daria; it may possibly have been another part
of the road seen by M. Bonin. (See _La Géographie_, 15th March,
1901, p. 173.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XL.

CONCERNING THE GREAT PROVINCE OF TANGUT.

After you have travelled thirty days through the Desert, as I have
described, you come to a city called SACHIU, lying between north-east
and east; it belongs to the Great Kaan, and is in a province called
TANGUT.{1} The people are for the most part Idolaters, but there
are also some Nestorian Christians and some Saracens. The Idolaters
have a peculiar language, and are no traders, but live by their
agriculture.{2} They have a great many abbeys and minsters full of
idols of sundry fashions, to which they pay great honour and reverence,
worshipping them and sacrificing to them with much ado. For example,
such as have children will feed up a sheep in honour of the idol, and
at the New Year, or on the day of the Idol’s Feast, they will take
their children and the sheep along with them into the presence of the
idol with great ceremony. Then they will have the sheep slaughtered
and cooked, and again present it before the idol with like reverence,
and leave it there before him, whilst they are reciting the offices
of their worship and their prayers for the idol’s blessing on their
children. And, if you will believe them, the idol feeds on the meat
that is set before it! After these ceremonies they take up the flesh
and carry it home, and call together all their kindred to eat it with
them in great festivity [the idol-priests receiving for their portion
the head, feet, entrails, and skin, with some part of the meat]. After
they have eaten, they collect the bones that are left and store them
carefully in a hutch.{3}

And you must know that all the Idolaters in the world burn their dead.
And when they are going to carry a body to the burning, the kinsfolk
build a wooden house on the way to the spot, and drape it with cloths
of silk and gold. When the body is going past this building they call
a halt and set before it wine and meat and other eatables; and this
they do with the assurance that the defunct will be received with the
like attentions in the other world. All the minstrelsy in the town goes
playing before the body; and when it reaches the burning-place the
kinsfolk are prepared with figures cut out of parchment and paper in
the shape of men and horses and camels, and also with round pieces of
paper like gold coins, and all these they burn along with the corpse.
For they say that in the other world the defunct will be provided with
slaves and cattle and money, just in proportion to the amount of such
pieces of paper that has been burnt along with him.{4}

But they never burn their dead until they have [sent for the
astrologers, and told them the year, the day, and the hour of the
deceased person’s birth, and when the astrologers have ascertained
under what constellation, planet, and sign he was born, they declare
the day on which, by the rules of their art, he ought to be burnt].
And till that day arrive they keep the body, so that ’tis sometimes a
matter of six months, more or less, before it comes to be burnt.{5}

Now the way they keep the body in the house is this: They make a
coffin first of a good span in thickness, very carefully joined and
daintily painted. This they fill up with camphor and spices, to keep
off corruption [stopping the joints with pitch and lime], and then they
cover it with a fine cloth. Every day as long as the body is kept, they
set a table before the dead covered with food; and they will have it
that the soul comes and eats and drinks: wherefore they leave the food
there as long as would be necessary in order that one should partake.
Thus they do daily. And worse still! Sometimes those soothsayers shall
tell them that ’tis not good luck to carry out the corpse by the door,
so they have to break a hole in the wall, and to draw it out that way
when it is taken to the burning.{6} And these, I assure you, are the
practices of all the Idolaters of those countries.

However, we will quit this subject, and I will tell you of another city
which lies towards the north-west at the extremity of the desert.

NOTE 1.—[The Natives of this country were called by the Chinese
_T’ang-hiang_, and by the Mongols _T’angu_ or _T’ang-wu_, and with
the plural suffix _Tangut_. The kingdom of Tangut, or in Chinese,
_Si Hia_ (Western Hia), or _Ho si_ (West of the Yellow River), was
declared independent in 982 by Li Chi Ch’ien, who had the dynastic
title or _Miao Hao_ of Tai Tsu. “The rulers of Tangut,” says Dr.
Bushell, “were scions of the Toba race, who reigned over North
China as the Wei Dynasty (A.D. 386–557), as well as in some of
the minor dynasties which succeeded. Claiming descent from the
ancient Chinese Hsia Dynasty of the second millennium B.C., they
adopted the title of _Ta Hsia_ (‘Great Hsia’), and the dynasty is
generally called by the Chinese Hsi Hsia, or Western Hsia.” This is
a list of the Tangut sovereigns, with the date of their accession
to the throne: Tai Tsu (982), Tai Tsung (1002), Ching Tsung (1032),
Yi Tsung (1049), Hui Tsung (1068), Ch’ung Tsung (1087), Jen Tsung
(1140), Huan Tsung (1194), Hsiang Tsung (1206), Shên Tsung (1213),
Hien Tsung (1223), Mo Chu (1227). In fact, the real founder of
the Dynasty was Li Yuan-hao, who conquered in 1031, the cities
of Kanchau and Suhchau from the Uighúr Turks, declaring himself
independent in 1032, and who adopted in 1036 a special script of
which we spoke when mentioning the archway at Kiuyung Kwan. His
capital was Hia chau, now Ning hia, on the Yellow River. Chinghiz
invaded Tangut three times, in 1206, 1217, and at last in 1225;
the final struggle took place the following year, when Kanchau,
Liangchau, and Suhchau fell into the hands of the Mongols. After
the death of Chinghiz (1227), the last ruler of Tangut, Li H’ien,
who surrendered the same year to Okkodaï, son of the conqueror,
was killed. The dominions of Tangut in the middle of the 11th
century, according to the _Si Hia Chi Shih Pên Mo_, quoted by Dr.
Bushell, “were bounded, according to the map, by the Sung Empire
on the south and east, by the Liao (Khitan) on the north-east, the
Tartars (Tata) on the north, the Uighúr Turks (Hui-hu) on the west,
and the Tibetans on the south-west. The Alashan Mountains stretch
along the northern frontier, and the western extends to the Jade
Gate (Yü Mên Kwan) on the border of the Desert of Gobi.” Under the
Mongol Dynasty, Kan Suh was the official name of one of the twelve
provinces of the Empire, and the popular name was Tangut.

(Dr. S. W. Bushell: _Inscriptions in the Juchen and Allied Scripts_
and _The Hsi Hsia Dynasty of Tangut_. See above, p. 29.)

“The word Tangutan applied by the Chinese and by Colonel Prjevalsky
to a Tibetan-speaking people around the Koko-nor has been explained
to me in a variety of ways by native Tangutans. A very learned lama
from the Gserdkog monastery, south-east of the Koko-nor, told me
that Tangutan, Amdoans, and Sifan were interchangeable terms, but I
fear his geographical knowledge was a little vague. The following
explanation of the term Tangut is taken from the _Hsi-tsang-fu_.
‘The Tangutans are descendants of the _Tang-tu-chüeh_. The origin
of this name is as follows: In early days, the Tangutans lived in
the Central Asian Chin-shan, where they were workers of iron. They
made a model of the Chin-shan, which, in shape, resembled an iron
helmet. Now, in their language, “iron helmet” is _Tang-küeh_, hence
the name of the country. To the present day, the Tangutans of the
Koko-nor wear a hat shaped like a pot, high crowned and narrow,
rimmed with red fringe sewn on it, so that it looks like an iron
helmet, and this is a proof of [the accuracy of the derivation].’
Although the proof is not very satisfactory, it is as good as we
are often offered by authors with greater pretension to learning.

“If I remember rightly, Prjevalsky derives the name from two words
meaning ‘black tents.’” (_W. W. Rockhill, China Br. R. As. Soc._,
XX. pp. 278–279.)

“Chinese authorities tell us that the name [Tangut] was originally
borne by a people living in the Altaï, and that the word is
Turkish.... The population of Tangut was a mixture of Tibetans,
Turks, Uighúrs, Tukuhuns, Chinese, etc.” (_Rockhill_, _Rubruck_, p.
150, note.—H. C.)]

_Sachiu_ is SHACHAU, “Sand-district,” an outpost of China Proper,
at the eastern verge of the worst part of the Sandy Desert. It is
recorded to have been fortified in the 1st century as a barrier
against the Hiongnu.

[The name of Shachau dates from A.D. 622, when it was founded by
the first emperor of the T’ang Dynasty. Formerly, Shachau was one
of the Chinese colonies established by the Han, at the expense of
the Hiongnu; it was called T’ung hoang (B.C. 111), a name still
given to Shachau; the other colonies were Kiu-kaan (Suhchau, B.C.
121) and Chang-yé (Kanchau, B.C. 111). (See _Bretschneider, Med.
Res._ II. 18.)

“Sha-chow, the present _Tun-hwang-hien_ (a few _li_ east of the
ancient town).... In 1820, or about that time, an attempt was made
to re-establish the ancient direct way between Sha-chow and Khotan.
With this object in view, an exploring party of ten men was sent
from Khotan towards Sha-chow; this party wandered in the desert
over a month, and found neither dwellings nor roads, but pastures
and water everywhere. M. Polo omits to mention a remarkable place
at Sha-chow, a sandy hillock (a short distance south of this town)
known under the name of _Ming-sha shan_—the ‘rumbling sandhill.’
The sand, in rolling down the hill, produces a particular sound,
similar to that of distant thunder. In M. Polo’s time (1292),
Khubilaï removed the inhabitants of Sha-chow to the interior of
China; fearing, probably, the aggression of the seditious princes;
and his successor, in 1303, placed there a garrison of ten thousand
men.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 5.)

“Sha-chau is one of the best oases of Central Asia. It is situated
at the foot of the Nan-shan range, at a height of 3700 feet above
the sea, and occupies an area of about 200 square miles, the whole
of which is thickly inhabited by Chinese. Sha-chau is interesting
as the meeting-place of three expeditions started independently
from Russia, India, and China. Just two months before Prjevalsky
reached this town, it was visited by Count Szechényi [April, 1879],
and eighteen months afterwards Pundit A-k, whose report of it
agrees fairly well with that of our traveller, also stayed here.
Both Prejevalsky and Szechényi remark on some curious caves in a
valley near Sha-chau containing Buddhistic clay idols.[1] These
caves were in Marco Polo’s time the resort of numerous worshippers,
and are said to date back to the Han Dynasty.” (_Prejevalsky’s
Journeys_ ... by E. Delmar Morgan, _Proc. R. G. S._ IX. 1887, pp.
217–218.)—H. C.]

(_Ritter_, II. 205; _Neumann_, p. 616; _Cathay_, 269, 274;
_Erdmann_, 155; _Erman_, II. 267; _Mag. Asiat._ II. 213.)

NOTE 2.—By _Idolaters_, Polo here means Buddhists, as generally.
We do not know whether the Buddhism here was a recent introduction
from Tibet, or a relic of the old Buddhism of Khotan and other
Central Asian kingdoms, but most probably it was the former, and
the “peculiar language” ascribed to them may have been, as Neumann
supposes, Tibetan. This language in modern Mongolia answers to the
Latin of the Mass Book, indeed with a curious exactness, for in
both cases the holy tongue is not that of the original propagators
of the respective religions, but that of the hierarchy which has
assumed their government. In the Lamaitic convents of China and
Manchuria also the Tibetan only is used in worship, except at one
privileged temple at Peking. (_Koeppen_, II. 288.) The language
intended by Polo may, however, have been a Chinese dialect. (See
notes 1 and 4.) The Nestorians must have been tolerably numerous in
Tangut, for it formed a metropolitan province of their Church.

NOTE 3.—A practice resembling this is mentioned by Pallas as
existing among the Buddhist Kalmaks, a relic of their old Shaman
superstitions, which the Lamas profess to decry, but sometimes
take part in. “Rich Kalmaks select from their flock a ram for
dedication, which gets the name of _Tengri Tockho_, ‘Heaven’s Ram.’
It must be a white one with a yellow head. He must never be shorn
or sold, but when he gets old, and the owner chooses to dedicate
a fresh one, then the old one must be sacrificed. This is usually
done in autumn, when the sheep are fattest, and the neighbours are
called together to eat the sacrifice. A fortunate day is selected,
and the ram is slaughtered amid the cries of the sorcerer directed
towards the sunrise, and the diligent sprinkling of milk for the
benefit of the Spirits of the Air. The flesh is eaten, but the
skeleton with a part of the fat is burnt on a turf altar erected on
four pillars of an ell and a half high, and the skin, with the head
and feet, is then hung up in the way practised by the Buraets.”
(_Sammlungen_, II. 346.)

NOTE 4.—Several of the customs of Tangut mentioned in this chapter
are essentially Chinese, and are perhaps introduced here because
it was on entering Tangut that the traveller first came in contact
with Chinese peculiarities. This is true of the manner of forming
coffins, and keeping them with the body in the house, serving food
before the coffin whilst it is so kept, the burning of paper
and papier-maché figures of slaves, horses, etc., at the tomb.
Chinese settlers were very numerous at Shachau and the neighbouring
Kwachau, even in the 10th century. (_Ritter_, II. 213.) [“Keeping
a body unburied for a considerable time is called _khǹg koan_,
‘to conceal or store away a coffin,’ or _thîng koan_, ‘to detain
a coffin.’ It is, of course, a matter of necessity in such cases
to have the cracks and fissures, and especially the seam where
the case and the lid join, hermetically caulked. This is done by
means of a mixture of chunam and oil. The seams, sometimes even the
whole coffin, are pasted over with linen, and finally everything is
varnished black, or, in case of a mandarin of rank, red. In process
of time, the varnishing is repeated as many times as the family
think desirable or necessary. And in order to protect the coffin
still better against dust and moisture, it is generally covered
with sheets of oiled paper, over which comes a white pall.” (_De
Groot_, I. 106.)—H. C.] Even as regards the South of China many
of the circumstances mentioned here are strictly applicable, as
may be seen in _Doolittle’s Social Life of the Chinese_. (See, for
example, p. 135; also _Astley_, IV. 93–95, or Marsden’s quotations
from _Duhalde_.) The custom of burning the dead has been for
several centuries disused in China, but we shall see hereafter that
Polo represents it as general in his time. On the custom of burning
gilt paper in the form of gold coin, as well as of paper clothing,
paper houses, furniture, slaves, etc., see also _Medhurst_, p.
213, and _Kidd_, 177–178. No one who has read Père Huc will forget
his ludicrous account of the Lama’s charitable distribution of
paper horses for the good of disabled travellers. The manufacture
of mock money is a large business in Chinese cities. In Fuchau
there are more than thirty large establishments where it is kept
for sale. (_Doolittle_, 541.) [The Chinese believe that sheets
of paper, partly tinned over on one side, are, “according to the
prevailing conviction, turned by the process of fire into real
silver currency available in the world of darkness, and sent there
through the smoke to the soul; they are called _gûn-tsoá_, ‘silver
paper.’ Most families prefer to previously fold every sheet in
the shape of a hollow ingot, a ‘silver ingot,’ _gûn-khò_, as they
call it. This requires a great amount of labour and time, but
increases the value of the treasure immensely.” (_De Groot_, I.
25.) “Presenting paper money when paying a visit of condolence
is a custom firmly established, and accordingly complied with by
everybody with great strictness.... The paper is designed for
the equipment of the coffin, and, accordingly, always denoted by
the term _koan-thaô-tsoá_, ‘coffin paper.’ But as the receptacle
of the dead is, of course, not spacious enough to hold the whole
mass offered by so many friends, it is regularly burned by lots by
the side of the corpse, the ashes being carefully collected to be
afterwards wrapped in paper and placed in the coffin, or at the
side of the coffin, in the tomb.” (_De Groot_, I. 31–32.)—H. C.]
There can be little doubt that these latter customs are symbols of
the ancient sacrifices of human beings and valuable property on
such occasions; so Manetho states that the Egyptians in days of
yore used human sacrifices, but a certain King Amosis abolished
them and substituted images of wax. Even when the present Manchu
Dynasty first occupied the throne of China, they still retained
the practice of human sacrifice. At the death of Kanghi’s mother,
however, in 1718, when four young girls offered themselves for
sacrifice on the tomb of their mistress, the emperor would not
allow it, and prohibited for the future the sacrifice of life or
the destruction of valuables on such occasions. (_Deguignes, Voy._
I. 304.)

NOTE 5.—Even among the Tibetans and Mongols burning is only one
of the modes of disposing of the dead. “They sometimes bury their
dead: often they leave them exposed in their coffins, or cover them
with stones, paying regard to the sign under which the deceased
was born, his age, the day and hour of his death, which determine
the mode in which he is to be interred (or otherwise disposed
of). For this purpose they consult some books which are explained
to them by the Lamas.” (_Timk._ II. 312.) The extraordinary and
complex absurdities of the books in question are given in detail by
Pallas, and curiously illustrate the paragraph in the text. (See
_Sammlungen_, II. 254 _seqq._) [“The first seven days, including
that on which the demise has taken place, are generally deemed to
be lucky for the burial, especially the odd ones. But when they
have elapsed, it becomes requisite to apply to a day-professor....
The popular almanac which chiefly wields sway in Amoy and the
surrounding country, regularly stigmatises a certain number of
days as _tîng-sng jít_: ‘days of reduplication of death,’ because
encoffining or burying a dead person on such a day will entail
another loss in the family shortly afterwards.” (_De Groot_, I.
103, 99–100.)—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—The Chinese have also, according to Duhalde, a custom of
making a new opening in the wall of a house by which to carry
out the dead; and in their prisons a special hole in the wall
is provided for this office. This same custom exists among the
Esquimaux, as well as, according to Sonnerat, in Southern India,
and it used to exist in certain parts both of Holland and of
Central Italy. In the “clean village of Broek,” near Amsterdam,
those special doors may still be seen. And in certain towns of
Umbria, such as Perugia, Assisi, and Gubbio, this opening was
common, elevated some feet above the ground, and known as the “Door
of the Dead.”

I find in a list, printed by Liebrecht, of popular French
superstitions, amounting to 479 in number, condemned by Maupas du
Tour, Bishop of Evreux in 1664, the following: “When a woman lies
in of a dead child, it must not be taken out by the door of the
chamber but by the window, for if it were taken out by the door the
woman would never lie in of any but dead children.” The Samoyedes
have the superstition mentioned in the text, and act exactly as
Polo describes.

[“The body [of the Queen of Bali, 17th century] was drawn out of a
large aperture made in the wall to the right hand side of the door,
in the absurd opinion of _cheating the devil_, whom these islanders
believe to lie in wait in the ordinary passage.” (_John Crawford,
Hist. of the Indian Archipelago_, II. p. 245.)—H. C.]

And the Rev. Mr. Jaeschke writes to me from Lahaul, in British
Tibet: “Our Lama (from Central Tibet) tells us that the owner of
a house and the members of his family when they die are carried
through the house-door; but if another person dies in the house his
body is removed by some other aperture, such as a window, or the
smokehole in the roof, or a hole in the wall dug expressly for the
purpose. Or a wooden frame is made, fitting into the doorway, and
the body is then carried through; it being considered that by this
contrivance the evil consequences are escaped that might ensue,
were it carried through the ordinary, and, so to say, _undisguised_
house-door! Here, in Lahaul and the neighbouring countries, we have
not heard of such a custom.”

(_Duhalde_, quoted by Marsden; _Semedo_, p. 175; _Mr. Sala_ in
_N. and Q._, 2nd S. XI. 322; _Lubbock_, p. 500; _Sonnerat_ I. 86;
_Liebrecht’s Gervasius of Tilbury_, Hanover, 1856, p. 224; _Mag.
Asiat._ II. 93.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] M. Bonin visited in 1899 these caves which he calls “Grottoes of
Thousand Buddhas” (_Tsien Fo tung_). (_La Géographie_, 15th March,
1901, p. 171.) He found a stèle dated 1348, bearing a Buddhist
prayer in six different scripts like the inscription at Kiu Yung
Kwan. (_Rev. Hist. des Religions_, 1901, p. 393.)—H. C.

CHAPTER XLI.

OF THE PROVINCE OF CAMUL.

Camul is a province which in former days was a kingdom. It contains
numerous towns and villages, but the chief city bears the name of
CAMUL. The province lies between the two deserts; for on the one side
is the Great Desert of Lop, and on the other side is a small desert
of three days’ journey in extent.{1} The people are all Idolaters, and
have a peculiar language. They live by the fruits of the earth, which
they have in plenty, and dispose of to travellers. They are a people
who take things very easily, for they mind nothing but playing and
singing, and dancing and enjoying themselves.{2}

And it is the truth that if a foreigner comes to the house of one of
these people to lodge, the host is delighted, and desires his wife to
put herself entirely at the guest’s disposal, whilst he himself gets
out of the way, and comes back no more until the stranger shall have
taken his departure. The guest may stay and enjoy the wife’s society as
long as he lists, whilst the husband has no shame in the matter, but
indeed considers it an honour. And all the men of this province are
made wittols of by their wives in this way.{3} The women themselves are
fair and wanton.

Now it came to pass during the reign of MANGU KAAN, that as lord of
this province he came to hear of this custom, and he sent forth an
order commanding them under grievous penalties to do so no more [but
to provide public hostelries for travellers]. And when they heard this
order they were much vexed thereat. [For about three years’ space
they carried it out. But then they found that their lands were no
longer fruitful, and that many mishaps befell them.] So they collected
together and prepared a grand present which they sent to their Lord,
praying him graciously to let them retain the custom which they had
inherited from their ancestors; for it was by reason of this usage that
their gods bestowed upon them all the good things that they possessed,
and without it they saw not how they could continue to exist.{4} When
the Prince had heard their petition his reply was “Since ye must needs
keep your shame, keep it then,” and so he left them at liberty to
maintain their naughty custom. And they always have kept it up, and do
so still.

Now let us quit Camul, and I will tell you of another province which
lies between north-west and north, and belongs to the Great Kaan.

NOTE 1.—Kamul (or Komul) does not fall into the great line of
travel towards Cathay which Marco is following. His notice of it,
and of the next province, forms a digression like that which he
has already made to Samarkand. It appears very doubtful if Marco
himself had visited it; his father and uncle may have done so on
their first journey, as one of the chief routes to Northern China
from Western Asia lies through this city, and has done so for many
centuries. This was the route described by Pegolotti as that of the
Italian traders in the century following Polo; it was that followed
by Marignolli, by the envoys of Shah Rukh at a later date, and
at a much later by Benedict Goës. The people were in Polo’s time
apparently Buddhist, as the Uighúrs inhabiting this region had been
from an old date: in Shah Rukh’s time (1420) we find a mosque and a
great Buddhist Temple cheek by jowl; whilst Ramusio’s friend Hajji
Mahomed (_circa_ 1550) speaks of Kamul as the first Mahomedan city
met with in travelling from China.

Kamul stands on an oasis carefully cultivated by aid of reservoirs
for irrigation, and is noted in China for its rice and for some of
its fruits, especially melons and grapes. It is still a place of
some consequence, standing near the bifurcation of two great roads
from China, one passing north and the other south of the Thian
Shan, and it was the site of the Chinese Commissariat depôts for
the garrisons to the westward. It was lost to the Chinese in 1867.

Kamul appears to have been the see of a Nestorian bishop. A Bishop
of Kamul is mentioned as present at the inauguration of the
Catholicos Denha in 1266. (_Russians in Cent. Asia_, 129; _Ritter_,
II. 357 _seqq._; _Cathay, passim_; _Assemani_, II. 455–456.)

[_Kamul_ is the Turkish name of the province called by the Mongols
_Khamil_, by the Chinese _Hami_; the latter name is found for the
first time in the _Yuen Shi_, but it is first mentioned in Chinese
history in the 1st century of our Era under the name of _I-wu-lu_
or _I-wu_ (_Bretschneider, Med. Res._ II. p. 20); after the death
of Chinghiz, it belonged to his son Chagataï. From the Great Wall,
at the Pass of Kia Yü, to Hami there is a distance of 1470 _li_.
(_C. Imbault-Huart. Le Pays de Hami ou Khamil_ ... d’après les
auteurs chinois, _Bul. de Géog. hist. et desc._, Paris, 1892, pp.
121–195.) The Chinese general Chang Yao was in 1877 at Hami, which
had submitted in 1867 to the Athalik Ghazi, and made it the basis
of his operations against the small towns of Chightam and Pidjam,
and Yakúb Khan himself stationed at Turfan. The Imperial Chinese
Agent in this region bears the title of _K’u lun Pan She Ta Ch’en_
and resides at K’urun (Urga); of lesser rank are the agents (_Pan
She Ta Ch’en_) of Kashgar, Kharashar, Kuché, Aksu, Khotan, and
Hami. (See a description of Hami by Colonel M. S. Bell, _Proc. R.
G. S._ XII. 1890, p. 213.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—Expressed almost in the same words is the character
attributed by a Chinese writer to the people of Kuché in the same
region. (_Chin. Repos._ IX. 126.) In fact, the character seems to
be generally applicable to the people of East Turkestan, but sorely
kept down by the rigid Islam that is now enforced. (See _Shaw,
passim_, and especially the Mahrambáshi’s lamentations over the
jolly days that were no more, pp. 319, 376.)

NOTE 3.—Pauthier’s text has “_sont si_ honni _de leur moliers
comme vous avez ouy_.” Here the Crusca has “_sono_ bozzi _delle
loro moglie_,” and the Lat. Geog. “_sunt_ bezzi _de suis
uxoribus_.” The Crusca Vocab. has inserted _bozzo_ with the meaning
we have given, on the strength of this passage. It occurs also in
Dante (_Paradiso_, XIX. 137), in the general sense of _disgraced_.

The shameful custom here spoken of is ascribed by Polo also to a
province of Eastern Tibet, and by popular report in modern times
to the Hazaras of the Hindu-Kush, a people of Mongolian blood, as
well as to certain nomad tribes of Persia, to say nothing of the
like accusation against our own ancestors which has been drawn from
Laonicus Chalcondylas. The old Arab traveller Ibn Muhalhal (10th
century) also relates the same of the Hazlakh (probably _Kharlikh_)
Turks: “Ducis alicujus uxor vel filia vel soror, quum mercatorum
agmen in terram venit, eos adit, eorumque lustrat faciem. Quorum
siquis earum afficit admiratione hunc domum suam ducit, eumque apud
se hospitio excipit, eique benigne facit. Atque marito suo et filio
fratrique rerum necessariarum curam demandat; neque dum hospes
apud eam habitat, nisi necessarium est, maritus eam adit.” A like
custom prevails among the Chukchis and Koryaks in the vicinity of
Kamtchatka. (_Elphinstone’s Caubul; Wood_, p. 201; _Burnes_, who
discredits, II. 153, III. 195; _Laon. Chalcond._ 1650, pp. 48–49;
_Kurd de Schloezer_, p. 13; _Erman_, II. 530.)

[“It is remarkable that the Chinese author, _Hung Hao_, who lived
a century before M. Polo, makes mention in his memoirs nearly in
the same words of this custom of the Uighúrs, with whom he became
acquainted during his captivity in the kingdom of the _Kin_.
According to the chronicle of the Tangut kingdom of Si-hia, Hami
was the nursery of Buddhism in Si-hia, and provided this kingdom
with Buddhist books and monks.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 6.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—So the Jewish rabble to Jeremiah: “Since we left
off to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out
drink-offerings to her, we have wanted all things, and have been
consumed by the sword and by famine.” (_Jerem._ xliv. 18.)

CHAPTER XLII.

OF THE PROVINCE OF CHINGINTALAS.

Chingintalas is also a province at the verge of the Desert, and lying
between north-west and north. It has an extent of sixteen days’
journey, and belongs to the Great Kaan, and contains numerous towns and
villages. There are three different races of people in it—Idolaters,
Saracens, and some Nestorian Christians.{1} At the northern extremity
of this province there is a mountain in which are excellent veins of
steel and ondanique.{2} And you must know that in the same mountain
there is a vein of the substance from which Salamander is made.{3}
For the real truth is that the Salamander is no beast, as they allege
in our part of the world, but is a substance found in the earth; and I
will tell you about it.

Everybody must be aware that it can be no animal’s nature to live in
fire, seeing that every animal is composed of all the four elements.{4}
Now I, Marco Polo, had a Turkish acquaintance of the name of Zurficar,
and he was a very clever fellow. And this Turk related to Messer Marco
Polo how he had lived three years in that region on behalf of the Great
Kaan, in order to procure those Salamanders for him.{5} He said that
the way they got them was by digging in that mountain till they found
a certain vein. The substance of this vein was then taken and crushed,
and when so treated it divides as it were into fibres of wool, which
they set forth to dry. When dry, these fibres were pounded in a great
copper mortar, and then washed, so as to remove all the earth and to
leave only the fibres like fibres of wool. These were then spun, and
made into napkins. When first made these napkins are not very white,
but by putting them into the fire for a while they come out as white
as snow. And so again whenever they become dirty they are bleached by
being put in the fire.

Now this, and nought else, is the truth about the Salamander, and the
people of the country all say the same. Any other account of the matter
is fabulous nonsense. And I may add that they have at Rome a napkin of
this stuff, which the Grand Kaan sent to the Pope to make a wrapper for
the Holy Sudarium of Jesus Christ.{6}

We will now quit this subject, and I will proceed with my account of
the countries lying in the direction between north-east and east.

NOTE 1.—The identification of this province is a difficulty,
because the geographical definition is vague, and the name assigned
to it has not been traced in other authors. It is said to lie
_between north-west and north_, whilst Kamul was said to lie
_towards the north-west_. The account of both provinces forms a
digression, as is clear from the last words of the present chapter,
where the traveller returns to take up his regular route “in the
direction between north-east and east.” The point from which he
digresses, and to which he reverts, is Shachau, and ’tis presumably
from Shachau that he assigns bearings to the two provinces forming
the subject of the digression. Hence, as Kamul lies _vers maistre_,
_i.e._ north-west, and Chingintalas _entre maistre et tramontaine_,
_i.e._ nor’-nor’-west, Chingintalas can scarcely lie due west of
Kamul, as M. Pauthier would place it, in identifying it with an
obscure place called _Saiyintala_, in the territory of Urumtsi.
Moreover, the province is said to belong to the Great Kaan. Now,
_Urumtsi_ or Bishbalik seems to have belonged, not to the Great
Kaan, but to the empire of Chagatai, or possibly at this time to
Kaidu. Rashiduddin, speaking of the frontier between the Kaan and
Kaidu, says:—“From point to point are posted bodies of troops
under the orders of princes of the blood or other generals, and
they often come to blows with the troops of Kaidu. Five of these
are cantoned on the verge of the Desert; a sixth in Tangut, near
Chagan-Nor (White Lake); a seventh in the vicinity of Karakhoja,
a city of the Uighúrs, which lies between the two States, and
maintains neutrality.”

Karakhoja, this neutral town, is near Turfan, to the south-east of
Urumtsi, which thus would lie _without_ the Kaan’s boundary; Kamul
and the country north-east of it would lie within it. This country,
to the north and north-east of Kamul, has remained till quite
recently unexplored by any modern traveller, unless we put faith in
Mr. Atkinson’s somewhat hazy narrative. But it is here that I would
seek for Chingintalas.

Several possible explanations of this name have suggested
themselves or been suggested to me. I will mention two.

1. Klaproth states that the Mongols applied to Tibet the name of
_Baron-tala_, signifying the “Right Side,” _i.e._ the south-west
or south quarter, whilst Mongolia was called _Dzöhn_ (or _Dzegun_)
_Tala_, _i.e._ the “Left,” or north-east side. It is possible
that _Chigin-talas_ might represent _Dzegun Tala_ in some like
application. The etymology of _Dzungaria_, a name which in modern
times covers the territory of which we are speaking, is similar.

2. Professor Vámbéry thinks that it is probably _Chingin Tala_,
“The Vast Plain.” But nothing can be absolutely satisfactory in
such a case except historical evidence of the application of the
name.

I have left the identity of this name undecided, though pointing to
the general position of the region so-called by Marco, as indicated
by the vicinity of the Tangnu-Ola Mountains (p. 215). A passage
in the Journey of the Taouist Doctor, Changchun, as translated by
Dr. Bretschneider (_Chinese Recorder and Miss. Journ._, Shanghai,
Sept.–Oct., 1874, p. 258), suggests to me the strong probability
that it may be the _Kem-kém-jút_ of Rashiduddin, called by the
Chinese teacher _Kien-kien_-chau.

Rashiduddin couples the territory of the Kirghiz with Kemkemjút,
but defines the country embracing both with some exactness: “On one
side (south-east?), it bordered on the Mongol country; on a second
(north-east?), it was bounded by the Selenga; on a third (north),
by the ‘great river called Angara, which flows on the confines of
Ibir-Sibir’ (_i.e._ of Siberia); on a fourth side by the territory
of the Naimans. This great country contained _many towns and
villages_, as well as many nomad inhabitants.” Dr. Bretschneider’s
Chinese Traveller speaks of it as a country where _good iron was
found_, where (grey) squirrels abounded, and wheat was cultivated.
Other notices quoted by him show that it lay to the south-east of
the Kirghiz country, and had its name from the _Kien_ or _Ken_ R.
(_i.e._ the Upper Yenisei).

The name (_Kienkien_), the general direction, the existence of
good iron (“steel and ondanique”), the many towns and villages in
a position where we should little look for such an indication, all
point to the identity of this region with the Chingintalas of our
text. The only alteration called for in the Itinerary Map (No. IV.)
would be to spell the name _Hinkin_, or _Ghinghin_ (as it _is_ in
the Geographic Text), and to shift it a very little further to the
north.

(See _Chingin_ in _Kovalevski’s Mongol Dict._, No. 2134; and for
_Baron-tala_, etc., see _Della Penna, Breve Notizia del Regno
del Thibet_, with Klaproth’s notes, p. 6; _D’Avezac_, p. 568;
_Relation_ prefixed to D’Anville’s Atlas, p. 11; _Alphabetum
Tibetanum_, 454; and _Kircher, China Illustrata_, p. 65.)

Since the first edition was published, Mr. Ney Elias has traversed
the region in question from east to west; and I learn from him that
at Kobdo he found the most usual name for that town among Mongols,
Kalmaks, and Russians to be SANKIN-hoto. He had not then thought
of connecting this name with Chinghin-talas, and has therefore no
information as to its origin or the extent of its application. But
he remarks that Polo’s bearing of between north and north-west, if
understood to be _from Kamul_, would point exactly to Kobdo. He
also calls attention to the Lake _Sankin_-dalai, to the north-east
of Uliasut’ai, of which Atkinson gives a sketch. The recurrence of
this name over so wide a tract may have something to do with the
Chinghin-talas of Polo. But we must still wait for further light.[1]

[“Supposing that M. Polo mentions this place on his way
from Sha-chow to Su-chow, it is natural to think that it is
_Chi-kin-talas_, _i.e._ ‘Chi-kin plain’ or valley; Chi-kin was the
name of a lake, called so even now, and of a defile, which received
its name from the lake. The latter is on the way from Kia-yü kwan
to Ansi chow.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 7.) “_Chikin_, or more
correctly _Chigin_, is a Mongol word meaning ‘ear.’” (_Ibid._)
Palladius (p. 8) adds: “The Chinese accounts of Chi-kin are not
in contradiction to the statements given by M. Polo regarding the
same subject; but when the distances are taken into consideration,
a serious difficulty arises; Chi-kin is two hundred and fifty or
sixty _li_ distant from Su-chow, whilst, according to M. Polo’s
statement, ten days are necessary to cross this distance. One
of the three following explanations of this discrepancy must be
admitted: either Chingintalas is not Chi-kin, or the traveller’s
memory failed, or, lastly, an error crept into the number of days’
journey. The two last suppositions I consider the most probable;
the more so that similar difficulties occur several times in Marco
Polo’s narrative.” (_L.c._ p. 8.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—[_Ondanique_.—We have already referred to this word,
_Kermán_, p. 90. _Cobinan_, p. 124. La Curne de Sainte-Palaye
(_Dict._), F. Godefroy (_Dict._), Du Cange (_Gloss._), all give
to _andain_ the meaning of _enjambée_, from the Latin _andare_.
Godefroy, _s.v. andaine_, calls it _sorte d’acier ou de fer_, and
quotes besides Marco Polo:

“I. espiel, ou ot fer d’andaine,
Dont la lamele n’iert pas trouble.”

(Huon de Mery, _Le Tornoiement de l’Antechrist_, p. 3, Tarbé.)

There is a forest in the department of Orne, arrondissement of
Domfront, which belonged to the Crown before 1669, and is now State
property, called Forêt d’Andaine; it is situated near some bed of
iron. Is this the origin of the name?—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The Altai, or one of its ramifications, is probably the
mountain of the text, but so little is known of this part of the
Chinese territory that we can learn scarcely anything of its
mineral products. Still Martini does mention that asbestos is found
“in the Tartar country of _Tangu_,” which probably is the _Tangnu
Oola_ branch of the Altai to the south of the Upper Yenisei, and in
the very region we have indicated as Chingintalas. Mr. Elias tells
me he inquired for asbestos by its Chinese name at Uliasut’ai, but
without success.

NOTE 4.—

“Degli elementi quattro principali,
Che son la Terra, e l’Acqua, e l’Aria, e ’l Foco,
Composti sono gli universi Animali,
Pigliando di ciascuno assai o poco.”
(_Dati_, _La Sfera_, p. 9.)

_Zurficar_ in the next sentence is a Mahomedan name, _Zu’lfiḳár_,
the title of [the edge of] Ali’s sword.

NOTE 5.—Here the G. Text adds: “_Et je meisme le vi_,” intimating,
I conceive, his having himself seen specimens of the asbestos—not
to his having been at the place.

NOTE 6.—The story of the Salamander passing unhurt through fire
is at least as old as Aristotle. But I cannot tell when the fable
arose that asbestos was a substance derived from the animal. This
belief, however, was general in the Middle Ages, both in Asia and
Europe. “The fable of the Salamander,” says Sir Thomas Browne,
“hath been much promoted by stories of incombustible napkins and
textures which endure the fire, whose materials are called by the
name of Salamander’s wool, which many, too literally apprehending,
conceive some investing part or integument of the Salamander....
Nor is this Salamander’s wool desumed from any animal, but a
mineral substance, metaphorically so called for this received
opinion.”

Those who knew that the Salamander was a lizard-like animal were
indeed perplexed as to its woolly coat. Thus the Cardinal de Vitry
is fain to say the creature “_profert ex cute_ quasi quamdam lanam
_de quâ zonae contextae comburi non possunt igne._” A Bestiary,
published by Cahier and Martin, says of it: “_De lui naist une
cose qui n’est ne soie ne lin ne laine._” Jerome Cardan looked in
vain, he says, for hair on the Salamander! Albertus Magnus calls
the incombustible fibre _pluma Salamandri_; and accordingly Bold
Bauduin de Sebourc finds the Salamander in the Terrestrial Paradise
_a kind of bird covered with the whitest plumage_; of this he takes
some, which he gets woven into a cloth; this he presents to the
Pope, and the Pontiff applies it to the purpose mentioned in the
text, viz. to cover the holy napkin of St. Veronica.

Gervase of Tilbury writes: “I saw, when lately at Rome, a broad
strap of Salamander skin, like a girdle for the loins, which had
been brought thither by Cardinal Peter of Capua. When it had become
somewhat soiled by use, I myself saw it cleaned perfectly, and
without receiving harm, by being put in the fire.”

In Persian the creature is called _Samandar_, _Samandal_, etc., and
some derive the word from _Sam_, “fire,” and _Andar_, “within.”
Doubtless it is a corruption of the Greek Σαλαμάνδρα, whatever be
the origin of that. Bakui says the animal is found at Ghur, near
Herat, and is _like a mouse_. Another author, quoted by D’Herbelot,
says it is _like a marten_.

[Sir T. Douglas Forsyth, in his _Introductory Remarks_ to
Prjevalsky’s _Travels to Lob-nor_ (p. 20), at Aksu says: “The
asbestos mentioned by Marco Polo as a utilized product of this
region is not even so known in this country.”—H. C.]

✛ Interesting details regarding the fabrication of cloth and paper
from amianth or asbestos are contained in a report presented to the
French Institute by M. Sage (_Mém. Ac. Sciences_, 2e Sem., 1806, p.
102), of which large extracts are given in the _Diction. général
des Tissus_, par M. Bezon, 2e éd. vol. ii. Lyon, 1859, p. 5. He
mentions that a _Sudarium_ of this material is still shown at the
Vatican; we hope it is the cover which Kúblái sent.

[This hope is not to be realized. Mgr. Duchesne, of the Institut
de France, writes to me from Rome, from information derived from
the keepers of the Vatican Museum, that there is no sudarium from
the Great Khan, that indeed part of a sudarium made of asbestos is
shown (under glass) in this Museum, about 20 inches long, but it is
ancient, and was found in a Pagan tomb of the Appian Way.—H. C.]

M. Sage exhibited incombustible paper made from this material,
and had himself seen a small furnace of Chinese origin made from
it. Madame Perpenté, an Italian lady, who experimented much with
asbestos, found that from a crude mass of that substance threads
could be elicited which were ten times the length of the mass
itself, and were indeed sometimes several metres in length, the
fibres seeming to be involved, like silk in a cocoon. Her process
of preparation was much like that described by Marco. She succeeded
in carding and reeling the material, made gloves and the like, as
well as paper, from it, and sent to the Institute a work printed on
such paper.

The Rev. A. Williamson mentions asbestos as found in Shantung. The
natives use it for making stoves, crucibles, and so forth.

(_Sir T. Browne_, I. 293; _Bongars_, I. 1104; _Cahier et Martin_,
III. 271; _Cardan, de Rer. Varietate_, VII. 33; _Alb. Mag. Opera_,
1551, II. 227, 233; _Fr. Michel, Recherches_, etc., II. 91; _Gerv.
of Tilbury_, p. 13; _N. et E._ II. 493; _D. des Tissus_, II. 1–12;
_J. N. China Branch R. A. S._, December, 1867, p. 70.) [_Berger de
Xivrey, Traditions tératologiques_, 457–458, 460–463.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The late Mr. Atkinson has been twice alluded to in this note. I
take the opportunity of saying that Mr. Ney Elias, a most competent
judge, who has travelled across the region in question whilst
admitting, as every one must, Atkinson’s vagueness and sometimes
very careless statements, is not at all disposed to discredit the
truth of his narrative.

CHAPTER XLIII.

OF THE PROVINCE OF SUKCHUR.

On leaving the province of which I spoke before,{1} you ride ten days
between north-east and east, and in all that way you find no human
dwelling, or next to none, so that there is nothing for our book to
speak of.

At the end of those ten days you come to another province called
SUKCHUR, in which there are numerous towns and villages. The chief
city is called SUKCHU.{2} The people are partly Christians and partly
Idolaters, and all are subject to the Great Kaan.

The great General Province to which all these three provinces belong is
called TANGUT.

Over all the mountains of this province rhubarb is found in great
abundance, and thither merchants come to buy it, and carry it thence
all over the world.{3} [Travellers, however, dare not visit those
mountains with any cattle but those of the country, for a certain plant
grows there which is so poisonous that cattle which eat it lose their
hoofs. The cattle of the country know it and eschew it.{4}] The people
live by agriculture, and have not much trade. [They are of a brown
complexion. The whole of the province is healthy.]

NOTE 1.—Referring apparently to Shachau; see Note 1 and the closing
words of last chapter.

NOTE 2.—There is no doubt that the province and city are those of
SUHCHAU, but there is a great variety in the readings, and several
texts have a marked difference between the name of the province
and that of the city, whilst others give them as the same. I have
adopted those to which the resultants of the readings of the best
texts seem to point, viz. _Succiur_ and _Succiu_, though with
considerable doubt whether they should not be identical. Pauthier
declares that _Suctur_, which is the reading of his favourite MS.,
is the exact pronunciation, after the vulgar Mongol manner, of
_Suh-chau-lu_, the _Lu_ or circuit of Suhchau; whilst Neumann says
that the Northern Chinese constantly add an euphonic particle _or_
to the end of words. I confess to little faith in such refinements,
when no evidence is produced.

[Suhchau had been devastated and its inhabitants massacred by
Chinghiz Khan in 1226.—H. C.]

Suhchau is called by Rashiduddin, and by Shah Rukh’s ambassadors,
_Sukchú_, in exact correspondence with the reading we have adopted
for the name of the city, whilst the Russian Envoy Boikoff, in the
17th century, calls it “_Suktsey_, where the rhubarb grows”; and
Anthony Jenkinson, in Hakluyt, by a slight metathesis, _Sowchick_.
Suhchau lies just within the extreme north-west angle of the Great
Wall. It was at Suhchau that Benedict Goës was detained, waiting
for leave to go on to Peking, eighteen weary months, and there he
died just as aid reached him.

NOTE 3.—The real rhubarb [_Rheum palmatum_] grows wild, on very
high mountains. The central line of its distribution appears to be
the high range dividing the head waters of the Hwang-Ho, Yalung,
and Min-Kiang. The chief markets are Siningfu (see ch. lvii.), and
Kwan-Kian in Szechwan. In the latter province an inferior kind is
grown in fields, but the genuine rhubarb defies cultivation. (See
_Richthofen_, Letters, No. VII. p. 69.) Till recently it was almost
all exported by Kiakhta and Russia, but some now comes _viâ_ Hankau
and Shanghai.

[“See, on the preparation of the root in China, Gemelli-Careri.
(_Churchill’s Collect._, Bk. III. ch. v. 365.) It is said that when
Chinghiz Khan was pillaging Tangut, the only things his minister,
Yeh-lü Ch’u-ts’ai, would take as his share of the booty were a few
Chinese books and a supply of rhubarb, with which he saved the
lives of a great number of Mongols, when, a short time after, an
epidemic broke out in the army.” (_D’Ohsson_, I. 372.—_Rockhill,
Rubruck_, p. 193, note.)

“With respect to rhubarb ... the _Suchowchi_ also makes the remark,
that the best rhubarb, with golden flowers in the breaking, is
gathered in this province (district of _Shan-tan_), and that it
is equally beneficial to men and beasts, preserving them from the
pernicious effects of the heat.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 9.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—_Erba_ is the title applied to the poisonous growth, which
may be either “plant” or “grass.” It is not unlikely that it was
a plant akin to the _Andromeda ovalifolia_, the tradition of the
poisonous character of which prevails everywhere along the Himalaya
from Nepal to the Indus.

It is notorious for poisoning sheep and goats at Simla and other
hill sanitaria; and Dr. Cleghorn notes the same circumstance
regarding it that Polo heard of the plant in Tangut, viz. that its
effects on flocks imported from the plains are highly injurious,
whilst those of the hills do not appear to suffer, probably because
they shun the young leaves, which alone are deleterious. Mr. Marsh
attests the like fact regarding the _Kalmia angustifolia_ of New
England, a plant of the same order (_Ericaceae_). Sheep bred where
it abounds almost always avoid browsing on its leaves, whilst those
brought from districts where it is unknown feed upon it and are
poisoned.

Firishta, quoting from the _Zafar-Námah_, says: “On the road from
Kashmir towards Tibet there is a plain on which no other vegetable
grows but a poisonous grass that destroys all the cattle that taste
of it, and therefore no horsemen venture to travel that route.”
And Abbé Desgodins, writing from E. Tibet, mentions that sheep and
goats are poisoned by rhododendron leaves. (_Dr. Hugh Cleghorn_
in _J. Agricultural and Hortic. Society of India_, XIV. part 4;
_Marsh’s Man and Nature_, p. 40; _Brigg’s Firishta_, IV. 449; _Bul.
de la Soc. de Géog._ 1873, I. 333.)

[“This poisonous plant seems to be the _Stipa inebrians_ described
by the late Dr. Hance in the _Journal of Bot._ 1876, p. 211, from
specimens sent to me by Belgian Missionaries from the Ala Shan
Mountains, west of the Yellow River.” (_Bretschneider, Hist. of
Bot. Disc._ I. p. 5.)

“M. Polo notices that the cattle not indigenous to the province
lose their hoofs in the Suh-chau Mountains; but that is probably
not on account of some poisonous grass, but in consequence of the
stony ground.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 9.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XLIV.

OF THE CITY OF CAMPICHU.

Campichu is also a city of Tangut, and a very great and noble one.
Indeed it is the capital and place of government of the whole province
of Tangut.{1} The people are Idolaters, Saracens, and Christians,
and the latter have three very fine churches in the city, whilst the
Idolaters have many minsters and abbeys after their fashion. In these
they have an enormous number of idols, both small and great, certain
of the latter being a good ten paces in stature; some of them being
of wood, others of clay, and others yet of stone. They are all highly
polished, and then covered with gold. The great idols of which I speak
lie at length.{2} And round about them there are other figures of
considerable size, as if adoring and paying homage before them.

Now, as I have not yet given you particulars about the customs of these
Idolaters, I will proceed to tell you about them.

You must know that there are among them certain religious recluses
who lead a more virtuous life than the rest. These abstain from all
lechery, though they do not indeed regard it as a deadly sin; howbeit
if any one sin against nature they condemn him to death. They have an
Ecclesiastical Calendar as we have; and there are five days in the
month that they observe particularly; and on these five days they would
on no account either slaughter any animal or eat flesh meat. On those
days, moreover, they observe much greater abstinence altogether than on
other days.{3}

Among these people a man may take thirty wives, more or less, if he
can but afford to do so, each having wives in proportion to his wealth
and means; but the first wife is always held in highest consideration.
The men endow their wives with cattle, slaves, and money, according
to their ability. And if a man dislikes any one of his wives, he just
turns her off and takes another. They take to wife their cousins and
their fathers’ widows (always excepting the man’s own mother), holding
to be no sin many things that we think grievous sins, and, in short,
they live like beasts.{4}

Messer Maffeo and Messer Marco Polo dwelt a whole year in this city
when on a mission.{5}

Now we will leave this and tell you about other provinces towards the
north, for we are going to take you a sixty days’ journey in that
direction.

NOTE 1.—Campichiu is undoubtedly Kanchau, which was at this time,
as Pauthier tells us, the chief city of the administration of
_Kansuh_, corresponding to Polo’s Tangut. _Kansuh_ itself is a name
compounded of the names of the two cities _Kan_-chau and _Suh_-chau.

[Kanchau fell under the Tangut dominion in 1208. (_Palladius_,
p. 10.) The Musulmans mentioned by Polo at Shachau and Kanchau
probably came from Khotan.—H. C.]

The difficulties that have been made about the form of the name
_Campiciou_, etc., in Polo, and the attempts to explain these,
are probably alike futile. Quatremère writes the Persian form
of the name after Abdurrazzak as _Kamtcheou_, but I see that
Erdmann writes it after Rashid, I presume on good grounds, as
_Ckamidschu_, _i.e._ _Ḳamiju_ or _Ḳamichu_. And that this _was_
the Western pronunciation of the name is shown by the form which
Pegolotti uses, _Camexu_, _i.e._ Camechu. The _p_ in Polo’s spelling
is probably only a superfluous letter, as in the occasional old
spelling of _dampnum_, _contempnere_, _hympnus_, _tirampnus_,
_sompnour_, _Dampne Deu_. In fact, Marignolli writes Polo’s
_Quinsai_ as _Campsay_.

It is worthy of notice that though Ramusio’s text prints the
names of these two cities as _Succuir_ and _Campion_, his own
pronunciation of them appears to have been quite well understood
by the Persian traveller Hajji Mahomed, for it is perfectly clear
that the latter recognized in these names Suhchau and Kanchau.
(See _Ram._ II. f. 14v.) The second volume of the _Navigationi_,
containing Polo, was published after Ramusio’s death, and it is
possible that the names as he himself read them were more correct
(_e.g._ _Succiur, Campjou_).

[Illustration: Colossal Figure, Buddha entering Nirvana.

“=Et si voz di qu’il ont de ydres que sunt grant dix pas.... Ceste
grant ydres gigent.=” ...]

NOTE 2.—This is the meaning of the phrase in the G. T.: “_Ceste
grande ydre_ gigent,” as may be seen from Ramusio’s _giaciono
distesi_. Lazari renders the former expression, “giganteggia
un idolo,” etc., a phrase very unlike Polo. The circumstance
is interesting, because this recumbent Colossus at Kanchau is
mentioned both by Hajji Mahomed and by Shah Rukh’s people. The
latter say: “In this city of Kanchú there is an Idol-Temple 500
cubits square. In the middle is an idol lying at length which
measures 50 paces. The sole of the foot is nine paces long, and the
instep is 21 cubits in girth. Behind this image and overhead are
other idols of a cubit (?) in height, besides figures of _Bakshis_
as large as life. The action of all is hit off so admirably that
you would think they were alive.” These great recumbent figures
are favourites in Buddhist countries still, _e.g._ in Siam, Burma,
and Ceylon. They symbolise Sakya Buddha entering _Nirvána_. Such a
recumbent figure, perhaps the prototype of these, was seen by Hiuen
Tsang in a Vihara close to the Sál Grove at Kusinágara, where Sakya
entered that state, _i.e._ died. The stature of Buddha was, we are
told, 12 cubits; but Brahma, Indra, and the other gods vainly tried
to compute his dimensions. Some such rude metaphor is probably
embodied in these large images. I have described one 69 feet long
in Burma (represented in the cut), but others exist of much greater
size, though probably none equal to that which Hiuen Tsang, in the
7th century, saw near Bamian, which was 1000 feet in length! I have
heard of but one such image remaining in India, viz. in one of the
caves at Dhamnár in Málwa. This is 15 feet long, and is popularly
known as “Bhim’s Baby.” (_Cathay_, etc., pp. cciii., ccxviii.;
_Mission to Ava_, p. 52; _V. et V. de H. T._, p. 374: _Cunningham’s
Archæl. Reports_, ii. 274; _Tod_, ii. 273.)

[“The temple, in which M. Polo saw an idol of Buddha, represented
in a lying position, is evidently _Wo-fo-sze_, _i.e._ ‘Monastery of
the lying Buddha.’ It was built in 1103 by a Tangut queen, to place
there three idols representing Buddha in this posture, which have
since been found in the ground on this very spot.” (_Palladius_,
_l.c._ p. 10.)

Rubruck (p. 144) says: “A Nestorian, who had come from Cathay told
me that in that country there is an idol so big that it can be
seen from two days off.” Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 144, _note_)
writes: “The largest stone image I have seen is in a cave temple at
Yung-kán, about 10 miles north-west of Ta t’ung Fu in Shan-si. Père
Gerbillon says the Emperor K’ang-hsi measured it himself and found
it to be 57 _chih_ high (61 feet). (_Duhalde, Description_, IV.
352.) I have seen another colossal statue in a cave near Pinchou in
north-west Shan-si, and there is another about 45 miles south of
Ning-hsia Fu, near the left bank of the Yellow River. (_Rockhill,
Land of the Lamas_, 26, and _Diary_, 47.) The great recumbent
figure of the ‘Sleeping Buddha’ in the Wo Fo ssŭ, near Peking, is
of clay.”

King Haython (Brosset’s ed. p. 181) mentions the statue in clay, of
an extraordinary height, of a God (Buddha) aged 3040 years, who is
to live 370,000 years more, when he will be superseded by another
god called _Madri_ (Maitreya).—H. C.]

[Illustration: Great Lama Monastery.]

NOTE 3.—Marco is now speaking of the Lamas, or clergy of Tibetan
Buddhism. The customs mentioned have varied in details, both
locally and with the changes that the system has passed through in
the course of time.

The institutes of ancient Buddhism set apart the days of new and
full moon to be observed by the _Sramanas_ or monks, by fasting,
confession, and listening to the reading of the law. It became
usual for the laity to take part in the observance, and the number
of days was increased to three and then to four, whilst Hiuen Tsang
himself speaks of “the six fasts of every month,” and a Chinese
authority quoted by Julien gives the days as the 8th, 14th, 15th,
23rd, 29th, and 30th. Fahian says that in Ceylon preaching took
place on the 8th, 14th, and 15th days of the month. Four is the
number now most general amongst Buddhist nations, and the days
may be regarded as a kind of Buddhist Sabbath. In the southern
countries and in Nepal they occur at the moon’s changes. In Tibet
and among the Mongol Buddhists they are not at equal intervals,
though I find the actual days differently stated by different
authorities. Pallas says the Mongols observed the 13th, 14th, and
15th, the three days being brought together, he thought, on account
of the distance many Lamas had to travel to the temple—just as in
some Scotch country parishes they used to give two sermons in one
service for like reason! Koeppen, to whose work this note is much
indebted, says the Tibetan days are the 14th, 15th, 29th, 30th,
and adds as to the manner of observance: “On these days, by rule,
among the Lamas, nothing should be tasted but farinaceous food and
tea; the very devout refrain from all food from sunrise to sunset.
The Temples are decorated, and the altar tables set out with the
holy symbols, with tapers, and with dishes containing offerings
in corn, meal, tea, butter, etc., and especially with small
pyramids of dough, or of rice or clay, and accompanied by much
burning of incense-sticks. The service performed by the priests
is more solemn, the music louder and more exciting, than usual.
The laity make their offerings, tell their beads, and repeat _Om
mani padma hom_,” etc. In the _concordat_ that took place between
the Dalai-Lama and the Altun Khaghan, on the reconversion of the
Mongols to Buddhism in the 16th century, one of the articles was
the entire prohibition of hunting and the slaughter of animals on
the monthly fast days. The practice varies much, however, even in
Tibet, with different provinces and sects—a variation which the
Ramusian text of Polo implies in these words: “For five days, or
_four days_, or _three_ in each month, they shed no blood,” etc.

In Burma the Worship Day, as it is usually called by Europeans,
is a very gay scene, the women flocking to the pagodas in their
brightest attire. (_H. T. Mémoires_, I. 6, 208; _Koeppen_, I.
563–564, II. 139, 307–308; _Pallas, Samml._ II. 168–169).

NOTE 4.—These matrimonial customs are the same that are afterwards
ascribed to the Tartars, so we defer remark.

NOTE 5.—So Pauthier’s text, “_en legation_.” The G. Text includes
Nicolo Polo, and says, “on business of theirs that is not worth
mentioning,” and with this Ramusio agrees.

CHAPTER XLV.

OF THE CITY OF ETZINA.

When you leave the city of Campichu you ride for twelve days, and then
reach a city called ETZINA, which is towards the north on the verge
of the Sandy Desert; it belongs to the Province of Tangut.{1} The
people are Idolaters, and possess plenty of camels and cattle, and the
country produces a number of good falcons, both Sakers and Lanners. The
inhabitants live by their cultivation and their cattle, for they have
no trade. At this city you must needs lay in victuals for forty days,
because when you quit Etzina, you enter on a desert which extends forty
days’ journey to the north, and on which you meet with no habitation
nor baiting-place.{2} In the summer-time, indeed, you will fall in with
people, but in the winter the cold is too great. You also meet with
wild beasts (for there are some small pine-woods here and there), and
with numbers of wild asses.{3} When you have travelled these forty days
across the Desert you come to a certain province lying to the north.
Its name you shall hear presently.

[Illustration: Wild Ass of Mongolia.]

NOTE 1.—Deguignes says that YETSINA is found in a Chinese Map of
Tartary of the Mongol era, and this is confirmed by Pauthier, who
reads it _Itsinai_, and adds that the text of the Map names it
as one of the seven _Lu_ or Circuits of the Province of Kansuh
(or Tangut). Indeed, in D’Anville’s Atlas we find a river called
_Etsina Pira_, running northward from Kanchau, and a little below
the 41st parallel joining another from Suhchau. Beyond the
junction is a town called _Hoa-tsiang_, which probably represents
Etzina. Yetsina is also mentioned in Gaubil’s History of Chinghiz
as taken by that conqueror in 1226, on his last campaign against
Tangut. This capture would also seem from Pétis de la Croix to be
mentioned by Rashiduddin. Gaubil says the Chinese Geography places
Yetsina north of Kanchau and north-east of Suhchau, at a distance
of 120 leagues from Kanchau, but observes that this is certainly
too great. (_Gaubil_, p. 49.)

[I believe there can be no doubt that Etzina must be looked for
on the river _Hei-shui_, called _Etsina_ by the Mongols, east of
Suhchau. This river empties its waters into the two lakes Soho-omo
and Sopo-omo. Etzina would have been therefore situated on the
river on the border of the Desert, at the top of a triangle whose
bases would be Suhchau and Kanchau. This river was once part
of the frontier of the kingdom of Tangut. (Cf. _Devéria, Notes
d’épigraphie mongolo-chinoise_, p. 4.) Reclus (_Géog. Univ., Asie
Orientale_, p. 159) says: “To the east [of Hami], beyond the Chukur
Gobi, are to be found also some permanent villages and the remains
of cities. One of them is perhaps the ‘cité d’Etzina’ of which
Marco Polo speaks, and the name is to be found in that of the river
Az-sind.”

“Through Kanchau was the shortest, and most direct and convenient
road to _I-tsi-nay_.... I-tsi-nay, or _Echiné_, is properly the
name of a lake. Khubilaï, disquieted by his factious relatives on
the north, established a military post near lake I-tsi-nay, and
built a town, or a fort on the south-western shore of this lake.
The name of I-tsi-nay appears from that time; it does not occur
in the chronicle of the Tangut kingdom; the lake had then another
name. Vestiges of the town are seen to this day; the buildings
were of large dimensions, and some of them were very fine. In
Marco Polo’s time there existed a direct route from I-tsi-nay to
Karakorum; traces of this road are still noticeable, but it is
no more used. This circumstance, _i.e._ the existence of a road
from I-tsi-nay to Karakorum, probably led Marco Polo to make an
excursion (a mental one, I suppose) to the residence of the Khans
in Northern Mongolia.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ pp. 10–11.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“_Erberge_” (G. T.). Pauthier has _Herbage_.

NOTE 3.—The Wild Ass of Mongolia is the _Dshiggetai_ of Pallas
(_Asinus hemionus_ of Gray), and identical with the Tibetan _Kyang_
of Moorcroft and Trans-Himalayan sportsmen. It differs, according
to Blyth, only in shades of colour and unimportant markings from
the _Ghor Khar_ of Western India and the Persian Deserts, the
_Kulan_ of Turkestan, which Marco has spoken of in a previous
passage (_suprà_, ch. xvi.; _J. A. S. B._ XXVIII. 229 _seqq._).
There is a fine Kyang in the Zoological Gardens, whose portrait,
after Wolf, is given here. But Mr. Ney Elias says of this animal
that he has little of the aspect of his nomadic brethren. [The wild
ass (Tibetan _Kyang_, Mongol _Holu_ or _Hulan_) is called by the
Chinese _yeh ma_, “wild horse,” though “every one admits that it is
an ass, and should be called _yeh lo-tzŭ_.” (_Rockhill, Land of the
Lamas_, 151, note.)—H. C.]

[Captain Younghusband (1886) saw in the Altaï Mountains
“considerable numbers of wild asses, which appeared to be perfectly
similar to the Kyang of Ladak and Tibet, and wild horses too—the
_Equus Prejevalskii_—roaming about these great open plains.”
(_Proc. R. G. S._ X. 1888, p. 495.) Dr. Sven Hedin says the
_habitat_ of the _Kulan_ is the heights of Tibet as well as the
valley of the Tarim; it looks like a mule with the mane and tail of
an ass, but shorter ears, longer than those of a horse; he gives a
picture of it.—H. C.]

CHAPTER XLVI.

OF THE CITY OF CARACORON.

Caracoron is a city of some three miles in compass. [It is surrounded
by a strong earthen rampart, for stone is scarce there. And beside it
there is a great citadel wherein is a fine palace in which the Governor
resides.] ’Tis the first city that the Tartars possessed after they
issued from their own country. And now I will tell you all about how
they first acquired dominion and spread over the world.{1}

Originally the Tartars{2} dwelt in the north on the borders of
CHORCHA.{3} Their country was one of great plains; and there were no
towns or villages in it, but excellent pasture-lands, with great rivers
and many sheets of water; in fact it was a very fine and extensive
region. But there was no sovereign in the land. They did, however, pay
tax and tribute to a great prince who was called in their tongue UNC
CAN, the same that we call Prester John, him in fact about whose great
dominion all the world talks.{4} The tribute he had of them was one
beast out of every ten, and also a tithe of all their other gear.

Now it came to pass that the Tartars multiplied exceedingly. And when
Prester John saw how great a people they had become, he began to
fear that he should have trouble from them. So he made a scheme to
distribute them over sundry countries, and sent one of his Barons to
carry this out. When the Tartars became aware of this they took it
much amiss, and with one consent they left their country and went off
across a desert to a distant region towards the north, where Prester
John could not get at them to annoy them. Thus they revolted from his
authority and paid him tribute no longer. And so things continued for a
time.

NOTE 1.—KARÁKORUM, near the upper course of the River Orkhon, is
said by Chinese authors to have been founded by Búkú Khan of the
Hoei-Hu or Uigúrs, in the 8th century. In the days of Chinghiz, we
are told that it was the headquarters of his ally, and afterwards
enemy, Togrul Wang Khan, the Prester John of Polo. [“The name of
this famous city is Mongol, _Kara_, ‘black,’ and _Kuren_, ‘a camp,’
or properly ‘pailing.’” It was founded in 1235 by Okkodai, who
called it Ordu Balik, or “the City of the Ordu,” otherwise “The
Royal City.” Mohammedan authors say it took its name of Karákorum
from the mountains to the south of it, in which the Orkhon had
its source. (_D’Ohsson_, ii. 64.) The Chinese mention a range of
mountains from which the Orkhon flows, called _Wu-tê kien shan_.
(_T’ang shu_, bk. 43_b_.) Probably these are the same. Rashiduddin
speaks of a tribe of Utikien Uigúrs living in this country.
(_Bretschneider, Med. Geog._ 191; _D’Ohsson_, i. 437; _Rockhill,
Rubruck_, 220, note.)—Karákorum was called by the Chinese _Ho-lin_
and was chosen by Chinghiz, in 1206, as his capital; the full
name of it, _Ha-la Ho-lin_, was derived from a river to the west.
(_Yuen shi_, ch. lviii.) Gaubil (_Holin_, p. 10) says that the
river, called in his days in Tartar _Karoha_, was, at the time
of the Mongol Emperors, named by the Chinese _Ha-la Ho-lin_, in
Tartar language _Ka la Ko lin_, or _Cara korin_, or _Kara Koran_.
In the spring of 1235, Okkodai had a wall raised round Ho-lin
and a palace called _Wang an_, built inside the city. (_Gaubil,
Gentchiscan_, 89.) After the death of Kúblái, _Ho-lin_ was altered
into _Ho-Ning_, and, in 1320, the name of the province was changed
into _Ling-pé_ (mountainous north, _i.e._ the _Yin-shan_ chain,
separating China Proper from Mongolia). In 1256, Mangu Kaan decided
to transfer the seat of government to Kaipingfu, or Shangtu, near
the present Dolonnor, north of Peking. (_Suprà_ in Prologue, ch.
xiii. note 1.) In 1260, Kúblái transferred his capital to _Ta-Tu_
(Peking).

Plano Carpini (1246) is the first Western traveller to mention it
by name which he writes _Caracoron_; he visited the Sira Orda, at
half a day’s journey from Karákorum, where Okkodai used to pass the
summer; it was situated at a place Ormektua. (_Rockhill, Rubruck_,
21, 111.) Rubruquis (1253) visited the city itself; the following
is his account of it: “As regards the city of Caracoron, you must
understand that if you set aside the Kaan’s own Palace, it is not
as good as the Borough of St. Denis; and as for the Palace, the
Abbey of St. Denis is worth ten of it! There are two streets in
the town; one of which is occupied by the Saracens, and in that is
the marketplace. The other street is occupied by the Cathayans,
who are all craftsmen. Besides these two streets there are some
great palaces occupied by the court secretaries. There are also
twelve idol temples belonging to different nations, two Mahummeries
in which the Law of Mahomet is preached, and one church of the
Christians at the extremity of the town. The town is enclosed by
a mud-wall and has four gates. At the east gate they sell millet
and other corn, but the supply is scanty; at the west gate they
sell rams and goats; at the south gate oxen and waggons; at the
north gate horses.... Mangu Kaan has a great Court beside the Town
Rampart, which is enclosed by a brick wall, just like our priories.
Inside there is a big palace, within which he holds a drinking-bout
twice a year; ... there are also a number of long buildings like
granges, in which are kept his treasures and his stores of victual”
(345–6; 334).

Where was Karákorum situated?

The Archimandrite Palladius is very prudent (_l.c._ p. 11):
“Everything that the studious Chinese authors could gather and
say of the situation of Karakhorum is collected in two Chinese
works, _Lo fung low wen kao_ (1849), and _Mungku yew mu ki_
(1859). However, no positive conclusion can be derived from these
researches, chiefly in consequence of the absence of a tolerably
correct map of Northern Mongolia.”

Abel Rémusat (_Mém. sur Géog. Asie Centrale_, p. 20) made a
confusion between Karábalgasun and Karákorum which has misled most
writers after him.

Sir Henry Yule says: “The evidence adduced in Abel Rémusat’s paper
on Karákorum (_Mém. de l’Acad. R. des Insc._ VII. 288) establishes
the site on the north bank of the Orkhon, and about five days’
journey above the confluence of the Orkhon and Tula. But as we have
only a very loose knowledge of these rivers, it is impossible to
assign the geographical position with accuracy. Nor is it likely
that ruins exist beyond an outline perhaps of the Kaan’s Palace
walls.”

In the _Geographical Magazine_ for July, 1874 (p. 137), Sir Henry
Yule has been enabled, by the kind aid of Madame Fedtchenko in
supplying a translation from the Russian, to give some account of
Mr. Paderin’s visit to the place, in the summer of 1873, along with
a sketch-map.

“The site visited by Mr. Paderin is shown, by the particulars
stated in that paper, to be sufficiently identified with Karákorum.
It is precisely that which Rémusat indicated, and which bears in
the Jesuit maps, as published by D’Anville, the name of _Talarho
Hara Palhassoun_ (_i.e._ Kará Balghásun), standing 4 or 5 miles from
the left bank of the Orkhon, in lat. (by the Jesuit Tables) 47° 32′
24″. It is now known as Kara-Khărăm (Rampart) or Kara Balghasun
(city). The remains consist of a quadrangular rampart of mud and
sun-dried brick, of about 500 paces to the side, and now about 9
feet high, with traces of a higher tower, and of an inner rampart
parallel to the other. But these remains probably appertain to the
city as re-occupied by the descendants of the Yuen in the end of
the 14th century, after their expulsion from China.”

Dr. Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. p. 123) rightly observes: “It
seems, however, that Paderin is mistaken in his supposition.
At least it does not agree with the position assigned to the
ancient Mongol residence in the Mongol annals _Erdenin erikhe_,
translated into Russian, in 1883, by Professor Pozdneiev. It is
there positively stated (p. 110, note 2) that the monastery of
_Erdenidsu_, founded in 1585, was erected on the ruins of that
city, which once had been built by order of Ogotai Khan, and where
he had established his residence; and where, after the expulsion
of the Mongols from China, Toghon Temur again had fixed the Mongol
court. This vast monastery still exists, one English mile, or more,
east of the Orkhon. It has even been astronomically determined by
the Jesuit missionaries, and is marked on our maps of Mongolia.
Pozdneiev, who visited the place in 1877, obligingly informs
me that the square earthen wall surrounding the monastery of
Erdenidsu, and measuring about an English mile in circumference,
may well be the very wall of ancient Karákorum.”

Recent researches have fully confirmed the belief that the Erdeni
Tso, or Erdeni Chao, Monastery occupies the site of Karákorum, near
the bank of the Orkhon, between this river and the Kokchin (old)
Orkhon. (See map in _Inscriptions de l’Orkhon_, Helsingfors, 1892;
a plan of the vicinity and of the Erdeni Tso is given (plate 36) in
_W. Radloff’s Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei_, St. Pet., 1892.)

According to a work of the 13th century quoted by the late
Professor G. Devéria, the distance between the old capital of the
Uighúr, Kara Balgasún, on the left bank of the Orkhon, north of
Erdeni Tso, and the Ho-lin or Karákorum of the Mongols, would be
70 _li_ (about 30 miles), and such is the space between Erdeni
Tso and Kara Balgasún. M. Marcel Monnier (_Itinéraires_, p. 107)
estimates the bird’s-eye distance from Erdeni Tso to Kara Balgasún
at 33 kilom. (about 20½ miles). “When the brilliant epoch of the
power of the Chinghizkhanides,” says Professor Axel Heikel, “was
at an end, the city of Karákorum fell into oblivion, and towards
the year 1590 was founded, in the centre of this historically
celebrated region of the Orkhon, the most ancient of Buddhist
monasteries of Mongolia, this of Erdeni Tso [Erdeni Chao]. It was
built, according to a Mongol chronicle, on the ruins of the town
built by Okkodaï, son of Chinghiz Khan, that is to say, on the
ancient Karákorum.” (_Inscriptions de l’Orkhon_.) So Professor
Heikel, like Professor Pozdneiev, concludes that Erdeni Tso
was built on the site of Karákorum and cannot be mistaken for
Karabalgásun. Indeed it is highly probable that one of the walls of
the actual convent belonged to the old Mongol capital. The travels
and researches by expeditions from Finland and Russia have made
these questions pretty clear. Some most interesting inscriptions
have been brought home and have been studied by a number of
Orientalists: G. Schlegel, O. Donner, G. Devéria, Vasiliev, G. von
der Gabelentz, Dr. Hirth, G. Huth, E. H. Parker, W. Bang, etc., and
especially Professor Vilh. Thomsen, of Copenhagen, who deciphered
them (_Déchiffrement des Inscriptions de l’Orkhon et de l’Iénissei_,
Copenhague, 1894, 8vo; _Inscriptions de l’Orkhon déchiffrées,
par_ V. Thomsen, Helsingfors, 1894, 8vo), and Professor W. Radloff
of St. Petersburg (_Atlas der Alterthümer der Mongolei_, 1892–6,
fol.; _Die alttürkischen Inschriften der Mongolei_, 1894–7, etc.).
There is an immense literature on these inscriptions, and for the
bibliography, I must refer the reader to _H. Cordier, Etudes
Chinoises_ (1891–1894), Leide, 1895, 8vo. _Id._ (1895–1898), Leide,
1898, 8vo. The initiator of these discoveries was N. Iarindsev,
of Irkutsk, who died at Barnaoul in 1894, and the first great
expedition was started from Finland in 1890, under the guidance
of Professor Axel Heikel. (_Inscriptions de l’Orkhon recueillies
par l’expédition finnoise, 1890, et publiées par la Société
Finno-Ougrienne_, Helsingfors, 1892, fol.) The Russian expedition
left the following year, 1891, under the direction of the
Academician W. Radloff.

[Illustration]

M. Chaffanjon (_Nouv. Archiv. des Missions Scient._ IX., 1899, p.
81), in 1895, does not appear to know that there is a difference
between Kará Korum and Kará Balgásun, as he writes: “Forty
kilometres south of Kara Korum _or_ Kara Balgásun, the convent of
Erdin Zoun.”

A plan of Kara Balgásun is given (plate 27) in _Radloff’s Atlas_.
See also _Henri Cordier et Gaubil, Situation de Holin en Tartarie_,
Leide, 1893.

In Rubruquis’s account of Karákorum there is one passage of great
interest: “Then master William [Guillaume L’Orfèvre] had made for
us an iron to make wafers ... he made also a silver box to put
the body of Christ in, with relics in little cavities made in the
sides of the box.” Now M. Marcel Monnier, who is one of the last,
if not the last traveller who visited the region, tells me that he
found in the large temple of Erdeni Tso an iron (the cast bore a
Latin cross; had the wafer been Nestorian, the cross should have
been Greek) and a silver box, which are very likely the objects
mentioned by Rubruquis. It is a new proof of the identity of the
sites of Erdeni Tso and Karákorum.—H. C.]

[Illustration: Entrance to the Erdeni Tso Great Temple.]

NOTE 2.—[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 113, note) says: “The earliest
date to which I have been able to trace back the name Tartar is
A.D. 732. We find mention made in a Turkish inscription found on
the river Orkhon and bearing that date, of the _Tokuz Tatar_, or
‘Nine (tribes of) Tatars,’ and of the _Otuz Tatar_, or ‘Thirty
(tribes of) Tatars.’ It is probable that these tribes were then
living between the Oguz or Uigúr Turks on the west, and the Kitan
on the east. (_Thomsen, Inscriptions de l’Orkhon_, 98, 126, 140.)
Mr. Thos. Watters tells me that the Tartars are first mentioned
by the Chinese in the period extending from A.D. 860 to 874; the
earliest mention I have discovered, however, is under date of
A.D. 880. (_Wu tai shih_, Bk. 4.) We also read in the same work
(Bk. 74, 2) that ‘The Ta-ta were a branch of the Mo-ho (the name
the Nû-chēn Tartars bore during the Sui and T’ang periods: _Ma
Tuan-lin_, Bk. 327, 5). They first lived to the north of the Kitan.
Later on they were conquered by this people, when they scattered, a
part becoming tributaries of the Kitan, another to the P’o-hai (a
branch of the Mo-ho), while some bands took up their abode in the
Yin Shan in Southern Mongolia, north of the provinces of Chih-li
and Shan-si, and took the name of _Ta-ta_.’ In 981 the Chinese
ambassador to the Prince of Kao-chang (Karakhodjo, some 20 miles
south-east of Turfan) traversed the Ta-ta country. They then seem
to have occupied the northern bend of the Yellow River. He gives
the names of some nine tribes of Ta-ta living on either side of
the river. He notes that their neighbours to the east were Kitan,
and that for a long time they had been fighting them after the
occupation of Kan-chou by the Uigúrs. (_Ma Tuan-lin_, Bk. 336,
12–14.) We may gather from this that these Tartars were already
settled along the Yellow River and the Yin Shan (the valley in
which is now the important frontier mart of Kwei-hua Ch’eng) at the
beginning of the ninth century, for the Uigúrs, driven southward
by the Kirghiz, first occupied Kan-chou in north-western Kan-suh,
somewhere about A.D. 842.”]

NOTE 3.—CHORCHA (_Ciorcia_) is the Manchu country, whose people
were at that time called by the Chinese _Yuché_ or _Niuché_, and
by the Mongols _Churché_, or as it is in Sanang Setzen, _Jurchid_.
The country in question is several times mentioned by Rashiduddin
as Churché. The founders of the _Kin_ Dynasty, which the Mongols
superseded in Northern China, were of Churché race. [It was part of
Nayan’s appanage. (See Bk. II. ch. v.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—The idea that a Christian potentate of enormous wealth
and power, and bearing this title, ruled over vast tracts in the
far East, was universal in Europe from the middle of the 12th to
the end of the 13th century, after which time the Asiatic story
seems gradually to have died away, whilst the Royal Presbyter
was assigned to a locus in Abyssinia; the equivocal application
of the term _India_ to the East of Asia and the East of Africa
facilitating this transfer. Indeed I have a suspicion, contrary
to the view now generally taken, that the term may from the first
have belonged to the Abyssinian Prince, though circumstances led to
its being applied in another quarter for a time. It appears to me
almost certain that the letter of Pope Alexander III., preserved
by R. Hoveden, and written in 1177 to the _Magnificus Rex Indorum,
Sacerdotum sanctissimus_, was meant for the King of Abyssinia.

Be that as it may, the inordinate report of Prester John’s
magnificence became especially diffused from about the year 1165,
when a letter full of the most extravagant details was circulated,
which purported to have been addressed by this potentate to the
Greek Emperor Manuel, the Roman Emperor Frederick, the Pope, and
other Christian sovereigns. By the circulation of this letter,
glaring fiction as it is, the idea of this Christian Conqueror
was planted deep in the mind of Europe, and twined itself round
every rumour of revolution in further Asia. Even when the din of
the conquests of Chinghiz began to be audible in the West, he was
invested with the character of a Christian King, and more or less
confounded with the mysterious Prester John.

The first notice of a conquering Asiatic potentate so styled had
been brought to Europe by the Syrian Bishop of Gabala (_Jibal_,
south of Laodicea in Northern Syria), who came, in 1145, to lay
various grievances before Pope Eugene III. He reported that not
long before a certain John, inhabiting the extreme East, king and
Nestorian priest, and claiming descent from the Three Wise Kings,
had made war on the _Samiard_ Kings of the Medes and Persians, and
had taken Ecbatana their capital. He was then proceeding to the
deliverance of Jerusalem, but was stopped by the Tigris, which he
could not cross, and compelled by disease in his host to retire.

M. d’Avezac first showed to whom this account must apply, and the
subject has more recently been set forth with great completeness
and learning by Dr. Gustavus Oppert. The conqueror in question was
the founder of Kara Khitai, which existed as a great Empire in
Asia during the last two-thirds of the 12th century. This chief
was a prince of the Khitan dynasty of Liao, who escaped with a
body of followers from Northern China on the overthrow of that
dynasty by the _Kin_ or Niuchen about 1125. He is called by the
Chinese historians Yeliu Tashi; by Abulghazi, Nuzi Taigri Ili;
and by Rashiduddin, Nushi (or Fushi) Taifu. Being well received
by the Uighúrs and other tribes west of the Desert who had been
subject to the Khitan Empire, he gathered an army and commenced
a course of conquest which eventually extended over Eastern and
Western Turkestan, including Khwarizm, which became tributary to
him. He took the title of _Gurkhan_, said to mean Universal or
Suzerain Khan, and fixed at Bala Sagun, north of the Thian Shan,
the capital of his Empire, which became known as _Kará_ (Black)
_Khitai_.[1] [The dynasty being named by the Chinese _Si-Liao_
(Western Liao) lasted till it was destroyed in 1218.—H. C.] In 1141
he came to the aid of the King of Khwarizm against _Sanjar_ the
Seljukian sovereign of Persia (whence the _Samiard_ of the Syrian
Bishop), who had just taken Samarkand, and defeated that prince
with great slaughter. Though the Gurkhan himself is not described
to have extended his conquests into Persia, the King of Khwarizm
followed up the victory by an invasion of that country, in which he
plundered the treasury and cities of Sanjar.

Admitting this Karacathayan prince to be the first conqueror (in
Asia, at all events) to whom the name of Prester John was applied,
it still remains obscure how that name arose. Oppert supposes that
_Gurkhan_ or _Kurkhan_, softened in West Turkish pronunciation
into _Yurkan_, was confounded with _Yochanan_ or _Johannes_; but
he finds no evidence of the conqueror’s profession of Christianity
except the fact, notable certainly, that the daughter of the last
of his brief dynasty is recorded to have been a Christian. Indeed,
D’Ohsson says that the first Gurkhan was a Buddhist, though on what
authority is not clear. There seems a probability at least that
it was an error in the original ascription of Christianity to the
Karacathayan prince, which caused the confusions as to the identity
of Prester John which appear in the next century, of which we shall
presently speak. Leaving this doubtful point, it has been plausibly
suggested that the title of Presbyter Johannes was connected with
the legends of the immortality of John the Apostle (ὁ πρεσβύτερος,
as he calls himself in the 2nd and 3rd epistles), and the belief
referred to by some of the Fathers that he would be the Forerunner
of our Lord’s second coming, as John the Baptist had been of His
first.

A new theory regarding the original Prester John has been
propounded by Professor Bruun of Odessa, in a Russian work entitled
_The Migrations of Prester John_. The author has been good enough
to send me large extracts of this essay in (French) translation;
and I will endeavour to set forth the main points as well as the
small space that can be given to the matter will admit. Some
remarks and notes shall be added, but I am not in a position to do
justice to Professor Bruun’s views, from the want of access to
some of his most important authorities, such as Brosset’s _History
of Georgia_, and its appendices.

It will be well, before going further, to give the essential
parts of the passage in the History of Bishop Otto of Freisingen
(referred to in vol i. p. 229), which contains the first allusion
to a personage styled Prester John:

“We saw also there [at Rome in 1145] the afore-mentioned Bishop of
Gabala, from Syria.... We heard him bewailing with tears the peril
of the Church beyond-sea since the capture of Edessa, and uttering
his intention on that account to cross the Alps and seek aid from
the King of the Romans and the King of the Franks. He was also
telling us how, not many years before, one JOHN, KING and PRIEST,
who dwells in the extreme Orient beyond Persia and Armenia, and
is (with his people) a Christian, but a Nestorian, had waged war
against the brother Kings of the Persians and Medes who are called
the Samiards, and had captured Ecbatana, of which we have spoken
above, the seat of their dominion. The said Kings having met him
with their forces made up of Persians, Medes, and Assyrians, the
battle had been maintained for 3 days, either side preferring
death to flight. But at last PRESBYTER JOHN (for so they are wont
to style him), having routed the Persians, came forth the victor
from a most sanguinary battle. After this victory (he went on to
say) the aforesaid John was advancing to fight in aid of the Church
at Jerusalem; but when he arrived at the Tigris, and found there
no possible means of transport for his army, he turned northward,
as he had heard that the river in that quarter was frozen over in
winter-time. Halting there for some years[2] in expectation of a
frost, which never came, owing to the mildness of the season, he
lost many of his people through the unaccustomed climate, and was
obliged to return homewards. This personage is said to be of the
ancient race of those Magi who are mentioned in the Gospel, and to
rule the same nations that they did, and to have such glory and
wealth that he uses (they say) only an emerald sceptre. It was
(they say) from his being fired by the example of his fathers, who
came to adore Christ in the cradle, that he was proposing to go to
Jerusalem, when he was prevented by the cause already alleged.”

Professor Bruun will not accept Oppert’s explanation, which
identifies this King and Priest with the Gur-Khan of Karacathay,
for whose profession of Christianity there is indeed (as has been
indicated—_supra_) no real evidence; who could not be said to have
made an attack upon any pair of brother Kings of the Persians and
the Medes, nor to have captured Ecbatana (a city, whatever its
identity, of Media); who could never have had any intention of
coming to Jerusalem; and whose geographical position in no way
suggested the mention of Armenia.

Professor Bruun thinks he finds a warrior much better answering
to the indications in the Georgian prince John Orbelian, the
general-in-chief under several successive Kings of Georgia in that
age.

At the time when the Gur-Khan defeated Sanjar the real brothers
of the latter had been long dead; Sanjar had withdrawn from
interference with the affairs of Western Persia; and Hamadán (if
this is to be regarded as Ecbatana) was no residence of his. But
it was the residence of Sanjar’s nephew Mas’úd, in whose hands was
now the dominion of Western Persia; whilst Mas’úd’s nephew, Dáúd,
held Media, _i.e._ Azerbeiján, Arrán, and Armenia. It is in these two
princes that Professor Bruun sees the _Samiardi fratres_ of the
German chronicler.

Again the expression “extreme Orient” is to be interpreted by local
usage. And with the people of Little Armenia, through whom probably
such intelligence reached the Bishop of Gabala, the expression the
_East_ signified specifically Great Armenia (which was then a part
of the kingdom of Georgia and Abkhasia), as Dulaurier has stated.[3]

It is true that the Georgians were not really Nestorians, but
followers of the Greek Church. It was the fact, however, that in
general, the Armenians, whom the Greeks accused of following
the Jacobite errors, retorted upon members of the Greek Church
with the reproach of the opposite heresy of Nestorianism. And the
attribution of Nestorianism to a Georgian Prince is, like the
expression “_extreme East_,” an indication of the Armenian channel
through which the story came.

The intention to march to the aid of the Christians in Palestine is
more like the act of a Georgian General than that of a Karacathayan
Khan; and there are in the history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem
several indications of the proposal at least of Georgian assistance.

The personage in question is said to have come from the country of
the Magi, from whom he was descended. But these have frequently
been supposed to come from Great Armenia. _E.g._ Friar Jordanus says
they came from Moghán.[4]

The name _Ecbatana_ has been so variously applied that it was
likely to lead to ambiguities. But it so happens that, in a
previous passage of his History, Bishop Otto of Freisingen, in
rehearsing some Oriental information gathered apparently from
the same Bishop of Gabala, has shown what was the place that he
had been taught to identify with Ecbatana, viz. the old Armenian
city of ANI.[5] Now this city was captured from the Turks, on
behalf of the King of Georgia, David the Restorer, by his great
_sbasalar_,[6] John Orbelian, in 1123–24.

Professor Bruun also lays stress upon a passage in a German
chronicle of date some years later than Otho’s work:

“1141. Liupoldus dux Bawariorum obiit, Henrico fratre ejus
succedente in ducatu. Iohannes Presbyter Rex Armeniæ et Indiæ cum
duobus regibus fratribus Persarum et Medorum pugnavit et vicit.”[7]

He asks how the Gur-Khan of Karakhitai could be styled King of
_Armenia_ and of India? It may be asked, _per contra_, how either
the King of Georgia or his _Peshwa_ (to use the Mahratta analogy
of John Orbelian’s position) could be styled King of Armenia and
of _India_? In reply to this, Professor Bruun adduces a variety of
quotations which he considers as showing that the term _India_ was
applied to some Caucasian region.

My own conviction is that the report of Otto of Freisingen is not
merely the _first mention_ of a great Asiatic potentate called
Prester John, but that his statement is the whole and sole basis
of good faith on which the story of such a potentate rested;
and I am quite as willing to believe, on due evidence, that the
nucleus of fact to which his statement referred, and on which such
a pile of long-enduring fiction was erected, occurred in Armenia
as that it occurred in Turan. Indeed in many respects the story
would thus be more comprehensible. One cannot attach any value
to the quotation from the Annalist in Pertz, because there seems
no reason to doubt that the passage is a mere adaptation of the
report by Bishop Otto, of whose work the Annalist makes other use,
as is indeed admitted by Professor Bruun, who (be it said) is a
pattern of candour in controversy. But much else that the Professor
alleges is interesting and striking. The fact that Azerbeijan and
the adjoining regions were known as “the East” is patent to the
readers of this book in many a page, where the Khan and his Mongols
in occupation of that region are styled by Polo _Lord of the_
LEVANT, _Tartars of the_ LEVANT (_i.e._ of the East), even when the
speaker’s standpoint is in far Cathay.[8] The mention of _Aní_ as
identical with the Ecbatana of which Otto had heard is a remarkable
circumstance which I think even Oppert has overlooked. That this
Georgian hero _was_ a Christian and that his name _was_ John are
considerable facts. Oppert’s conversion of Korkhan into Yokhanan
or John is anything but satisfactory. The identification proposed
again makes it quite intelligible how the so-called Prester John
should have talked about coming to the aid of the Crusaders; a
point so difficult to explain on Oppert’s theory, that he has been
obliged to introduce a duplicate John in the person of a Greek
Emperor to solve that knot; another of the weaker links in his
argument. In fact, Professor Bruun’s thesis seems to me more than
fairly successful in _paving the way_ for the introduction of a
Caucasian Prester John; the barriers are removed, the carpets are
spread, the trumpets sound royally—but the conquering hero comes
not!

He does very nearly come. The almost royal power and splendour of
the Orbelians at this time is on record: “They held the office of
_Sbasalar_ or Generalissimo of all Georgia. All the officers of the
King’s Palace were under their authority. Besides that they had
12 standards of their own, and under each standard 1000 warriors
mustered. As the custom was for the King’s flag to be white and the
pennon over it red, it was ruled that the Orpelian flag should be
red and the pennon white.... At banquets they alone had the right
to couches whilst other princes had cushions only. Their food was
served on silver; and to them it belonged to crown the kings.”[9]
Orpel Ivané, _i.e._ John Orbelian, Grand _Sbasalar_, was for years
the pride of Georgia and the hammer of the Turks. In 1123–1124 he
wrested from them Tiflis and the whole country up to the Araxes,
including _Ani_, as we have said. His King David, the Restorer,
bestowed on him large additional domains from the new conquests;
and the like brilliant service and career of conquest was continued
under David’s sons and successors, Demetrius and George; his later
achievements, however, and some of the most brilliant, occurring
after the date of the Bishop of Gabala’s visit to Rome. But still
we hear of no actual conflict with the chief princes of the
Seljukian house, and of no event in his history so important as to
account for his being made to play the part of Presbyter Johannes
in the story of the Bishop of Gabala. Professor Bruun’s most
forcible observation in reference to this rather serious difficulty
is that the historians have transmitted to us extremely little
detail concerning the reign of Demetrius II., and do not even agree
as to its duration. Carebat vate sacro: “It was,” says Brosset,
“long and glorious, but it lacked a commemorator.” If new facts
can be alleged, the identity may still be proved. But meantime the
conquests of the Gur-Khan and his defeat of Sanjar, just at a time
which suits the story, are indubitable, and this great advantage
Oppert’s thesis retains. As regards the claim to the title of
_Presbyter_ nothing worth mentioning is alleged on either side.

When the Mongol Conquests threw Asia open to Frank travellers in
the middle of the 13th century, their minds were full of Prester
John; they sought in vain for an adequate representative, but
it was not in the nature of things but they should find _some_
representative. In fact they found _several_. Apparently no
real tradition existed among the Eastern Christians of any such
personage, but the persistent demand produced a supply, and the
honour of identification with Prester John, after hovering over
one head and another, settled finally upon that of the King of the
Keraits, whom we find to play the part in our text.

Thus in Plano Carpini’s single mention of Prester John as the King
of the Christians of India the Greater, who defeats the Tartars
by an elaborate stratagem, Oppert recognizes Sultan Jaláluddín of
Khwarizm and his temporary success over the Mongols in Afghanistan.
In the Armenian Prince Sempad’s account, on the other hand, this
Christian King of India is _aided_ by the Tartars to defeat and
harass the neighbouring Saracens, his enemies, and becomes the
Mongol’s vassal. In the statement of Rubruquis, though distinct
reference is made to the conquering Gurkhan (under the name of
Coir Cham of Caracatay), the title of _King John_ is assigned to
the Naiman Prince (_Kushluk_), who had married the daughter of the
last lineal sovereign of Karakhitai, and usurped his power, whilst,
with a strange complication of confusion, UNC, Prince of the Crit
and Merkit (Kerait and Merkit, two great tribes of Mongolia)[10]
and Lord of Karákorum, is made the brother and successor of this
Naiman Prince. His version of the story, as it proceeds, has so
much resemblance to Polo’s, that we shall quote the words. The
Crit and Merkit, he says, were Nestorian Christians. “But their
Lord had abandoned the worship of Christ to follow idols, and kept
by him those priests of the idols who are all devil-raisers and
sorcerers. Beyond his pastures, at the distance of ten or fifteen
days’ journey, were the pastures of the MOAL (Mongol), who were a
very poor people, without a leader and without any religion except
sorceries and divinations, such as all the people of those parts
put so much faith in. Next to Moal was another poor tribe called
TARTAR. King John having died without an heir, his brother Unc got
his wealth, and caused himself to be proclaimed Cham, and sent out
his flocks and herds even to the borders of Moal. At that time
there was a certain blacksmith called Chinghis among the tribe of
Moal, and he used to lift the cattle of Unc Chan as often as he had
a chance, insomuch that the herdsmen of Unc Chan made complaint to
their master. The latter assembled an army, and invaded the land
of the Moal in search of Chinghis, but he fled and hid himself
among the Tartars. So Unc, having plundered the Moal and Tartars,
returned home. And Chinghis addressed the Tartars and Moal, saying:
‘It is because we have no leader that we are thus oppressed by our
neighbours.’ So both Tartars and Moal made Chinghis himself their
leader and captain. And having got a host quietly together, he made
a sudden onslaught upon Unc and conquered him, and compelled him
to flee into Cathay. On that occasion his daughter was taken, and
given by Chinghis to one of his sons, to whom she bore Mangu, who
now reigneth.... The land in which they (the Mongols) first were,
and where the residence of Chinghis still exists, is called _Onan
Kerule_.[11] But because Caracoran is in the country which was
their first conquest, they regard it as a royal city, and there
hold the elections of their Chan.”

Here we see plainly that the Unc Chan of Rubruquis is the Unc Can
or Unecan of Polo. In the narrative of the former, Unc is only
_connected_ with King or Prester John; in that of the latter,
rehearsing the story as heard some 20 or 25 years later, the two
are _identified_. The shadowy _rôle_ of Prester John has passed
from the Ruler of Kara Khitai to the Chief of the Keraits. This
transfer brings us to another history.

We have already spoken of the extensive diffusion of Nestorian
Christianity in Asia during the early and Middle Ages. The
Christian historian Gregory Abulfaraj relates a curious history of
the conversion, in the beginning of the 11th century, of the King
of _Kerith_ with his people, dwelling in the remote north-east
of the land of the Turks. And that the Keraits continued to
profess Christianity down to the time of Chinghiz is attested
by Rashiduddin’s direct statement, as well as by the numerous
Christian princesses from that tribe of whom we hear in Mongol
history. It is the chief of this tribe of whom Rubruquis and Polo
speak under the name of Unc Khan, and whom the latter identifies
with Prester John. His proper name is called Tuli by the Chinese,
and Togrul by the Persian historians, but the Kin sovereign of
Northern China had conferred on him the title of _Wang_ or King,
from which his people gave him the slightly corrupted cognomen of
اونک خان, which some scholars read _Awang_, and _Avenk_ Khan, but
which the spelling of Rubruquis and Polo shows probably to have
been pronounced as _Aung_ or _Ung_ Khan.[12] The circumstance
stated by Rubruquis of his having abandoned the profession of
Christianity, is not alluded to by Eastern writers; but in any
case his career is not a credit to the Faith. I cannot find any
satisfactory corroboration of the claims of supremacy over the
Mongols which Polo ascribes to Aung Khan. But that his power
and dignity were considerable, appears from the term _Pádsháh_
which Rashiduddin applies to him. He had at first obtained the
sovereignty of the Keraits by the murder of two of his brothers
and several nephews. Yesugai, the father of Chinghiz, had been
his staunch friend, and had aided him effectually to recover his
dominion from which he had been expelled. After a reign of many
years he was again ejected, and in the greatest necessity sought
the help of Temujin (afterwards called Chinghiz Khan), by whom he
was treated with the greatest consideration. This was in 1196.
For some years the two chiefs conducted their forays in alliance,
but differences sprang up between them; the son of Aung Khan
entered into a plot to kill Temujin, and in 1202–1203 they were in
open war. The result will be related in connection with the next
chapters.

We may observe that the idea which Joinville picked up in the
East about Prester John corresponds pretty closely with that set
forth by Marco. Joinville represents him as one of the princes to
whom the Tartars were tributary in the days of their oppression,
and as “their ancient enemy”; one of their first acts, on being
organized under a king of their own, was to attack him and conquer
him, slaying all that bore arms, but sparing all monks and priests.
The expression used by Joinville in speaking of the original land
of the Tartars, “_une grande_ berrie _de sablon_,” has not been
elucidated in any edition that I have seen. It is the Arabic
بريه _Băríya_, “a Desert.” No doubt Joinville learned the word
in Palestine. (See _Joinville_, p. 143 _seqq._; see also _Oppert_,
_Der Presb. Johannes in Sage und Geschichte_, and _Cathay_, etc.,
pp. 173–182.) [_Fried. Zarncke, Der Priester Johannes; Cordier,
Odoric_.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] A passage in Mirkhond extracted by Erdmann (_Temudschín_, p. 532)
seems to make Bálá Sághún the same as Bishbálik, now Urumtsi, but
this is inconsistent with other passages abstracted by Oppert
(_Presbyter Johan._ 131–32); and Vámbéry indicates a reason for
its being sought very much further west (_H. of Bokhara_, 116).
[Dr. Bretschneider (_Med. Res._) has a chapter on Kara-Khitaí
(I. 208 _seqq._) and in a long note on Bala Sagun, which he calls
Belasagun, he says (p. 226) that “according to the Tarikh Djihan
Kúshai (_d’Ohsson_, i. 433), the city of Belasagun had been founded
by Buku Khan, sovereign of the Uigurs, in a well-watered plain
of Turkestan with rich pastures. The Arabian geographers first
mention Belasagun, in the ninth or tenth century, as a city beyond
the Sihun or Yaxartes, depending on _Isfidjab_ (Sairam, according
to Lerch), and situated east of Taras. They state that the people
of Turkestan considered Belasagun to represent ‘the navel of the
earth,’ on account of its being situated in the middle between
east and west, and likewise between north and south.” (_Sprenger’s
Poststr. d. Or., Mavarannahar_). Dr. Bretschneider adds (p. 227):
“It is not improbable that ancient Belasagun was situated at the
same place where, according to the T’ang history, the Khan of one
branch of the Western T’u Kuë (Turks) had his residence in the
seventh century. It is stated in the T’ang shu that _Ibi Shabolo
Shehu Khan_, who reigned in the first half of the seventh century,
placed his ordo on the northern border of the river _Sui ye_. This
river, and a city of the same name, are frequently mentioned in the
T’ang annals of the seventh and eighth centuries, in connection
with the warlike expeditions of the Chinese in Central Asia. _Sui
ye_ was situated on the way from the river _Ili_ to the city of
Ta-lo-sz’ (Talas). In 679 the Chinese had built on the Sui ye River
a fortress; but in 748 they were constrained to destroy it.” (Comp.
_Visdelou_ in _Suppl. Bibl. Orient._ pp. 110–114; _Gaubil’s Hist.
de la Dyn. des Thang_, in _Mém. conc. Chin._ xv. p. 403
_seqq._).—H. C.]

[2] Sic: _per aliquot annos_, but an evident error.

[3] _J. As._ sér. V. tom. xi. 449.

[4] The Great Plain on the Lower Araxes and Cyrus. The word Moghán =
_Magi_: and Abulfeda quotes this as the etymology of the name.
(_Reinaud’s Abulf._ I. 300.)—Y. [_Cordier, Odoric_, 36.]

[5] Here is the passage, which is worth giving for more reasons than
one:

“That portion of ancient Babylon which is still occupied is (as
we have heard from persons of character from beyond sea) styled
BALDACH, whilst the part that lies, according to the prophecy,
deserted and pathless extends some ten miles to the Tower of Babel.
The inhabited portion called Baldach is very large and populous;
and though it should belong to the Persian monarchy it has been
conceded by the Kings of the Persians to their High Priest, whom
they call the _Caliph_; in order that in this also a certain
analogy [_quaedam habitudo_] such as has been often remarked
before, should be exhibited between Babylon and Rome. For the
same (privilege) that here in the city of Rome has been made over
to our chief Pontiff by the Christian Emperor, has there been
conceded to their High Priest by the Pagan Kings of Persia, to whom
Babylonia has for a long time been subject. But the Kings of the
Persians (just as our Kings have their royal city, like Aachen)
have themselves established the seat of their kingdom at Egbatana,
which, in the Book of Judith, Arphaxat is said to have founded, and
which in their tongue is called HANI, containing as they allege
100,000 or more fighting men, and have reserved to themselves
nothing of Babylon except the nominal dominion. Finally, the place
which is now vulgarly called Babylonia, as I have mentioned, is not
upon the Euphrates (at all) as people suppose, but on the Nile,
about 6 days’ journey from Alexandria, and is the same as Memphis,
to which Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, anciently gave the name of
Babylon.”—Ottonis Frising. Lib. VII. cap. 3, in _Germanic Hist.
Illust. etc. Christiani Urstisii Basiliensis_, Francof. 1585.—Y.

[6] Sbasalar, or “General-in-chief,” = Pers. _Sipáhsálár_.—Y.

[7] _Continuatio Ann. Admutensium_, in Pertz, Scriptores, IX. 580.

[8] _E.g._ ii. 42.

[9] _St. Martin, Mém. sur l’Arménie_, II. 77.

[10] [“The Keraits,” says Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 111, note), “lived
on the Orkhon and the Tula, south-east of Lake Baikal; Abulfaraj
relates their conversion to Christianity in 1007 by the Nestorian
Bishop of Merv. Rashid-eddin, however, says their conversion took
place in the time of Chingis Khan. (_D’Ohsson_, I. 48; _Chabot,
Mar Jabalaha, III._ 14.) D’Avezac (536) identifies, with some
plausibility, I think, the Keraits with the _Kí-lê_ (or _T’íeh-lê_)
of the early Chinese annals. The name K’í-lê was applied in the
3rd century A.D. to _all_ the Turkish tribes, such as the _Hui-hu_
(Uigúrs), _Kieh-Ku_ (Kirghiz) Alans, etc., and they are said to
be the same as the _Kao-ch’ê_, from whom descended the _Cangle_
of Rubruck. (_T’ang shu_, Bk. 217, i.; _Ma Tuan-lin_, Bk. 344, 9,
Bk. 347, 4.) As to the Merkits, or Merkites, they were a nomadic
people of Turkish stock, with a possible infusion of Mongol blood.
They are called by Mohammedan writers Uduyut, and were divided
into four tribes. They lived on the Lower Selinga and its feeders.
(_D’Ohsson_, i. 54; _Howorth, History_, I., pt. i. 22, 698.)”—H. C.]

[11] [_Onan Kerule_ is “the country watered by the Orkhon and Kerulun
Rivers, _i.e._ the country to the south and south-east of Lake
Baikal. The headquarters (_ya-chang_) of the principal chief of
the Uigurs in the eighth century was 500 _li_ (about 165 miles)
south-west of the confluence of the Wen-Kun ho (Orkhon) and the
Tu-lo ho (Tura). Its ruins, sometimes, but wrongly, confounded with
those of the Mongol city of Karakorum, some 20 miles from it, built
in 1235 by Ogodai, are now known by the name of Kara Balgasun,
‘Black City.’” [See p. 228.] The name _Onankerule_ seems to be
taken from the form _Onan-ou-Keloran_, which occurs in Mohammedan
writers. (_Quatremère_, 115 _et seq._; _see_ also _T’ang shu_, Bk.
43b; _Rockhill_, _Rubruck_, 116, note.)—H. C.]

[12] Vámbéry makes _Ong_ an Uighúr word, signifying “right.” [Palladius
(_l.c._ 23) says: “The consonance of the names of Wang-Khan and
Wang-Ku (Ung-Khan and Ongu—Ongot of Rashiduddin, a Turkish Tribe)
led to the confusion regarding the tribes and persons, which at
M. Polo’s time seems to have been general among the Europeans in
China; M. Polo and Johannes de Monte Corvino transfer the title of
Prester John from Wang-Khan, already perished at that time, to the
distinguished family of Wang-Ku.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER XLVII.

OF CHINGHIS, AND HOW HE BECAME THE FIRST KAAN OF THE
TARTARS.

Now it came to pass in the year of Christ’s Incarnation 1187 that the
Tartars made them a King whose name was CHINGHIS KAAN.{1} He was a man
of great worth, and of great ability (eloquence), and valour. And as
soon as the news that he had been chosen King was spread abroad through
those countries, all the Tartars in the world came to him and owned him
for their Lord. And right well did he maintain the Sovereignty they had
given him. What shall I say? The Tartars gathered to him in astonishing
multitude, and when he saw such numbers he made a great furniture of
spears and arrows and such other arms as they used, and set about the
conquest of all those regions till he had conquered eight provinces.
When he conquered a province he did no harm to the people or their
property, but merely established some of his own men in the country
along with a proportion of theirs, whilst he led the remainder to the
conquest of other provinces. And when those whom he had conquered
became aware how well and safely he protected them against all others,
and how they suffered no ill at his hands, and saw what a noble prince
he was, then they joined him heart and soul and became his devoted
followers. And when he had thus gathered such a multitude that they
seemed to cover the earth, he began to think of conquering a great
part of the world. Now in the year of Christ 1200 he sent an embassy
to Prester John, and desired to have his daughter to wife. But when
Prester John heard that Chinghis Kaan demanded his daughter in marriage
he waxed very wroth, and said to the Envoys, “What impudence is this,
to ask my daughter to wife! Wist he not well that he was my liegeman
and serf? Get ye back to him and tell him that I had liever set my
daughter in the fire than give her in marriage to him, and that he
deserves death at my hand, rebel and traitor that he is!” So he bade
the Envoys begone at once, and never come into his presence again. The
Envoys, on receiving this reply, departed straightway, and made haste
to their master, and related all that Prester John had ordered them to
say, keeping nothing back.{2}

NOTE 1.—Temujin was born in the year 1155, according to all the
Persian historians, who are probably to be relied on; the Chinese
put the event in 1162. 1187 does not appear to be a date of special
importance in his history. His inauguration as sovereign under
the name of Chinghiz Kaan was in 1202 according to the Persian
authorities, in 1206 according to the Chinese.

In a preceding note (p. 236) we have quoted a passage in which
Rubruquis calls Chinghiz “a certain blacksmith.” This mistaken
notion seems to have originated in the resemblance of his name
_Temújin_ to the Turki _Temúrjí_, a blacksmith; but it was common
throughout Asia in the Middle Ages, and the story is to be found
not only in Rubruquis, but in the books of Hayton, the Armenian
prince, and of Ibn Batuta, the Moor. That cranky Orientalist, Dr.
Isaac Jacob Schmidt, positively reviles William Rubruquis, one of
the most truthful and delightful of travellers, and certainly not
inferior to his critic in mother-wit, for adopting this story,
and rebukes Timkowski—not for adopting it, but for merely telling
us the very interesting fact that the story was still, in 1820,
current in Mongolia. (_Schmidt’s San. Setz._ 376, and _Timkowski_,
I. 147.)

NOTE 2.—Several historians, among others Abulfaraj, represent
Chinghiz as having married a daughter of Aung Khan; and this is
current among some of the mediæval European writers, such as
Vincent of Beauvais. It is also adopted by Pétis de la Croix in his
history of Chinghiz, apparently from a comparatively late Turkish
historian; and both D’Herbelot and St. Martin state the same; but
there seems to be no foundation for it in the best authorities:
either Persian or Chinese. (See _Abulfaragius_, p. 285; _Speculum
Historiale_, Bk. XXIX. ch. lxix.; _Hist. of Genghiz Can_, p. 29;
and _Golden Horde_, pp. 61–62.) But there is a real story at the
basis of Polo’s, which seems to be this: About 1202, when Aung Khan
and Chinghiz were still acting in professed alliance, a double
union was proposed between Aung Khan’s daughter Jaur Bigi and
Chinghiz’s son Juji, and between Chinghiz’s daughter Kijin Bigi and
Togrul’s grandson Kush Buka. From certain circumstances this union
fell through, and this was one of the circumstances which opened
the breach between the two chiefs. There were, however, several
marriages between the families. (_Erdmann_, 283; others are quoted
under ch. lix., note 2.)

CHAPTER XLVIII.

HOW CHINGHIS MUSTERED HIS PEOPLE TO MARCH AGAINST
PRESTER JOHN.

When Chinghis Kaan heard the brutal message that Prester John had sent
him, such rage seized him that his heart came nigh to bursting within
him, for he was a man of a very lofty spirit. At last he spoke, and
that so loud that all who were present could hear him: “Never more
might he be prince if he took not revenge for the brutal message of
Prester John, and such revenge that insult never in this world was so
dearly paid for. And before long Prester John should know whether he
were his serf or no!”

So then he mustered all his forces, and levied such a host as never
before was seen or heard of, sending word to Prester John to be on
his defence. And when Prester John had sure tidings that Chinghis was
really coming against him with such a multitude, he still professed to
treat it as a jest and a trifle, for, quoth he, “these be no soldiers.”
Natheless he marshalled his forces and mustered his people, and made
great preparations, in order that if Chinghis did come, he might take
him and put him to death. In fact he marshalled such an host of many
different nations that it was a world’s wonder.

And so both sides gat them ready to battle. And why should I make a
long story of it? Chinghis Kaan with all his host arrived at a vast and
beautiful plain which was called TANDUC, belonging to Prester John, and
there he pitched his camp; and so great was the multitude of his people
that it was impossible to number them. And when he got tidings that
Prester John was coming, he rejoiced greatly, for the place afforded
a fine and ample battle-ground, so he was right glad to tarry for him
there, and greatly longed for his arrival.

But now leave we Chinghis and his host, and let us return to Prester
John and his people.

CHAPTER XLIX.

HOW PRESTER JOHN MARCHED TO MEET CHINGHIS.

Now the story goes that when Prester John became aware that Chinghis
with his host was marching against him, he went forth to meet him with
all his forces, and advanced until he reached the same plain of Tanduc,
and pitched his camp over against that of Chinghis Kaan at a distance
of 20 miles. And then both armies remained at rest for two days that
they might be fresher and heartier for battle.{1}

So when the two great hosts were pitched on the plains of Tanduc as you
have heard, Chinghis Kaan one day summoned before him his astrologers,
both Christians and Saracens, and desired them to let him know which
of the two hosts would gain the battle, his own or Prester John’s. The
Saracens tried to ascertain, but were unable to give a true answer;
the Christians, however, did give a true answer, and showed manifestly
beforehand how the event should be. For they got a cane and split
it lengthwise, and laid one half on this side and one half on that,
allowing no one to touch the pieces. And one piece of cane they called
_Chinghis Kaan_, and the other piece they called _Prester John_. And
then they said to Chinghis: “Now mark! and you will see the event of
the battle, and who shall have the best of it; for whose cane soever
shall get above the other, to him shall victory be.” He replied that he
would fain see it, and bade them begin. Then the Christian astrologers
read a Psalm out of the Psalter, and went through other incantations.
And lo! whilst all were beholding, the cane that bore the name of
Chinghis Kaan, without being touched by anybody, advanced to the other
that bore the name of Prester John, and got on the top of it. When the
Prince saw that he was greatly delighted, and seeing how in this matter
he found the Christians to tell the truth, he always treated them with
great respect, and held them for men of truth for ever after.{2}

NOTE 1.—Polo in the preceding chapter has stated that this plain
of Tanduc was in Prester John’s country. He plainly regards it as
identical with the Tanduc of which he speaks more particularly in
ch. lix. as belonging to Prester John’s descendants, and which must
be located near the Chinese Wall. He is no doubt wrong in placing
the battle there. Sanang Setzen puts the battle between the two,
the only one which he mentions, “at the outflow of the Onon near
Kulen Buira.” The same action is placed by De Mailla’s authorities
at Calantschan, by P. Hyacinth at Kharakchin Schatu, by Erdmann
after Rashid in the vicinity of Hulun Barkat and Kalanchinalt,
which latter was on the borders of the Churché or Manchus. All this
points to the vicinity of Buir Nor and Hulan or Kalon Nor (though
the Onon is far from these). But this was _not_ the final defeat
of Aung Khan or Prester John, which took place some time later
(in 1203) at a place called the Chacher Ondur (or Heights), which
Gaubil places between the Tula and the Kerulun, therefore near the
modern Urga. Aung Khan was wounded, and fled over the frontier
of the Naiman; the officers of that tribe seized and killed him.
(_Schmidt_, 87, 383; _Erdmann_, 297; _Gaubil_, p. 10.)

NOTE 2.—A Tartar divination by twigs, but different from that
here employed, is older than Herodotus, who ascribes it to the
Scythians. We hear of one something like the last among the Alans,
and (from Tacitus) among the Germans. The words of Hosea (iv. 12),
“My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth
unto them,” are thus explained by Theophylactus: “They stuck up a
couple of sticks, whilst murmuring certain charms and incantations;
the sticks then, by the operation of devils, direct or indirect,
would fall over, and the direction of their fall was noted,” etc.
The Chinese method of divination comes still nearer to that in the
text. It is conducted by tossing in the air two symmetrical pieces
of wood or bamboo of a peculiar form. It is described by Mendoza,
and more particularly, with illustrations, by Doolittle.[1]

But Rubruquis would seem to have witnessed nearly the same process
that Polo describes. He reprehends the conjuring practices of the
Nestorian priests among the Mongols, who seem to have tried to
rival the indigenous _Káms_ or Medicine-men. Visiting the Lady
Kuktai, a Christian Queen of Mangu Kaan, who was ill, he says: “The
Nestorians were repeating certain verses, I know not what (they
said it was part of a Psalm), over two twigs which were brought
into contact in the hands of two men. The monk stood by during the
operation” (p. 326).[2] Pétis de la Croix quotes from Thévenot’s
travels, a similar mode of divination as much used, before a fight,
among the Barbary corsairs. Two men sit on the deck facing one
another and each holding two arrows by the points, and hitching
the notches of each pair of arrows into the other pair. Then the
ship’s writer reads a certain Arabic formula, and it is pretended
that whilst this goes on, the two sets of arrows, _of which one
represents the Turks and the other the Christians_, struggle
together in spite of the resistance of the holders, and finally
one rises over the other. This is perhaps the divination by arrows
which is prohibited in the Koran. (_Sura_, V. v. 92.) It is related
by Abulfeda that Mahomed found in the Kaaba an image of Abraham
with such arrows in his hand.

P. della Valle describes the same process, conducted by a Mahomedan
conjuror of Aleppo: “By his incantations he made the four points
of the arrows come together without any movement of the holders,
and by the way the points spontaneously placed themselves, obtained
answers to interrogatories.”

And Mr. Jaeschke writes from Lahaul: “There are many different
ways of divination practised among the Buddhists; and that also
mentioned by Marco Polo is known to our Lama, but in a slightly
different way, making use of _two arrows_ instead of a cane split
up, wherefore this kind is called _da-mo_, ‘Arrow-divination.’”
Indeed the practice is not extinct in India, for in 1833 Mr. Vigne
witnessed its application to detect the robber of a government
chest at Lodiana.

As regards Chinghiz’s respect for the Christians there are other
stories. Abulfaragius has one about Chinghiz seeing in a dream a
religious person who promised him success. He told the dream to
his wife, Aung Khan’s daughter, who said the description answered
to that of the bishop who used to visit her father. Chinghiz then
inquired for a bishop among the Uighúr Christians in his camp, and
they indicated Mar Denha. Chinghiz thenceforward was milder towards
the Christians, and showed them many distinctions (p. 285). Vincent
of Beauvais also speaks of Rabbanta, a Nestorian monk, who lived
in the confidence of Chinghiz’s wife, daughter of “the Christian
King David or Prester John,” and who used by divination to make
many revelations to the Tartars. We have already said that there
seems no ground for assigning a daughter of Aung Khan as wife to
Chinghiz. But there was a _niece_ of the former, named Abika, among
the wives of Chinghiz. And Rashiduddin _does_ relate a dream of the
Kaan’s in relation to her. But it was to the effect that he was
divinely commanded to give her away; and this he did next morning!

(_Rawlins. Herod._ IV. 67; _Amm. Marcell._ XXXI. 2; _Delvio, Disq.
Magic._ 558; _Mendoza_, Hak. Soc. I. 47; _Doolittle_, 435–436;
_Hist. of Genghizcan_, pp. 52–53; _Preston’s al-Hariri_, p. 183;
_P. della V._ II. 865–866; _Vigne_, I. 46; _D’Ohsson_, I. 418–419).

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] [On the Chinese divining-twig, see _Dennys, Folk-lore of China_,
57.—H. C.]

[2] [With reference to this passage from _Rubruck_, Mr. Rockhill says
(195, note): “The mode of divining here referred to is apparently
the same as that described by Polo. It must not however be
confounded with rabdomancy, in which bundles of wands or arrows
were used.” Ammianus Marcellinus (XXXI. 2. 350) says this mode of
divination was practised by the Alans. “They have a singular way
of divining: they take straight willow wands and make bundles of
them, and on examining them at a certain time, with certain secret
incantations, they know what is going to happen.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER L.

THE BATTLE BETWEEN CHINGHIS KAAN AND PRESTER JOHN.

And after both sides had rested well those two days, they armed for the
fight and engaged in desperate combat; and it was the greatest battle
that ever was seen. The numbers that were slain on both sides were very
great, but in the end Chinghis Kaan obtained the victory. And in the
battle Prester John was slain. And from that time forward, day by day,
his kingdom passed into the hands of Chinghis Kaan till the whole was
conquered.

[Illustration: _A. Housselin D._

Death of Chinghiz Khan. (From a miniature in the _Livre des
Merveilles_.)]

I may tell you that Chinghis Kaan reigned six years after this battle,
engaged continually in conquest, and taking many a province and city
and stronghold. But at the end of those six years he went against a
certain castle that was called CAAJU, and there he was shot with an
arrow in the knee, so that he died of his wound. A great pity it was,
for he was a valiant man and a wise.{1}

I will now tell you who reigned after Chinghis, and then about the
manners and customs of the Tartars.

NOTE 1.—Chinghiz in fact survived Aung Khan some 24 years, dying
during his fifth expedition against Tangut, 18th August 1227, aged
65 according to the Chinese accounts, 72 according to the Persian.
Sanang Setzen says that Kurbeljin Goa Khatún, the beautiful Queen
of Tangut, who had passed into the tents of the conqueror, did
him some bodily mischief (it is not said what), and then went and
drowned herself in the Karamuren (or Hwang-ho), which thenceforth
was called by the Mongols the _Khátún-gol_, or Lady’s River, a name
which it in fact still bears. Carpini relates that Chinghiz was
killed by lightning. The Persian and Chinese historians, however,
agree in speaking of his death as natural. Gaubil calls the place
of his death Lou-pan, which he says was in lat. 38°. Rashiduddin
calls it Leung-Shan, which appears to be the mountain range still
so called in the heart of Shensi.

The name of the place before which Polo represents him as mortally
wounded is very variously given. According to Gaubil, Chinghiz
was in reality dangerously wounded by an arrow-shot at the siege
of Taitongfu in 1212. And it is possible, as Oppert suggests,
that Polo’s account of his death before _Caagiu_ (as I prefer
the reading), arose out of a confusion between this circumstance
and those of the death of _Mangku Kaan_, which is said to have
occurred at the assault of HOCHAU in Sze-ch’uan, a name which Polo
would write _Caagiu_, or nearly so. Abulfaragius specifically says
that Mangku Kaan died _by an arrow_; though it is true that other
authors say he died of disease, and Haiton that he was drowned;
all which shows how excusable were Polo’s errors as to events
occurring 50 to 100 years before his time. (See _Oppert’s Presbyter
Johannes_, p. 76; _De Mailla_, IX. 275, and note; _Gaubil_, 18, 50,
52, 121; _Erdmann_, 443; _San. Setzen_, 103.)

It is only by referring back to ch. xlvii., where we are told that
Chinghiz “began to think of conquering a great part of the world,”
that we see Polo to have been really aware of the vast extent and
aim of the conquests of Chinghiz; the _aim_ being literally the
conquest of the world as he conceived it; the _extent_ of the
empire which he initiated actually covering (probably) one half of
the whole number of the human race. (See remarks in _Koeppen, Die
Relig. des Buddha_, II. 86.)

CHAPTER LI.

OF THOSE WHO DID REIGN AFTER CHINGHIS KAAN, AND OF THE
CUSTOMS OF THE TARTARS.

Now the next that reigned after Chinghis Kaan, their first Lord,{1}
was CUY KAAN, and the third Prince was BATUY KAAN, and the fourth was
ALACOU KAAN, the fifth MONGOU KAAN, the sixth CUBLAY KAAN, who is the
sovereign now reigning, and is more potent than any of the five who
went before him; in fact, if you were to take all those five together,
they would not be so powerful as he is.{2} Nay, I will say yet more;
for if you were to put together all the Christians in the world, with
their Emperors and their Kings, the whole of these Christians,—aye, and
throw in the Saracens to boot,—would not have such power, or be able to
do so much as this Cublay, who is the Lord of all the Tartars in the
world, those of the Levant and of the Ponent included; for these are
all his liegemen and subjects. I mean to show you all about this great
power of his in this book of ours.

You should be told also that all the Grand Kaans, and all the
descendants of Chinghis their first Lord, are carried to a mountain
that is called ALTAY to be interred. Wheresoever the Sovereign may die,
he is carried to his burial in that mountain with his predecessors;
no matter an the place of his death were 100 days’ journey distant,
thither must he be carried to his burial.{3}

Let me tell you a strange thing too. When they are carrying the body
of any Emperor to be buried with the others, the convoy that goes with
the body doth put to the sword all whom they fall in with on the road,
saying: “Go and wait upon your Lord in the other world!” For they do in
sooth believe that all such as they slay in this manner do go to serve
their Lord in the other world. They do the same too with horses; for
when the Emperor dies, they kill all his best horses, in order that
he may have the use of them in the other world, as they believe. And
I tell you as a certain truth, that when Mongou Kaan died, more than
20,000 persons, who chanced to meet the body on its way, were slain in
the manner I have told.{4}

NOTE 1.—Before parting with Chinghiz let me point out what has
not to my knowledge been suggested before, that the name of
“_Cambuscan_ bold” in Chaucer’s tale is only a corruption of the
name of Chinghiz. The name of the conqueror appears in Fr. Ricold
as _Camiuscan_, from which the transition to Cambuscan presents no
difficulty. _Camius_ was, I suppose, a clerical corruption out of
_Canjus_ or _Cianjus_. In the chronicle of St. Antonino, however,
we have him called “_Chinghiscan rectius_ Tamgius _Cam_” (XIX. c.
8). If this is not merely the usual blunder of _t_ for _c_, it
presents a curious analogy to the form _Tankiz Khán_ always used
by Ibn Batuta. I do not know the origin of the latter, unless it
was suggested by _tankis_ (Ar.) “Turning upside down.” (See _Pereg.
Quat._, p. 119; _I. B._ III. 22, etc.)

NOTE 2.—Polo’s history here is inadmissible. He introduces into
the list of the supreme Kaans _Batu_, who was only Khan of Kipchak
(the Golden Horde), and _Hulaku_ who was Khan of Persia, whilst he
omits _Okkodai_, the immediate successor of Chinghiz. It is also
remarkable that he uses the form _Alacou_ here instead of _Alaü_
as elsewhere; nor does he seem to mean the same person, for he
was quite well aware that _Alaü_ was Lord of the Levant, who sent
ambassadors to the Great Khan Cúbláy, and could not therefore be
one of his predecessors. The real succession ran: 1. Chinghiz; 2.
Okkodai; 3. Kuyuk; 4. Mangku; 5. Kúblái.

There are quite as great errors in the history of Haiton, who had
probably greater advantages in this respect than Marco. And I may
note that in Teixeira’s abridgment of Mirkhond, Hulaku is made to
succeed Mangku Kaan on the throne of Chinghiz. (_Relaciones_, p.
338.)

NOTE 3.—The ALTAI here certainly does not mean the Great South
Siberian Range to which the name is now applied. Both _Altai_ and
_Altun-Khan_ appear sometimes to be applied by Sanang Setzen to
the Khingan of the Chinese, or range running immediately north
of the Great Wall near Kalgan. (See ch. lxi. note 1.) But in
reference to this matter of the burial of Chinghiz, he describes
the place as “the district of Yekeh Utek, between the shady side
of the Altai-Khan and the sunny side of the Kentei-Khan.” Now the
Kentei-Khan (_khan_ here meaning “mountain”) is near the sources
of the Onon, immediately to the north-east of Urga; and Altai-Khan
in this connection cannot mean the hills near the Great Wall, 500
miles distant.

According to Rashiduddin, Chinghiz was buried at a place called
_Búrkán Káldún_ (“God’s Hill”), or _Yekeh Kúrúk_ (“The Great Sacred
or Tabooed Place”); in another passage he calls the spot _Búdah
Undúr_ (which means, I fancy, the same as Búrkán Káldún), near the
River Selenga. Búrkán Káldún is often mentioned by Sanang Setzen,
and Quatremère seems to demonstrate the identity of this place
with the mountain called by Pallas (and Timkowski) _Khanoolla_.
This is a lofty mountain near Urga, covered with dense forest,
and is indeed the first woody mountain reached in travelling from
Peking. It is still held sacred by the Mongols and guarded from
access, though the tradition of Chinghiz’s grave seems to be
extinct. Now, as this Khanoolla (“Mount Royal,” for _khan_ here
means “sovereign,” and _oolla_ “mountain”) stands immediately
to the south of the _Kentei_ mentioned in the quotation from S.
Setzen, this identification agrees with his statement, on the
supposition that the Khanoolla is the Altai of the same quotation.
The Khanoolla must also be the _Han_ mountain which Mongol chiefs
claiming descent from Chinghiz named to Gaubil as the burial-place
of that conqueror. Note that the Khanoolla, which we suppose to be
the Altai of Polo, and here of Sanang Setzen, belongs to a range
known as _Khingan_, whilst we see that Setzen elsewhere applies
Altai and Altan-Khan to the other Khingan near the Great Wall.

Erdmann relates, apparently after Rashiduddin, that Chinghiz was
buried at the foot of a tree which had taken his fancy on a hunting
expedition, and which he had then pointed out as the place where he
desired to be interred. It was then conspicuous, but afterwards the
adjoining trees shot up so rapidly, that a dense wood covered the
whole locality, and it became impossible to identify the spot. (_Q.
R._ 117 _seqq._; _Timk._ I. 115 _seqq._, II. 475–476; _San. Setz._
103, 114–115, 108–109; _Gaubil_, 54; _Erd._ 444.)

[“There are no accurate indications,” says Palladius (_l.c._ pp.
11–13), “in the documents of the Mongol period on the burial-places
of Chingiz Khan and of the Khans who succeeded him. The _Yuan-shi_
or ‘History of the Mongol Dynasty in China,’ in speaking of the
burial of the Khans, mentions only that they used to be conveyed
from Peking to the north, to their common burial-ground in the
_K’i-lien_ Valley. This name cannot have anything in common with
the ancient _K’i-lien_ of the Hiung-nu, a hill situated to the west
of the Mongol desert; the _K’i-lien_ of the Mongols is to be sought
more to the east. When Khubilai marched out against Prince Nayan,
and reached the modern Talnor, news was received of the occupation
of the Khan’s burial-ground by the rebels. They held out there very
long, which exceedingly afflicted Khubilai [_Yüan shi lui pien_];
and this goes to prove that the tombs could not be situated much
to the west. Some more positive information on this subject is
found in the diary of the campaign in Mongolia in 1410, of the
Ming Emperor Yung-lo [_Pe ching lu_]. He reached the Kerulen at
the place where this river, after running south, takes an easterly
direction. The author of the diary notes, that from a place one
march and a half before reaching the Kerulen, a very large mountain
was visible to the north-east, and at its foot a solitary high
and pointed hillock, covered with stones. The author says, that
the sovereigns of the house of Yuan used to be buried near this
hill. It may therefore be plausibly supposed that the tombs of the
Mongol Khans were near the Kerulen, and that the ‘K’i-lien’ of the
_Yüan shi_ is to be applied to this locality; it seems to me even,
that K’i-lien is an abbreviation, customary to Chinese authors, of
Kerulen. The way of burying the Mongol Khans is described in the
_Yüan shi_ (ch. ‘On the national religious rites of the Mongols’),
as well as in the _Ch’ue keng lu_, ‘Memoirs of the time of the Yuan
Dynasty.’ When burying, the greatest care was taken to conceal
from outside people the knowledge of the locality of the tomb.
With this object in view, after the tomb was closed, a drove of
horses was driven over it, and by this means the ground was, for a
considerable distance, trampled down and levelled. It is added to
this (probably from hearsay) in the _Ts’ao mu tze Memoirs_ (also
of the time of the Yuan Dynasty), that a young camel used to be
killed (in the presence of its mother) on the tomb of the deceased
Khan; afterwards, when the time of the usual offerings of the tomb
approached, the mother of this immolated camel was set at liberty,
and she came crying to the place where it was killed; the locality
of the tomb was ascertained in this way.”

The Archimandrite Palladius adds in a footnote: “Our well-known
Mongolist N. Golovkin has told us, that according to a story
actually current among the Mongols, the tombs of the former Mongol
Khans are situated near Tasola Hill, equally in the vicinity of the
Kerulen. He states also that even now the Mongols are accustomed
to assemble on that hill on the seventh day of the seventh moon
(according to an ancient custom), in order to adore Chingiz Khan’s
tomb. Altan tobchi (translated into Russian by Galsan Gomboeff),
in relating the history of the Mongols after their expulsion
from China, and speaking of the Khans’ tombs, calls them _Naiman
tzagan gher_, _i.e._ ‘Eight White Tents’ (according to the number of
chambers for the souls of the chief deceased Khans in Peking), and
sometimes simply _Tzagan gher_, ‘the White Tent,’ which, according
to the translator’s explanation, denotes only Chingiz Khan’s tomb.”

“According to the Chinese Annals (_T’ung kien kang mu_), quoted
by Dr. E. Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. p. 157), Chinghiz died
near the _Liu p’an shan_ in 1227, after having subdued the Tangut
empire. On modern Chinese maps _Liu p’an shan_ is marked south of
the city of _Ku yüan chou_, department of _P’ing liang_, in _Kan
suh_. The _Yüan shi_ however, implies that he died in Northern
Mongolia. We read there, in the annals, _s.a._ 1227, that in the
fifth intercalary month the Emperor moved to the mountain _Liu p’an
shan_ in order to avoid the heat of the summer. In the sixth month
the empire of the _Hia_ (Tangut) submitted. Chinghiz rested on the
river _Si Kiang_ in the district of _Ts’ing shui_ (in Kansuh; it
has still the same name). In autumn, in the seventh month (August),
on the day _jen wu_, the Emperor fell ill, and eight days later
died in his palace _Ha-lao-t’u_ on the River _Sa-li_. This river
Sali is repeatedly mentioned in the _Yüan shi_, viz. in the first
chapter, in connection with the first military doings of Chinghiz.
Rashid reports (_D’Ohsson_, I. 58) that Chinghiz in 1199 retired
to his residence _Sari Kihar_. The _Yüan chao pi shi_ (Palladius’
transl., 81) writes the same name _Saari Keher_ (_Keher_ in modern
Mongol means ‘a plain’). On the ancient map of Mongolia found
in the _Yüan shi lei pien_, _Sa-li K’ie-rh_ is marked south of
the river _Wa-nan_ (the _Onon_ of our maps), and close to _Sa-li
K’ie-rh_ we read: ‘Here was the original abode of the Yüan’
(Mongols). Thus it seems the passage in the Yüan history translated
above intimates that Chinghiz died in Mongolia, and not near the
_Liu p’an shan_, as is generally believed. The _Yüan ch’ao pi shi_
(Palladius’ transl., 152) and the _’Ts’in cheng lu_ (Palladius’
transl., 195) both agree in stating that, after subduing the Tangut
empire, Chinghiz returned home, and then died. Colonel Yule, in
his _Marco Polo_ (I. 245), states ‘that Rashid calls the place of
Chinghiz’ death _Leung shan_, which appears to be the mountain
range still so-called in the heart of Shensi.’ I am not aware
from what translation of Rashid, Yule’s statement is derived,
but d’Ohsson (I. 375, note) seems to quote the same passage in
translating from Rashid: ‘_Liu-p’an-shan_ was situated on the
frontiers of the _Churche_ (empire of the _Kin_), _Nangias_ (empire
of the _Sung_) and _Tangut_;’ which statement is quite correct.”

We now come to the Mongol tradition, which places the tomb of
Chinghiz in the country of the Ordos, in the great bend of the
Yellow River.

Two Belgian missionaries, MM. de Vos and Verlinden, who visited
the tomb of Chinghiz Khan, say that before the Mahomedan invasion,
on a hill a few feet high, there were two courtyards, one in front
of the other, surrounded by palisades. In the second courtyard,
there were a building like a Chinese dwelling-house and six tents.
In a double tent are kept the remains of the _bokta_ (the Holy).
The neighbouring tents contained various precious objects, such
as a gold saddle, dishes, drinking-cups, a tripod, a kettle, and
many other utensils, all in solid silver. (_Missions Catholiques_,
No. 315, 18th June, 1875.)—This periodical gives (p. 293) a sketch
of the tomb of the Conqueror, according to the account of the two
missionaries.

Prjevalsky (_Mongolia and Tangut_) relates the story of the _Khatún
Gol_ (see _supra_, p. 245), and says that her tomb is situated at 11
versts north-east of lake of Dzaïdemin Nor, and is called by the
Mongols Tumir-Alku, and by the Chinese Djiou-Djin Fu; one of the
legends mentioned by the Russian traveller gives the Ordo country
as the burial-place of Chinghiz, 200 versts south of lake Dabasun
Nor; the remains are kept in two coffins, one of wood, the other of
silver; the Khan prophesied that after eight or ten centuries he
would come to life again and fight the Emperor of China, and being
victorious, would take the Mongols from the Ordos back to their
country of Khalka; Prjevalsky did not see the tomb, nor did Potanin.

“Their holiest place [of the Mongols of Ordos] is a collection of
felt tents called ‘Edjen-joro,’ reputed to contain the bones of
Jenghiz Khan. These sacred relics are entrusted to the care of a
caste of Darhats, numbering some fifty families. Every summer, on
the twenty-first day of the sixth moon, sacrifices are offered
up in his honour, when numbers of people congregate to join in
the celebration, such gatherings being called _táilgan_.” On the
southern border of the Ordos are the ruins of Boro-balgasun [Grey
town], said to date from Jenghiz Khan’s time. (_Potanin_, _Proc. R.
G. S._ IX. 1887, p. 233.)

The last traveller who visited the tomb of Chinghiz is M. C. E.
Bonin, in July 1896; he was then on the banks of the Yellow River
in the northern part of the Ordo country, which is exclusively
inhabited by nomadic and pastoral Mongols, forming seven tribes or
hords, Djungar, Talat, Wan, Ottok, Djassak, Wushun and Hangkin,
among which are eastward the Djungar and in the centre the Wan;
according to their own tradition, these tribes descend from the
seven armies encamped in the country at the time of Chinghiz’s
death; the King of Djungar was 67 years of age, and was the chief
of all the tribes, being considered the 37th descendant of the
conqueror in a direct line. His predecessor was the Wushun Wang. M.
Bonin gives (_Revue de Paris_, 15th February 1898) the following
description of the tomb and of the country surrounding it. Between
the _yamen_ (palace) of the King (Wang) of Djungar and the tomb
of Chinghiz-Khan, there are five or six marches made difficult by
the sands of the Gobi, but horses and camels may be used for the
journey. The road, southward through the desert, passes near the
great lama-monastery called _Barong-tsao_ or _Si-tsao_ (Monastery
of the West), and in Chinese _San-t’ang sse_ (Three Temples). This
celebrated monastery was built by the King of Djungar to hold
the tablets of his ancestors—on the ruins of an old temple, said
to have been erected by Chinghiz himself. More than a thousand
lamas are registered there, forty of them live at the expense of
the Emperor of China. Crossing afterwards the two upper branches
of the Ulan Muren (Red River) on the banks of which Chinghiz was
murdered, according to local tradition, close to the lake of
Chahan Nor (White Lake), near which are the tents of the Prince
of Wan, one arrives at last at the spot called _Yeke-Etjen-Koro_,
in Mongol: the abode of the Great Lord, where the tomb is to be
found. It is erected to the south-east of the village, comprising
some twenty tents or tent-like huts built of earth. Two large white
felt tents, placed side by side, similar to the tents of the modern
Mongols, but much larger, cover the tomb; a red curtain, when
drawn, discloses the large and low silver coffin, which contains
the ashes of the Emperor, placed on the ground of the second tent;
it is shaped like a big trunk, with great rosaces engraved upon it.
The Emperor, according to local tradition, was cremated on the bank
of the Ulan Muren, where he is supposed to have been slain. On the
twenty-first day of the third moon the anniversary fête of Mongolia
takes place; on this day of the year only are the two mortuary
tents opened, and the coffin is exhibited to be venerated by people
coming from all parts of Mongolia. Many other relics, dispersed
all over the Ordo land, are brought thither on this occasion;
these relics called in Mongol _Chinghiz Bogdo_ (Sacred remains
of Chinghiz) number ten; they are in the order adopted by the
Mongols: the saddle of Chinghiz, hidden in the Wan territory; the
bow, kept at a place named Hu-ki-ta-lao Hei, near Yeke-Etjen-Koro;
the remains of his war-horse, called Antegan-tsegun (more),
preserved at Kebere in the Djungar territory; a fire-arm kept in
the palace of the King of Djungar; a wooden and leather vase called
Pao-lao-antri, kept at the place Shien-ni-chente; a wax figure
containing the ashes of the Khan’s equerry, called Altaqua-tosu,
kept at Ottok (one of the seven tribes); the remains of the second
wife, who lay at Kiasa, on the banks of the Yellow River, at a
place called on Prjevalsky’s map in Chinese Djiou-Djin-fu, and in
Mongol Tumir-Alku; the tomb of the third wife of Chinghiz, who
killed him, and lay to-day at Bagha-Ejen-Koro, “the abode of the
little Sovereign,” at a day’s march to the south of the Djungar
King’s palace; the very tomb of Yeke-Etjen-Koro, which is supposed
to contain also the ashes of the first wife of the Khan; and last,
his great standard, a black wood spear planted in the desert, more
than 150 miles to the south of the tomb; the iron of it never gets
rusty; no one dares touch it, and therefore it is not carried to
Yeke-Etjen-Koro with the other relics for the yearly festival. (See
also _Rockhill, Diary_, p. 29.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—Rashiduddin relates that the escort, in carrying Chinghiz
to his burial, slew all whom they met, and that forty noble and
beautiful girls were despatched to serve him in the other world, as
well as superb horses. As Mangku Kaan died in the heart of China,
any attempt to carry out the barbarous rule in his case would
involve great slaughter. (_Erd._ 443; _D’Ohsson_, I. 381, II. 13;
and see _Cathay_, 507–508.)

Sanang Setzen ignores these barbarities. He describes the body of
Chinghiz as removed to his native land on a two-wheeled waggon, the
whole host escorting it, and wailing as they went: “And Kiluken
Bahadur of the Sunid Tribe (one of the Khan’s old comrades) lifted
up his voice and sang—

‘Whilom Thou didst swoop like a Falcon: A rumbling waggon now
trundles thee off:
O My King!
Hast thou in truth then forsaken thy wife and thy children
and the Diet of thy People?
O My King!
Circling in pride like an Eagle whilom Thou didst lead us,
O My King!
But now Thou hast stumbled and fallen, like an unbroken Colt,
O My King!’” (p. 108.)

[“The burying of living men with the dead was a general custom
with the tribes of Eastern Asia. Favourite servants and wives
were usually buried in this way. In China, the chief wives and
those concubines who had already borne children, were exempted
from this lot. The Tunguz and other tribes were accustomed to kill
the selected victims by strangulation. In China they used to be
buried alive; but the custom of burying living men ceased in A.D.
1464. [_Hwang ming ts’ung sin lu_.] In the time of the present
Manchu Dynasty, the burying of living men was prohibited by the
Emperor Kang-hi, at the close of the 17th century, _i.e._ the forced
burying; but voluntary sepulture remained in force [_Yu chi wen_].
Notwithstanding this prohibition, cases of forced burying occurred
again in remote parts of Manchuria; when a concubine refused to
follow her deceased master, she was forcibly strangled with a
bow-string [_Ninguta chi_]. I must observe, however, that there is
no mention made in historical documents of the existence of this
custom with the Mongols; it is only an hypothesis based on the
analogy between the religious ideas and customs of the Mongols and
those of other tribes.” (_Palladius_, p. 13.)

In his _Religious System of China_, II., Dr. J. J. M. de Groot
devotes a whole chapter (ix. 721 _seqq._), _Concerning the
Sacrifice of Human Beings at Burials, and Usages connected
therewith_. The oldest case on record in China dates as far back as
B.C. 677, when sixty-six men were killed after the ruler Wu of the
state of Ts’in died.

The Official Annals of the Tartar Dynasty of Liao, quoted by
Professor J. J. M. de Groot (_Religious System of China_, vol.
ii. 698), state that “in the tenth year of the T’ung hwo period
(A.D. 692) the killing of horses for funeral and burial rites was
interdicted, as also the putting into the tombs of coats of mail,
helmets, and articles and trinkets of gold and silver.” Professor
de Groot writes (_l.c._ 709): “But, just as the placing of victuals
in the graves was at an early date changed into sacrifices of
food outside the graves, so burying horses with the dead was also
modified under the Han Dynasty into presenting them to the dead
without interring them, and valueless counterfeits were on such
occasions substituted for the real animals.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER LII.

CONCERNING THE CUSTOMS OF THE TARTARS.

Now that we have begun to speak of the Tartars, I have plenty to tell
you on that subject. The Tartar custom is to spend the winter in warm
plains, where they find good pasture for their cattle, whilst in summer
they betake themselves to a cool climate among the mountains and
valleys, where water is to be found as well as woods and pastures.

Their houses are circular, and are made of wands covered with felts.{1}
These are carried along with them whithersoever they go; for the wands
are so strongly bound together, and likewise so well combined, that
the frame can be made very light. Whenever they erect these huts the
door is always to the south. They also have waggons covered with black
felt so efficaciously that no rain can get in. These are drawn by oxen
and camels, and the women and children travel in them.{2} The women
do the buying and selling, and whatever is necessary to provide for
the husband and household; for the men all lead the life of gentlemen,
troubling themselves about nothing but hunting and hawking, and looking
after their goshawks and falcons, unless it be the practice of warlike
exercises.

They live on the milk and meat which their herds supply, and on the
produce of the chase; and they eat all kinds of flesh, including that
of horses and dogs, and Pharaoh’s rats, of which last there are great
numbers in burrows on those plains.{3} Their drink is mare’s milk.

They are very careful not to meddle with each other’s wives, and will
not do so on any account, holding that to be an evil and abominable
thing. The women too are very good and loyal to their husbands, and
notable housewives withal.{4} [Ten or twenty of them will dwell
together in charming peace and unity, nor shall you ever hear an ill
word among them.]

The marriage customs of Tartars are as follows. Any man may take a
hundred wives an he so please, and if he be able to keep them. But the
first wife is ever held most in honour, and as the most legitimate [and
the same applies to the sons whom she may bear]. The husband gives a
marriage payment to his wife’s mother, and the wife brings nothing to
her husband. They have more children than other people, because they
have so many wives. They may marry their cousins, and if a father dies,
his son may take any of the wives, his own mother always excepted; that
is to say the eldest son may do this, but no other. A man may also take
the wife of his own brother after the latter’s death. Their weddings
are celebrated with great ado.{5}

NOTE 1.—The word here in the G. T. is “_fennes_,” which seems
usually to mean _ropes_, and in fact Pauthier’s text reads: “_Il
ont mesons de verges et les cueuvrent de cordes_.” Ramusio’s text
has _feltroni_, and both Müller and the Latin of the S. G. have
_filtro_. This is certainly the right reading. But whether _fennes_
was ever used as a form of _feltres_ (as _pennes_ means _peltry_)
I cannot discover. Perhaps some words have dropped out. A good
description of a Kirghiz hut (35 feet in diameter), and exactly
corresponding to Polo’s account, will be found in _Atkinson’s
Siberia_, and another in _Vámbéry’s Travels_. How comfortable
and civilised the aspect of such a hut may be, can be seen also
in Burnes’s account of a Turkoman dwelling of this kind. This
description of hut or tent is common to nearly all the nomade
tribes of Central Asia. The trellis-work forming the skeleton of
the tent-walls is (at least among the Turkomans) loosely pivoted,
so as to draw out and compress like “lazy-tongs.”

[Illustration: Dressing up a tent.]

Rubruquis, Pallas, Timkowski, and others, notice the custom of
turning the door to the south; the reason is obvious. (_Atkinson_,
285; _Vámb._ 316; _Burnes_, III. 51; _Conolly_, I. 96) But
throughout the Altai, Mr. Ney Elias informs me, K’alkas, Kirghiz,
and Kalmaks all pitch their tents facing _east_. The prevailing
winter wind is there _westerly_.

[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 56, note) says that he has often
seen Mongol tents facing east and south-east. He adds: “It is
interesting to find it noted in the _Chou Shu_ (Bk. 50, 3) that the
Khan of the Turks, who lived always on the Tu-kin mountains, had
his tent invariably facing south, so as to show reverence to the
sun’s rising place.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—Æschylus already knows the

“wandering Scyths who dwell
In latticed huts high-poised on easy wheels.”
(_Prom. Vinct._ 709–710.)

And long before him Hesiod says Phineus was carried by the Harpies—

“To the Land of the Milk-fed nations, whose houses are waggons.”
(_Strabo_, vii. 3–9.)

Ibn Batuta describes the Tartar waggon in which he travelled to
Sarai as mounted on four great wheels, and drawn by two or more
horses:—

“On the waggon is put a sort of pavilion of wands laced together
with narrow thongs. It is very light, and is covered with felt or
cloth, and has latticed windows, so that the person inside can look
out without being seen. He can change his position at pleasure,
sleeping or eating, reading or writing, during the journey.” These
waggons were sometimes of enormous size. Rubruquis declares that
he measured between the wheel-tracks of one and found the interval
to be 20 feet. The axle was like a ship’s mast, and twenty-two
oxen were yoked to the waggon, eleven abreast. (See opposite cut.)
He describes the huts as not usually taken to pieces, but carried
all standing. The waggon just mentioned carried a hut of 30 feet
diameter, for it projected beyond the wheels at least 5 feet on
either side. In fact, Carpini says explicitly, “Some of the huts
are speedily taken to pieces and put up again; such are packed
on the beasts. Others cannot be taken to pieces, but are carried
bodily on the waggons. To carry the smaller tents on a waggon one
ox may serve; for the larger ones three oxen or four, or even more,
according to the size.” The carts that were used to transport the
Tartar valuables were covered with felt soaked in tallow or ewe’s
milk, to make them waterproof. The tilts of these were rectangular,
in the form of a large trunk. The carts used in Kashgar, as
described by Mr. Shaw, seem to resemble these latter. (_I. B._ II.
381–382; _Rub._ 221; _Carp._ 6, 16.)

The words of Herodotus, speaking generally of the Scyths, apply
perfectly to the Mongol hordes under Chinghiz: “Having neither
cities nor forts, and carrying their dwellings with them wherever
they go; accustomed, moreover, one and all, to shoot from
horseback; and living not by husbandry but on their cattle, their
waggons the only houses that they possess, how can they fail of
being unconquerable?” (Bk. IV. ch. 46, p. 41, _Rawlins._) Scythian
prisoners in their waggons are represented on the Column of
Theodosius at Constantinople; but it is difficult to believe that
these waggons, at least as figured in Banduri, have any really
Scythian character.

It is a curious fact that the practice of carrying these _yurts_
or felt tents upon waggons appears to be entirely obsolete in
Mongolia. Mr. Ney Elias writes: “I frequently showed your picture
[that opposite] to Mongols, Chinese, and Russian border-traders,
but none had ever seen anything of the kind. The only cart I have
ever seen used by Mongols is a little low, light, roughly-made
bullock-dray, _certainly_ of Chinese importation.” The old system
would, however, appear to have been kept up to our own times by
the Nogai Tartars, near the Sea of Azof. (See note from Heber, in
_Clark’s Travels_, 8vo ed. I. 440, and Dr. Clark’s vignette at p.
394 in the same volume.)

[Illustration: J. Cooper Sc

Mediæval Tartar Huts and Waggons.]

NOTE 3.—_Pharaoh’s Rat_ was properly the Gerboa of Arabia and
North Africa, which the Arabs also regard as a dainty. There
is a kindred animal in Siberia, called _Alactaga_, and a kind of
Kangaroo-rat (probably the same) is mentioned as very abundant
on the Mongolian Steppe. There is also the _Zieselmaus_ of
Pallas, a Dormouse, I believe, which he says the Kalmaks, even of
distinction, count a delicacy, especially cooked in sour milk.
“They eat not only the flesh of all their different kinds of
cattle, including horses and camels, but also that of many wild
animals which other nations eschew, _e.g._ marmots and _zieselmice_,
beavers, badgers, otters, and lynxes, leaving none untouched except
the dog and weasel kind, and also (unless _very_ hard pressed) the
flesh of the fox and the wolf.” (_Pallas, Samml._ I. 128; also
_Rubr._ 229–230.)

[“In the Mongol biography of Chinghiz Khan (Mongol text of the
_Yuan ch’ao pi shi_), mention is made of two kinds of animals
(mice) used for food; the tarbagat (_Aritomys Bobac_) and
_kuchugur_.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 14.) Regarding the marmots
called _Sogur_ by Rubruquis, Mr. Rockhill writes (p. 69): “Probably
the _Mus citillus_, the _Suslik_ of the Russians.... M. Grenard
tells me that _Soghur_, more usually written _sour_ in Turki, is
the ordinary name of the marmot.”—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—“Their wives are chaste; nor does one ever hear any talk
of their immodesty,” says Carpini;—no Boccaccian and Chaucerian
stories.

NOTE 5.—“The Mongols are not prohibited from having a plurality of
wives; the first manages the domestic concerns, and is the most
respected.” (_Timk._ II. 310.) Naturally Polygamy is not so general
among the Mongols as when Asia lay at their feet. The Buraets, who
seem to retain the old Mongol customs in great completeness, are
polygamists, and have as many wives as they choose. Polygamy is
also very prevalent among the Yakuts, whose lineage seems to be
Eastern Turk. (_Ritter_, III. 125; _Erman_, II. 346.)

Of the custom that entitled the son on succeeding to take such
as he pleased of his deceased father’s wives, we have had some
illustration (see _Prologue_, ch. xvii. note 2), and many
instances will be found in Hammer’s or other Mongol Histories.
The same custom seems to be ascribed by Herodotus to the Scyths
(IV. 78). A number of citations regarding the practice are given
by Quatremère. (_Q. R._ p. 92.) A modern Mongol writer in the
_Mélanges Asiatiques_ of the Petersburg Academy, states that the
custom of taking a deceased brother’s wives is now obsolete, but
that a proverb preserves its memory (II. 656). It is the custom of
some Mahomedan nations, notably of the Afghans, and is one of those
points that have been cited as a supposed proof of their Hebrew
lineage.

“The Kalin is a present which the Bridegroom or his parents make
to the parents of the Bride. All the Pagan nations of Siberia have
this custom; they differ only in what constitutes the present,
whether money or cattle.” (_Gmelin_, I. 29; see also _Erman_, II.
348.)

CHAPTER LIII.

CONCERNING THE GOD OF THE TARTARS.

This is the fashion of their religion. [They say there is a Most High
God of Heaven, whom they worship daily with thurible and incense, but
they pray to Him only for health of mind and body. But] they have
[also] a certain [other] god of theirs called NATIGAY, and they say he
is the god of the Earth, who watches over their children, cattle, and
crops. They show him great worship and honour, and every man hath a
figure of him in his house, made of felt and cloth; and they also make
in the same manner images of his wife and children. The wife they put
on the left hand, and the children in front. And when they eat, they
take the fat of the meat and grease the god’s mouth withal, as well as
the mouths of his wife and children. Then they take of the broth and
sprinkle it before the door of the house; and that done, they deem that
their god and his family have had their share of the dinner.{1}

Their drink is mare’s milk, prepared in such a way that you would
take it for white wine; and a right good drink it is, called by them
_Kemiz_.{2}

The clothes of the wealthy Tartars are for the most part of gold and
silk stuffs, lined with costly furs, such as sable and ermine, vair and
fox-skin, in the richest fashion.

NOTE 1.—There is no reference here to Buddhism, which was then of
recent introduction among the Mongols; indeed, at the end of the
chapter, Polo speaks of their new adoption of the Chinese idolatry,
_i.e._ Buddhism. We may add here that the Buddhism of the Mongols
decayed and became practically extinct after their expulsion from
China (1368–1369). The old Shamanism then apparently revived; nor
was it till 1577 that the great reconversion of Mongolia to Lamaism
began. This reconversion is the most prominent event in the Mongol
history of Sanang Setzen, whose great-grandfather Khutuktai Setzen,
Prince of the Ordos, was a chief agent in the movement.

The Supreme Good Spirit appears to have been called by the Mongols
_Tengri_ (Heaven), and _Khormuzda_, and is identified by Schmidt
with the Persian Hormuzd. In Buddhist times he became identified
with Indra.

Plano Carpini’s account of this matter is very like Marco’s: “They
believe in one God, the Maker of all things, visible and invisible,
and the Distributor of good and evil in this world; but they
worship Him not with prayers or praises or any kind of service.
Natheless, they have certain idols of felt, imitating the human
face, and having underneath the face something resembling teats;
these they place on either side of the door. These they believe to
be the guardians of the flocks, from whom they have the boons of
milk and increase. Others they fabricate of bits of silk, and these
are highly honoured; ... and whenever they begin to eat or drink,
they first offer these idols a portion of their food or drink.”

The account agrees generally with what we are told of the original
Shamanism of the Tunguses, which recognizes a Supreme Power over
all, and a small number of potent spirits called _Ongot_. These
spirits among the Buraets are called, according to one author,
_Nougait_ or _Nogat_, and according to Erman _Ongotui_. In some
form of this same word, _Nogait_, _Ongot_, _Onggod_, _Ongotui_,
we are, I imagine, to trace the _Natigay_ of Polo. The modern
representative of this Shamanist _Lar_ is still found among
the Buraets, and is thus described by Pallas under the name of
_Immegiljin_: “He is honoured as the tutelary god of the sheep and
other cattle. Properly, the divinity consists of _two_ figures,
hanging side by side, one of whom represents the god’s wife. These
two figures are merely a pair of lanky flat bolsters with the upper
part shaped into a round disk, and the body hung with a long woolly
fleece; eyes, nose, breasts, and navel, being indicated by leather
knobs stitched on. The male figure commonly has at his girdle
the foot-rope with which horses at pasture are fettered, whilst
the female, which is sometimes accompanied by smaller figures
representing her children, has all sorts of little nicknacks and
sewing implements.” Galsang Czomboyef, a recent Russo-Mongol writer
already quoted, says also: “Among the Buryats, in the middle of
the hut and place of honour, is the _Dsaiagaçhi_ or ‘Chief Creator
of Fortune.’ At the door is the _Emelgelji_, the Tutelary of the
Herds and Young Cattle, made of sheepskins. Outside the hut is the
_Chandaghatu_, a name implying that the idol was formed of a white
hare-skin, the Tutelary of the Chase and perhaps of War. All these
have been expelled by Buddhism except Dsaiagachi, who is called
_Tengri_, and introduced among the Buddhist divinities.”

[Illustration: Tartar Idols and Kumis Churn.]

[Dorji Banzaroff, in his dissertation _On the Black Religion_,
_i.e._ Shamanism, 1846, “is disposed to see in Natigay of M. Polo,
the Ytoga of other travellers, _i.e._ the Mongol _Etugen_—‘earth,’
as the object of veneration of the Mongol Shamans. They look upon
it as a divinity, for its power as _Delegei in echen_, _i.e._ ‘the
Lord of Earth,’ and on account of its productiveness, _Altan
delegei_, _i.e._ ‘Golden Earth.’” Palladius (_l.c._ pp. 14–16) adds
one new variant to what the learned Colonel Yule has collected and
set forth with such precision, on the Shaman household gods. “The
Dahurs and Barhus have in their dwellings, according to the number
of the male members of the family, puppets made of straw, on which
eyes, eyebrows, and mouth are drawn; these puppets are dressed up
to the waist. When some one of the family dies, his puppet is taken
out of the house, and a new puppet is made for every newly-born
member of the family. On New Year’s Day offerings are made to the
puppets, and care is taken not to disturb them (by moving them,
etc.), in order to avoid bringing sickness upon the family.” (_He
lung kiang wai ki_.)

(Cf. _Rubruck_, 58–59, and Mr. Rockhill’s note, 59–60.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—KIMIZ or KUMIZ, the habitual drink of the Mongols, as it
still is of most of the nomads of Asia. It is thus made. Fresh
mare’s milk is put in a well-seasoned bottle-necked vessel of
horse-skin; a little _kurút_ (see note 5, ch. liv.) or some sour
cow’s milk is added; and when acetous fermentation is commencing
it is violently churned with a peculiar staff which constantly
stands in the vessel. This interrupts fermentation and introduces a
quantity of air into the liquid. It is customary for visitors who
may drop in to give a turn or two at the churn-stick. After three
or four days the drink is ready.

Kumiz keeps long; it is wonderfully tonic and nutritious, and it is
said that it has cured many persons threatened with consumption.
The tribes using it are said to be remarkably free from pulmonary
disease; and indeed I understand there is a regular _Galactopathic_
establishment somewhere in the province of Orenburg for treating
pulmonary patients with Kumiz diet.

It has a peculiar fore- and after-taste which, it is said,
everybody does not like. Yet I have found no confession of a
dislike to Kumiz. Rubruquis tells us it is pungent on the tongue,
like _vinum raspei_ (_vin rapé_ of the French), whilst you are
drinking it, but leaves behind a pleasant flavour like milk of
almonds. It makes a man’s inside feel very cosy, he adds, even
turning a weak head, and is strongly diuretic. To this last
statement, however, modern report is in direct contradiction. The
Greeks and other Oriental Christians considered it a sort of denial
of the faith to drink Kumiz. On the other hand, the Mahomedan
converts from the nomad tribes seem to have adhered to the use of
Kumiz even when strict in abstinence from wine; and it was indulged
in by the early Mamelukes as a public solemnity. Excess on such an
occasion killed Bibars Bundukdari, who was passionately fond of
this liquor.

The intoxicating power of Kumiz varies according to the _brew_.
The more advanced is the vinous fermentation the less acid is the
taste and the more it sparkles. The effect, however, is always
slight and transitory, and leaves no unpleasant sensation, whilst
it produces a strong tendency to refreshing sleep. If its good
qualities amount to half what are ascribed to it by Dr. W. F. Dahl,
from whom we derive some of these particulars, it must be the pearl
of all beverages. “With the nomads it is the drink of all from the
suckling upwards, it is the solace of age and illness, and the
greatest of treats to all!”

There was a special kind called _Ḳará Ḳumiz_, which is mentioned
both by Rubruquis and in the history of Wassáf. It seems to have
been strained and clarified. The modern Tartars distil a spirit
from Kumiz of which Pallas gives a detailed account. (_Dahl, Ueber
den Kumyss_ in _Baer’s Beiträge_, VII.; _Lettres sur le Caucase et
la Crimée_, Paris, 1859, p. 81; _Makrizi_, II. 147; _J. As._ XI.
160; _Levchine_, 322–323; _Rubr._ 227–228, 335; _Gold. Horde_, p.
46; _Erman_, I. 296; _Pallas, Samml._ I. 132 _seqq._)

[In the _Si yu ki_, Travels to the West of Ch’ang ch’un, we find
a drink called _tung lo_. “The Chinese characters, _tung lo_,”
says Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. 94), “denote according to the
dictionaries preparations from mare’s or cow’s milk, as Kumis,
sour milk, etc. In the _Yüan shi_ (ch. cxxviii.) biography of the
Kipchak prince _Tú-tú-ha_, it is stated that ‘black mare’s milk’
(evidently the cara cosmos of Rubruck), very pleasant to the taste,
used to be sent from Kipchak to the Mongol court in China.” (On
the drinks of the Mongols, see Mr. Rockhill’s note, _Rubruck_,
p. 62.)—The Mongols indulge in sour milk (_tarak_) and distilled
mare’s milk (_arreki_), but Mr. Rockhill (_Land of the Lamas_,
130) says he never saw them drink _kumiz_.—H. C.]

The mare’s-milk drink of Scythian nomads is alluded to by many
ancient authors. But the manufacture of Kumiz is particularly
spoken of by Herodotus. “The (mare’s) milk is poured into deep
wooden casks, about which the blind slaves are placed, and then
the milk is stirred round. That which rises to the top is drawn
off, and considered the best part; the under portion is of less
account.” Strabo also speaks of the nomads beyond the Cimmerian
Chersonesus, who feed on horse-flesh and other flesh, mare’s-milk
cheese, mare’s milk, and sour milk (ὀξυγάλακτα) “_which they have a
particular way of preparing_.” Perhaps Herodotus was mistaken about
the wooden tubs. At least all modern attempts to use anything but
the orthodox skins have failed. Priscus, in his narrative of the
mission of himself and Maximin to Attila, says the Huns brought
them a drink made from _barley_ which they called Κάμος. The barley
was, no doubt, a misapprehension of his. (_Herod._ Bk. iv. p. 2, in
_Rawl._; _Strabo_, VII. 4, 6; _Excerpta de Legationibus_, in _Corp.
Hist. Byzant._ I. 55.)

CHAPTER LIV.

CONCERNING THE TARTAR CUSTOMS OF WAR.

All their harness of war is excellent and costly. Their arms are bows
and arrows, sword and mace; but above all the bow, for they are capital
archers, indeed the best that are known. On their backs they wear
armour of cuirbouly, prepared from buffalo and other hides, which is
very strong.{1} They are excellent soldiers, and passing valiant in
battle. They are also more capable of hardships than other nations; for
many a time, if need be, they will go for a month without any supply
of food, living only on the milk of their mares and on such game as
their bows may win them. Their horses also will subsist entirely on the
grass of the plains, so that there is no need to carry store of barley
or straw or oats; and they are very docile to their riders. These, in
case of need, will abide on horseback the livelong night, armed at all
points, while the horse will be continually grazing.

Of all troops in the world these are they which endure the greatest
hardship and fatigue, and which cost the least; and they are the best
of all for making wide conquests of country. And this you will perceive
from what you have heard and shall hear in this book; and (as a fact)
there can be no manner of doubt that now they are the masters of the
biggest half of the world. Their troops are admirably ordered in the
manner that I shall now relate.

You see, when a Tartar prince goes forth to war, he takes with him,
say, 100,000 horse. Well, he appoints an officer to every ten men, one
to every hundred, one to every thousand, and one to every ten thousand,
so that his own orders have to be given to ten persons only, and each
of these ten persons has to pass the orders only to other ten, and so
on; no one having to give orders to more than ten. And every one in
turn is responsible only to the officer immediately over him; and the
discipline and order that comes of this method is marvellous, for they
are a people very obedient to their chiefs. Further, they call the
corps of 100,000 men a _Tuc_; that of 10,000 they call a _Toman_; the
thousand they call ...; the hundred _Guz_; the ten ....{2} And when the
army is on the march they have always 200 horsemen, very well mounted,
who are sent a distance of two marches in advance to reconnoitre, and
these always keep ahead. They have a similar party detached in the
rear, and on either flank, so that there is a good look-out kept on all
sides against a surprise. When they are going on a distant expedition
they take no gear with them except two leather bottles for milk; a
little earthenware pot to cook their meat in, and a little tent to
shelter them from rain.{3} And in case of great urgency they will ride
ten days on end without lighting a fire or taking a meal. On such an
occasion they will sustain themselves on the blood of their horses,
opening a vein and letting the blood jet into their mouths, drinking
till they have had enough, and then staunching it.{4}

They also have milk dried into a kind of paste to carry with them; and
when they need food they put this in water, and beat it up till it
dissolves, and then drink it. [It is prepared in this way; they boil
the milk, and when the rich part floats on the top they skim it into
another vessel, and of that they make butter; for the milk will not
become solid till this is removed. Then they put the milk in the sun
to dry. And when they go on an expedition, every man takes some ten
pounds of this dried milk with him. And of a morning he will take a
half pound of it and put it in his leather bottle, with as much water
as he pleases. So, as he rides along, the milk-paste and the water in
the bottle get well churned together into a kind of pap, and that makes
his dinner.{5}]

When they come to an engagement with the enemy, they will gain the
victory in this fashion. [They never let themselves get into a regular
medley, but keep perpetually riding round and shooting into the enemy.
And] as they do not count it any shame to run away in battle, they
will [sometimes pretend to] do so, and in running away they turn in
the saddle and shoot hard and strong at the foe, and in this way make
great havoc. Their horses are trained so perfectly that they will
double hither and thither, just like a dog, in a way that is quite
astonishing. Thus they fight to as good purpose in running away as if
they stood and faced the enemy, because of the vast volleys of arrows
that they shoot in this way, turning round upon their pursuers, who are
fancying that they have won the battle. But when the Tartars see that
they have killed and wounded a good many horses and men, they wheel
round bodily, and return to the charge in perfect order and with loud
cries; and in a very short time the enemy are routed. In truth they
are stout and valiant soldiers, and inured to war. And you perceive
that it is just when the enemy sees them run, and imagines that he has
gained the battle, that he has in reality lost it; for the Tartars
wheel round in a moment when they judge the right time has come. And
after this fashion they have won many a fight.{6}

All this that I have been telling you is true of the manners and
customs of the genuine Tartars. But I must add also that in these days
they are greatly degenerated; for those who are settled in Cathay
have taken up the practices of the Idolaters of the country, and have
abandoned their own institutions; whilst those who have settled in the
Levant have adopted the customs of the Saracens.{7}

NOTE 1.—The bow was the characteristic weapon of the Tartars,
insomuch that the Armenian historians often call them “The
Archers.” (_St. Martin_, II. 133.) “CUIRBOULY, leather softened
by boiling, in which it took any form or impression required, and
then hardened.” (_Wright’s Dict._) The English adventurer among
the Tartars, whose account of them is given by Archbishop Ivo of
Narbonne, in Matthew Paris (_sub._ 1243), says: “De coriis bullitis
sibi arma levia quidem, sed tamen impenetrabilia coaptarunt.” This
armour is particularly described by Plano Carpini (p. 685). See the
tail-piece to Book IV.

[Mr. E. H. Parker (_China Review_, XXIV. iv. p. 205) remarks that
“the first coats of mail were made in China in 1288: perhaps the
idea was obtained from the Malays or Arabs.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—M. Pauthier has judiciously pointed out the omissions that
have occurred here, perhaps owing to Rusticiano’s not properly
catching the foreign terms applied to the various grades. In the G.
Text the passage runs: “_Et sachiés que les cent mille est apellé
un_ Tut (read _tuc_) _et les dix mille un_ Toman, _et les por
milier et por centenier et por desme_.” In Pauthier’s (uncorrected)
text one of the missing words is supplied: “_Et appellent les
C.M. un_ Tuc; _et les X.M. un_ Toman; _et un millier_ Guz _por
centenier et por disenier_.” The blanks he supplies thus from
Abulghazi: “_Et un millier_: [un Miny]; _Guz, por centenier et_
[Un] _por disenier_.” The words supplied are Turki, but so is the
_Guz_, which appears already in Pauthier’s text, whilst _Toman_
and _Tuc_ are common to Turki and Mongol. The latter word, _Túk_
or _Túgh_, is the horse-tail or yak-tail standard which among so
many Asiatic nations has marked the supreme military command. It
occurs as _Taka_ in ancient Persian, and Cosmas Indicopleustes
speaks of it as _Tupha_. The Nine Orloks or Marshals under Chinghiz
were entitled to the _Tuk_, and theirs is probably the class of
command here indicated as of 100,000, though the figure must not be
strictly taken. Timur ordains that every Amir who should conquer a
kingdom or command in a victory should receive a title of honour,
the _Tugh_ and the _Naḳḳárá_. (_Infra_, Bk. II. ch. iv. note 3.)
Baber on several occasions speaks of conferring the _Tugh_ upon his
generals for distinguished service. One of the military titles
at Bokhara is still _Tokhsabai_, a corruption of _Túgh-Sáhibi_
(Master of the Tugh).

We find the whole gradation except the _Tuc_ in a rescript of
Janibeg, Khan of Sarai, in favour of Venetian merchants dated
February 1347. It begins in the Venetian version: “_La parola
de Zanibeck allo puovolo di Mogoli, alli_ Baroni di Thomeni,[1]
delli miera, delli centenera, delle dexiene.” (_Erdmann_, 576;
_D’Avezac_, 577–578; _Rémusat, Langues Tartares_, 303; _Pallas,
Samml._ I. 283; _Schmidt_, 379, 381; _Baber_, 260, etc.; _Vámbéry_,
374; _Timour Inst._ pp. 283 and 292–293; _Bibl. de l’Ec. des
Chartes_, tom. lv. p. 585.)

The decimal division of the army was already made by Chinghiz at an
early period of his career, and was probably much older than his
time. In fact we find the Myriarch and Chiliarch already in the
Persian armies of Darius Hystaspes. From the Tartars the system
passed into nearly all the Musulman States of Asia, and the titles
_Min-bashi_ or _Bimbashi_, _Yuzbashi_, _Onbashi_, still subsist not
only in Turkestan, but also in Turkey and Persia. The term _Tman_
or _Tma_ was, according to Herberstein, still used in Russia in his
day for 10,000. (_Ramus._ II. 159.)

[The King of An-nam, Dinh Tiên-hòang (A.D. 968) had an army of
1,000,000 men forming 10 corps of 10 legions; each legion forming
10 cohorts of 10 centuries; each century forming 10 squads of 10
men.—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—Ramusio’s edition says that what with horses and mares
there will be an average of eighteen beasts (?) to every man.

NOTE 4.—See the Oriental account quoted below in Note 6.

So Dionysius, combining this practice with that next described,
relates of the Massagetæ that they have no delicious bread nor
native wine:

“But with horse’s blood
And white milk mingled set their banquets forth.”
(_Orbis Desc._ 743–744.)

And Sidonius:

“Solitosque cruentum
Lac potare Getas, et pocula tingere venis.”
(_Parag. ad Avitum._)

[“The Scythian soldier drinks the blood of the first man he
overthrows in battle.” (_Herodotus_, _Rawlinson_, Bk. IV. ch.
64, p. 54.)—H. C.] “When in lack of food, they bleed a horse
and suck the vein. If they need something more solid, they put
a sheep’s pudding full of blood under the saddle; this in time
gets coagulated and cooked by the heat, and then they devour it.”
(_Georg. Pachymeres_, V. 4.) The last is a well-known story, but
is strenuously denied and ridiculed by Bergmann. (_Streifereien,
etc._ I. 15.) Joinville tells the same story. Hans Schiltberger
asserts it very distinctly: “Ich hon och gesehen wann sie in reiss
ylten, das sie ein fleisch nemen, und es dunn schinden und legents
unter den sattel, und riten doruff; und essents wann sie hungert”
(ch. 35). Botero had “heard from a trustworthy source that a Tartar
of Perekop, travelling on the steppes, lived for some days on the
blood of his horse, and then, not daring to bleed it more, cut off
and ate its _ears_!” (_Relazione Univers._ p. 93.) The Turkmans
speak of such practices, but Conolly says he came to regard them as
hyperbolical talk (I. 45).

[Abul-Ghazi Khan, in his History of Mongols, describing a raid of
Russian (_Ourous_) Cossacks, who were hemmed in by the Uzbeks,
says: “The Russians had in continued fighting exhausted all their
water. They began to drink blood; the fifth day they had not even
blood remaining to drink.” (_Transl. by Baron Des Maisons_, St.
Petersburg, II. 295.)]

NOTE 5.—Rubruquis thus describes this preparation, which is called
_Kurút_: “The milk that remains after the butter has been made,
they allow to get as sour as sour can be, and then boil it. In
boiling, it curdles, and that curd they dry in the sun; and in this
way it becomes as hard as iron-slag. And so it is stored in bags
against the winter. In the winter time, when they have no milk,
they put that sour curd, which they call _Griut_, into a skin,
and pour warm water on it, and they shake it violently till the
curd dissolves in the water, to which it gives an acid flavour;
that water they drink in place of milk. But above all things they
eschew drinking plain water.” From Pallas’s account of the modern
practice, which is substantially the same, these cakes are also
made from the leavings of distillation in making milk-arrack. The
Kurút is frequently made of ewe-milk. Wood speaks of it as an
indispensable article in the food of the people of Badakhshan, and
under the same name it is a staple food of the Afghans. (_Rubr._
229; _Samml._ I. 136; _Dahl_, u.s.; _Wood_, 311.)

[It is the _ch’ura_ of the Tibetans. “In the Kokonor country and
Tibet, this _krut_ or _chura_ is put in tea to soften, and then
eaten either alone or mixed with parched barley meal (_tsamba_).”
(_Rockhill, Rubruck_, p. 68, note.)—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—Compare with Marco’s account the report of the Mongols,
which was brought by the spies of Mahomed, Sultan of Khwarizm,
when invasion was first menaced by Chinghiz: “The army of Chinghiz
is countless, as a swarm of ants or locusts. Their warriors are
matchless in lion-like valour, in obedience, and endurance.
They take no rest, and flight or retreat is unknown to them. On
their expeditions they are accompanied by oxen, sheep, camels,
and horses, and sweet or sour milk suffices them for food. Their
horses scratch the earth with their hoofs and feed on the roots
and grasses they dig up, so that they need neither straw nor oats.
They themselves reck nothing of the clean or the unclean in food,
and eat the flesh of all animals, even of dogs, swine, and bears.
They will open a horse’s vein, draw blood, and drink it.... In
victory they leave neither small nor great alive; they cut up women
great with child and cleave the fruit of the womb. If they come
to a great river, as they know nothing of boats, they sew skins
together, stitch up all their goods therein, tie the bundle to
their horses’ tails, mount with a hard grip of the mane, and so
swim over.” This passage is an absolute abridgment of many chapters
of Carpini. Still more terse was the sketch of Mongol proceedings
drawn by a fugitive from Bokhara after Chinghiz’s devastations
there. It was set forth in one unconscious hexameter:

“_Ámdand u khandand u sokhtand u kushtand u burdand u raftand!_”
“They came and they sapped, they fired and they slew, trussed up
their loot and were gone!”

Juwaini, the historian, after telling the story, adds: “The
cream and essence of whatever is written in this volume might be
represented in these few words.”

A Musulman author quoted by Hammer, Najmuddin of Rei, gives an
awful picture of the Tartar devastations, “Such as had never been
heard of, whether in the lands of unbelief or of Islam, and can
only be likened to those which the Prophet announced as signs of
the Last Day, when he said: ‘The Hour of Judgment shall not come
until ye shall have fought with the Turks, men small of eye and
ruddy of countenance, whose noses are flat, and their faces like
hide-covered shields. Those shall be Days of Horror!’ ‘And what
meanest thou by horror?’ said the Companions; and he replied,
‘SLAUGHTER! SLAUGHTER!’ This beheld the Prophet in vision 600 years
ago. And could there well be worse slaughter than there was in Rei,
where I, wretch that I am, was born and bred, and where the whole
population of five hundred thousand souls was either butchered or
dragged into slavery?”

Marco habitually suppresses or ignores the frightful brutalities of
the Tartars, but these were somewhat less, no doubt, in Kúblái’s
time.

The Hindustani poet Amir Khosru gives a picture of the Mongols more
forcible than elegant, which Elliot has translated (III. 528).

This is Hayton’s account of the Parthian tactics of the Tartars:
“They will run away, but always keeping their companies together;
and it is very dangerous to give them chase, for as they flee they
shoot back over their heads, and do great execution among their
pursuers. They keep very close rank, so that you would not guess
them for half their real strength.” Carpini speaks to the same
effect. Baber, himself of Mongol descent, but heartily hating his
kindred, gives this account of their military usage in his day:
“Such is the uniform practice of these wretches the Moghuls; if
they defeat the enemy they instantly seize the booty; if they are
defeated, they plunder and dismount their own allies, and, betide
what may, carry off the spoil.” (_Erdmann_, 364, 383, 620; _Gold.
Horde_, 77, 80; _Elliot_, II. 388; _Hayton_ in _Ram._ ch. xlviii.;
_Baber_, 93; _Carpini_, p. 694.)

NOTE 7.—“The Scythians” (_i.e._ in the absurd Byzantine pedantry,
_Tartars_), says Nicephorus Gregoras, “from converse with the
Assyrians, Persians, and Chaldæans, in time acquired their manners
and adopted their religion, casting off their ancestral atheism....
And to such a degree were they changed, that though in former days
they had been wont to cover the head with nothing better than a
loose felt cap, and for other clothing had thought themselves well
off with the skins of wild beasts or ill-dressed leather, and had
for weapons only clubs and slings, or spears, arrows, and bows
extemporised from the oaks and other trees of their mountains and
forests, now, forsooth, they will have no meaner clothing than
brocades of silk and gold! And their luxury and delicate living
came to such a pitch that they stood far as the poles asunder from
their original habits” (II. v. 6).

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This is _Chomeni_ in the original, but I have ventured to correct
it.

CHAPTER LV.

CONCERNING THE ADMINISTERING OF JUSTICE AMONG THE TARTARS.

The way they administer justice is this. When any one has committed
a petty theft, they give him, under the orders of authority, seven
blows of a stick, or seventeen, or twenty-seven, or thirty-seven, or
forty-seven, and so forth, always increasing by tens in proportion to
the injury done, and running up to one hundred and seven. Of these
beatings sometimes they die.{1} But if the offence be horse-stealing,
or some other great matter, they cut the thief in two with a sword.
Howbeit, if he be able to ransom himself by paying nine times the
value of the thing stolen, he is let off. Every Lord or other person
who possesses beasts has them marked with his peculiar brand, be they
horses, mares, camels, oxen, cows, or other great cattle, and then they
are sent abroad to graze over the plains without any keeper. They get
all mixt together, but eventually every beast is recovered by means
of its owner’s brand, which is known. For their sheep and goats they
have shepherds. All their cattle are remarkably fine, big, and in good
condition.{2}

They have another notable custom, which is this. If any man have a
daughter who dies before marriage, and another man have had a son also
die before marriage, the parents of the two arrange a grand wedding
between the dead lad and lass. And marry them they do, making a regular
contract! And when the contract papers are made out they put them in
the fire, in order (as they will have it) that the parties in the other
world may know the fact, and so look on each other as man and wife.
And the parents thenceforward consider themselves sib to each other,
just as if their children had lived and married. Whatever may be agreed
on between the parties as dowry, those who have to pay it cause to be
painted on pieces of paper and then put these in the fire, saying that
in that way the dead person will get all the real articles in the other
world.{3}

Now I have told you all about the manners and customs of the Tartars;
but you have heard nothing yet of the great state of the Grand Kaan,
who is the Lord of all the Tartars and of the Supreme Imperial Court.
All that I will tell you in this book in proper time and place, but
meanwhile I must return to my story which I left off in that great
plain when we began to speak of the Tartars.{4}

NOTE 1.—The cudgel among the Mongols was not confined to thieves
and such like. It was the punishment also of military and state
offences, and even princes were liable to it without fatal
disgrace. “If they give any offence,” says Carpini, “or omit to
obey the slightest beck, the Tartars themselves are beaten like
donkeys.” The number of blows administered was, according to
Wassáf, always odd, 3, 5, and so forth, up to 77. (_Carp._ 712;
_Ilchan._ I. 37.)

[“They also punish with death grand larceny, but as for petty
thefts, such as that of a sheep, so long as one has not repeatedly
been taken in the act, they beat him cruelly, and if they
administer an hundred blows they must use an hundred sticks.”
(_Rockhill, Rubruck_, p. 80.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“They have no herdsmen or others to watch their cattle,
because the laws of the Turks (_i.e._ Tartars) against theft are so
severe.... A man in whose possession a stolen horse is found is
obliged to restore it to its owner, _and to give nine of the same
value_; if he cannot, his children are seized in compensation;
if he have no children, he is slaughtered like a mutton.” (_Ibn
Batuta_, II. 364.)

NOTE 3.—This is a Chinese custom, though no doubt we may trust
Marco for its being a Tartar one also. “In the province of Shansi
they have a ridiculous custom, which is to marry dead folks to each
other. F. Michael Trigault, a Jesuit, who lived several years in
that province, told it us whilst we were in confinement. It falls
out that one man’s son and another man’s daughter die. Whilst the
coffins are in the house (and they used to keep them two or three
years, or longer) the parents agree to marry them; they send the
usual presents, as if the pair were alive, with much ceremony and
music. After this they put the two coffins together, hold the
wedding dinner in their presence, and, lastly, lay them together
in one tomb. The parents, from this time forth, are looked on not
merely as friends but as relatives—just as they would have been had
their children been married when in life.” (_Navarrete_, quoted
by _Marsden._) Kidd likewise, speaking of the Chinese custom of
worshipping at the tombs of progenitors, says: “So strongly does
veneration for this tribute after death prevail that parents,
in order to secure the memorial of the sepulchre for a daughter
who has died during her betrothal, give her in marriage after
her decease to her intended husband, who receives with nuptial
ceremonies at his own house a paper effigy made by her parents,
and after he has burnt it, erects a tablet to her memory—an honour
which usage forbids to be rendered to the memory of unmarried
persons. The law seeks without effect to abolish this absurd
custom.” (_China_, etc., pp. 179–180.)

[Professor J. J. M. de Groot (_Religious System of China_) gives
several instances of marriages after death; the following example
(II. 804–805) will illustrate the custom: “An interesting account
of the manner in which such _post-mortem_ marriages were concluded
at the period when the Sung Dynasty governed the Empire, is given
by a contemporary work in the following words: ‘In the northern
parts of the Realm it is customary, when an unmarried youth and
an unmarried girl breathe their last, that the two families each
charge a match-maker to demand the other party in marriage. Such
go-betweens are called match-makers for disembodied souls. They
acquaint the two families with each other’s circumstances, and
then cast lots for the marriage by order of the parents on both
sides. If they augur that the union will be a happy one, (wedding)
garments for the next world are cut out, and the match-makers
repair to the grave of the lad, there to set out wine and fruit
for the consummation of the marriage. Two seats are placed side
by side, and a small streamer is set up near each seat. If these
streamers move a little after the libation has been performed, the
souls are believed to approach each other; but if one of them does
not move, the party represented thereby is considered to disapprove
of the marriage. Each family has to reward its match-maker with a
present of woven stuffs. Such go-betweens make a regular livelihood
out of these proceedings.’”—H. C.]

The Ingushes of the Caucasus, according to Klaproth, have the same
custom: “If a man’s son dies, another who has lost his daughter
goes to the father and says, ‘Thy son will want a wife in the other
world; I will give him my daughter; pay me the price of the bride.’
Such a demand is never refused, even though the purchase of the
bride amount to thirty cows.” (_Travels, Eng. Trans._ 345.)

NOTE 4.—There is a little doubt about the reading of this last
paragraph. The G. T. has—“_Mès desormès volun retorner à nostre
conte en_ la grant plaingne _où nos estion quant nos comechames des
fais des Tartars_,” whilst Pauthier’s text has “_Mais desormais
vueil retourner à mon conte que Je lessai_ d’or plain _quant nous
commençames des faiz des Tatars.”_ The former reading looks very
like a misunderstanding of one similar to the latter, where _d’or
plain_ seems to be an adverbial expression, with some such meaning
as “just now,” “a while ago.” I have not, however, been able to
trace the expression elsewhere. Cotgrave has _or primes_, “but even
now,” etc.; and has also _de plain_, “presently, immediately, out
of hand.” It seems quite possible that _d’or plain_ should have had
the meaning suggested.

CHAPTER LVI.

SUNDRY PARTICULARS OF THE PLAIN BEYOND CARACORON.

And when you leave Caracoron and the Altay, in which they bury the
bodies of the Tartar Sovereigns, as I told you, you go north for forty
days till you reach a country called the PLAIN OF BARGU.{1} The people
there are called MESCRIPT; they are a very wild race, and live by their
cattle, the most of which are stags, and these stags, I assure you,
they used to ride upon. Their customs are like those of the Tartars,
and they are subject to the Great Kaan. They have neither corn nor
wine.[They get birds for food, for the country is full of lakes and
pools and marshes, which are much frequented by the birds when they are
moulting, and when they have quite cast their feathers and can’t fly,
those people catch them. They also live partly on fish.{2}]

And when you have travelled forty days over this great plain you
come to the ocean, at the place where the mountains are in which the
Peregrine falcons have their nests. And in those mountains it is so
cold that you find neither man or woman, nor beast nor bird, except
one kind of bird called _Barguerlac_, on which the falcons feed. They
are as big as partridges, and have feet like those of parrots and
a tail like a swallow’s, and are very strong in flight. And when
the Grand Kaan wants Peregrines from the nest, he sends thither to
procure them.{3} It is also on islands in that sea that the Gerfalcons
are bred. You must know that the place is so far to the north that
you leave the North Star somewhat behind you towards the south! The
gerfalcons are so abundant there that the Emperor can have as many as
he likes to send for. And you must not suppose that those gerfalcons
which the Christians carry into the Tartar dominions go to the Great
Kaan; they are carried only to the Prince of the Levant.{4}

Now I have told you all about the provinces northward as far as the
Ocean Sea, beyond which there is no more land at all; so I shall
proceed to tell you of the other provinces on the way to the Great
Kaan. Let us, then, return to that province of which I spoke before,
called Campichu.

NOTE 1.—The readings differ as to the length of the journey. In
Pauthier’s text we seem to have first a journey of forty days from
near Karakorúm to the Plain of Bargu, and then a journey of forty
days more across the plain to the Northern Ocean. The G. T. seems
to present only _one_ journey of forty days (Ramusio, of sixty
days), but leaves the interval from Karakorúm undefined. I have
followed the former, though with some doubt.

NOTE 2.—This paragraph from Ramusio replaces the following in
Pauthier’s text: “In the summer they got abundance of game, both
beasts and birds, but in winter, there is none to be had because of
the great cold.”

Marco is here dealing, I apprehend, with hearsay geography,
and, as is common in like cases, there is great compression
of circumstances and characteristics, analogous to the like
compression of little-known regions in mediæval maps.

The name _Bargu_ appears to be the same with that often mentioned
in Mongol history as BARGUCHIN TUGRUM or BARGUTI, and which
Rashiduddin calls the northern limit of the inhabited earth. This
commenced about Lake Baikal, where the name still survives in that
of a river (_Barguzin_) falling into the Lake on the east side, and
of a town on its banks (_Barguzinsk_). Indeed, according to Rashid
himself, BARGU was the name of one of the tribes occupying the
plain; and a quotation from Father Hyacinth would seem to show that
the country is still called _Barakhu_.

[The Archimandrite Palladius (_Elucidations_, 16–17) writes:—“In
the Mongol text of Chingis Khan’s biography, this country is called
Barhu and Barhuchin; it is to be supposed, according to Colonel
Yule’s identification of this name with the modern Barguzin, that
this country was near Lake Baikal. The fact that Merkits were in
Bargu is confirmed by the following statement in Chingis Khan’s
biography: ‘When Chingis Khan defeated his enemies, the Merkits,
they fled to Barhuchin tokum.’ _Tokum_ signifies ‘a hollow, a low
place,’ according to the Chinese translation of the above-mentioned
biography, made in 1381; thus Barhuchin tokum undoubtedly
corresponds to M. Polo’s Plain of Bargu. As to M. Polo’s statement
that the inhabitants of Bargu were Merkits, it cannot be accepted
unconditionally. The Merkits were not indigenous to the country
near Baikal, but belonged originally,—according to a division
set forth in the Mongol text of the _Yuan ch’ao pi shi_,—to the
category of tribes _living in yurts_, _i.e._ nomad tribes, or tribes
of the desert. Meanwhile we find in the same biography of Chingis
Khan, mention of a people called Barhun, which belonged to the
category of tribes _living in the forests_; and we have therefore
reason to suppose that the Barhuns were the aborigines of Barhu.
After the time of Chingis Khan, this ethnographic name disappears
from Chinese history; it appears again in the middle of the 16th
century. The author of the _Yyu_ (1543–1544), in enumerating the
tribes inhabiting Mongolia and the adjacent countries, mentions
the Barhu, as a strong tribe, able to supply up to several tens of
thousands (?) of warriors, armed with steel swords; but the country
inhabited by them is not indicated. The Mongols, it is added, call
them Black Ta-tze (Khara Mongols, _i.e._ ‘Lower Mongols’).

“At the close of the 17th century, the Barhus are found inhabiting
the western slopes of the interior Hing’an, as well as between
Lake Kulon and River Khalkha, and dependent on a prince of eastern
Khalkhas, Doro beile. (Manchu title.)

“At the time of Galdan Khan’s invasion, a part of them fled to
Siberia with the eastern Khalkhas, but afterwards they returned.
[_Mung ku yew mu ki_ and _Lung sha ki lio_.] After their rebellion
in 1696, quelled by a Manchu General, they were included with
other petty tribes (regarding which few researches have been made)
in the category _butkha_, or hunters, and received a military
organisation. They are divided into Old and New Barhu, according
to the time when they were brought under Manchu rule. The Barhus
belong to the Mongolian, not to the Tungusian race; they are
sometimes considered even to have been in relationship with the
Khalkhas. (_He lung kiang wai ki_ and _Lung sha ki lio_.)

“This is all the substantial information we possess on the Barhu.
Is there an affinity to be found between the modern Barhus and the
Barhuns of Chingis Khan’s biography?—and is it to be supposed, that
in the course of time, they spread from Lake Baikal to the Hing’an
range? Or is it more correct to consider them a branch of the
Mongol race indigenous to the Hing’an Mountains, and which received
the general archaic name of Bargu, which might have pointed out the
physical character of the country they inhabited [_Kin Shi_], just
as we find in history the Urianhai of Altai and the Urianhai of
Western Manchuria? It is difficult to solve this question for want
of historical data.”—H. C.]

_Mescript_, or _Mecri_, as in G. T. The _Merkit_, a great tribe
to the south-east of the Baikal, were also called _Mekrit_, and
sometimes _Megrin_. The Mekrit are spoken of also by Carpini and
Rubruquis. D’Avezac thinks that the _Kerait_, and not the _Merkit_,
are intended by all three travellers. As regards Polo, I see
no reason for this view. The name he uses is _Mekrit_, and the
position which he assigns to them agrees fairly with that assigned
on good authority to the Merkit or Mekrit. Only, as in other cases,
where he is rehearsing hearsay information, it does not follow that
the identification of the name involves the correctness of all the
circumstances that he connects with that name. We saw in ch. xxx.
that under _Pashai_ he seemed to lump circumstances belonging to
various parts of the region from Badakhshan to the Indus; so here
under _Mekrit_ he embraces characteristics belonging to tribes
extending far beyond the Mekrit, and which in fact are appropriate
to the Tunguses. Rashiduddin seems to describe the latter under
the name of _Uriangkut_ of the Woods, a people dwelling beyond the
frontier of Barguchin, and in connection with whom he speaks of
their Reindeer obscurely, as well as of their tents of birch bark,
and their hunting on snow-shoes.

The mention of the Reindeer by Polo in this passage is one of the
interesting points which Pauthier’s text omits. Marsden objects
to the statement that the stags are ridden upon, and from this
motive mis-renders “_li qual’anche_ cavalcano,” as, “which
they make use of for the purpose of travelling.” Yet he might
have found in Witsen that the Reindeer are _ridden_ by various
Siberian Tribes, but especially by the Tunguses. Erman is very
full on the reindeer-riding of the latter people, having himself
travelled far in that way in going to Okhotsk, and gives a very
detailed description of the saddle, etc., employed. The reindeer
of the Tunguses are stated by the same traveller to be much larger
and finer animals than those of Lapland. They are also used for
pack-carriage and draught. Old Richard Eden says that the “olde
wryters” relate that “certayne Scythians doe ryde on Hartes.” I
have not traced to what he refers, but if the statement be in
any ancient author it is very remarkable. Some old editions of
Olaus Magnus have curious cuts of Laplanders and others riding on
reindeer, but I find nothing in the text appropriate. We hear from
travellers of the Lapland deer being occasionally mounted, but only
it would seem in sport, not as a practice. (_Erdmann_, 189, 191;
_D’Ohsson_, I. 103; _D’Avezac_, 534 _seqq._; _J. As._ sér. II.
tom. xi.; sér. IV. tom. xvii. 107; _N. et E._ XIII. i. 274–276;
_Witsen_, II. 670, 671, 680; _Erman_, II. 321, 374, 429, 449
_seqq._, and original German, II. 347 _seqq._; _Notes on Russia_,
Hac. Soc. II. 224; _J. A. S. B._ XXIX. 379.)

The numerous lakes and marshes swarming with water-fowl are very
characteristic of the country between Yakutsk and the Kolyma. It
is evident that Marco had his information from an eye-witness,
though the whole picture is compressed. Wrangell, speaking of
Nijni Kolyma, says: “It is at the moulting season that the great
bird-hunts take place. The sportsmen surround the nests, and slip
their dogs, which drive the birds to the water, on which they are
easily knocked over with a gun or arrow, or even with a stick....
This chase is divided into several periods. They begin with the
ducks, which moult first; then come the geese; then the swans....
In each case the people take care to choose the time when the birds
have lost their feathers.” The whole calendar with the Yakuts
and Russian settlers on the Kolyma is a succession of fishing
and hunting seasons which the same author details. (I. 149, 150;
119–121.)

NOTE 3.—What little is said of the _Barguerlac_ points to some
bird of the genus _Pterocles_, or Sand Grouse (to which belong
the so-called Rock Pigeons of India), or to the allied _Tetrao
paradoxus_ of Pallas, now known as _Syrrhaptes Pallasii_. Indeed,
we find in Zenker’s Dictionary that _Boghurtláḳ_ (or _Baghírtláḳ_,
as it is in Pavet de Courteille’s) in Oriental Turkish is the
_Kata_, _i.e._ I presume, the _Pterocles alchata_ of Linnæus, or
Large Pin-tailed Sand Grouse. Mr. Gould, to whom I referred the
point, is clear that the _Syrrhaptes_ is Marco’s bird, and I
believe there can be no question of it.

[Passing through Ch’ang-k’ou, Mr. Rockhill found the people praying
for rain. “The people told me,” he says, in his _Journey_ (p. 9),
“that they knew long ago the year would be disastrous, for the
sand grouse had been more numerous of late than for years, and the
saying goes _Sha-ch’i kuo, mai lao-po_, ‘when the sand grouse fly
by, wives will be for sale.’”—H. C.]

The chief difficulty in identification with the Syrrhaptes or any
known bird, would be “the feet like a parrot’s.” The feet of the
Syrrhaptes are not indeed like a parrot’s, though its awkward,
slow, and waddling gait on the ground, may have suggested the
comparison; and though it has very odd and anomalous feet, a
circumstance which the Chinese indicate in another way by calling
the bird (according to Huc) _Lung Kio_, or “Dragon-foot.” [Mr.
Rockhill (_Journey_) writes in a note (p. 9): “I, for my part,
never heard any other name than _sha-ch’i_, ‘sand-fowl,’ given
them. This name is used, however, for a variety of birds, among
others the partridge.”—H. C.] The hind-toe is absent, the toes are
unseparated, recognisable only by the broad flat nails, and fitted
below with a callous couch, whilst the whole foot is covered with
short dense feathers like hair, and is more like a quadruped’s paw
than a bird’s foot.

The home of the Syrrhaptes is in the Altai, the Kirghiz Steppes,
and the country round Lake Baikal, though it also visits the North
of China in great flights. “On plains of grass and sandy deserts,”
says Gould (_Birds of Great Britain_, Part IV.), “at one season
covered with snow, and at another sun-burnt and parched by drought,
it finds a congenial home; in these inhospitable and little-known
regions it breeds, and when necessity compels it to do so, wings
its way ... over incredible distances to obtain water or food.” Huc
says, speaking of the bird on the northern frontier of China: “They
generally arrive in great flights from the north, especially when
much snow has fallen, flying with astonishing rapidity, so that the
movement of their wings produces a noise like hail.” It is said to
be very delicate eating. The bird owes its place in Gould’s _Birds
of Great Britain_ to the fact—strongly illustrative of its being
_moult volant_, as Polo says it is—that it appeared in England in
1859, and since then, at least up to 1863, continued to arrive
annually in pairs or companies in nearly all parts of our island,
from Penzance to Caithness. And Gould states that it was breeding
in the Danish islands. A full account by Mr. A. Newton of this
remarkable immigration is contained in the _Ibis_ for April, 1864,
and many details in _Stevenson’s Birds of Norfolk_, I. 376 _seqq._
There are plates of _Syrrhaptes_ in _Radde’s Reisen im Süden
von Ost-Sibirien_, Bd. II.; in vol. v. of _Temminck_, Planches
Coloriées, Pl. 95; in _Gould_, as above; in _Gray, Genera of
Birds_, vol. iii. p. 517 (life size); and in the _Ibis_ for April,
1860. From the last our cut is taken.

[See _A. David et Oustalet_, _Oiseaux de la Chine_, 389, on
_Syrrhaptes Pallasii_ or _Syrrhaptes Paradoxus_.—H. C.]

[Illustration: Syrrhaptes Pallasii.]

NOTE 4.—Gerfalcons (_Shonḳár_) were objects of high estimation
in the Middle Ages, and were frequent presents to and from royal
personages. Thus among the presents sent with an embassy from
King James II. of Aragon to the Sultan of Egypt, in 1314, we find
three white gerfalcons. They were sent in homage to Chinghiz and
to Kúblái, by the Kirghiz, but I cannot identify the mountains
where they or the Peregrines were found. The Peregrine falcon was
in Europe sometimes termed _Faucon Tartare_. (See _Ménage_ s.v.
_Sahin_.) The Peregrine of Northern Japan, and probably therefore
that of Siberia, is identical with that of Europe. Witsen speaks
of an island in the Sea of Tartary, from which falcons were got,
apparently referring to a Chinese map as his authority; but I know
nothing more of it. (_Capmany_, IV. 64–65; _Ibis_, 1862, p. 314;
_Witsen_, II. 656.)

[On the _Falco peregrinus_, Lin., and other Falcons, see Ed.
Blanc’s paper mentioned on p. 162. The _Falco Saker_ is to be found
all over Central Asia; it is called by the Pekingese _Hwang-yng_
(yellow falcon). (_David et Oustalet_, _Oiseaux de la Chine_,
31–32.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER LVII.

OF THE KINGDOM OF ERGUIUL, AND PROVINCE OF SINJU.

On leaving Campichu, then, you travel five days across a tract in which
many spirits are heard speaking in the night season; and at the end
of those five marches, towards the east, you come to a kingdom called
ERGUIUL, belonging to the Great Kaan. It is one of the several kingdoms
which make up the great Province of Tangut. The people consist of
Nestorian Christians, Idolaters, and worshippers of Mahommet.{1}

There are plenty of cities in this kingdom, but the capital is ERGUIUL.
You can travel in a south-easterly direction from this place into the
province of Cathay. Should you follow that road to the south-east, you
come to a city called SINJU, belonging also to Tangut, and subject to
the Great Kaan, which has under it many towns and villages.{2} The
population is composed of Idolaters, and worshippers of Mahommet, but
there are some Christians also. There are wild cattle in that country
[almost] as big as elephants, splendid creatures, covered everywhere
but on the back with shaggy hair a good four palms long. They are
partly black, partly white, and really wonderfully fine creatures [and
the hair or wool is extremely fine and white, finer and whiter than
silk. Messer Marco brought some to Venice as a great curiosity, and so
it was reckoned by those who saw it]. There are also plenty of them
tame, which have been caught young. [They also cross these with the
common cow, and the cattle from this cross are wonderful beasts, and
better for work than other animals.] These the people use commonly for
burden and general work, and in the plough as well; and at the latter
they will do full twice as much work as any other cattle, being such
very strong beasts.{3}

In this country too is found the best musk in the world; and I will
tell you how ’tis produced. There exists in that region a kind of wild
animal like a gazelle. It has feet and tail like the gazelle’s, and
stag’s hair of a very coarse kind, but no horns. It has four tusks,
two below and two above, about three inches long, and slender in form,
one pair growing upwards, and the other downwards. It is a very pretty
creature. The musk is found in this way. When the creature has been
taken, they find at the navel between the flesh and the skin something
like an impostume full of blood, which they cut out and remove with all
the skin attached to it. And the blood inside this impostume is the
musk that produces that powerful perfume. There is an immense number of
these beasts in the country we are speaking of. [The flesh is very good
to eat. Messer Marco brought the dried head and feet of one of these
animals to Venice with him.{4}]

The people are traders and artizans, and also grow abundance of
corn. The province has an extent of 26 days’ journey. Pheasants are
found there twice as big as ours, indeed nearly as big as a peacock,
and having tails of 7 to 10 palms in length; and besides them other
pheasants in aspect like our own, and birds of many other kinds, and
of beautiful variegated plumage.{5} The people, who are Idolaters,
are fat folks with little noses and black hair, and no beard, except
a few hairs on the upper lip. The women too have very smooth and
white skins, and in every respect are pretty creatures. The men are
very sensual, and marry many wives, which is not forbidden by their
religion. No matter how base a woman’s descent may be, if she have
beauty she may find a husband among the greatest men in the land, the
man paying the girl’s father and mother a great sum of money, according
to the bargain that may be made.

NOTE 1.—No approximation to the name of Erguiul in an appropriate
position has yet been elicited from Chinese or other Oriental
sources. We cannot go widely astray as to its position, five days
east of Kanchau. Klaproth identifies it with Liangchau-fu; Pauthier
with the neighbouring city of Yungchang, on the ground that the
latter was, in the time of Kúblái, the head of one of the _Lús_, or
Circles, of Kansuh or Tangut, which he has shown some reason for
believing to be the “kingdoms” of Marco.

It is probable, however, that the _town_ called by Polo Erguiul lay
north of both the cities named, and more in line with the position
assigned below to _Egrigaya_. (See note 1, ch. lviii.)

I may notice that the structure of the name Ergui-ul or Ergiu-ul,
has a look of analogy to that of _Tang-keu-ul_, named in the next
note.

[“Erguiul is Erichew of the Mongol text of the _Yuen ch’ao pi
shi_, Si-liang in the Chinese history, the modern _Liang chow fu_.
Klaproth, on the authority of Rashid-eddin, has already identified
this name with that of Si-liang.” (_Palladius_, p. 18.) M. Bonin
left Ning-h’ia at the end of July, 1899, and he crossed the desert
to Liangchau in fifteen days from east to west; he is the first
traveller who took this route: Prjevalsky went westward, passing by
the residence of the Prince of Alashan, and Obrutchev followed the
route south of Bonin’s.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—No doubt Marsden is right in identifying this with
SINING-CHAU, now Sining-fu, the Chinese city nearest to Tibet
and the Kokonor frontier. Grueber and Dorville, who passed it on
their way to Lhasa, in 1661, call it _urbs ingens_. Sining was
visited also by Huc and Gabet, who are unsatisfactory, as usually
on geographical matters. They also call it “an immense town,” but
thinly peopled, its commerce having been in part transferred to
Tang-keu-ul, a small town closer to the frontier.

[Sining belonged to the country called Hwang chung; in 1198,
under the Sung Dynasty, it was subjugated by the Chinese, and was
named Si-ning chau; at the beginning of the Ming Dynasty (from
1368), it was named Si-ning wei, and since 1726 Si-ning fu. (Cf.
Gueluy, _Chine_, p. 62.) From Liangchau, M. Bonin went to Sining
through the Lao kou kau pass and the Ta-Tung ho. Obrutchev and
Grum Grijmaïlo took the usual route from Kanchau to Sining. After
the murder of Dutreuil de Rhins at Tung bu _m_do, his companion,
Grenard, arrived at Sining, and left it on the 29th July, 1894.
Dr. Sven Hedin gives in his book his own drawing of a gate of
Sining-fu, where he arrived on the 25th November, 1896.—H. C.]

Sining is called by the Tibetans _Ziling_ or Jiling, by the Mongols
_Seling Khoto_. A shawl wool texture, apparently made in this
quarter, is imported into Kashmir and Ladak, under the name of
_S’ling_. I have supposed Sining to be also the _Zilm_ of which
Mr. Shaw heard at Yarkand, and am answerable for a note to that
effect on p. 38 of his _High Tartary_. But Mr. Shaw, on his return
to Europe, gave some rather strong reasons against this. (See
_Proc. R. G. S._ XVI. 245; _Kircher_, pp. 64, 66; _Della Penna_,
27; _Davies’s Report_, App. p. ccxxix.; _Vigne_, II. 110, 129.)
[At present Sining is called by the Tibetans Seling K’ar or Kuar,
and by the Mongols, Seling K’utun, _K’ar_ and _K’utun_ meaning
“fortified city.” (_Rockhill, Land of the Lamas_, 49, note.)—H. C.]

[Mr. Rockhill (_Diary of a Journey_, 65) writes: “There must be
some Scotch blood in the Hsi-ningites, for I find they are very
fond of oatmeal and of cracked wheat. The first is called _yen-mei
ch’en_, and is eaten boiled with the water in which mutton has been
cooked, or with neat’s-foot oil (_yang-t’i yu_). The cracked wheat
(_mei-tzŭ fan_) is eaten prepared in the same way, and is a very
good dish.”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The _Dong_, or Wild Yak, has till late years only been
known by vague rumour. It has always been famed in native reports
for its great fierceness. The _Haft Iḳlím_ says that “it kills with
its horns, by its kicks, by treading under foot, and by tearing
with its teeth,” whilst the Emperor Humáyún himself told Sidi ’Ali,
the Turkish admiral, that when it had knocked a man down it skinned
him from head to heels by licking him with its tongue! Dr. Campbell
states, in the _Journal of the As. Soc. of Bengal_, that it was
said to be four times the size of the domestic Yak. The horns are
alleged to be sometimes three feet long, and of immense girth; they
are handed round full of strong drink at the festivals of Tibetan
grandees, as the Urus horns were in Germany, according to Cæsar.

A note, with which I have been favoured by Dr. Campbell (long
the respected Superintendent of British Sikkim) says: “Captain
Smith, of the Bengal Army, who had travelled in Western Tibet,
told me that he had shot many wild Yaks in the neighbourhood of
the Mansarawar Lake, and that he measured a bull which was 18
hands high, _i.e._ 6 feet. All that he saw were _black_ all over. He
also spoke to the fierceness of the animal. He was once charged
by a bull that he had wounded, and narrowly escaped being killed.
Perhaps my statement (above referred to) in regard to the relative
size of the Wild and Tame Yak, may require modification if applied
to all the countries in which the Yak is found. At all events,
the finest specimen of the tame Yak I ever saw, was not in Nepal,
Sikkim, Tibet, or Bootan, but in the _Jardin des Plantes_ at
_Paris_; and that one, a male, was brought from Shanghai. The best
drawing of a Yak I know is that in Turner’s _Tibet_.”

[Lieutenant Samuel Turner gave a very good description of the Yak
of Tartary, which he calls _Soora-Goy_, or the Bushy-tailed Bull of
Tibet. (_Asiat. Researches_, No. XXIII, pp. 351–353, with a plate.)
He says with regard to the colour: “There is a great variety of
colours amongst them, but black or white are the most prevalent. It
is not uncommon to see the long hair upon the ridge of the back,
the tail, tuft upon the chest, and the legs below the knee white,
when all the rest of the animal is jet black.” A good drawing of
“an enormous” Yak is to be found on p. 183 of Captain Wellby’s
_Unknown Tibet_. (See also Captain Deasy’s work on _Tibet_, p.
363.) Prince Henri d’Orléans brought home a fine specimen, which
he shot during his journey with Bonvalot; it is now exhibited in
the galleries of the Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. Some Yaks were
brought to Paris on the 1st April, 1854, and the celebrated artist,
Mme. Rosa Bonheur, made sketches after them. (See _Jour. Soc.
Acclimatation_, June, 1900, 39–40.)—H. C.]

Captain Prjevalsky, in his recent journey (1872–1873), shot twenty
wild Yaks south of the Koko Nor. He specifies one as 11 feet in
length exclusive of the tail, which was 3 feet more; the height
6 feet. He speaks of the Yak as less formidable than it looks,
from apathy and stupidity, but very hard to kill; one having taken
eighteen bullets before it succumbed.

[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 151, note) writes: “The average load
carried by a Yak is about 250 lbs. The wild Yak bull is an enormous
animal, and the people of Turkestan and North Tibet credit him with
extraordinary strength. Mirza Haidar, in the _Tarikhi Rashidi_,
says of the wild Yak or _kutás_: ‘This is a very wild and ferocious
beast. In whatever manner it attacks one it proves fatal. Whether
it strikes with its horns, or kicks, or overthrows its victim. If
it has no opportunity of doing any of these things, it tosses
its enemy with its tongue twenty _gaz_ into the air, and he is
dead before reaching the ground. One male _kutás_ is a load for
twelve horses. One man cannot possibly raise a shoulder of the
animal.’”—Captain Deasy (_In Tibet_, 363) says: “In a few places
on lofty ground in Tibet we found Yaks in herds numbering from
ten to thirty, and sometimes more. Most of the animals are black,
brown specimens being very rare. Their roving herds move with great
agility over the steep and stony ground, apparently enjoying the
snow and frost and wind, which seldom fail.... Yaks are capable of
offering formidable resistance to the sportsman....”—H. C.]

The tame Yaks are never, I imagine, “caught young,” as Marco says;
it is a domesticated _breed_, though possibly, as with buffaloes in
Bengal, the breed may occasionally be refreshed by a cross of wild
blood. They are employed for riding, as beasts of burden, and in
the plough. [Lieutenant S. Turner, _l.c._, says, on the other hand:
“They are never employed in agriculture, but are extremely useful
as beasts of burthen.”—H. C.] In the higher parts of our Himalayan
provinces, and in Tibet, the Yak itself is most in use; but in the
less elevated tracts several breeds crossed with the common Indian
cattle are more used. They have a variety of names according to
their precise origin. The inferior Yaks used in the plough are ugly
enough, and “have more the appearance of large shaggy bears than
of oxen,” but the Yak used for riding, says Hoffmeister, “is an
infinitely handsomer animal. It has a stately hump, a rich silky
hanging tail nearly reaching the ground, twisted horns, a noble
bearing, and an erect head.” Cunningham, too, says that the _Dso_,
one of the mixed breeds, is “a very handsome animal, with long
shaggy hair, generally black and white.” Many of the various tame
breeds appear to have the tail and back white, and also the fringe
under the body, but black and red are the prevailing colours. Some
of the crossbred cows are excellent milkers, better than either
parent stock.

Notice in this passage the additional and interesting particulars
given by Ramusio, _e.g._ the use of the mixed breeds. “Finer than
silk,” is an exaggeration, or say an _hyberbole_, as is the
following expression, “As big as elephants,” even with Ramusio’s
apologetic _quasi_. Cæsar says the Hercynian Urus was _magnitudine
paullo infra elephantos_.

The tame Yak is used across the breadth of Mongolia. Rubruquis saw
them at Karakorum, and describes them well. Mr. Ney Elias tells
me he found Yaks common everywhere along his route in Mongolia,
between the Tui river (long. _circa_ 101°) and the upper valleys of
the Kobdo near the Siberian frontier. At Uliasut’ai they were used
occasionally by Chinese settlers for drawing carts, but he never
saw them used for loads or for riding, as in Tibet. He has also
seen Yaks in the neighbourhood of Kwei-hwa-ch’eng. (_Tenduc_, see
ch. lix. note 1.) This may be taken as the eastern limit of the
employment of the Yak; the western limit is in the highlands of
Khokand.

These animals had been noticed by Cosmas [who calls them
_agriobous_] in the 6th century, and by Ælian in the 3rd. The
latter speaks of them as black cattle with white tails, from which
fly-flappers were made for Indian kings. And the great Kalidása
thus sang of the Yak, according to a learned (if somewhat rugged)
version ascribed to Dr. Mill. The poet personifies the Himálaya:—

“For Him the large Yaks in his cold plains that bide
Whisk here and there, playful, their tails’ bushy pride,
And evermore flapping those fans of long hair
Which borrowed moonbeams have made splendid and fair,
Proclaim at each stroke (what our flapping men sing)
His title of Honour, ‘The Dread Mountain King.’”

Who can forget Père Huc’s inimitable picture of the hairy Yaks
of their caravan, after passing a river in the depth of winter,
“walking with their legs wide apart, and bearing an enormous
load of stalactites, which hung beneath their bellies quite to
the ground. The monstrous beasts _looked exactly as if they were
preserved in sugar-candy_.” Or that other, even more striking,
of a great troop of wild Yaks, caught in the upper waters of the
Kin-sha Kiang, as they swam, in the moment of congelation, and thus
preserved throughout the winter, gigantic “flies in amber.”

(_N. et E._ XIV. 478; _J. As._ IX. 199; _J. A. S. B._ IX. 566,
XXIV. 235; _Shaw_, p. 91; _Ladak_, p. 210; _Geog. Magazine_, April,
1874; _Hoffmeister’s Travels_, p. 441; _Rubr._ 288; _Æl. de Nat.
An._ XV. 14; _J. A. S. B._ I. 342; _Mrs. Sinnett’s Huc_, pp. 228,
235.)

NOTE 4.—Ramusio adds that the hunters seek the animal at New Moon,
at which time the musk is secreted.

The description is good except as to the _four_ tusks, for the musk
deer has canine teeth only in the upper jaw, slender and prominent
as he describes them. The flesh of the animal is eaten by the
Chinese, and in Siberia by both Tartars and Russians, but that of
the males has a strong musk flavour.

The “immense number” of these animals that existed in the Himalayan
countries may be conceived from Tavernier’s statement, that on one
visit to Patna, then the great Indian mart for this article, he
purchased 7673 pods of musk. These presumably came by way of Nepal;
but musk pods of the highest class were also imported from Khotan
_viâ_ Yarkand and Leh, and the lowest price such a pod fetched at
Yarkand was 250 tankas, or upwards of 4_l._ This import has long
been extinct, and indeed the trade in the article, except towards
China, has altogether greatly declined, probably (says Mr. Hodgson)
because its repute as a medicine is becoming fast exploded. In
Sicily it is still so used, but apparently only as a sort of decent
medical _viaticum_, for when it is said “the Doctors have given him
musk,” it is as much as to say that they have given up the patient.

[“Here Marco Polo speaks of musk; musk and rhubarb (which he
mentions before, Sukchur, ch. xliii.) are the most renowned
and valuable of the products of the province of Kansu, which
comparatively produces very little; the industry in both these
articles is at present in the hands of the Tanguts of that province
[_Su chow chi_].” (_Palladius_, p. 18.)

Writing under date 15th February, 1892, from Lusar (coming from
Sining), Mr. Rockhill says: “The musk trade here is increasing,
Cantonese and Ssŭ-ch’uanese traders now come here to buy it, paying
for good musk four times its weight in silver (_ssŭ huan_, as they
say). The best test of its purity is an examination of the colour.
The Tibetans adulterate it by mixing tsamba and blood with it. The
best time to buy it is from the seventh to the ninth moon (latter
part of August to middle of November).” Mr. Rockhill adds in a
note: “Mongols call musk _owo_; Tibetans call it _latsé_. The best
musk they say is ‘white musk,’ _tsahan owo_ in Mongol, in Tibetan
_latsé karpo_. I do not know whether white refers to the colour of
the musk itself or to that of the hair on the skin covering the
musk pouch.” (_Diary of a Journey_, p. 71.)—H. C.]

Three species of the _Moschus_ are found in the Mountains of Tibet,
and _M. Chrysogaster_, which Mr. Hodgson calls “the loveliest,” and
which chiefly supplies the highly-prized pod called _Kághazi_, or
“Thin-as-paper,” is almost exclusively confined to the Chinese
frontier. Like the Yak, the _Moschus_ is mentioned by Cosmas
(_circa_ A.D. 545), and _musk_ appears in a Greek prescription by
Aëtius of Amida, a physician practising at Constantinople about the
same date.

(_Martini_, p. 39; _Tav., Des Indes_, Bk. II. ch. xxiv.; _J. A.
S. B._ XI. 285; _Davies’s Rep._ App. p. ccxxxvii.; _Dr. Flückiger
in Schweiz. Wochenschr. für Pharmacie_, 1867; _Heyd, Commerce du
Levant_, II. 636–640.)

[Illustration: Reeves’s Pheasant.]

NOTE 5.—The China pheasant answering best to the indications in the
text, appears to be _Reeves’s Pheasant_. Mr. Gould has identified
this bird with Marco’s in his magnificent _Birds of Asia_, and
has been kind enough to show me a specimen which, with the body,
measured 6 feet 8 inches. The tail feathers alone, however, are
said to reach to 6 and 7 feet, so that Marco’s ten palms was
scarcely an exaggeration. These tail-feathers are often seen on
the Chinese stage in the cap of the hero of the drama, and also
decorate the hats of certain civil functionaries.

_Size_ is the point in which the bird fails to meet Marco’s
description. In that respect the latter would rather apply to
the _Crossoptilon auritum_, which is nearly as big as a turkey,
or to the glorious _Múnál (Lophophorus impeyanus)_, but then that
has no length of tail. The latter seems to be the bird described
by Ælian: “Magnificent cocks which have the crest variegated
and ornate like a crown of flowers, and the tail feathers not
curved like a cock’s, but broad and carried in a train like a
peacock’s; the feathers are partly golden, and partly azure or
emerald-coloured.” (_Wood’s Birds_, 610, from which I have copied
the illustration; _Williams, M. K._ I. 261; _Æl. De Nat. An._ XVI.
2.) A species of _Crossoptilon_ has recently been found by Captain
Prjevalsky in Alashan, the Egrigaia (as I believe) of next chapter,
and one also by Abbé Armand David at the Koko Nor.

[See on the Phasianidæ family in Central and Western Asia,
_David et Oustalet, Oiseaux de la Chine_, 401–421; the _Phasianus
Reevesii_ or _veneratus_ is called by the Chinese of Tung-lin, near
Peking, _Djeu-ky_ (hen-arrow); the _Crossoptilon auritum_ is named
_Ma-ky_.—H. C.]

CHAPTER LVIII.

OF THE KINGDOM OF EGRIGAIA.

Starting again from Erguiul you ride eastward for eight days, and
then come to a province called EGRIGAIA, containing numerous cities
and villages, and belonging to Tangut.{1} The capital city is called
CALACHAN.{2} The people are chiefly Idolaters, but there are fine
churches belonging to the Nestorian Christians. They are all subjects
of the Great Kaan. They make in this city great quantities of camlets
of camel’s wool, the finest in the world; and some of the camlets that
they make are white, for they have white camels, and these are the best
of all. Merchants purchase these stuffs here, and carry them over the
world for sale.{3}

We shall now proceed eastward from this place and enter the territory
that was formerly Prester John’s.

NOTE 1.—Chinghiz invaded Tangut in all five times, viz. in 1205,
1207, 1209 (or according to Erdmann, 1210–1211), 1218, and
1226–1227, on which last expedition he died.

_A_. In the third invasion, according to D’Ohsson’s Chinese guide
(Father Hyacinth), he took the town of _Uiraca_, and the fortress
of Imen, and laid siege to the capital, then called Chung-sing or
Chung-hing, now Ning-hsia.

Rashid, in a short notice of this campaign, calls the first city
_Erica_, _Erlaca_, or, as Erdmann has it, _Artacki_. In De Mailla
it is _Ulahai_.

_B_. On the last invasion (1226), D’Ohsson’s Chinese authority says
that Chinghiz took Kanchau and Suhchau, Cholo and Khola in the
province of Liangcheu, and then proceeded to the Yellow River, and
invested Lingchau, south of Ning-hsia.

Erdmann, following his reading of Rashiduddin, says Chinghiz
took the cities of Tangut, called _Arucki_, _Kachu_, _Sichu_,
and _Kamichu_, and besieged Deresgai (D’Ohsson, _Derssekai_),
whilst Shidergu, the King of Tangut, betook himself to his capital
_Artackin_.

D’Ohsson, also professing to follow Rashid, calls this “his capital
_Irghai_, which the Mongols call _Ircaya_.” Klaproth, illustrating
Polo, reads “Eyircai, which the Mongols call _Eyircayá_.”

Pétis de la Croix, relating the same campaign and professing to
follow Fadlallah, _i.e._ Rashiduddin, says the king “retired to his
fortress of _Arbaca_.”

_C_. Sanang Setzen several times mentions a city called _Irghai_,
_apparently_ in Tangut; but all we can gather as to his position is
that it seems to have lain east of Kanchau.

We perceive that the _Arbaca_ of P. de la Croix, the _Eyircai_ of
Klaproth, the _Uiraca_ of D’Ohsson, the _Artacki_ or _Artackin_ of
Erdmann, are all various readings or forms of the same name, and
are the same with the Chinese form _Ulahai_ of De Mailla, and most
probably the place is the _Egrigaia_ of Polo.

We see also that Erdmann mentions another place _Aruki_ (ارقى?)
in connection with Kanchau and Suhchau. This is, I suspect, the
_Erguiul_ of Polo, and perhaps the Irghai of Sanang Setzen.

Rashiduddin seems wrong in calling Ircayá the capital of the king,
a circumstance which leads Klaproth to identify it with Ning-hsia.
Pauthier, identifying Ulahai with Egrigaya, shows that the former
was one of the circles of Tangut, but _not_ that of Ning-hsia. Its
position, he says, is uncertain. Klaproth, however, inserts it in
his map of Asia, in the era of Kúblái (_Tabl. Hist._ pl. 22), as
_Ulakhai_ to the north of Ning-hsia, near the great bend eastward
of the Hwang-Ho. Though it may have extended in this direction, it
is probable, from the name referred to in next note, that Egrigaia
or Ulahai is represented by the modern principality of ALASHAN,
visited by Prjevalsky in 1871 and 1872.

[New travels and researches enable me to say that there can be
no doubt that _Egrigaia = Ning-hsia_. Palladius (_l.c._ 18) says:
“_Egrigaia_ is Erigaia of the Mongol text. Klaproth was correct
in his supposition that it is modern Ning-h’ia. Even now the
Eleuths of Alashan call Ning-h’ia, _Yargai_. In M. Polo’s time
this department was famous for the cultivation of the Safflower
(_carthamus tinctorius_). [_Siu t’ung kien_, A.D. 1292.]” Mr.
Rockhill (cf. his _Diary of a Journey_) writes to me that Ning-hsia
is still called _Irge Khotun_ by Mongols at the present day. M.
Bonin (_J. As._, 1900. I. 585) mentions the same fact.

Palladius (19) adds: “_Erigaia_ is not to be confounded with
_Urahai_, often mentioned in the history of Chingis Khan’s wars
with the Tangut kingdom. Urahai was a fortress in a pass of the
same name in the Alashan Mountains. Chingis Khan spent five months
there (an. 1208), during which he invaded and plundered the country
in the neighbourhood. [_Si hia shu shi._] The Alashan Mountains
form a semicircle 500 _li_ in extent, and have over forty narrow
passes leading to the department of Ning-hia; the broadest and most
practicable of these is now called Ch’i-mu-K’ow; it is not more
than 80 feet broad. [_Ning hia fu chi._] It may be that the Urahai
fortress existed near this pass.”

“From Liang-chow fu, M. Polo follows a special route, leaving the
modern postal route on his right; the road he took has, since the
time of the Emperor K’ang-hi, been called the courier’s route.”
(_Palladius_, 18.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—_Calachan_, the chief town of Egrigaia, is mentioned,
according to Klaproth, by Rashiduddin, among the cities of Tangut,
as KALAJÁN. The name and approximate position suggest, as just
noticed, identity with Alashan, the modern capital of which, called
by Prjevalsky Dyn-yuan-yin, stands some distance west of the
Hwang-Ho, in about lat. 39°. Polo gives no data for the interval
between this and his next stage.

[The _Dyn-yuan-yin_ of Prjevalsky is the camp of _Ting-yuan-yng_
or Fu-ma-fu of M. Bonin, the residence of the Si-wang (western
prince), of Alashan, an abbreviation of Alade-shan (_shan_,
mountain in Chinese), Alade = Eleuth or Œlöt; the sister of this
prince married a son of Prince Tuan, the chief of the _Boxers_.
(_La Géographie_, 1901. I. 118.) Palladius (_l.c._ 19) says: “Under
the name of Calachan, Polo probably means the summer residence of
the Tangut kings, which was 60 _li_ from Ning-hia, at the foot
of the Alashan Mountains. It was built by the famous Tangut king
Yuen-hao, on a large scale, in the shape of a castle, in which
were high terraces and magnificent buildings. Traces of these
buildings are visible to this day. There are often found coloured
tiles and iron nails 1 foot, and even 2 feet long. The last Tangut
kings made this place their permanent residence, and led there
an indolent and sensual life. The Chinese name of this residence
was Ho-lan shan _Li-Kung_. There is sufficient reason to suppose
that this very residence is named (under the year 1226) in the
Mongol text _Alashai nuntuh_; and in the chronicles of the Tangut
Kingdom, _Halahachar_, otherwise _Halachar_, apparently in the
Tangut language. Thus M. Polo’s Calachan can be identified with the
Halachar of the _Si hia shu shi_, and can be taken to designate the
Alashan residence of the Tangut kings.”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—Among the Buraets and Chinese at Kiakhta snow-white camels,
without albino character, are often seen, and probably in other
parts of Mongolia. (See _Erdmann_, II. 261.) Philostratus tells us
that the King of Taxila furnished white camels to Apollonius. I
doubt if the present King of Taxila, whom Anglo-Indians call the
Commissioner of Ráwal Pindi, could do the like.

_Cammellotti_ appear to have been fine woollen textures, by no
means what are now called camlets, nor were they necessarily of
camel’s wool, for those of Angora goat’s wool were much valued.
M. Douet d’Arcq calls it “a fine stuff of wool approaching to our
Cashmere, and sometimes of silk.” Indeed, as Mr. Marsh points
out, the word is Arabic, and has nothing to do with _Camel_ in
its origin; though it evidently came to be associated therewith.
_Khamlat_ is defined in F. Johnson’s Dict.: “Camelot, silk and
camel’s hair; also all silk or velvet, especially pily and plushy,”
and _Khaml_ is “pile or plush.” _Camelin_ was a different and
inferior material. There was till recently a considerable import
of different kinds of woollen goods from this part of China into
Ladakh, Kashmir, and the northern Panjáb. [Leaving Ning-hsia, Mr.
Rockhill writes (_Diary_, 1892, 44): “We passed on the road a cart
with Jardine and Matheson’s flag, coming probably from Chung-Wei
Hsien, where camel’s wool is sold in considerable quantities to
foreigners. This trade has fallen off very much in the last three
or four years on account of the Chinese middlemen rolling the
wool in the dirt so as to add to its weight, and practising other
tricks on buyers.”—H. C.] Among the names of these were _Sling_,
_Shirum_, _Gurun_, and _Khoza_, said to be the names of the towns
in China where the goods were made. We have supposed _Sling_ to be
Sining (note 2, ch. lvii.), but I can make nothing of the others.
Cunningham also mentions “camlets of camel’s hair,” under the name
of _Suḳlát_, among imports from the same quarter. The term _Suḳlát_
is, however, applied in the _Panjáb_ trade returns to _broadcloth_.
Does not this point to the real nature of the _siclatoun_ of the
Middle Ages? It is, indeed, often spoken of as used for banners,
which implies that it was not a _heavy_ woollen:

“There was mony gonfanoun
Of gold, sendel, and siclatoun.”
(_King Alisaundre_, in Weber, I. 85.)

But it was also a material for ladies’ robes, for quilts,
leggings, housings, pavilions. Franc. Michel does not decide what
it was, only that it was generally _red_ and wrought with gold.
Dozy renders it “silk stuff brocaded with gold”; but this seems
conjectural. Dr. Rock says it was a thin glossy silken stuff, often
with a woof of gold thread, and seems to derive it from the Arabic
ṣaḳl, “polishing” (a sword), which is improbable. Perhaps the name
is connected with _Ṣiḳiliyat_, “Sicily.”

(_Marsh on Wedgwood_, and _on Webster_ in _N. Y. Nation_, 1867;
_Douet D’Arcq_, p. 355; _Punjab Trade Rep._, App. ccxix.–xx.;
_Ladak_, 242; _Fr.-Michel Rech._ I. 221 _seqq._; _Dozy_, _Dict. des
Vêtements_, etc.; _Dr. Rock’s Kens. Catal._ xxxix.–xl.)

CHAPTER LIX.

CONCERNING THE PROVINCE OF TENDUC, AND THE DESCENDANTS
OF PRESTER JOHN.

Tenduc is a province which lies towards the east, and contains numerous
towns and villages; among which is the chief city, also called TENDUC.
The king of the province is of the lineage of Prester John, George by
name, and he holds the land under the Great Kaan; not that he holds
anything like the whole of what Prester John possessed.{1} It is a
custom, I may tell you, that these kings of the lineage of Prester
John always obtain to wife either daughters of the Great Kaan or other
princesses of his family.{2}

In this province is found the stone from which Azure is made. It
is obtained from a kind of vein in the earth, and is of very fine
quality.{3} There is also a great manufacture of fine camlets of
different colours from camel’s hair. The people get their living by
their cattle and tillage, as well as by trade and handicraft.

The rule of the province is in the hands of the Christians, as I have
told you; but there are also plenty of Idolaters and worshippers of
Mahommet. And there is also here a class of people called _Argons_,
which is as much as to say in French _Guasmul_, or, in other words,
sprung from two different races: to wit, of the race of the Idolaters
of Tenduc and of that of the worshippers of Mahommet. They are
handsomer men than the other natives of the country, and having more
ability, they come to have authority; and they are also capital
merchants.{4}

You must know that it was in this same capital city of Tenduc that
Prester John had the seat of his government when he ruled over the
Tartars, and his heirs still abide there; for, as I have told you, this
King George is of his line, in fact, he is the sixth in descent from
Prester John.

Here also is what _we_ call the country of GOG and MAGOG; _they_,
however, call it UNG and MUNGUL, after the names of two races of people
that existed in that Province before the migration of the Tartars.
_Ung_ was the title of the people of the country, and _Mungul_ a name
sometimes applied to the Tartars.{5}

And when you have ridden seven days eastward through this province
you get near the provinces of Cathay. You find throughout those seven
days’ journey plenty of towns and villages, the inhabitants of which
are Mahommetans, but with a mixture also of Idolaters and Nestorian
Christians. They get their living by trade and manufactures; weaving
those fine cloths of gold which are called _Nasich_ and _Naques_,
besides silk stuffs of many other kinds. For just as we have cloths of
wool in our country, manufactured in a great variety of kinds, so in
those regions they have stuffs of silk and gold in like variety.{6}

All this region is subject to the Great Kaan. There is a city you come
to called SINDACHU, where they carry on a great many crafts such as
provide for the equipment of the Emperor’s troops. In a mountain of the
province there is a very good silver mine, from which much silver is
got: the place is called YDIFU. The country is well stocked with game,
both beast and bird.{7}

Now we will quit that province and go three days’ journey forward.

NOTE 1.—Marco’s own errors led commentators much astray about
Tanduc or Tenduc, till Klaproth put the matter in its true light.

Our traveller says that Tenduc had been the seat of Aung Khan’s
sovereignty; he has already said that it had been the scene of
his final defeat, and he tells us that it was still the residence
of his descendants in their reduced state. To the last piece of
information he can speak as a witness, and he is corroborated by
other evidence; but the second statement we have seen to be almost
certainly erroneous; about the first we cannot speak positively.

Klaproth pointed out the true position of Tenduc in the vicinity
of the great northern bend of the Hwang-Ho, quoting Chinese
authorities to show that _Thianté_ or _Thianté-Kiun_ was the name
of a district or group of towns to the north of that bend, a name
which he supposes to be the original of Polo’s _Tenduc_. The
general position entirely agrees with Marco’s indications; it lies
on his way eastward from Tangut towards Chagannor, and Shangtu (see
ch. lx., lxi.), whilst in a later passage (Bk. II. ch. lxiv.), he
speaks of the Caramoran or Hwang-Ho in its lower course, as “coming
from the lands of Prester John.”

M. Pauthier finds severe fault with Klaproth’s identification of
the _name_ Tenduc with the Thianté of the Chinese, belonging to a
city which had been destroyed 300 years before, whilst he himself
will have that name to be a corruption of _Tathung_. The latter is
still the name of a city and Fu of northern Shansi, but in Mongol
time its circle of administration extended beyond the Chinese
wall, and embraced territory on the left of the Hwang-Ho, being
in fact the first _Lu_, or circle, entered on leaving Tangut, and
therefore, Pauthier urges, the “Kingdom of Tanduc” of our text.

I find it hard to believe that Marco could get no nearer TATHUNG
than in the form of _Tanduc_ or _Tenduc_. The origin of the last
may have been some Mongol name, not recovered. But it is at least
conceivable that a name based on the old _Thianté-Kiun_ might
have been retained among the Tartars, from whom, and not from the
Chinese, Polo took his nomenclature. Thianté had been, according to
Pauthier’s own quotations, the _military post of Tathung_; Klaproth
cites a Chinese author of the Mongol era, who describes the
Hwang-Ho as passing through _the territory of the ancient Chinese
city of Thianté_; and Pauthier’s own quotation from the Modern
Imperial Geography seems to imply that a place in that territory
was recently known as Fung-chau-_Thianté-Kiun_.

In the absence of preciser indications, it is reasonable to suppose
that the Plain of Tenduc, with its numerous towns and villages, was
the extensive and well-cultivated plain which stretches from the
Hwang-Ho, past the city of Kuku-Khotan, or “Blue Town.” This tract
abounds in the remains of cities attributed to the Mongol era.
And it is not improbable that the city of Tenduc was Kuku-Khotan
itself, now called by the Chinese Kwei-hwa Ch’eng, but which was
known to them in the Middle Ages as _Tsing-chau_, and to which we
find the Kin Emperor of Northern China sending an envoy in 1210
to demand tribute from Chinghiz. The city is still an important
mart and a centre of Lamaitic Buddhism, being the residence of a
_Khutukhtu_, or personage combining the characters of cardinal and
voluntarily re-incarnate saint, as well as the site of five great
convents and fifteen smaller ones. Gerbillon notes that Kuku Khotan
had been a place of great trade and population during the Mongol
Dynasty.

[The following evidence shows, I think, that we must look for the
city of Tenduc to _Tou Ch’eng_ or _Toto Ch’eng_, called _Togto_ or
_Tokto_ by the Mongols. Mr. Rockhill (_Diary_, 18) passed through
this place, and 5 _li_ south of it, reached on the Yellow River,
Ho-k’ou (in Chinese) or Dugus or Dugei (in Mongol). Gerbillon
speaks of Toto in his sixth voyage in Tartary. (_Du Halde_,
IV. 345.) Mr. Rockhill adds that he cannot but think that Yule
overlooked the existence of Togto when he identified Kwei-hwa
Ch’eng with Tenduc. Tou Ch’eng is two days’ march west of Kwei-hwa
Ch’eng, “On the loess hill behind this place are the ruins of
a large camp, Orch’eng, in all likelihood the site of the old
town” (_l.c._ 18). M. Bonin (_J. As._ XV. 1900, 589) shares Mr.
Rockhill’s opinion. From Kwei-hwa Ch’eng, M. Bonin went by the
valley of the Hei Shui River to the Hwang Ho; at the junction of
the two rivers stands the village of Ho-k’au (Ho-k’ou) south of the
small town To Ch’eng, surmounted by the ruins of the old square
Mongol stronghold of Tokto, the walls of which are still in a good
state of preservation.—(_La Géographie_, I. 1901, p. 116.)

On the other hand, it is but fair to state that Palladius (21)
says: “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 aïmak 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. From very remote times, it appears to
have been a settlement of nomadic tribes. During the last 1000
years it has been alternately possessed by the Mongols and Chinese.
About A.D. 1573, Emperor Wan-Li reclaimed it, enclosed a space
within walls, and called it Kwei-hwa Ch’êng.”

Potanin left Peking on the 13th May, 1884, for Kuku-khoto (or
Kwei-hwa-Ch’eng), passing over the triple chain of mountains
dividing the Plain of Peking from that on which Kuku-khoto is
situate. The southernmost of these three ridges bears the Chinese
name of Wu-tai-shan, “the mountain of five sacrificial altars,”
after the group of five peaks, the highest of which is 10,000 feet
above the sea, a height not exceeded by any mountain in Northern
China. At its southern foot lies a valley remarkable for its
Buddhist monasteries and shrines, one of which, “Shing-tung-tze,”
is entirely made of brass, whence its name.

“Kuku-Khoto is the depôt for the Mongolian trade with China. It
contains two hundred tea-shops, five theatres, fifteen temples, and
six Mongol monasteries. Among its sights are the Buddhist convent
of Utassa, with its five pinnacles and bas-reliefs, the convent of
Fing-sung-si, and a temple containing a statue erected in honour of
the Chinese general, Pai-jin-jung, who avenged an insult offered
to the Emperor of China.” (_Proc. R. G. S._ IX. 1887, p. 233.)
—H. C.]

A passage in Rashiduddin does seem to intimate that the Kerait,
the tribe of Aung Khan, _alias_ Prester John, did occupy territory
close to the borders of Cathay or Northern China; but neither from
Chinese nor from other Oriental sources has any illustration yet
been produced of the existence of Aung Khan’s descendants as rulers
in this territory under the Mongol emperors. There is, however,
very positive evidence to that effect supplied by other European
travellers, to whom the fables prevalent in the West had made the
supposed traces of Prester John a subject of strong interest.

Thus John of Monte Corvino, afterwards Archbishop of Cambaluc or
Peking, in his letter of January, 1305, from that city, speaks of
Polo’s King George in these terms: “A certain king of this part of
the world, by name George, belonging to the sect of the Nestorian
Christians, and of the illustrious lineage of that great king who
was called Prester John of India, in the first year of my arrival
here [_circa_ 1295–1296] attached himself to me, and, after he had
been converted by me to the verity of the Catholic faith, took the
Lesser Orders, and when I celebrated mass used to attend me wearing
his royal robes. Certain others of the Nestorians on this account
accused him of apostacy, but he brought over a great part of his
people with him to the true Catholic faith, and built a church of
royal magnificence in honour of our God, of the Holy Trinity, and
of our Lord, the Pope, giving it the name of _the Roman Church_.
This King George, six years ago, departed to the Lord, a true
Christian, leaving as his heir a son scarcely out of the cradle,
and who is now nine years old. And after King George’s death,
his brothers, perfidious followers of the errors of Nestorius,
perverted again all those whom he had brought over to the Church,
and carried them back to their original schismatical creed. And
being all alone, and not able to leave His Majesty the Cham, I
could not go to visit the church above-mentioned, which is twenty
days’ journey distant.... I had been in treaty with the late King
George, if he had lived, to translate the whole Latin ritual, that
it might be sung throughout the extent of his territory; and whilst
he was alive I used to celebrate mass in his church according to
the Latin rite.” The distance mentioned, twenty days’ journey from
Peking, suits quite well with the position assigned to Tenduc, and
no doubt the Roman Church was in the city to which Polo gives that
name.

Friar Odoric, travelling from Peking towards Shensi, about
1326–1327, also visits the country of Prester John, and gives to
its chief city the name of _Tozan_, in which perhaps we may trace
_Tathung_. He speaks as if the family still existed in authority.

King George appears again in Marco’s own book (Bk. IV. ch. ii.) as
one of Kúblái’s generals against Kaidu, in a battle fought near
Karakorúm. (_Journ. As._ IX. 299 _seqq._; _D’Ohsson_, I. 123;
_Huc’s Tartary_, etc. I. 55 _seqq._; _Koeppen_, II. 381; _Erdmann’s
Temudschin_; _Gerbillon_ in _Astley_, IV. 670; _Cathay_, pp. 146
and 199 _seqq._)

NOTE 2.—Such a compact is related to have existed reciprocally
between the family of Chinghiz and that of the chief of the
Ḳunguráts; but I have not found it alleged of the Kerait family
except by Friar Odoric. We find, however, many _princesses_ of this
family married into that of Chinghiz. Thus three nieces of Aung
Khan became wives respectively of Chinghiz himself and of his sons
Juji and Tului; she who was the wife of the latter, Serḳuḳteni
Bigi, being the mother of Mangú, Hulaku, and Kúblái. Duḳuz Khatun,
the Christian wife of Hulaku, was a grand-daughter of Aung Khan.

The name _George_, of Prester John’s representative, may have been
actually Jirjis, Yurji, or some such Oriental form of Georgius. But
it is possible that the title was really _Gurgán_, “Son-in-Law,” a
title of honour conferred on those who married into the imperial
blood, and that this title may have led to the statements of Marco
and Odoric about the nuptial privileges of the family. Gurgán in
this sense was one of the titles borne by Timur.[1]

[The following note by the Archimandrite Palladius (_Eluc._ 21–23)
throws a great light on the relations between the families of
Chinghiz Khan and of Prester John.

“T’ien-te Kiun was bounded on the north by the _Yn-shan_ Mountains,
in and beyond which was settled the Sha-t’o Tu-K’iu tribe, _i.e._
Tu-K’iu of the sandy desert. The K’itans, when they conquered
the northern borders of China, brought also under their rule the
dispersed family of these Tu-K’iu. With the accession of the Kin,
a Wang Ku [Ongot] family made its appearance as the ruling family
of those tribes; it issued from those Sha-t’o Tu-K’iu, who once
reigned in the north of China as the How T’ang Dynasty (923–936
A.D.). It split into two branches, the Wang-Ku of the Yn-shan,
and the Wang-Ku of the Lin-t’ao (west of Kan-su). The Kin removed
the latter branch to Liao-tung (in Manchuria). The Yn-shan Wang-Ku
guarded the northern borders of China belonging to the Kin, and
watched their herds. When the Kin, as a protection against the
inroads of the tribes of the desert, erected a rampart, or new
wall, from the boundary of the Tángut Kingdom down to Manchuria,
they intrusted the defence of the principal places of the Yn-shan
portion of the wall to the Wang-Ku, and transferred there also
the Liao-tung Wang-Ku. At the time Chingiz Khan became powerful,
the chief of the Wang-Ku of the Yn-shan was Alahush; and at the
head of the Liao-tung Wang-Ku stood _Pa-sao-ma-ie-li_. Alahush
proved a traitor to the Kin, and passed over to Chinghiz Khan; for
this he was murdered by the malcontents of his family, perhaps by
Pa-sao-ma-ie-li, who remained true to the Kin. Later on, Chingiz
Khan married one of his daughters to the son of Alahush, by name
Po-yao-ho, who, however, had no children by her. He had three sons
by a concubine, the eldest of whom, Kiun-pu-hwa, was married to
Kuyuk Khan’s daughter. Kiun-pu-hwa’s son, Ko-li-ki-sze, had two
wives, both of imperial blood. During a campaign against Haidu, he
was made prisoner in 1298, and murdered. His title and dignities
passed over in A.D. 1310 to his son _Chuan_. Nothing is known of
Alahush’s later descendants; they probably became entirely Chinese,
like their relatives of the Liao-tung branch.

“The Wang-Ku princes were thus _de jure_ the sons-in-law of the
Mongol Khans, and they had, moreover, the hereditary title of
Kao-t’ang princes (Kao-t’ang wang); it is very possible that they
had their residence in ancient T’ien-te Kiun (although no mention
is made of it in history), just as at present the Tumot princes
reside in Kuku-hoton.

“The consonance of the names of Wang-Khan and Wang-Ku (Ung-Khan and
Ongu) led to the confusion regarding the tribes and persons, which
at Marco Polo’s time seems to have been general among the Europeans
in China; Marco Polo and Johannes de Monte Corvino transfer the
title of Prester John from Wang-Khan, already perished at that
time, to the distinguished family of Wang-Ku. Their Georgius is
undoubtedly Ko-li-ki-sze, Alahush’s great-grandson. That his name
is a Christian one is confirmed by other testimonies; thus in the
Asu (Azes) regiment of the Khan’s guards was Ko-li-ki-sze, _alias_
Kow-r-ki (†1311), and his son Ti-mi-ti-r. There is no doubt that
one of them was Georgius, and the other Demetrius. Further, in
the description of _Chin-Kiang_ in the time of the Yuen, mention
is made of Ko-li-ki-sze Ye-li-ko-wen, _i.e._ Ko-li-ki-sze, the
Christian, and of his son Lu-ho (Luke).

“Ko-li-ki-sze of Wang-ku is much praised in history for his valour
and his love for Confucian doctrine; he had in consequence of a
special favour of the Khan two Mongol princesses for wives at the
same time (which is rather difficult to conciliate with his being
a Christian). The time of his death is correctly indicated in a
letter of Joannes de M. Corvino of the year 1305: _ante sex annos
migravit ad Dominum_. He left a young son _Chu-an_, who probably
is the Joannes of the letter of Ioannes (Giovani) de M. Corvino,
so called _propter nomen meum_, says the missionary. In another
Wang-ku branch, Si-li-ki-sze reminds one also of the Christian name
_Sergius_.”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—“The _Lapis Armenus_, or Azure, ... is produced in the
district of Tayton-fu (_i.e._ _Tathung_), belonging to Shansi.” (_Du
Halde_ in _Astley_, IV. 309; see also _Martini_, p. 36.)

NOTE 4.—This is a highly interesting passage, but difficult, from
being corrupt in the G. Text, and over-curt in Pauthier’s MSS. In
the former it runs as follows: “_Hil hi a une jenerasion de jens
que sunt appellés_ Argon, _qe vaut à dire en françois_ Guasmul,
_ce est à dire qu’il sunt né del deus generasions de la lengnée
des celz_ Argon Tenduc et des celz reduc et des celz que aorent
Maomet. _Il sunt biaus homes plus que le autre dou païs et plus
sajes et plus mercaant_.” Pauthier’s text runs thus: “_Il ont
une generation de gens, ces Crestiens qui ont la Seigneurie, qui
s’appellent_ Argon, _qui vaut a dire_ Gasmul; _et sont plus beaux
hommes que les autres mescreans et plus sages. Et pour ce ont il la
seigneurie et sont bons marchans._” And Ramusio: “_Vi è anche una
sorte di gente che si chiamano_ Argon, _per che sono nati di due
generazioni_, cioè da quella di Tenduc che adorano gl’idoli, e da
quella che osservano la legge di Macometto. _E questi sono i piu
belli uomini che si trovino in quel paese e più savi, e più accorti
nella mercanzia._”

In the first quotation the definition of the _Argon_ as sprung _de
la lengnée, etc._, is not intelligible as it stands, but seems to
be a corruption of the same definition that has been rendered by
Ramusio, viz. that the Argon were half-castes between the race of
the Tenduc Buddhists and that of the Mahomedan settlers. These two
texts do not assert that the Argon were Christians. Pauthier’s text
at first sight seems to assert this, and to identify them with the
Christian rulers of the province. But I doubt if it means more
than that the Christian rulers _have under them_ a people called
Argon, etc. The passage has been read with a bias, owing to an
erroneous interpretation of the word _Argon_ in the teeth of Polo’s
explanation of it.

Klaproth, I believe, first suggested that _Argon_ represents the
term _Arkhaiún_, which is found repeatedly applied to Oriental
Christians, or their clergy, in the histories of the Mongol era.[2]
No quite satisfactory explanation has been given of the origin of
that term. It is barely possible that it may be connected with that
which Polo uses here; but he tells us as plainly as possible that
he means by the term, not a Christian, but a _half-breed_.

And in this sense the word is still extant in Tibet, probably also
in Eastern Turkestan, precisely in Marco’s form, ARGON. It is
applied in Ladak, as General Cunningham tells us, specifically to
the mixt race produced by the marriages of Kashmirian immigrants
with Bōt (Tibetan) women. And it was apparently to an analogous
cross between Caucasians and Turanians that the term was applied
in Tenduc. Moorcroft also speaks of this class in Ladak, calling
them _Argands_. Mr. Shaw styles them “a set of ruffians called
_Argoons_, half-bred between Toorkistan fathers and Ladak
mothers.... They possess all the evil qualities of both races,
without any of their virtues.” And the author of the Dabistan,
speaking of the Tibetan Lamas, says: “Their king, if his mother be
not of royal blood, is by them called _Arghún_, and not considered
their true king.” [See p. 291, my reference to _Wellby’s Tibet_.
—H. C.] Cunningham says the word is probably Turki, ارغون, _Arghún_,
“Fair,” “not _white_,” as he writes to me, “but _ruddy_ or _pink_,
and therefore ‘fair.’ _Arghún_ is both Turki and Mogholi, and is
applied to all fair children, both male and female, as _Arghun
Beg, Arghuna Khatun_,” etc.[3] We find an _Arghún_ tribe named in
Timur’s Institutes, which probably derived its descent from such
half-breeds. And though the Arghún Dynasty of Kandahar and Sind
claimed their descent and name from Arghún Khan of Persia, this may
have had no other foundation.

There are some curious analogies between these Argons of whom
Marco speaks and those Mahomedans of Northern China and Chinese
Turkestan lately revolted against Chinese authority, who are called
_Tungăni_, or as the Russians write it _Dungen_, a word signifying,
according to Professor Vámbéry, in Turki, “a convert.”[4] These
Tungani are said by one account to trace their origin to a large
body of Uighúrs, who were transferred _to the vicinity of the Great
Wall_ during the rule of the Thang Dynasty (7th to 10th century).
Another tradition derives their origin from Samarkand. And it
is remarkable that Rashiduddin speaks of a town to the west or
north-west of Peking, “most of the inhabitants of which are natives
of Samarkand, and have planted a number of gardens in the Samarkand
style.”[5] The former tradition goes on to say that marriages were
encouraged between the Western settlers and the Chinese women.
In after days these people followed the example of their kindred
in becoming Mahomedans, but they still retained the practice of
marrying Chinese wives, though bringing up their children in Islam.
The Tungani are stated to be known in Central Asia for their
commercial integrity; and they were generally selected by the
Chinese for police functionaries. They are passionate and ready to
use the knife; but are distinguished from both Manchus and Chinese
by their strength of body and intelligent countenances. Their
special feature is their predilection for mercantile speculations.

Looking to the many common features of the two accounts—the origin
as a half-breed between Mahomedans of Western extraction and
Northern Chinese, the position in the vicinity of the Great Wall,
the superior physique, intelligence, and special capacity for
trade, it seems highly probable that the Tungani of our day are the
descendants of Marco’s Argons. Otherwise we may at least point to
these analogies as a notable instance of like results produced by
like circumstances on the same scene; in fact, of history repeating
itself. (See _The Dungens_, by _Mr. H. K. Heins_, in the _Russian
Military Journal_ for August, 1866, and _Western China_, in the
_Ed. Review_ for April, 1868;[6] _Cathay_, p. 261.)

[Palladius (pp. 23–24) says that “it is impossible to admit that
Polo had meant to designate by this name the Christians, who
were called by the Mongols _Erkeun_ [_Ye li ke un_]. He was well
acquainted with the Christians in China, and of course could not
ignore the name under which they were generally known to such a
degree as to see in it a designation of a cross-race of Mahommetans
and heathens.” From the _Yuen ch’ao pi shi_ and the _Yuen shi_,
Palladius gives some examples which refer to Mahommedans.

Professor Devéria (_Notes d’Épig._ 49) says that the word Ἄρχων
was used by the Mongol Government as a designation for the members
of the Christian clergy at large; the word is used between 1252
and 1315 to speak of _Christian_ priests by the historians of
the Yuen Dynasty; it is not used before nor is it to be found in
the Si-ngan-fu inscription (_l.c._ 82). Mr. E. H. Parker (_China
Review_, xxiv. p. 157) supplies a few omissions in Devéria’s paper;
we note among others: “Ninth moon of 1329. Buddhist services
ordered to be held by the Uighúr priests, and by the Christians
[_Ye li ke un_].”

Captain Wellby writes (_Unknown Tibet_, p. 32): “We impressed into
our service six other muleteers, four of them being Argoons, who
are really half-castes, arising from the merchants of Turkestan
making short marriages with the Ladakhi women.”—H. C.]

Our author gives the odd word _Guasmul_ as the French equivalent
of Argon. M. Pauthier has first, of Polo’s editors, given the true
explanation from Ducange. The word appears to have been in use in
the Levant among the Franks as a name for the half-breeds sprung
from their own unions with Greek women. It occurs three times in
the history of George Pachymeres. Thus he says (_Mich. Pal._ III.
9), that the Emperor Michael “depended upon the _Gasmuls_, or mixt
breeds (συμμíκτοι), which is the sense of this word of the Italian
tongue, for these were born of Greeks and Italians, and sent them
to man his ships; for the race in question inherited at once the
military wariness and quick wit of the Greeks, and the dash and
pertinacity of the Latins.” Again (IV. 26) he speaks of these
“Gasmuls, whom a Greek would call διγενεῖς, men sprung from Greek
mothers and Italian fathers.” Nicephorus Gregoras also relates how
Michael Palaeologus, to oppose the projects of Baldwin for the
recovery of his fortunes, manned 60 galleys, chiefly with the tribe
of Gasmuls (γένος τοῦ Γασμουλικοῦ), to whom he assigns the same
characteristics as Pachymeres. (IV. v. 5, also VI. iii. 3, and XIV.
x. 11.) One MS. of Nicetas Choniates also, in his annals of Manuel
Comnenus (see Paris ed. p. 425), speaks of “the light troops whom
we call _Basmuls_.” Thus it would seem that, as in the analogous
case of the _Turcopuli_, sprung from Turk fathers and Greek
mothers, their name had come to be applied technically to a class
of troops. According to Buchon, the laws of the Venetians in Candia
mention, as different races in that island, the _Vasmulo_, Latino,
Blaco, and Griego.

Ducange, in one of his notes on Joinville, says: “During the time
that the French possessed Constantinople, they gave the name of
_Gas-moules_ to those who were born of French fathers and Greek
mothers; or more probably _Gaste-moules_, by way of derision, as
if such children by those irregular marriages ... had in some sort
debased the wombs of their mothers!” I have little doubt (_pace
tanti viri_) that the word is in a Gallicized form the same with
the surviving Italian _Guazzabúglio_, a hotch-potch, or mish-mash.
In Davanzati’s _Tacitus_, the words “Colluviem _illam nationum_”
(_Annal._ II. 55) are rendered “_quello_ guazzabuglio _di
nazioni_,” in which case we come very close to the meaning assigned
to _Guasmul_. The Italians are somewhat behind in matters of
etymology, and I can get no light from them on the history of this
word. (See _Buchon_, _Chroniques Etrangères_, p. xv.; _Ducange_,
_Gloss. Graecitatis_, and his note on _Joinville_, in _Bohn’s
Chron. of the Crusades_, 466.)

NOTE 5.—It has often been cast in Marco’s teeth that he makes
no mention of the Great Wall of China, and that is true; whilst
the apologies made for the omission have always seemed to me
unsatisfactory. [I find in Sir G. Staunton’s account of Macartney’s
Embassy (II. p. 185) this most amusing explanation of the reason
why Marco Polo did not mention the wall: “A copy of Marco Polo’s
route to China, taken from the Doge’s Library at Venice, is
sufficient to decide this question. By this route it appears that,
in fact, that traveller did not pass through Tartary to Pekin, but
that after having followed the usual track of the caravans, as far
to the eastward from Europe as Samarcand and Cashgar, he bent his
course to the south-east across the River Ganges to Bengal (!),
and, keeping to the southward of the Thibet mountains, reached the
Chinese province of Shensee, and through the adjoining province
of Shansee to the capital, without interfering with the line of
the Great Wall.”—H. C.] We shall see presently that the Great Wall
is spoken of by Marco’s contemporaries Rashiduddin and Abulfeda.
Yet I think, if we read “between the lines,” we shall see reason
to believe that the Wall _was_ in Polo’s mind at this point of
the dictation, whatever may have been his motive for withholding
distincter notice of it.[7] I cannot conceive why he should say:
“Here is what we call the country of Gog and Magog,” except as
intimating “Here we are _beside the_ GREAT WALL known as the
Rampart of Gog and Magog,” and being there he tries to find a
reason why those names should have been applied to it. Why they
were really applied to it we have already seen. (_Supra_, ch. iv.
note 3.) Abulfeda says: “The Ocean turns northward along the east
of China, and then expands in the same direction till it passes
China, and comes opposite to the Rampart of Yájúj and Májúj;”
whilst the same geographer’s definition of the boundaries of China
exhibits that country as bounded on the west by the Indo-Chinese
wildernesses; on the south, by the seas; on the east, by the
Eastern Ocean; on the north, by the _land of Yájúj and Májúj_, and
other countries unknown. Ibn Batuta, with less accurate geography
in his head than Abulfeda, maugre his travels, asks about the
Rampart of Gog and Magog (_Sadd Yájúj wa Májúj_) when he is at
Sin Kalán, _i.e._ Canton, and, as might be expected, gets little
satisfaction.

[Illustration: The Rampart of Gog and Magog.]

Apart from this interesting point Marsden seems to be right in the
general bearing of his explanation of the passage, and I conceive
that the two classes of people whom Marco tries to identify with
Gog and Magog do substantially represent the two genera or species,
TURKS and MONGOLS, or, according to another nomenclature used by
Rashiduddin, the _White_ and _Black_ Tartars. To the latter class
belonged Chinghiz and his MONGOLS proper, with a number of other
tribes detailed by Rashiduddin, and these I take to be in a general
way the MUNGUL of our text. The _Ung_, on the other hand, are the
UNG-_ḳut_, the latter form being presumably only the Mongol plural
of UNG. The Ung-ḳut were a Turk tribe who were vassals of the Kin
Emperors of Cathay, and were intrusted with the defence of the Wall
of China, or an important portion of it, which was called by the
Mongols _Ungu_, a name which some connect with that of the tribe.
[See note pp. 288–9.] Erdmann indeed asserts that the wall by which
the Ung-ḳut dwelt was not the Great Wall, but some other. There are
traces of other great ramparts in the steppes north of the present
wall. But Erdmann’s arguments seem to me weak in the extreme.

[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 112) writes: “The earliest mention I
have found of the name _Mongol_ in Oriental works occurs in the
Chinese annals of the After T’ang period (A.D. 923–934), where it
occurs in the form _Meng-ku_. In the annals of the Liao Dynasty
(A.D. 916–1125) it is found under the form _Meng-ku-li_. The first
occurrence of the name in the _Tung chien kang mu_ is, however, in
the 6th year Shao-hsing of Kao-tsung of the Sung (A.D. 1136). It
is just possible that we may trace the word back a little earlier
than the After T’ang period, and that the _Meng-wa_ (or _ngo_, as
this character may have been pronounced at the time), a branch of
the Shih-wei, a Tungusic or Kitan people living around Lake Keule,
to the east of the Baikal, and along the Kerulun, which empties
into it, during the 7th and subsequent centuries, and referred to
in the _T’ang shu_ (Bk. 219), is the same as the later Meng-ku.
Though I have been unable to find, as stated by Howorth (_History_,
i. pt. I. 28), that the name _Meng-ku_ occurs in the T’ang shu,
his conclusion that the northern Shih-wei of that time constituted
the Mongol nation proper is very likely correct.... I. J. Schmidt
(_Sanang Setzen_, 380) derives the name _Mongol_ from _mong_,
meaning ‘brave, daring, bold,’ while Rashid-eddin says it means
‘simple, weak’ (_d’Ohsson_, i. 22). The Chinese characters used to
transcribe the name mean ‘dull, stupid,’ and ‘old, ancient,’ but
they are used purely phonetically.... The Mongols of the present
day are commonly called by the Chinese _Ta-tzŭ_, but this name
is resented by the Mongols as opprobrious, though it is but an
abbreviated form of the name _Ta-ta-tzŭ_, in which, according to
Rubruck, they once gloried.”—H. C.]

Vincent of Beauvais has got from some of his authorities a
conception of the distinction of the Tartars into two races, to
which, however, he assigns no names: “_Sunt autem duo genera
Tartarorum, diversa quidem habentia idiomata, sed unicam legem
ac ritum, sicut Franci et Theutonici_.” But the result of _his_
effort to find a realisation of Gog and Magog is that he makes
_Guyuk Kaan_ into Gog, and _Mangu Kaan_ into Magog. Even the
intelligent Friar Ricold says of the Tartars: “They say themselves
that they are descended from Gog and Magog: and on this account
they are called _Mogoli_, as if from a corruption of _Magogoli_.”
(_Abulfeda_ in _Büsching_, IV. 140, 274–275; _I. B._ IV. 274;
_Golden Horde_, 34, 68; _Erdmann_, 241–242, 257–258; _Timk._ I.
259, 263, 268; _Vinc. Bellov. Spec. Hist._ XXIX. 73, XXXI. 32–34;
_Pereg. Quat._ 118; _Not. et Ext._ II. 536.)

NOTE 6.—The towns and villages were probably those immediately
north of the Great Wall, between 112° and 115° East longitude,
of which many remains exist, ascribed to the time of the Yuen or
Mongol Dynasty. This tract, between the Great Wall and the volcanic
plateau of Mongolia, is extensively colonised by Chinese, and has
resumed the flourishing aspect that Polo describes. It is known now
as the _Ku-wei_, or extramural region.

[After Kalgan, Captain Younghusband, on the 12th April, 1886,
“passed through the [outer] Great Wall ... entering what Marco Polo
calls the land of Gog and Magog. For the next two days I passed
through a hilly country inhabited by Chinese, though it really
belongs to Mongolia; but on the 14th I emerged on to the real
steppes, which are the characteristic features of Mongolia Proper.”
(_Proc. R. G. S._ X., 1888, p. 490.)—H. C.]

Of the cloths called _nakh_ and _nasij_ we have spoken before
(_supra_ ch. vi. note 4). These stuffs, or some such as these, were,
I believe, what the mediæval writers called _Tartary cloth_, not
because they were made in Tartary, but because they were brought
from China and its borders through the Tartar dominions; as we
find that for like reason they were sometimes called stuffs of
_Russia_. Dante alludes to the supposed skill of Turks and Tartars
in weaving gorgeous stuffs, and Boccaccio, commenting thereon, says
that Tartarian cloths are so skilfully woven that no painter with
his brush could equal them. Maundevile often speaks of cloths of
Tartary (_e.g._ pp. 175, 247). So also Chaucer:

“On every trumpe hanging a broad banere
Of fine _Tartarium_.”

Again, in the French inventory of the _Garde-Meuble_ of 1353 we
find two pieces of _Tartary_, one green and the other red, priced
at 15 crowns each. (_Flower and Leaf_, 211; _Dante, Inf._ XVII.
17, and _Longfellow_, p. 159; _Douet d’Arcq_, p. 328; _Fr.-Michel,
Rech._ I. 315, II. 166 _seqq._)

NOTE 7.—SINDACHU (Sindacui, Suidatui, etc., of the MSS.) is
SIUEN-HWA-FU, called under the Kin Dynasty _Siuen-te-chau_, more
than once besieged and taken by Chinghiz. It is said to have been a
summer residence of the later Mongol Emperors, and fine parks full
of grand trees remain on the western side. It is still a large town
and the capital of a _Fu_, about 25 miles south of the Gate on the
Great Wall at Chang Kia Kau, which the Mongols and Russians call
Kalgan. There is still a manufacture of felt and woollen articles
here.

[Mr. Rockhill writes to me that this place is noted for the
manufacture of buckskins.—H. C.]

_Ydifu_ has not been identified. But Baron Richthofen saw old mines
north-east of Kalgan, which used to yield argentiferous galena; and
Pumpelly heard of silver-mines near Yuchau, in the same department.

[In the _Yuen-shi_ it is “stated that there were gold and silver
mines in the districts of Siuen-te-chow and Yuchow, as well as
in the Kiming shan Mountains. These mines were worked by the
Government itself up to 1323, when they were transferred to private
enterprise. Marco Polo’s _Ydifu_ is probably a copyist’s error, and
stands instead of Yuchow.” (_Palladius_, 24, 25.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Mr. Ney Elias favours me with a curious but tantalising
communication on this subject: “An old man called on me at Kwei-hwa
Ch’eng (Tenduc), who said he was neither Chinaman, Mongol, nor
Mahomedan, and lived on ground a short distance to the north of
the city, especially allotted to his ancestors by the Emperor, and
where there now exist several families of the same origin. He then
mentioned the connection of his family with that of the Emperor,
but in what way I am not clear, and said that he ought to be, or
had been, a prince. Other people coming in, he was interrupted and
went away.... He was not with me more than ten minutes, and the
incident is a specimen of the difficulty in obtaining interesting
information, except by mere chance.... The idea that struck me
was, that he was perhaps a descendant of King George of Tenduc;
for I had your M. P. before me, and had been inquiring as much as
I dared about subjects it suggested.... At Kwei-hwa Ch’eng I was
very closely spied, and my servant was frequently told to warn me
against asking too many questions.”

I should mention that Oppert, in his very interesting monograph,
_Der Presbyter Johannes_, refuses to recognise the Kerait chief at
all in that character, and supposes Polo’s King George to be the
representative of a prince of the Liao (_supra_, p. 205), who, as
we learn from De Mailla’s History, after the defeat of the Kin, in
which he had assisted Chinghiz, settled in Liaotung, and received
from the conqueror the title of King of the Liao. This seems to me
geographically and otherwise quite inadmissible.

[2] The term _Arkaiun_, or _Arkaun_, in this sense, occurs in the
Armenian History of Stephen Orpelian, quoted by St. Martin. The
author of the _Tárikh Jahán Kushai_, cited by D’Ohsson, says
that Christians were called by the Mongols _Arkáún_. When Hulaku
invested Baghdad we are told that he sent a letter to the Judges,
Shaikhs, Doctors and _Arkauns_, promising to spare such as should
act peaceably. And in the subsequent sack we hear that no houses
were spared except those of a few _Arkauns_ and foreigners. In
Rashiduddin’s account of the Council of State at Peking, we are
told that the four _Fanchan_, or Ministers of the Second Class,
were taken from the four nations of Tájiks, Cathayans, Uighúrs, and
_Arkaun_. Sabadin _Arkaun_ was the name of one of the Envoys sent
by Arghun Khan of Persia to the Pope in 1288. Traces of the name
appear also in Chinese documents of the Mongol era, as denoting
_some_ religious body. Some of these have been quoted by Mr. Wylie;
but I have seen no notice taken of a very curious extract given
by Visdelou. This states that Kúblái in 1289 established a Board
of nineteen chief officers to have surveillance of the affairs of
the Religion of the Cross, of the _Marha_, the _Siliepan_, and
the _Yelikhawen_. This Board was raised to a higher rank in 1315:
and at that time 72 minor courts presiding over the religion of
the _Yelikhawen_ existed under its supervision. Here we evidently
have the word _Arkhaiun_ in a Chinese form; and we may hazard
the suggestion that _Marha_, _Siliepan_ and _Yelikhawen_ meant
respectively the Armenian, Syrian, or Jacobite, and Nestorian
Churches. (_St. Martin, Mém._ II. 133, 143, 279; _D’Ohsson_, II.
264; _Ilchan_, I. 150, 152; _Cathay_, 264; _Acad._ VII. 359; Wylie
in _J. As._ V. xix. 406. Suppt. to _D’Herbelot_, 142.)

[3] The word is not in Zenker or Pavet de Courteille.

[4] Mr. Shaw writes _Toongânee_. The first mention of this name that
I know of is in Izzat Ullah’s Journal. (Vide _J. R. A. S._ VII.
310.) The people are there said to have got the name from having
first settled in _Tungan_. Tung-gan is in the same page the name
given to the strong city of T’ung Kwan on the Hwang-ho. (See Bk.
II. ch. xli. note 1.) A variety of etymologies have been given, but
Vámbéry’s seems the most probable.

[5] Probably no man could now say what this means. But the following
note from Mr. Ney Elias is very interesting in its suggestion of
analogy: “In my report to the Geographical Society I have noticed
the peculiar Western appearance of Kwei-hwa-ch’eng, and the little
gardens of creepers and flowers in pots which are displayed round
the porches in the court-yards of the better class of houses, and
which I have seen in no other part of China. My attention was
especially drawn to these by your quotation from Rashiduddin.”

[6] A translation of _Heins’_ was kindly lent me by the author of this
article, the lamented Mr. J. W. S. Wyllie.

[7] I owe the suggestion of this to a remark in _Oppert’s Presbyter
Johannes_, p. 77.

CHAPTER LX.

CONCERNING THE KAAN’S PALACE OF CHAGANNOR.

At the end of those three days you find a city called CHAGAN NOR [which
is as much as to say White Pool], at which there is a great Palace
of the Grand Kaan’s;{1} and he likes much to reside there on account
of the Lakes and Rivers in the neighbourhood, which are the haunt of
swans{2} and of a great variety of other birds. The adjoining plains
too abound with cranes, partridges, pheasants, and other game birds, so
that the Emperor takes all the more delight in staying there, in order
to go a-hawking with his gerfalcons and other falcons, a sport of which
he is very fond.{3}

There are five different kinds of cranes found in those tracts, as I
shall tell you. First, there is one which is very big, and all over
as black as a crow; the second kind again is all white, and is the
biggest of all; its wings are really beautiful, for they are adorned
with round eyes like those of a peacock, but of a resplendent golden
colour, whilst the head is red and black on a white ground. The third
kind is the same as ours. The fourth is a small kind, having at the
ears beautiful long pendent feathers of red and black. The fifth kind
is grey all over and of great size, with a handsome head, red and
black.{4}

Near this city there is a valley in which the Emperor has had several
little houses erected in which he keeps in mew a huge number of
_cators_, which are what we call the Great Partridge. You would be
astonished to see what a quantity there are, with men to take charge
of them. So whenever the Kaan visits the place he is furnished with as
many as he wants.{5}

NOTE 1.—[According to the _Siu t’ung kien_, quoted by Palladius,
the palace in Chagannor was built in 1280.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—“_Ou demeurent_ sesnes.” _Sesnes, Cesnes, Cecini, Cesanae_,
is a mediæval form of _cygnes, cigni_, which seems to have escaped
the dictionary-makers. It occurs in the old Italian version of
_Brunetto Latini’s Tresor_, Bk. V. ch. xxv., as _cecino_; and for
other examples, see _Cathay_, p. 125.

NOTE 3.—The city called by Polo CHAGAN-NOR (meaning in Mongol, as
he says, “White Lake”) is the _Chaghan Balghasun_ mentioned by
Timkowski as an old city of the Mongol era, the ruined rampart of
which he passed about 30 miles north of the Great Wall at Kalgan,
and some 55 miles from Siuen-hwa, adjoining the Imperial pastures.
It stands near a lake still called Chaghan-Nor, and is called by
the Chinese Pe-ching-tzu, or White City, a translation of Chaghan
Balghasun. Dr. Bushell says of one of the lakes (Ichi-Nor), a few
miles east of Chaghan-Nor: “We ... found the water black with
waterfowl, which rose in dense flocks, and filled the air with
discordant noises. _Swans_, geese, and ducks predominated, and
_three different species of cranes_ were distinguished.”

The town appears as _Tchahan Toloho_ in D’Anville. It is also,
I imagine, the _Arulun Tsaghan Balghasun_ which S. Setzen says
Kúblái built about the same time with Shangtu and another city “on
the shady side of the Altai,” by which here he seems to mean the
Khingan range adjoining the Great Wall. (_Timk._ II. 374, 378–379;
_J. R. G. S._ vol. xliii.; _S. Setz._ 115.) I see Ritter has made
the same identification of Chaghan-Nor (II. 141).

NOTE 4.—The following are the best results I can arrive at in the
identification of these five cranes.

1. Radde mentions as a rare crane in South Siberia _Grus monachus_,
called by the Buraits _Kará Togorü_, or “Black Crane.” Atkinson
also speaks of “a beautiful black variety of crane,” probably the
same. The _Grus monachus_ is not, however, jet black, but brownish
rather. (_Radde, Reisen_, Bd. II. p. 318; _Atkinson. Or. and W.
Sib._ 548.)

2. _Grus leucogeranus_ (?) whose chief habitat is Siberia, but
which sometimes comes as far south as the Punjab. It is the largest
of the genus, snowy white, with red face and beak; the ten largest
quills are black, but this barely shows as a narrow black line when
the wings are closed. The resplendent golden eyes on the wings
remain unaccounted for; no naturalist whom I have consulted has any
knowledge of a crane or crane-like bird with such decorations. When
’tis discovered, let it be the _Grus Poli_!

3. _Grus cinerea_.

4. The colour of the pendants varies in the texts. Pauthier’s and
the G. Text have _red and black_; the Lat. S. G. _black_ only, the
Crusca _black and white_, Ramusio _feathers red and blue_ (not
pendants). The _red and black_ may have slipt in from the preceding
description. I incline to believe it to be the Demoiselle,
_Anthropoides Virgo_, which is frequently seen as far north as Lake
Baikal. It has a tuft of pure _white_ from the eye, and a beautiful
black pendent ruff or collar; the general plumage purplish-grey.

5. Certainly the Indian _Sáras_ (vulgo Cyrus), or _Grus antigone_,
which answers in colours and grows to 52 inches high.

NOTE 5.—_Cator_ occurs only in the G. Text and the Crusca, in
the latter with the interpolated explanation “_cioè contornici_”
(_i.e._ quails), whilst the S. G. Latin has _coturnices_ only. I
suspect this impression has assisted to corrupt the text, and
that it was originally written or dictated _ciacor_ or _çacor_,
viz. _chakór_, a term applied in the East to more than one kind
of “Great Partridge.” Its most common application in India is
to the Himalayan red-legged partridge, much resembling on a
somewhat larger scale the bird so called in Europe. It is the
“Francolin” of Moorcroft’s Travels, and the _Caccabis Chukor_
of Gray. According to Cunningham the name is applied in Ladak to
the bird sometimes called the Snow-pheasant, Jerdan’s Snow-cock,
_Tetraogallus himalayensis_ of Gray. And it must be the latter
which Moorcroft speaks of as “the gigantic Chukor, much larger than
the common partridge, found in large coveys on the edge of the
snow; ... one plucked and drawn weighed 5 lbs.”; described by Vigne
as “a partridge as large as a hen-turkey”; the original perhaps
of that partridge “larger than a vulture” which formed one of the
presents from an Indian King to Augustus Caesar. [With reference
to the large Tibetan partridge found in the Nan-shan Mountains
in the meridian of Sha-chau by Prjevalsky, M. E. D. Morgan in a
note (_P. R. Geog. S._ ix. 1887, p. 219), writes: “_Megaloperdrix
thibetanus_. Its general name in Asia is _ullar_, a word of Kirghiz
or Turkish origin; the Mongols call it _hailik_, and the Tibetans
_kung-mo_. There are two other varieties of this bird found in the
Himalaya and Altai Mountains, but the habits of life and call-note
of all three are the same.”] From the extensive diffusion of the
term, which seems to be common to India, Tibet, and Persia (for
the latter, see _Abbott_ in _J. R. G. S._ XXV. 41), it is likely
enough to be of Mongol origin, not improbably _Tsokhor_, “dappled
or pied.” (_Kovalevsky_, No. 2196, and _Strahlenberg’s_ Vocabulary;
see also _Ladak_, 205; _Moorcr._ I. 313, 432; _Jerdan’s Birds of
India_, III. 549, 572; _Dunlop, Hunting in Himalaya_, 178; _J. A.
S. B._ VI. 774.)

The chakór is mentioned by Baber (p. 282); and also by the Hindi
poet Chand (_Rás Mála_, I. 230, and _Ind. Antiquary_, I. 273).
If the latter passage is genuine, it is adverse to my Mongol
etymology, as Chand lived before the Mongol era.

The keeping of partridges for the table is alluded to by Chaucer in
his portrait of the Franklin, _Prologue, Cant. Tales_:

“It snewed in his hous of mete and drinke,
Of alle deyntees that men coud of thinke,
After the sondry sesons of the yere,
So changed he his mete and his soupere.
_Full many a fat partrich hadde he in mewe_,
And many a breme and many a luce in stewe.”

CHAPTER LXI.

OF THE CITY OF CHANDU, AND THE KAAN’S PALACE THERE.

And when you have ridden three days from the city last mentioned,
between north-east and north, you come to a city called CHANDU,{1}
which was built by the Kaan now reigning. There is at this place a very
fine marble Palace, the rooms of which are all gilt and painted with
figures of men and beasts and birds, and with a variety of trees and
flowers, all executed with such exquisite art that you regard them with
delight and astonishment.{2}

Round this Palace a wall is built, inclosing a compass of 16 miles,
and inside the Park there are fountains and rivers and brooks, and
beautiful meadows, with all kinds of wild animals (excluding such as
are of ferocious nature), which the Emperor has procured and placed
there to supply food for his gerfalcons and hawks, which he keeps there
in mew. Of these there are more than 200 gerfalcons alone, without
reckoning the other hawks. The Kaan himself goes every week to see his
birds sitting in mew, and sometimes he rides through the park with a
leopard behind him on his horse’s croup; and then if he sees any animal
that takes his fancy, he slips his leopard at it,{3} and the game when
taken is made over to feed the hawks in mew. This he does for diversion.

Moreover [at a spot in the Park where there is a charming wood] he has
another Palace built of cane, of which I must give you a description.
It is gilt all over, and most elaborately finished inside. [It is
stayed on gilt and lackered columns, on each of which is a dragon all
gilt, the tail of which is attached to the column whilst the head
supports the architrave, and the claws likewise are stretched out right
and left to support the architrave.] The roof, like the rest, is formed
of canes, covered with a varnish so strong and excellent that no amount
of rain will rot them. These canes are a good 3 palms in girth, and
from 10 to 15 paces in length. [They are cut across at each knot, and
then the pieces are split so as to form from each two hollow tiles, and
with these the house is roofed; only every such tile of cane has to be
nailed down to prevent the wind from lifting it.] In short, the whole
Palace is built of these canes, which (I may mention) serve also for a
great variety of other useful purposes. The construction of the Palace
is so devised that it can be taken down and put up again with great
celerity; and it can all be taken to pieces and removed whithersoever
the Emperor may command. When erected, it is braced [against mishaps
from the wind] by more than 200 cords of silk.{4}

The Lord abides at this Park of his, dwelling sometimes in the Marble
Palace and sometimes in the Cane Palace for three months of the year,
to wit, June, July, and August; preferring this residence because it
is by no means hot; in fact it is a very cool place. When the 28th day
of [the Moon of] August arrives he takes his departure, and the Cane
Palace is taken to pieces.{5} But I must tell you what happens when he
goes away from this Palace every year on the 28th of the August [Moon].

You must know that the Kaan keeps an immense stud of white horses and
mares; in fact more than 10,000 of them, and all pure white without a
speck. The milk of these mares is drunk by himself and his family, and
by none else, except by those of one great tribe that have also the
privilege of drinking it. This privilege was granted them by Chinghis
Kaan, on account of a certain victory that they helped him to win long
ago. The name of the tribe is HORIAD.{6}

Now when these mares are passing across the country, and any one falls
in with them, be he the greatest lord in the land, he must not presume
to pass until the mares have gone by; he must either tarry where he is,
or go a half-day’s journey round if need so be, so as not to come nigh
them; for they are to be treated with the greatest respect. Well, when
the Lord sets out from the Park on the 28th of August, as I told you,
the milk of all those mares is taken and sprinkled on the ground. And
this is done on the injunction of the Idolaters and Idol-priests, who
say that it is an excellent thing to sprinkle that milk on the ground
every 28th of August, so that the Earth and the Air and the False Gods
shall have their share of it, and the Spirits likewise that inhabit
the Air and the Earth. And thus those beings will protect and bless
the Kaan and his children and his wives and his folk and his gear, and
his cattle and his horses, his corn and all that is his. After this is
done, the Emperor is off and away.{7}

But I must now tell you a strange thing that hitherto I have forgotten
to mention. During the three months of every year that the Lord resides
at that place, if it should happen to be bad weather, there are certain
crafty enchanters and astrologers in his train, who are such adepts in
necromancy and the diabolic arts, that they are able to prevent any
cloud or storm from passing over the spot on which the Emperor’s Palace
stands. The sorcerers who do this are called TEBET and KESIMUR, which
are the names of two nations of Idolaters. Whatever they do in this way
is by the help of the Devil, but they make those people believe that
it is compassed by dint of their own sanctity and the help of God.{8}
[They always go in a state of dirt and uncleanness, devoid of respect
for themselves, or for those who see them, unwashed, unkempt, and
sordidly attired.]

These people also have a custom which I must tell you. If a man is
condemned to death and executed by the lawful authority, they take his
body and cook and eat it. But if any one die a natural death then they
will not eat the body.{9}

There is another marvel performed by those BACSI, of whom I have been
speaking as knowing so many enchantments.{10} For when the Great Kaan
is at his capital and in his great Palace, seated at his table, which
stands on a platform some eight cubits above the ground, his cups are
set before him [on a great buffet] in the middle of the hall pavement,
at a distance of some ten paces from his table, and filled with wine,
or other good spiced liquor such as they use. Now when the Lord desires
to drink, these enchanters by the power of their enchantments cause the
cups to move from their place without being touched by anybody, and to
present themselves to the Emperor! This every one present may witness,
and there are ofttimes more than 10,000 persons thus present. ’Tis a
truth and no lie! and so will tell you the sages of our own country who
understand necromancy, for they also can perform it.{11}

And when the Idol Festivals come round, these _Bacsi_ go to the Prince
and say: “Sire, the Feast of such a god is come” (naming him). “My
Lord, you know,” the enchanter will say, “that this god, when he gets
no offerings, always sends bad weather and spoils our seasons. So we
pray you to give us such and such a number of black-faced sheep,”
naming whatever number they please. “And we beg also, good my lord,
that we may have such a quantity of incense, and such a quantity of
lignaloes, and”—so much of this, so much of that, and so much of
t’other, according to their fancy—“that we may perform a solemn service
and a great sacrifice to our Idols, and that so they may be induced to
protect us and all that is ours.”

The _Bacsi_ say these things to the Barons entrusted with the
Stewardship, who stand round the Great Kaan, and these repeat them to
the Kaan, and he then orders the Barons to give everything that the
Bacsi have asked for. And when they have got the articles they go and
make a great feast in honour of their god, and hold great ceremonies of
worship with grand illuminations and quantities of incense of a variety
of odours, which they make up from different aromatic spices. And then
they cook the meat, and set it before the idols, and sprinkle the
broth hither and thither, saying that in this way the idols get their
bellyful. Thus it is that they keep their festivals. You must know that
each of the idols has a name of his own, and a feast-day, just as our
Saints have their anniversaries.{12}

They have also immense Minsters and Abbeys, some of them as big as
a small town, with more than two thousand monks (_i.e._ after their
fashion) in a single abbey.{13} These monks dress more decently than
the rest of the people, and have the head and beard shaven. There are
some among these _Bacsi_ who are allowed by their rule to take wives,
and who have plenty of children.{14}

Then there is another kind of devotees called SENSIN, who are men of
extraordinary abstinence after their fashion, and lead a life of such
hardship as I will describe. All their life long they eat nothing but
bran,{15} which they take mixt with hot water. That is their food:
bran, and nothing but bran; and water for their drink. ’Tis a lifelong
fast! so that I may well say their life is one of extraordinary
asceticism. They have great idols, and plenty of them; but they
sometimes also worship fire. The other Idolaters who are not of this
sect call these people heretics—_Patarins_ as we should say{16}—because
they do not worship their idols in their own fashion. Those of whom I
am speaking would not take a wife on any consideration.{17} They wear
dresses of hempen stuff, black and blue,{18} and sleep upon mats; in
fact their asceticism is something astonishing. Their idols are all
feminine, that is to say, they have women’s names.{19}

Now let us have done with this subject, and let me tell you of the
great state and wonderful magnificence of the Great Lord of Lords; I
mean that great Prince who is the Sovereign of the Tartars, CUBLAY by
name, that most noble and puissant Lord.

NOTE 1.—[There were two roads to go from Peking to Shangtu: the
eastern road through Tu-shi-k’ow, and the western (used for the
return journey) road by Ye-hu ling. Polo took this last road, which
ran from Peking to Siuen-te chau through the same places as now;
but from the latter town it led, not to Kalgan as it does now,
but more to the west, to a place called now Shan-fang pú where
the pass across the Ye-hu ling range begins. “On both these roads
_nabo_, or temporary palaces, were built, as resting-places for
the Khans; eighteen on the eastern road, and twenty-four on the
western.” (_Palladius_, p. 25.) The same author makes (p. 26) the
following remarks: “M. Polo’s statement that he travelled three
days from Siuen-te chau to Chagannor, and three days also from the
latter place to Shang-tu, agrees with the information contained
in the ‘Researches on the Routes to Shangtu.’ The Chinese authors
have not given the precise position of Lake Chagannor; there are
several lakes in the desert on the road to Shangtu, and their names
have changed with time. The palace in Chagannor was built in 1280”
(according to the _Siu t’ung kien_).—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—_Chandu_, called more correctly in Ramusio _Xandu_, _i.e._
SHANDU, and by Fr. Odorico _Sandu_, viz. SHANG-TU or “Upper Court,”
the Chinese title of Kúblái’s summer residence at Kaipingfu,
_Mongolicè_ Keibung (see ch. xiii. of Prologue) [is called also
_Loan king_, _i.e._ “the capital on the Loan River,” according to
Palladius, p. 26.—H. C.]. The ruins still exist, in about lat. 40°
22′, and a little west of the longitude of Peking. The site is 118
miles in direct line from Chaghan-nor, making Polo’s three marches
into rides of unusual length.[1] The ruins bear the Mongol name
of _Chao Naiman Sumé Khotan_, meaning “city of the 108 temples,”
and are about 26 miles to the north-west of Dolon-nor, a bustling,
dirty town of modern origin, famous for the manufactory of idols,
bells, and other ecclesiastical paraphernalia of Buddhism. The site
was visited (though not described) by Père Gerbillon in 1691, and
since then by no European traveller till 1872, when Dr. Bushell
of the British Legation at Peking, and the Hon. T. G. Grosvenor,
made a journey thither from the capital, by way of the Nan-kau Pass
(_supra_ p. 26), Kalgan, and the vicinity of Chaghan-nor, the route
that would seem to have been habitually followed, in their annual
migration, by Kúblái and his successors.

The deserted site, overgrown with rank weeds and grass, stands but
little above the marshy bed of the river, which here preserves the
name of Shang-tu, and about a mile from its north or left bank. The
walls, of earth faced with brick and unhewn stone, still stand,
forming, as in the Tartar city of Peking, a double _enceinte_, of
which the inner line no doubt represents the area of the “Marble
Palace” of which Polo speaks. This forms a square of about 2 _li_
(⅔ of a mile) to the side, and has three gates—south, east, and
west, of which the southern one still stands intact, a perfect
arch, 20 ft. high and 12 ft. wide. The outer wall forms a square of
4 _li_ (1⅓ mile) to the side, and has six gates. The foundations
of temples and palace-buildings can be traced, and both enclosures
are abundantly strewn with blocks of marble and fragments of lions,
dragons, and other sculptures, testifying to the former existence
of a flourishing city, but exhibiting now scarcely one stone upon
another. A broken memorial tablet was found, half buried in the
ground, within the north-east angle of the outer rampart, bearing
an inscription in an antique form of the Chinese character, which
proves it to have been erected by Kúblái, in honour of a Buddhist
ecclesiastic called Yun-Hien. Yun-Hien was the abbot of one of
those great minsters and abbeys of _Bacsis_, of which Marco
speaks, and the exact date (no longer visible) of the monument was
equivalent to A.D. 1288.[2]

[Illustration:
Heading
In the Old Chinese Seal-Character, of an INSCRIPTION
on a Memorial raised by KÚBLÁI-KAAN
to a Buddhist Ecclesiastic in the vicinity of his SUMMER-PALACE
at SHANG-TU in Mongolia.
Reduced from a facsimile obtained on the spot by Dr. _S. W. Bushell_,
1872.]

This city occupies the south-east angle of a more extensive
enclosure, bounded by what is now a grassy mound, and embracing,
on Dr. Bushell’s estimate, about 5 square miles. Further knowledge
may explain the discrepancy from Marco’s dimension, but this must
be the park of which he speaks.[3] The woods and fountains have
disappeared, like the temples and palaces; all is dreary and
desolate, though still abounding in the game which was one of
Kúblái’s attractions to the spot. A small monastery, occupied by
six or seven wretched Lamas, is the only building that remains in
the vicinity. The river Shangtu, which lower down becomes the Lan
[or Loan]-Ho, was formerly navigated from the sea up to this place
by flat grain-boats.

[Mgr. de Harlez gave in the _T’oung Pao_ (x. p. 73) an inscription
in _Chuen_ character on a _stele_ found in the ruins of Shangtu,
and built by an officer with the permission of the Emperor; it is
probably a token of imperial favour; the inscription means: _Great
Longevity_.—H. C.]

In the wail which Sanang Setzen, the poetical historian of the
Mongols, puts, perhaps with some traditional basis, into the mouth
of Toghon Temur, the last of the Chinghizide Dynasty in China, when
driven from his throne, the changes are rung on the lost glories of
his capital _Daïtu_ (see _infra_, Book II. ch. xi.) and his summer
palace _Shangtu_; thus (I translate from Schott’s amended German
rendering of the Mongol):

“My vast and noble Capital, My Daïtu, My splendidly adorned!
And Thou my cool and delicious Summer-seat, my Shangtu-Keibung!
Ye, also, yellow plains of Shangtu, Delight of my godlike Sires!
I suffered myself to drop into dreams,—and lo! my Empire was gone!
Ah Thou my Daïtu, built of the nine precious substances!
Ah my Shangtu-Keibung, Union of all perfections!
Ah my Fame! Ah my Glory, as Khagan and Lord of the Earth!
When I used to awake betimes and look forth, how the breezes blew
loaded with fragrance!
And turn which way I would all was glorious perfection of beauty!
• • • • •
Alas for my illustrious name as the Sovereign of the World!
Alas for my Daïtu, seat of Sanctity, Glorious work of the
Immortal KÚBLÁI!
All, all is rent from me!”

It was, in 1797, whilst reading this passage of Marco’s narrative
in old Purchas that Coleridge fell asleep, and dreamt the dream of
Kúblái’s Paradise, beginning:

“In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred River, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.
So twice five miles of fertile ground
With walls and towers were girdled round:
And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills
Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree;
And here were forests ancient as the hills,
Enfolding sunny spots of greenery.”

It would be a singular coincidence in relation to this poem were
Klaproth’s reading correct of a passage in Rashiduddin which he
renders as saying that the palace at Kaiminfu was “called Langtin,
and was built after a plan that Kúblái had seen in a dream, and
had retained in his memory.” But I suspect D’Ohsson’s reading is
more accurate, which runs: “Kúblái caused a Palace to be built for
him east of Kaipingfu, called Lengten; _but he abandoned it in
consequence of a dream._” For we see from Sanang Setzen that the
Palaces of Lengten and Kaiming or Shangtu were distinct; “Between
the year of the Rat (1264), when Kúblái was fifty years old, and
the year of the Sheep (1271), in the space of eight years, he
built four great cities, viz. for Summer Residence SHANGTU KEIBUNG
Kürdu Balgasun, for Winter Residence Yeke DAÏTU Khotan, and on
the shady side of the Altai (see ch. li. note 3, _supra_) Arulun
TSAGHAN BALGASUN, and Erchügin LANGTING Balgasun.” A valuable
letter from Dr. Bushell enables me now to indicate the position
of Langtin: “The district through which the river flows eastward
from Shangtu is known to the Mongolians of the present day by the
name of _Lang-tírh_ (_Lang-ting’rh_).... The ruins of the city are
marked on a Chinese map in my possession Pai-dseng-tzu, _i.e._
‘White City,’ implying that it was formerly an Imperial residence.
The remains of the wall are 7 or 8 _li_ in diameter, of stone, and
situated about 40 _li_ north-north-west from Dolon-nor.”

(_Gerbillon_ in _Astley_, IV. 701–716; Klaproth, in _J. As._
sér. II. tom. xi. 345–350; _Schott, Die letzten Jahre der
Mongolenherrschaft in China_ (Berl. Acad. d. Wissensch. 1850, pp.
502–503); _Huc’s Tartary_, etc., p. 14 _seqq._; _Cathay_, 134, 261;
_S. Setzen_, p. 115; _Dr. S. W. Bushell, Journey outside the Great
Wall_, in _J. R. G. S._ for 1874, and MS. notes.)

One of the pavilions of the celebrated Yuen-ming-Yuen may give some
idea of the probable style, though not of the scale, of Kúblái’s
Summer Palace.

Hiuen Tsang’s account of the elaborate and fantastic ornamentation
of the famous Indian monasteries at Nalanda in Bahár, where Mr.
Broadley has lately made such remarkable discoveries, seems to
indicate that these fantasies of Burmese and Chinese architecture
may have had a direct origin in India, at a time when timber was
still a principal material of construction there: “The pavilions
had pillars adorned with dragons, and posts that glowed with all
the colours of the rainbow, sculptured frets, columns set with
jade, richly chiselled and lackered, with balustrades of vermilion,
and carved open work. The lintels of the doors were tastefully
ornamented, and the roofs covered with shining tiles, the
splendours of which were multiplied by mutual reflection and from
moment to moment took a thousand forms.” (_Vie et Voyages_, 157.)

NOTE 3.—[Rubruck says (_Rockhill_, p. 248): “I saw also the envoy
of a certain Soldan of India, who had brought eight leopards and
ten _greyhounds_, taught to sit on horses’ backs, as leopards
sit.”—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—Ramusio’s is here so much more lucid than the other texts,
that I have adhered mainly to his account of the building. The
roof described is of a kind in use in the Indian Archipelago,
and in some other parts of Transgangetic India, in which the
semi-cylinders of bamboo are laid just like Roman tiles.

Rashiduddin gives a curious account of the way in which the
foundations of the terrace on which this palace stood were erected
in a lake. He says, too, in accord with Polo: “Inside the city
itself a second palace was built, about a bowshot from the first:
but the Kaan generally takes up his residence in the palace outside
the town,” _i.e._, as I imagine, in Marco’s Cane Palace. (_Cathay_,
pp. 261–262.)

[“The _Palace of canes_ is probably the Palm Hall, _Tsung tien_,
alias _Tsung mao tien_, of the Chinese authors, which was situated
in the western palace garden of Shangtu. Mention is made also in
the _Altan Tobchi_ of a cane tent in Shangtu.” (_Palladius_, p.
27.)—H. C.]

Marco might well say of the bamboo that “it serves also a great
variety of other purposes.” An intelligent native of Arakan who
accompanied me in wanderings on duty in the forests of the Burmese
frontier in the beginning of 1853, and who used to ask many
questions about Europe, seemed able to apprehend almost everything
except the possibility of existence in a country without bamboos!
“When I speak of bamboo huts, I mean to say that posts and walls,
wall-plates and rafters, floor and thatch, and the withes that bind
them, are all of bamboo. In fact, it might almost be said that
among the Indo-Chinese nations the staff of life is _a bamboo!_
Scaffolding and ladders, landing-jetties, fishing apparatus,
irrigation wheels and scoops, oars, masts, and yards [and in China,
sails, cables, and caulking, asparagus, medicine, and works of
fantastic art], spears and arrows, hats and helmets, bow, bowstring
and quiver, oil-cans, water-stoups and cooking-pots, pipe-sticks
[tinder and means of producing fire], conduits, clothes-boxes,
pawn-boxes, dinner-trays, pickles, preserves, and melodious musical
instruments, torches, footballs, cordage, bellows, mats, paper;
these are but a few of the articles that are made from the bamboo;”
and in China, to sum up the whole, as Barrow observes, it maintains
order throughout the Empire! (_Ava Mission_, p. 153; and see also
_Wallace, Ind. Arch._ I. 120 _seqq._)

[Illustration: Pavilion at Yuen-ming-Yuen.]

NOTE 5.—“The Emperor ... began this year (1264) to depart from
Yenking (Peking) in the second or third month for Shangtu, not
returning until the eighth month. Every year he made this passage,
and all the Mongol emperors who succeeded him followed his
example.” (_Gaubil_, p. 144.)

[“The Khans usually resorted to Shangtu in the 4th moon and
returned to Peking in the 9th. On the 7th day of the 7th moon there
were libations performed in honour of the ancestors; a shaman, his
face to the north, uttered in a loud voice the names of Chingiz
Khan and of other deceased Khans, and poured mare’s milk on the
ground. The propitious day for the return journey to Peking was
also appointed then.” (_Palladius_, p. 26.)—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—White horses were presented in homage to the Kaan on New
Year’s Day (_the White Feast_), as we shall see below. (Bk. II. ch.
xv.) Odoric also mentions this practice; and, according to Huc,
the Mongol chiefs continued it at least to the time of the Emperor
K’ang-hi. Indeed Timkowski speaks of annual tributes of white
camels and white horses from the Khans of the Kalkas and other
Mongol dignitaries, in the present century. (_Huc’s Tartary_, etc.;
_Tim._ II. 33.)

By the HORIAD are no doubt intended the UIRAD or OIRAD, a name
usually interpreted as signifying the “Closely Allied,” or
Confederates; but Vámbéry explains it as (Turki) _Oyurat_, “Grey
horse,” to which the statement in our text appears to lend colour.
They were not of the tribes properly called Mongol, but after their
submission to Chinghiz they remained closely attached to him.
In Chinghiz’s victory over Aung-Khan, as related by S. Setzen,
we find Turulji Taishi, the son of the chief of the Oirad, one
of Chinghiz’s three chief captains; perhaps that is the victory
alluded to. The seats of the Oirad appear to have been about the
head waters of the Kem, or Upper Yenisei.

In A.D. 1295 there took place a curious desertion from the service
of Gházán Khan of Persia of a vast corps of the Oirad, said
to amount to 18,000 _tents_. They made their way to Damascus,
where they were well received by the Mameluke Sultan. But their
heathenish practices gave dire offence to the Faithful. They were
settled in the _Sáhil_, or coast districts of Palestine. Many died
speedily; the rest embraced Islam, spread over the country, and
gradually became absorbed in the general population. Their sons and
daughters were greatly admired for their beauty. (_S. Setz._ p. 87;
_Erdmann_, 187; _Pallas, Samml._ I. 5 _seqq._; _Makrizi_, III. 29;
_Bretschneider, Med. Res._ II. p. 159 _seqq._)

[With reference to Yule’s conjecture, I may quote Palladius (_l.c._
p. 27): “It is, however, strange that the Oirats alone enjoyed the
privilege described by Marco Polo; for the highest position at the
Mongol Khan’s court belonged to the Kunkrat tribe, out of which the
Khans used to choose their first wives, who were called Empresses
of the first _ordo_.”—H. C.]

NOTE 7.—Rubruquis assigns such a festival to the month of May: “On
the 9th day of the May Moon they collect all the white mares of
their herds and consecrate them. The Christian priests also must
then assemble with their thuribles. They then sprinkle new cosmos
(_kumíz_) on the ground, and make a great feast that day, for
according to their calendar, it is their time of first drinking
new cosmos, just as we reckon of our new wine at the feast of St.
Bartholomew (24th August), or that of St. Sixtus (6th August),
or of our fruit on the feast of St. James and St. Christopher”
(25th July). [With reference to this feast, Mr. Rockhill gives
(_Rubruck_, p. 241, note) extracts from _Pallas, Voyages_, IV. 579,
and _Professor Radloff, Aus Siberien_, I. 378.—H. C.] The Yakuts
also hold such a festival in June or July, when the mares foal, and
immense wooden goblets of kumíz are emptied on that occasion. They
also pour out kumíz for the Spirits to the four quarters of heaven.

The following passage occurs in the narrative of the Journey of
Chang Te-hui, a Chinese teacher, who was summoned to visit the
camp of Kúblái in Mongolia, some twelve years before that Prince
ascended the throne of the Kaans:[4]

“On the 9th day of the 9th Moon (October), the Prince, having
called his subjects before his chief tent, performed the libation
of the milk of a white mare. This was the customary sacrifice
at that time. The vessels used were made of birch-bark, not
ornamented with either silver or gold. Such here is the respect for
simplicity....

“At the last day of the year the Mongols suddenly changed their
camping-ground to another place, for the mutual congratulation
on the 1st Moon. Then there was every day feasting before the
tents for the lower ranks. Beginning with the Prince, all dressed
themselves in white fur clothing....[5]

“On the 9th day of the 4th Moon (May) the Prince again collected
his vassals before the chief tent for the libation of the milk of a
white mare. This sacrifice is performed twice a year.”

It has been seen (p. 308) that Rubruquis also names the 9th day
of the May moon as that of the consecration of the white mares.
The autumn libation is described by Polo as performed on the 28th
day of the August moon, probably because it was unsuited to the
circumstances of the Court at Cambaluc, where the Kaan was during
October, and the day named was the last of his annual stay in the
Mongolian uplands.

Baber tells that among the ceremonies of a Mongol Review the Khan
and his staff took kumíz and sprinkled it towards the standards. An
Armenian author of the Mongol era says that it was the custom of
the Tartars, before drinking, to sprinkle drink towards heaven, and
towards the four quarters. Mr. Atkinson notices the same practice
among the Kirghiz; and I found the like in old days among the
Kasias of the eastern frontier of Bengal.

The time of year assigned by Polo for the ceremony implies some
change. Perhaps it had been made to coincide with the Festival
of Water Consecration of the Lamas, with which the time named
in the text seems to correspond. On that occasion the Lamas go
in procession to the rivers and lakes and consecrate them by
benediction and by casting in offerings, attended by much popular
festivity.

Rubruquis seems to intimate that the Nestorian priests were
employed to consecrate the white mares by incensing them. In the
rear of Lord Canning’s camp in India I once came upon the party of
his _Shutr Suwárs_, or dromedary-express riders, busily engaged in
incensing with frankincense the whole of the dromedaries, which
were kneeling in a circle. I could get no light on the practice,
but it was very probably a relic of the old Mongol custom. (_Rubr._
363; _Erman_, II. 397; _Billings’ Journey_, Fr. Tr. I. 217;
_Baber_, 103; _J. As._ sér. V. tom. xi. p. 249; _Atk. Amoor_, p.
47; _J. A. S. B._ XIII. 628; _Koeppen_, II. 313.)

NOTE 8.—The practice of weather-conjuring was in great vogue among
the Mongols, and is often alluded to in their history.

The operation was performed by means of a stone of magical virtues,
called _Yadah_ or _Jadah-Tásh_, which was placed in or hung over
a basin of water with sundry ceremonies. The possession of such a
stone is ascribed by the early Arab traveller Ibn Mohalhal to the
_Ḳímák_, a great tribe of the Turks. In the war raised against
Chinghiz and Aung Khan, when still allies, by a great confederation
of the Naiman and other tribes in 1202, we are told that Sengun,
the son of Aung Khan, when sent to meet the enemy, caused them to
be enchanted, so that all their attempted movements against him
were defeated by snow and mist. The fog and darkness were indeed so
dense that many men and horses fell over precipices, and many also
perished with cold. In another account of (apparently) the same
matter, given by Mir-Khond, the conjuring is set on foot by the
_Yadachi_ of Buyruk Khan, Prince of the Naiman, but the mischief
all rebounds on the conjurer’s own side.

In Tului’s invasion of Honan in 1231–1232, Rashiduddin describes
him, when in difficulty, as using the _Jadah_ stone with success.

Timur, in his Memoirs, speaks of the Jets using incantations to
produce heavy rains which hindered his cavalry from acting against
them. A _Yadachi_ was captured, and when his head had been taken
off the storm ceased.

Baber speaks of one of his early friends, Khwaja Ka Mulai, as
excelling in falconry and acquainted with _Yadagarí_ or the
art of bringing on rain and snow by means of enchantment. When
the Russians besieged Kazan in 1552 they suffered much from
the constant heavy rains, and this annoyance was universally
ascribed to the arts of the Tartar Queen, who was celebrated as an
enchantress. Sháh Abbás believed he had learned the Tartar secret,
and put much confidence in it. (_P. Della V._ I. 869.)

[Grenard says (II. p. 256) the most powerful and most feared of
sorcerers [in Chinese Turkestan] is the _djâduger_, who, to produce
rain or fine weather, uses a jade stone, given by Noah to Japhet.
Grenard adds (II. 406–407) there are sorcerers (Ngag-pa-snags-pa)
whose specialty is to make rain fall; they are similar to the
Turkish _Yadachi_ and like them use a stone called “water cristal,”
_chu shel_; probably jade stone.

Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 245, note) writes: “Rashideddin states
that when the Urianghit wanted to bring a storm to an end, they
said injuries to the sky, the lightning and thunder. I have seen
this done myself by Mongol storm-dispellers. (See _Diary_, 201,
203.) ‘The other Mongol people,’ he adds, ‘do the contrary. When
the storm rumbles, they remain shut up in their huts, full of
fear.’ The subject of storm-making, and the use of stones for that
purpose, is fully discussed by Quatremère, _Histoire_, 438–440.”
(Cf. also _Rockhill_, _l.c._ p. 254.)—H. C.]

An edict of the Emperor Shi-tsung, of the reigning dynasty,
addressed in 1724–1725 to the Eight Banners of Mongolia, warns
them against this rain-conjuring: “If I,” indignantly observes
the Emperor, “offering prayer in sincerity have yet room to fear
that it may please Heaven to leave MY prayer unanswered, it is
truly intolerable that mere common people wishing for rain should
at their own caprice set up altars of earth, and bring together
a rabble of Hoshang (Buddhist Bonzes) and Taossé to conjure the
spirits to gratify their wishes.”

[“Lamas were of various extraction; at the time of the great
assemblies, and of the Khan’s festivities in Shangtu, they erected
an altar near the Khan’s tent and prayed for fine weather; the
whistling of shells rose up to heaven.” These are the words in
which Marco Polo’s narrative is corroborated by an eye-witness who
has celebrated the remarkable objects of Shangtu (_Loan king tsa
yung_). These Lamas, in spite of the prohibition by the Buddhist
creed of bloody sacrifices, used to sacrifice sheep’s hearts to
Mahakala. It happened, as it seems, that the heart of an executed
criminal was also considered an agreeable offering; and as the
offerings could be, after the ceremony, eaten by the sacrificing
priests, Marco Polo had some reason to accuse the Lamas of
cannibalism. (_Palladius_, 28.)—H. C.]

The practice of weather-conjuring is not yet obsolete in Tartary,
Tibet, and the adjoining countries.[6]

Weather-conjuring stories were also rife in Europe during the
Middle Ages. One such is conspicuously introduced in connection
with a magical fountain in the romance of the _Chevalier au Lyon_:

“Et s’i pant uns bacins d’or fin
A une si longue chaainne
Qui dure jusqu’a la fontainne.
Lez la fontainne troveras
Un perron tel con tu verras
* * * *
S’au bacin viaus de l’iaue prandre
Et dessor le perron espandre,
La verras une tel tanpeste
Qu’an cest bois ne remandra beste,”
etc. etc.[7]

The effect foretold in these lines is the subject of a woodcut
illustrating a Welsh version of the same tale in the first volume
of the _Mabinogion_. And the existence of such a fountain is
alluded to by Alexander Neckam. (_De Naturis Rerum_, Bk. II. ch.
vii.)

In the _Cento Novelle Antiche_ also certain necromancers exhibit
their craft before the Emperor Frederic (Barbarossa apparently):
“The weather began to be overcast, and lo! of a sudden rain began
to fall with continued thunders and lightnings, as if the world
were come to an end, and hailstones that looked like steel-caps,”
etc. Various other European legends of like character will be found
in _Liebrecht’s Gervasius von Tilbury_, pp. 147–148.

Rain-makers there are in many parts of the world; but it is
remarkable that those also of Samoa in the Pacific operate by means
of a _rain-stone_.

Such weather conjurings as we have spoken of are ascribed by Ovid
to Circe:

“Concipit illa preces, et verba venefica dicit;
Ignotosque Deos ignoto carmine adorat,
* * * *
_Tunc quoque cantato densetur carmine caelum,
Et nebulas exhalat humus_.”—_Metam._ XIV. 365.

And to Medea:—

————“Quum volui, ripis mirantibus, amnes
In fontes rediere suos ... (another feat of the Lamas)
... _Nubila pello,
Nubilaque induco; ventos abigoque, vocoque_.”—_Ibid._ VII. 199.

And by Tibullus to the _Saga_ (_Eleg._ I. 2, 45); whilst
Empedocles, in verses ascribed to him by Diogenes Laertius, claims
power to communicate like secrets of potency:—

“By my spells thou may’st
To timely sunshine turn the purple rains,
And parching droughts to fertilising floods.”

(See _Cathay_, p. clxxxvii.; _Erdm._ 282; _Oppert_, 182 _seqq._;
_Erman_, I. 153; _Pallas, Samml._ II. 348 _seqq._; _Timk._ I. 402;
_J. R. A. S._ VII. 305–306; _D’Ohsson_, II. 614; and for many
interesting particulars, _Q. R._ p. 428 _seqq._, and _Hammer’s
Golden Horde_, 207 and 435 _seqq._)

NOTE 9.—It is not clear whether Marco attributes this cannibalism
to the Tibetans and Kashmirians, or brings it in as a particular of
Tartar custom which he had forgotten to mention before.

The accusations of cannibalism indeed against the Tibetans in old
accounts are frequent, and I have elsewhere (see _Cathay_, p. 151)
remarked on some singular Tibetan practices which go far to account
for such charges. Della Penna, too, makes a statement which bears
curiously on the present passage. Remarking on the great use made
by certain classes of the Lamas of human skulls for magical cups,
and of human thigh bones for flutes and whistles, he says that
to supply them with these _the bodies of executed criminals were
stored up at the disposal of the Lamas_; and a Hindu account of
Tibet in the _Asiatic Researches_ asserts that when one is killed
in a fight both parties rush forward and struggle for the liver,
which they eat (vol. xv).

[Carpini says of the people of Tibet: “They are pagans; they have
a most astonishing, or rather horrible, custom, for, when any
one’s father is about to give up the ghost, all the relatives meet
together, and they eat him, as was told to me for certain.” Mr.
Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 152, note) writes: “So far as I am aware,
this charge [of cannibalism] is not made by any Oriental writer
against the Tibetans, though both Arab travellers to China in the
ninth century and Armenian historians of the thirteenth century say
the Chinese practised cannibalism. The Armenians designate China by
the name _Nankas_, which I take to be Chinese _Nan-kuo_, ‘southern
country,’ the _Manzi_ country of Marco Polo.”—H. C.]

But like charges of cannibalism are brought against both Chinese
and Tartars very positively. Thus, without going back to the
Anthropophagous Scythians of Ptolemy and Mela, we read in the
_Relations_ of the Arab travellers of the ninth century: “In
China it occurs sometimes that the governor of a province revolts
from his duty to the emperor. In such a case he is slaughtered
and eaten. _In fact, the Chinese eat the flesh of all men who
are executed by the sword_.” Dr. Rennie mentions a superstitious
practice, the continued existence of which in our own day he has
himself witnessed, and which might perhaps have given rise to some
such statement as that of the Arab travellers, if it be not indeed
a relic, in a mitigated form, of the very practice they assert to
have prevailed. After an execution at Peking certain large pith
balls are steeped in the blood, and under the name of _blood-bread_
are sold as a medicine for consumption. _It is only to the blood of
decapitated criminals that any such healing power is attributed_.
It has been asserted in the annals of the _Propagation de la Foi_
that the Chinese executioners of M. Chapdelaine, a missionary who
was martyred in Kwang-si in 1856 (28th February), were seen to eat
the heart of their victim; and M. Huot, a missionary in the Yun-nan
province, recounts a case of cannibalism which he witnessed. Bishop
Chauveau, at Ta Ts’ien-lu, told Mr. Cooper that he had seen men
in one of the cities of Yun-nan eating the heart and brains of a
celebrated robber who had been executed. Dr. Carstairs Douglas of
Amoy also tells me that the like practices have occurred at Amoy
and Swatau.

[With reference to cannibalism in China see _Medical Superstitions
an Incentive to Anti-Foreign Riots in China_, by _D. J. Macgowan,
North China Herald_, 8th July, 1892, pp. 60–62. Mr. E. H. Parker
(_China Review_, February–March, 1901, 136) relates that the
inhabitants of a part of Kwang-si boiled and ate a Chinese officer
who had been sent to pacify them. “The idea underlying this
horrible act [cannibalism] is, that by eating a portion of the
victim, especially the heart, one acquires the valour with which he
was endowed.” (_Dennys’ Folk-lore of China_, 67.)—H. C.]

Hayton, the Armenian, after relating the treason of a Saracen,
called Parwana (he was an Iconian Turk), against Abaka Khan,
says: “He was taken and cut in two, and orders were issued that
in all the food eaten by Abaka there should be put a portion of
the traitor’s flesh. Of this Abaka himself ate, and caused all his
barons to partake. _And this was in accordance with the custom
of the Tartars_.” The same story is related independently and
differently by Friar Ricold, thus: “When the army of Abaga ran
away from the Saracens in Syria, a certain great Tartar baron was
arrested who had been guilty of treason. And when the Emperor Khan
was giving the order for his execution the Tartar ladies and women
interposed, and begged that he might be made over to them. Having
got hold of the prisoner they boiled him alive, and cutting his
body up into mince-meat gave it to eat to the whole army, as an
example to others.” Vincent of Beauvais makes a like statement:
“When they capture any one who is at bitter enmity with them, they
gather together and eat him in vengeance of his revolt, and like
infernal leeches suck his blood,” a custom of which a modern Mongol
writer thinks that he finds a trace in a surviving proverb. Among
more remote and ignorant Franks the cannibalism of the Tartars was
a general belief. Ivo of Narbonne, in his letter written during the
great Tartar invasion of Europe (1242), declares that the Tartar
chiefs, with their dog’s head followers and other _Lotophagi_
(!), ate the bodies of their victims like so much bread; whilst
a Venetian chronicler, speaking of the council of Lyons in 1274,
says there was a discussion about making a general move against the
Tartars, “_porce qu’il manjuent la char humaine._” These latter
writers no doubt rehearsed mere popular beliefs, but Hayton and
Ricold were both intelligent persons well acquainted with the
Tartars, and Hayton at least not prejudiced against them.

The old belief was revived in Prussia during the Seven Years’ War,
in regard to the Kalmaks of the Russian army; and Bergmann says
the old Kalmak warriors confessed to him that they had done what
they could to encourage it by cutting up the bodies of the slain
in presence of their prisoners, and roasting them! But Levchine
relates an act on the part of the Kirghiz Kazaks which was no jest.
They drank the blood of their victim if they did not eat his flesh.

There is some reason to believe that cannibalism was in the Middle
Ages generally a less strange and unwonted horror than we should at
first blush imagine, and especially that it was an idea tolerably
familiar in China. M. Bazin, in the second part of _Chine Moderne_,
p. 461, after sketching a Chinese drama of the Mongol era (“The
Devotion of Chao-li”), the plot of which turns on the acts of a
body of cannibals, quotes several other passages from Chinese
authors which indicate this. Nor is this wonderful in the age that
had experienced the horrors of the Mongol wars.

That was no doubt a fable which Carpini heard in the camp of the
Great Kaan, that in one of the Mongol sieges in Cathay, when the
army was without food, one man in ten of their own force was
sacrificed to feed the remainder.[8] But we are told in sober
history that the force of Tului in Honan, in 1231–1232, was reduced
to such straits as to eat grass and human flesh. At the siege of
the Kin capital Kaifongfu, in 1233, the besieged were reduced to
the like extremity; and the same occurred the same year at the
siege of Tsaichau; and in 1262, when the rebel general Litan was
besieged in Tsinanfu. The Taiping wars the other day revived the
same horrors in all their magnitude. And savage acts of the same
kind by the Chinese and their Turk partisans in the defence of
Kashgar were related to Mr. Shaw.

Probably, however, nothing of the kind in history equals what
Abdallatif, a sober and scientific physician, describes as having
occurred before his own eyes in the great Egyptian famine of A.H.
597 (1200). The horrid details fill a chapter of some length, and
we need not quote from them.

Nor was Christendom without the rumour of such barbarities.
The story of King Richard’s banquet in presence of Saladin’s
ambassadors on the head of a Saracen curried (for so it surely
was),—

“soden full hastily
With powder and with spysory,
And with saffron of good colour”—

fable as it is, is told with a zest that makes one shudder; but the
tale in the _Chanson d’Antioche_, of how the licentious bands of
ragamuffins, who hung on the army of the First Crusade, and were
known as the _Tafurs_,[9] ate the Turks whom they killed at the
siege, looks very like an abominable truth, corroborated as it
is by the prose chronicle of worse deeds at the ensuing siege of
Marrha:—

“A lor cotiaus qu’il ont trenchans et afilés
Escorchoient les Turs, aval parmi les près.
Voiant Paiens, les ont par pièces découpés.
En l’iave et el carbon les ont bien quisinés,
Volontiers les menjuent sans pain et dessalés.”[10]

(_Della Penna_, p. 76; _Reinaud, Rel._ I. 52; _Rennie’s Peking_,
II. 244; _Ann. de la Pr. de la F._ XXIX. 353, XXI. 298; _Hayton_
in _Ram._ ch. xvii.; _Per. Quat._ p. 116; _M. Paris_, sub. 1243;
_Mél. Asiat. Acad. St. Pétersb._ II. 659; _Canale_ in _Arch. Stor.
Ital._ VIII.; _Bergm. Nomad. Streifereien_, I. 14; _Carpini_,
638; _D’Ohsson_, II. 30, 43, 52; _Wilson’s Ever Victorious Army_,
74; _Shaw_, p. 48; _Abdallatif_, p. 363 _seqq._; _Weber_, II. 135;
_Littré, H. de la Langue Franç._ I. 191; _Gesta Tancredi_ in _Thes.
Nov. Anecd._ III. 172.)

NOTE 10.—_Bakhshi_ is generally believed to be a corruption of
_Bhikshu_, the proper Sanscrit term for a religious mendicant,
and in particular for the Buddhist devotees of that character.
_Bakhshi_ was probably applied to a class only of the Lamas, but
among the Turks and Persians it became a generic name for them all.
In this sense it is habitually used by Rashiduddin, and thus also
in the Ain Akbari: “The learned among the Persians and Arabians
call the priests of this (Buddhist) religion _Bukshee_, and in
Tibbet they are styled Lamas.”

According to Pallas the word among the modern Mongols is used in
the sense of _Teacher_, and is applied to the oldest and most
learned priest of a community, who is the local ecclesiastical
chief. Among the Kirghiz Kazaks again, who profess Mahomedanism,
the word also survives, but conveys among them just the idea that
Polo seems to have associated with it, that of a mere conjuror or
“medicine-man”; whilst in Western Turkestan it has come to mean a
Bard.

The word Bakhshi has, however, wandered much further from its
original meaning. From its association with persons who could read
and write, and who therefore occasionally acted as clerks, it
came in Persia to mean a clerk or secretary. In the Petrarchian
Vocabulary, published by Klaproth, we find _scriba_ rendered
in _Comanian_, _i.e._ Turkish of the Crimea, by _Bacsi_. The
transfer of meaning is precisely parallel to that in regard to
our _Clerk_. Under the Mahomedan sovereigns of India, _Bakhshi_ was
applied to an officer performing something like the duties of a
quartermaster-general; and finally, in our Indian army, it has
come to mean a paymaster. In the latter sense, I imagine it has
got associated in the popular mind with the Persian _bakhshídan_,
to bestow, and _bakhshísh_. (See a note in _Q. R._ p. 184 _seqq._;
_Cathay_, p. 474; _Ayeen Akbery_, III. 150; _Pallas, Samml._ II.
126; _Levchine_, p. 355; _Klap. Mém._ III.; _Vámbéry, Sketches_, p.
81.)

The sketch from the life, on p. 326, of a wandering Tibetan
devotee, whom I met once at Hardwár, may give an idea of the sordid
_Bacsis_ spoken of by Polo.

NOTE 11.—This feat is related more briefly by Odoric: “And jugglers
cause cups of gold full of good wine to fly through the air, and
to offer themselves to all who list to drink.” (_Cathay_, p. 143.)
In the note on that passage I have referred to a somewhat similar
story in the _Life of Apollonius_. “Such feats,” says Mr. Jaeschke,
“are often mentioned in ancient as well as modern legends of Buddha
and other saints; and our Lamas have heard of things very similar
performed by conjuring _Bonpos_.” (See p. 323.) The moving of
cups and the like is one of the sorceries ascribed in old legends
to Simon Magus: “He made statues to walk; leapt into the fire
without being burnt; flew in the air; made bread of stones; changed
his shape; assumed two faces at once; converted himself into a
pillar; caused closed doors to fly open spontaneously; made the
vessels in a house seem to move of themselves,” etc. The Jesuit
Delrio laments that credulous princes, otherwise of pious repute,
should have allowed diabolic tricks to be played before them, “as,
for example, things of iron, and silver goblets, or other heavy
articles, to be moved by bounds from one end of a table to the
other, without the use of a magnet or of any attachment.” The pious
prince appears to have been Charles IX., and the conjuror a certain
Cesare Maltesio. Another Jesuit author describes the veritable
mango-trick, speaking of persons who “within three hours’ space did
cause a genuine shrub of a span in length to grow out of the table,
besides other trees that produced both leaves and fruit.”

In a letter dated 1st December, 1875, written by Mr. R. B. Shaw,
after his last return from Kashgar and Lahore, this distinguished
traveller says: “I have heard stories related regarding a Buddhist
high priest whose temple is said to be not far to the east of
Lanchau, which reminds me of Marco Polo and Kúblái Khan. This high
priest is said to have the magic power of attracting cups and
plates to him from a distance, so that things fly through the air
into his hands.” (_MS. Note_.—H. Y.)

The profession and practice of exorcism and magic in general is
greatly more prominent in Lamaism or Tibetan Buddhism than in any
other known form of that religion. Indeed, the old form of Lamaism
as it existed in our traveller’s day, and till the reforms of
Tsongkhapa (1357–1419), and as it is still professed by the _Red_
sect in Tibet, seems to be a kind of compromise between Indian
Buddhism and the old indigenous Shamanism. Even the reformed
doctrine of the Yellow sect recognises an orthodox kind of magic,
which is due in great measure to the combination of Sivaism with
the Buddhist doctrines, and of which the institutes are contained
in the vast collection of the _Jud_ or Tantras, recognised among
the holy books. The magic arts of this code open even a short
road to the Buddhahood itself. To attain that perfection of power
and wisdom, culminating in the cessation of sensible existence,
requires, according to the ordinary paths, a period of three
_asankhyas_ (or say Uncountable Time × 3), whereas by means of
the magic arts of the _Tantras_ it may be reached in the course
of three _rebirths_ only, nay, of one! But from the Tantras also
can be learned how to acquire miraculous powers for objects
entirely selfish and secular, and how to exercise these by means of
_Dhárani_ or mystic Indian charms.

Still the orthodox Yellow Lamas professedly repudiate and despise
the grosser exhibitions of common magic and charlatanism which
the Reds still practise, such as knife-swallowing, blowing fire,
cutting off their own heads, etc. But as the vulgar will not
dispense with these marvels, every great orthodox monastery in
Tibet _keeps a conjuror_, who is a member of the unreformed, and
does not belong to the brotherhood of the convent, but lives in
a particular part of it, bearing the name of _Choichong_, or
protector of religion, and is allowed to marry. The magic of these
Choichong is in theory and practice different from the orthodox
Tantrist magic. The practitioners possess no literature, and hand
down their mysteries only by tradition. Their fantastic equipments,
their frantic bearing, and their cries and howls, seem to identify
them with the grossest Shamanist devil dancers.

Sanang Setzen enumerates a variety of the wonderful acts which
could be performed through the _Dhárani_. Such were, sticking a peg
into solid rock; restoring the dead to life; turning a dead body
into gold; penetrating everywhere as air does; flying; catching
wild beasts with the hand; reading thoughts; making water flow
backwards; eating tiles; sitting in the air with the legs doubled
under, etc. Some of these are precisely the powers ascribed to
Medea, Empedocles, and Simon Magus, in passages already cited.
Friar Ricold says on this subject: “There are certain men whom the
Tartars honour above all in the world, viz. the _Baxitae_ (_i.e._
_Bakhshis_), who are a kind of idol-priests. These are men from
India, persons of deep wisdom, well-conducted, and of the gravest
morals. They are usually acquainted with magic arts, and depend on
the counsel and aid of demons; they exhibit many illusions, and
predict some future events. For instance, one of eminence among
them was said to fly; the truth, however, was (as it proved), that
he did not fly, but did walk close to the surface of the ground
without touching it; and _would seem to sit down without having any
substance to support him_.” This last performance was witnessed by
Ibn Batuta at Delhi, in the presence of Sultan Mahomed Tughlak;
and it was professedly exhibited by a Brahmin at Madras in the
present century, a descendant doubtless of those Brahmans whom
Apollonius saw walking two cubits from the ground. It is also
described by the worthy Francis Valentyn as a performance known and
practised in his own day in India. It is related, he says, that “a
man will first go and sit on three sticks put together so as to
form a tripod; after which, first one stick, then a second, then
the third shall be removed from under him, and the man shall not
fall but shall still remain sitting in the air! Yet I have spoken
with two friends who had seen this at one and the same time; and
one of them, I may add, mistrusting his own eyes, had taken the
trouble to feel about with a long stick if there were nothing on
which the body rested; yet, as the gentleman told me, he could
neither feel nor see any such thing. Still, I could only say that I
could not believe it, as a thing too manifestly contrary to reason.”

Akin to these performances, though exhibited by professed jugglers
without claim to religious character, is a class of feats which
might be regarded as simply inventions if told by one author
only, but which seem to deserve prominent notice from their being
recounted by a series of authors, certainly independent of one
another, and writing at long intervals of time and place. Our
first witness is Ibn Batuta, and it will be necessary to quote
him as well as the others in full, in order to show how closely
their evidence tallies. The Arab Traveller was present at a great
entertainment at the Court of the Viceroy of Khansa (_Kinsay_ of
Polo, or Hang-chau fu): “That same night a juggler, who was one of
the Kán’s slaves, made his appearance, and the Amír said to him,
‘Come and show us some of your marvels.’ Upon this he took a wooden
ball, with several holes in it, through which long thongs were
passed, and, laying hold of one of these, slung it into the air.
It went so high that we lost sight of it altogether. (It was the
hottest season of the year, and we were outside in the middle of
the palace court.) There now remained only a little of the end of
a thong in the conjuror’s hand, and he desired one of the boys who
assisted him to lay hold of it and mount. He did so, climbing by
the thong, and we lost sight of him also! The conjuror then called
to him three times, but getting no answer, he snatched up a knife
as if in a great rage, laid hold of the thong, and disappeared
also! By and bye he threw down one of the boy’s hands, then a foot,
then the other hand, and then the other foot, then the trunk, and
last of all the head! Then he came down himself, all puffing and
panting, and with his clothes all bloody, kissed the ground before
the Amír, and said something to him in Chinese. The Amír gave some
order in reply, and our friend then took the lad’s limbs, laid them
together in their places, and gave a kick, when, presto! there
was the boy, who got up and stood before us! All this astonished
me beyond measure, and I had an attack of palpitation like that
which overcame me once before in the presence of the Sultan of
India, when he showed me something of the same kind. They gave me a
cordial, however, which cured the attack. The Kazi Afkharuddin was
next to me, and quoth he, ‘_Wallah!_ ’tis my opinion there has been
neither going up nor coming down, neither marring nor mending; ’tis
all hocus pocus!’”

Now let us compare with this, which Ibn Batuta the Moor says he
saw in China about the year 1348, the account which is given us
by Edward Melton, an Anglo-Dutch traveller, of the performances
of a Chinese gang of conjurors, which he witnessed at Batavia
about the year 1670 (I have forgotten to note the year). After
describing very vividly the _basket-murder_ trick, which is well
known in India, and now also in Europe, and some feats of bamboo
balancing similar to those which were recently shown by Japanese
performers in England, only more wonderful, he proceeds: “But now
I am going to relate a thing which surpasses all belief, and which
I should scarcely venture to insert here had it not been witnessed
by thousands before my own eyes. One of the same gang took a ball
of cord, and grasping one end of the cord in his hand slung the
other up into the air with such force that its extremity was beyond
reach of our sight. He then immediately climbed up the cord with
indescribable swiftness, and got so high that we could no longer
see him. I stood full of astonishment, not conceiving what was to
come of this; when lo! a leg came tumbling down out of the air.
One of the conjuring company instantly snatched it up and threw it
into the basket whereof I have formerly spoken. A moment later a
hand came down, and immediately on that another leg. And in short
all the members of the body came thus successively tumbling from
the air and were cast together into the basket. The last fragment
of all that we saw tumble down was the head, and no sooner had that
touched the ground than he who had snatched up all the limbs and
put them in the basket turned them all out again topsy-turvy. Then
straightway we saw with these eyes all those limbs creep together
again, and in short, form a whole man, who at once could stand
and go just as before, without showing the least damage! Never
in my life was I so astonished as when I beheld this wonderful
performance, and I doubted now no longer that these misguided
men did it by the help of the Devil. For it seems to me totally
impossible that such things should be accomplished by natural
means.” The same performance is spoken of by Valentyn, in a passage
also containing curious notices of the basket-murder trick, the
mango trick, the sitting in the air (quoted above), and others; but
he refers to Melton, and I am not sure whether he had any other
authority for it. The cut on this page is taken from Melton’s plate.

[Illustration: Chinese Conjuring Extraordinary.]

Again we have in the Memoirs of the Emperor Jahángir a detail
of the wonderful performances of seven jugglers from Bengal who
exhibited before him. Two of their feats are thus described:
“_Ninth_. They produced a man whom they divided limb from limb,
actually severing his head from the body. They scattered these
mutilated members along the ground, and in this state they lay for
some time. They then extended a sheet or curtain over the spot, and
one of the men putting himself under the sheet, in a few minutes
came from below, followed by the individual supposed to have been
cut into joints, in perfect health and condition, and one might
have safely sworn that he had never received wound or injury
whatever ... _Twenty-third_. They produced a chain of 50 cubits in
length, and in my presence threw one end of it towards the sky,
_where it remained as if fastened to something in the air_. A dog
was then brought forward, and being placed at the lower end of the
chain, immediately ran up, and reaching the other end, _immediately
disappeared in the air_. In the same manner a hog, a panther, a
lion, and a tiger were successively sent up the chain, and all
equally disappeared at the upper end of the chain. At last they
took down the chain and put it into a bag, no one ever discovering
in what way the different animals were made to vanish into the air
in the mysterious manner above described.”

[There would appear (says the _Times of India_, quoted by the
_Weekly Dispatch_, 15th September, 1889) to be a fine field of
unworked romance in the annals of Indian jugglery. One Siddeshur
Mitter, writing to the Calcutta paper, gives a thrilling account
of a conjurer’s feat which he witnessed recently in one of the
villages of the Hooghly district. He saw the whole thing himself,
he tells us, so there need be no question about the facts. On the
particular afternoon when he visited the village the place was
occupied by a company of male and female jugglers, armed with
bags and boxes and musical instruments, and all the mysterious
paraphernalia of the peripatetic _Jadugar_. While Siddeshur was
looking on, and in the broad, clear light of the afternoon, a man
was shut up in a box, which was then carefully nailed up and bound
with cords. Weird spells and incantations of the style we are
all familiar with were followed by the breaking open of the box,
which, “to the unqualified amazement of everybody, was found to be
perfectly empty.” All this is much in the usual style; but what
followed was so much superior to the ordinary run of modern Indian
jugglery that we must give it in the simple Siddeshur’s own words.
When every one was satisfied that the man had really disappeared,
the principal performer, who did not seem to be at all astonished,
told his audience that the vanished man had gone up to the heavens
to fight Indra. “In a few moments,” says Siddeshur, “he expressed
anxiety at the man’s continued absence in the aerial regions, and
said that he would go up to see what was the matter. A boy was
called, who held upright a long bamboo, up which the man climbed
to the top, whereupon we suddenly lost sight of him, and the boy
laid the bamboo on the ground. Then there fell on the ground before
us the different members of a human body, all bloody,—first one
hand, then another, a foot, and so on, until complete. The boy then
elevated the bamboo, and the principal performer, appearing on
the top as suddenly as he had disappeared, came down, and seeming
quite disconsolate, said that Indra had killed his friend before
he could get there to save him. He then placed the mangled remains
in the same box, closed it, and tied it as before. Our wonder and
astonishment reached their climax when, a few minutes later, on the
box being again opened, the man jumped out perfectly hearty and
unhurt.” Is not this rather a severe strain on one’s credulity,
even for an Indian jugglery story?]

In Philostratus, again, we may learn the antiquity of some juggling
tricks that have come up as novelties in our own day. Thus at
Taxila a man set his son against a board, and then threw darts
tracing the outline of the boy’s figure on the board. This feat was
shown in London some fifteen or twenty years ago, and humorously
commemorated in _Punch_ by John Leech.

(_Philostratus_, Fr. Transl. Bk. III. ch. xv. and xxvii.; _Mich.
Glycas_, Ann. II. 156, Paris ed.; _Delrio, Disquis. Magic._ pp. 34,
100; _Koeppen_, I. 31, II. 82, 114–115, 260, 262, 280; _Vassilyev_,
156; _Della Penna_, 36; _S. Setzen_, 43, 353; _Pereg. Quat._ 117;
_I. B._ IV. 39 and 290 _seqq._; _Asiat. Researches_, XVII. 186;
_Valentyn_, V. 52–54; _Edward Melton, Engelsch Edelmans, Zeldzaame
en Gedenkwaardige Zee en Land Reizen, etc., aangevangen in den
Jaare 1660 en geendigd in den Jaare 1677_, Amsterdam, 1702, p. 468;
_Mem. of the Emp. Jahangueir_, pp. 99, 102.)

[Illustration: CHO-KHANG

The Grand Temple of Buddha at LHASA]

NOTE 12.—[“The maintenance of the Lamas, of their monasteries,
the expenses for the sacrifices and for transcription of sacred
books, required enormous sums. The Lamas enjoyed a preponderating
influence, and stood much higher than the priests of other creeds,
living in the palace as if in their own house. The perfumes, which
M. Polo mentions, were used by the Lamas for two purposes; they
used them for joss-sticks, and for making small turrets, known
under the name of _ts’a-ts’a_; the joss-sticks used to be burned
in the same way as they are now; the _ts’a-ts’a_ were inserted in
_suburgas_ or buried in the ground. At the time when the _suburga_
was built in the garden of the Peking palace in 1271, there were
used, according to the Empress’ wish, 1008 turrets made of the
most expensive perfumes, mixed with pounded gold, silver, pearls,
and corals, and 130,000 _ts’a-ts’a_ made of ordinary perfumes.”
(_Palladius_, 29.)—H. C.]

NOTE 13.—There is no exaggeration in this number. Turner speaks
of 2500 monks in one Tibetan convent. Huc mentions Chorchi, north
of the Great Wall, as containing 2000; and Kúnbúm, where he and
Gabet spent several months, on the borders of Shensi and Tibet, had
nearly 4000. The missionary itinerary from Nepal to L’hasa given by
Giorgi, speaks of a group of convents at a place called Brephung,
which formerly contained 10,000 inmates, and at the time of the
journey (about 1700) still contained 5000, including attendants.
Dr. Campbell gives a list of twelve chief convents in L’hasa and
its vicinity (not including the Potala or Residence of the Grand
Lama), of which one is said to have 7500 members, resident and
itinerary. Major Montgomerie’s Pandit gives the same convent 7700
Lamas. In the great monastery at L’hasa called _Labrang_, they
show a copper kettle holding more than 100 buckets, which was
used to make tea for the Lamas who performed the daily temple
service. The monasteries are usually, as the text says, like small
towns, clustered round the great temples. That represented at p.
224 is at Jehol, and is an imitation of the Potala at L’hasa.
(_Huc’s Tartary_, _etc._, pp. 45, 208, etc.; _Alph. Tibetan_, 453;
_J. A. S. B._ XXIV. 219; _J. R. G. S._ XXXVIII. 168; _Koeppen_,
II. 338.) [_La Géographie_, II. 1901, pp. 242–247, has an article
by Mr. J. Deniker, _La Première Photographie de Lhassa_, with a
view of _Potala_, in 1901, from a photograph by M. O. Norzunov;
it is interesting to compare it with the view given by Kircher in
1670.—H. C.]

[“The monasteries with numbers of monks, who, as M. Polo asserts,
behaved decently, evidently belonged to Chinese Buddhists,
_ho-shang_; in Kúblái’s time they had two monasteries in Shangtu,
in the north-east and north-west parts of the town.” (_Palladius_,
29.) Rubruck (_Rockhill’s_ ed. p. 145) says: “All the priests
(of the idolaters) shave their heads, and are dressed in saffron
colour, and they observe chastity from the time they shave their
heads, and they live in congregations of one or two hundred.”—H. C.]

NOTE 14.—There were many anomalies in the older Lamaism, and it
permitted, at least in some sects of it which still subsist, the
marriage of the clergy under certain limitations and conditions.
One of Giorgi’s missionaries speaks of a Lama of high _hereditary_
rank as a spiritual prince who marries, but separates from his
wife as soon as he has a son, who after certain trials is deemed
worthy to be his successor. [“A good number of Lamas were married,
as M. Polo correctly remarks; their wives were known amongst the
Chinese, under the name of _Fan-sao_.” (_Ch’ue keng lu_, quoted by
_Palladius_, 28.)—H. C.] One of the “_reforms_” of Tsongkhapa was
the absolute prohibition of marriage to the clergy, and in this
he followed the institutes of the oldest Buddhism. Even the _Red
Lamas_, or unreformed, cannot now marry without a dispensation.

But even the oldest orthodox Buddhism had its Lay brethren and Lay
sisters (_Upásaka_ and _Upásiká_), and these are to be found in
Tibet and Mongolia (_Voués au blanc_, as it were). They are called
by the Mongols, by a corruption of the Sanskrit, _Ubashi_ and
_Ubashanza_. Their vows extend to the strict keeping of the five
great commandments of the Buddhist Law, and they diligently ply the
rosary and the prayer-wheel, but they are not pledged to celibacy,
nor do they adopt the tonsure. As a sign of their amphibious
position, they commonly wear a red or yellow girdle. These are what
some travellers speak of as the lowest order of Lamas, permitted to
marry; and Polo may have regarded them in the same light.

(_Koeppen_, II. 82, 113, 276, 291; _Timk._ II. 354; _Erman_, II.
304; _Alph. Tibet._ 449.)

[Illustration: Monastery of Lamas.]

NOTE 15.—[Mr. Rockhill writes to me that “bran” is certainly
Tibetan _tsamba_ (parched barley).—H. C.]

NOTE 16.—Marco’s contempt for _Patarins_ slips out in a later
passage (Bk. III. ch. xx.). The name originated in the eleventh
century in Lombardy, where it came to be applied to the “heretics,”
otherwise called “Cathari.” Muratori has much on the origin of the
name Patarini, and mentions a monument, which still exists, in
the Piazza de’ Mercanti at Milan, in honour of Oldrado Podestà of
that city in 1233, and which thus, with more pith than grammar,
celebrates his meritorious acts:—

“Qui solium struxit Catharos _ut debuit_ UXIT.”

Other cities were as piously Catholic. A Mantuan chronicler records
under 1276: “Captum fuit Sermionum seu redditum fuit Ecclesiæ, et
capti fuerunt cercha CL Patarini contra fidem, inter masculos et
feminas; qui omnes ducti fuerunt Veronam, et ibi incarcerati, _et
pro magna parte_ COMBUSTI.” (_Murat. Dissert._ III. 238; _Archiv.
Stor. Ital._ N.S. I. 49.)

NOTE 17.—Marsden, followed by Pauthier, supposes these unorthodox
ascetics to be Hindu Sanyasis, and the latter editor supposes even
the name _Sensi_ or _Sensin_ to represent that denomination. Such
wanderers do occasionally find their way to Tartary; Gerbillon
mentions having encountered five of them at Kuku Khotan (_supra_,
p. 286), and I think John Bell speaks of meeting one still further
north. But what is said of the great and numerous idols of the
_Sensin_ is inconsistent with such a notion, as is indeed, it seems
to me, the whole scope of the passage. Evidently no occasional
vagabonds from a far country, but some indigenous sectaries, are
in question. Nor would bran and hot water be a Hindu regimen.
The staple diet of the Tibetans is _Chamba_, the meal of toasted
barley, mixed sometimes with warm water, but more frequently with
hot tea, and I think it is probable that these were the elements
of the ascetic diet rather than the mere _bran_ which Polo speaks
of. Semedo indeed says that some of the Buddhist devotees professed
never to take any food but tea; knowing people said they mixed
with it pellets of sun-dried beef. The determination of the sect
intended in the text is, I conceive, to be sought in the history of
Chinese or Tibetan Buddhism and their rivals.

Both Baldelli and Neumann have indicated a general opinion that
the _Taossé_ or some branch of that sect is meant, but they have
entered into no particulars except in a reference by the former to
_Shien-sien_, a title of perfection affected by that sect, as the
origin of Polo’s term _Sensin_. In the substance of this I think
they are right. But I believe that in the text this Chinese sect
are, rightly or wrongly, identified with the ancient Tibetan sect
of _Bon-po_, and that part of the characters assigned belong to
each.

First with regard to the _Taossé_. These were evidently the
_Patarini_ of the Buddhists in China at this time, and Polo was
probably aware of the persecution which the latter had stirred up
Kúblái to direct against them in 1281—persecution at least it is
called, though it was but a mild proceeding in comparison with the
thing contemporaneously practised in Christian Lombardy, for in
heathen Cathay, books, and not human creatures, were the subjects
doomed to burn, and even that doom was not carried out.

[“The Tao-sze,” says M. Polo, “were looked upon as heretics by
the other sects; that is, of course, by the Lamas and Ho-shangs;
in fact in his time a passionate struggle was going on between
Buddhists and Tao-sze, or rather a persecution of the latter by the
former; the Buddhists attributed to the doctrine of the Tao-sze a
pernicious tendency, and accused them of deceit; and in support
of these assertions they pointed to some of their sacred books.
Taking advantage of their influence at Court, they persuaded Kúblái
to decree the burning of these books, and it was carried out in
Peking.” (_Palladius_, 30.)—H. C.]

The term which Polo writes as _Sensin_ appears to have been that
popularly applied to the Taossé sect at the Mongol Court. Thus we
are told by Rashíduddín in his History of Cathay: “In the reign
of Din-Wang, the 20th king of this (the 11th) Dynasty, TAI SHANG
LÁI KÚN, was born. This person is stated to have been accounted a
prophet by the people of Khitá; his father’s name was Hán; like
Shák-múni he is said to have been conceived by light, and it is
related that his mother bore him in her womb no less a period than
80 years. The people who embraced his doctrine were called شن شن
(_Shăn-shăn_ or _Shinshin_).” This is a correct epitome of the
Chinese story of _Laokiun_ or _Lao-tsé_, born in the reign of _Ting
Wang_ of the Cheu Dynasty. The whole title used by Rashíduddín,
_Tai Shang Lao Kiun_, “The Great Supreme Venerable Ruler,” is that
formerly applied by the Chinese to this philosopher.

Further, in a Mongol [and Chinese] inscription of the year 1314
from the department of Si-ngan fu, which has been interpreted and
published by Mr. Wylie, the Taossé priests are termed _Senshing_.
[See _Devéria, Notes d’Épigraphie_, pp. 39–43, and Prince _R.
Bonaparte’s Recueil_, Pl. xii. No. 3.—H. C.]

Seeing then that the very term used by Polo is that applied by both
Mongol and Persian authorities of the period to the Taossé, we can
have no doubt that the latter are indicated, whether the facts
stated about them be correct or not.

The word Senshing-ud (the Mongol plural) is represented in the
Chinese version of Mr. Wylie’s inscription by _Sín-săng_, a
conventional title applied to literary men, and this perhaps is
sufficient to determine the Chinese word which _Sensin_ represents.
I should otherwise have supposed it to be the _Shin-sian_ alluded
to by Baldelli, and mentioned in the quotations which follow;
and indeed it seems highly probable that two terms so much alike
should have been confounded by foreigners. Semedo says of the
Taossé: “They pretend that by means of certain exercises and
meditations one shall regain his youth, and others shall attain to
be _Shien-sien_, _i.e._ ‘Terrestrial Beati,’ in whose state every
desire is gratified, whilst they have the power to transport
themselves from one place to another, however distant, with speed
and facility.” Schott, on the same subject, says: “By _Sian_ or
_Shin-sian_ are understood in the old Chinese conception, and
particularly in that of the Tao-Kiao [or Taossé] sect, persons
who withdraw to the hills to lead the life of anchorites, and who
have attained, either through their ascetic observances or by the
power of charms and elixirs, to the possession of miraculous gifts
and of terrestrial immortality.” And M. Pauthier himself, in his
translation of the Journey of Khieu, an eminent doctor of this
sect, to the camp of the Great Chinghiz in Turkestan, has related
how Chinghiz bestowed upon this personage “a seal with a tiger’s
head and a diploma” (surely a lion’s head, _P’aizah_ and _Yarligh_;
see _infra_, Bk. II. ch. vii. note 2), “wherein he was styled _Shin
Sien_ or Divine Anchorite.” _Sian-jin_ again is the word used by
Hiuen Tsang as the equivalent to the name of the Indian _Rishis_,
who attain to supernatural powers.

[“_Sensin_ is a sufficiently faithful transcription of _Sien-seng_
(Sien-shing in Pekingese); the name given by the Mongols in
conversation as well as in official documents, to the Tao-sze,
in the sense of preceptors, just as Lamas were called by them
_Bacshi_, which corresponds to the Chinese _Sien-seng_. M. Polo
calls them fasters and ascetics. It was one of the sects of
Taouism. There was another one which practised cabalistic and other
mysteries. The Tao-sze had two monasteries in Shangtu, one in the
eastern, the other in the western part of the town.” (_Palladius_,
30.) —H. C.]

One class of the Tao priests or devotees does marry, but another
class never does. Many of them lead a wandering life, and
derive a precarious subsistence from the sale of charms and
medical nostrums. They shave the sides of the head, and coil the
remaining hair in a tuft on the crown, in the ancient Chinese
manner; moreover, says Williams, they “_are recognised by their
slate-coloured robes_.” On the feast of one of their divinities
whose title Williams translates as “High Emperor of the Sombre
Heavens,” they assemble before his temple, “and having made a
great fire, about 15 or 20 feet in diameter, go over it barefoot,
preceded by the priests and bearing the gods in their arms. They
firmly assert that if they possess a sincere mind they will not
be injured by the fire; but both priests and people get miserably
burnt on these occasions.” Escayrac de Lauture says that on those
days they leap, dance, and whirl round the fire, striking at the
devils with a straight Roman-like sword, and sometimes wounding
themselves as the priests of Baal and Moloch used to do.

(_Astley_, IV. 671; _Morley_ in _J. R. A. S._ VI. 24; _Semedo_,
111, 114; _De Mailla_, IX. 410; _J. As._ sér. V. tom. viii. 138;
_Schott über den Buddhismus_ etc. 71; _Voyage de Khieou_ in _J.
As._ sér. VI. tom. ix. 41; _Middle Kingdom_, II. 247; _Doolittle_,
192; _Esc. de Lauture, Mém. sur la Chine, Religion_, 87, 102;
_Pèler. Boudd._ II. 370, and III. 468.)

Let us now turn to the _Bon-po_. Of this form of religion and
its sectaries not much is known, for it is now confined to the
eastern and least known part of Tibet. It is, however, believed
to be a remnant of the old pre-Buddhistic worship of the powers
of nature, though much modified by the Buddhistic worship with
which it has so long been in contact. Mr. Hodgson also pronounces
a collection of drawings of Bonpo divinities, which were made for
him by a mendicant friar of the sect from the neighbourhood of
Tachindu, or Ta-t’sien-lu, to be saturated with _Sakta_ attributes,
_i.e._ with the spirit of the Tantrika worship, a worship which he
tersely defines as “a mixture of lust, ferocity, and mummery,”
and which he believes to have originated in an incorporation with
the Indian religions of the rude superstitions of the primitive
Turanians. Mr. Hodgson was told that the Bonpo sect still possessed
numerous and wealthy Vihars (or abbeys) in Tibet. But from the
information of the Catholic missionaries in Eastern Tibet, who
have come into closest contact with the sect, it appears to be now
in a state of great decadence, “oppressed by the Lamas of other
sects, the _Peunbo_ (Bonpo) think only of shaking off the yoke,
and getting deliverance from the vexations which the smallness of
their number forces them to endure.” In June, 1863, apparently
from such despairing motives, the Lamas of Tsodam, a Bonpo convent
in the vicinity of the mission settlement of Bonga in E. Tibet,
invited the Rev. Gabriel Durand to come and instruct them. “In
this temple,” he writes, “are the _monstrous idols_ of the sect
of Peunbo; horrid figures, whose features only Satan could have
inspired. They are disposed about the enclosure according to their
power and their seniority. Above the pagoda is a loft, the nooks
of which are crammed with all kinds of diabolical trumpery; little
idols of wood or copper, hideous masques of men and animals,
superstitious Lama vestments, drums, trumpets of human bones,
sacrificial vessels, in short, all the utensils with which the
devil’s servants in Tibet honour their master. And what will
become of it all? The Great River, whose waves roll to Martaban
(the Lu-kiang or Salwen), is not more than 200 or 300 paces
distant.... Besides the infernal paintings on the walls, eight
or nine monstrous idols, seated at the inner end of the pagoda,
were calculated by their size and aspect to inspire awe. In the
middle was _Tamba-Shi-Rob_, the great doctor of the sect of the
Peunbo, squatted with his right arm outside his red scarf, and
holding in his left the vase of knowledge.... On his right hand
sat _Keumta-Zon-bo_, ‘the All-Good,’ ... with ten hands and three
heads, one over the other.... At his right is _Dreuma_, the most
celebrated goddess of the sect. On the left of Tamba-Shi-Rob was
another goddess, whose name they never could tell me. On the left
again of this anonymous goddess appeared _Tam-pla-mi-ber_, ...
a monstrous dwarf environed by flames and his head garnished
with a diadem of skulls. _He trod with one foot on the head of
Shakia-tupa_ [_Shakya Thubba_, _i.e._ ‘the Mighty Shakya,’ the usual
Tibetan appellation of Sakya Buddha himself].... The idols are made
of a coarse composition of mud and stalks kneaded together, on
which they put first a coat of plaster and then various colours, or
even silver or gold.... _Four oxen would scarcely have been able to
draw one of the idols_.” Mr. Emilius Schlagintweit, in a paper on
the subject of this sect, has explained some of the names used by
the missionary. _Tamba-Shi-Rob_ is “_bs_tanpa _g_Shen-rabs,” _i.e._
the doctrine of Shen-rabs, who is regarded as the founder of the
Bon religion. [Cf. _Grenard_, II. 407.—H. C.] _Keun-tu-zon-bo_ is
“Kun-tu-_b_zang-po,” “_the All Best_.”

[_Bon-po_ seems to be (according to Grenard, II. 410) a “coarse
naturism combined with ancestral worship” resembling Taoism. It
has, however, borrowed a good deal from Buddhism. “I noticed,”
says Mr. Rockhill (_Journey_, 86), “a couple of grimy volumes
of Bönbo sacred literature. One of them I examined; it was a
funeral service, and was in the usual Bönbo jargon, three-fourths
Buddhistic in its nomenclature.” The Bon-po Lamas are above all
sorcerers and necromancers, and are very similar to the _kam_
of the Northern Turks, the _bô_ of the Mongols, and lastly to
the _Shamans_. During their operations, they wear a tall pointed
black hat, surmounted by the feather of a peacock, or of a cock,
and a human skull. Their principal divinities are the White God
of Heaven, the Black Goddess of Earth, the Red Tiger and the
Dragon; they worship an idol called _Kye’-p’ang_ formed of a mere
block of wood covered with garments. Their sacred symbol is the
_svastika_ turned from right to left 卍. The most important of
their monasteries is Zo-chen gum-pa, in the north-east of Tibet,
where they print most of their books. The Bonpos Lamas “are very
popular with the agricultural Tibetans, but not so much so with the
pastoral tribes, who nearly all belong to the Gélupa sect of the
orthodox Buddhist Church.” A. K. says, “Buddhism is the religion of
the country; there are two sects, one named Mangba and the other
Chiba or Baimbu.” _Explorations made by A—— K——_, 34. _Mangba_ means
“Esoteric,” _Chiba_ (_p’yi-ba_), “Exoteric,” and _Baimbu_ is Bönbo.
_Rockhill, Journey_, 289, _et passim.; Land of the Lamas_, 217–218;
_Grenard, Mission Scientifique_, II. 407 _seqq._—H. C.]

There is an indication in Koeppen’s references that the followers
of the _Bon_ doctrine are sometimes called in Tibet _Nag-choi_,
or “Black Sect,” as the old and the reformed Lamas are called
respectively the “Red” and the “Yellow.” If so, it is reasonable
to conclude that the first appellation, like the two last, has a
reference to the colour of clothing affected by the priesthood.

The Rev. Mr. Jaeschke writes from Lahaul: “There are no Bonpos in
our part of the country, and as far as we know there cannot be many
of them in the whole of Western Tibet, _i.e._ in Ladak, Spiti, and
all the non-Chinese provinces together; we know, therefore, not
much more of them than has been made known to the European public
by different writers on Buddhism in Tibet, and lately collected
by Emil de Schlagintweit.... Whether they can be with certainty
identified with the Chinese _Taossé_ I cannot decide, as I don’t
know if anything like historical evidence about their Chinese
origin has been detected anywhere, or if it is merely a conclusion
from the similarity of their doctrines and practices.... But the
Chinese author of the _Wei-tsang-tu-Shi_, translated by Klaproth,
under the title of _Description du Tubet_ (Paris, 1831), renders
_Bonpo_ by _Taossé_. So much seems to be certain that it was the
ancient religion of Tibet, before Buddhism penetrated into the
country, and that even at later periods it several times gained the
ascendancy when the secular power was of a disposition averse to
the Lamaitic hierarchy. Another opinion is that the Bon religion
was originally a mere fetishism, and related to or identical with
Shamanism; this appears to me very probable and easy to reconcile
with the former supposition, for it may afterwards, on becoming
acquainted with the Chinese doctrine of the ‘Taossé,’ have adorned
itself with many of its tenets.... With regard to the following
particulars, I have got most of my information from our Lama, a
native of the neighbourhood of Tashi Lhunpo, whom we consulted
about all your questions. The extraordinary asceticism which
struck Marco Polo so much is of course not to be understood as
being practised by all members of the sect, but exclusively, or
more especially, by the _priests_. That these _never_ marry, and
are consequently more strictly celibatary than many sects of the
Lamaitic priesthood, was confirmed by our Lama.” (Mr. Jaeschke then
remarks upon the _bran_ to much the same effect as I have done
above.) “The Bonpos are by all Buddhists regarded as heretics.
Though they worship idols partly the same, at least in name, with
those of the Buddhists, ... their rites seem to be very different.
The most conspicuous and most generally known of their customs,
futile in itself, but in the eyes of the common people the greatest
sign of their sinful heresy, is that they perform the religious
ceremony of making a turn round a sacred object _in the opposite
direction_ to that prescribed by Buddhism. As to their dress, our
Lama said that they had no particular colour of garments, but their
priests frequently wore red clothes, as some sects of the Buddhist
priesthood do. Mr. Heyde, however, once on a journey in our
neighbouring county of Langskar, saw a man _clothed in black with
blue borders_, who the people said was a _Bonpo_.”

[Mr. Rockhill (_Journey _, 63) saw at Kao miao-tzŭ “a _red_-gowned,
long-haired Bönbo Lama,” and at Kumbum (p. 68), “was surprised to
see quite a large number of Bönbo Lamas, recognisable by their
huge mops of hair and their _red_ gowns, and also from their being
dirtier than the ordinary run of people.”—H. C.]

The identity of the Bonpo and Taossé seems to have been accepted by
Csoma de Körös, who identifies the Chinese founder of the latter,
Lao-tseu, with the Shen-rabs of the Tibetan Bonpos. Klaproth
also says, “Bhonbp’o, Bhanpo, and _Shen_, are the names by which
are commonly designated (in Tibetan) the Taoszu, or followers of
the Chinese philosopher Laotseu.”[11] Schlagintweit refers to
Schmidt’s Tibetan Grammar (p. 209) and to the Calcutta edition of
the _Fo-kouè-ki_ (p. 218) for the like identification, but I do
not know how far any two of these are independent testimonies.
General Cunningham, however, fully accepts the identity, and
writes to me: “Fahian (ch. xxiii.) calls the heretics who
assembled at Râmagrâma _Taossé_,[12] thus identifying them with
the Chinese Finitimists. The Taossé are, therefore, the same as
the _Swâstikas_, or worshippers of the mystic cross _Swasti_,
who are also _Tirthakaras_, or ‘Pure-doers.’ The synonymous word
_Punya_ is probably the origin of _Pon_ or _Bon_, the Tibetan
Finitimists. From the same word comes the Burmese _P’ungyi_ or
_Pungi_.” I may add that the Chinese envoy to Cambodia in 1296,
whose narrative Rémusat has translated, describes a sect which he
encountered there, apparently Brahminical, as _Taossé_. And even
if the Bonpo and the Taossé were not fundamentally identical, it
is extremely probable that the Tibetan and Mongol Buddhists should
have applied to them one name and character. Each played towards
them the same part in Tibet and in China respectively; both were
heretic sects and hated rivals; both made high pretensions to
asceticism and supernatural powers; both, I think we see reason
to believe, affected the dark clothing which Polo assigns to the
_Sensin_; both, we may add, had “great idols and plenty of them.”
We have seen in the account of the Taossé the ground that certain
of their ceremonies afford for the allegation that they “sometimes
also worship fire,” whilst the whole account of that rite and of
others mentioned by Duhalde,[13] shows what a powerful element of
the old devil-dancing Shamanism there is in their practice. The
French Jesuit, on the other hand, shows us what a prominent place
female divinities occupied in the Bon-po Pantheon,[14] though we
cannot say of either sect that “their idols are all feminine.” A
strong symptom of relation between the two religions, by the way,
occurs in M. Durand’s account of the Bon Temple. We see there that
_Shen-rabs_, the great doctor of the sect, occupies a chief and
central place among the idols. Now in the Chinese temples of the
Taossé the figure of _their_ Doctor _Lao-tseu_ is one member of
the triad called the “Three Pure Ones,” which constitute the chief
objects of worship. This very title recalls General Cunningham’s
etymology of Bonpo.

[Illustration: Tibetan Bacsi.]

[At the quarterly fair (_yueh kai_) of Ta-li (Yun-Nan), Mr. E.
C. Baber (_Travels_, 158–159) says: “A Fakir with a praying
machine, which he twirled for the salvation of the pious at the
price of a few cash, was at once recognised by us; he was our old
acquaintance, the Bakhsi, whose portrait is given in _Colonel
Yule’s Marco Polo_.”—H. C.]

(_Hodgson_, in _J. R. A. S._ XVIII. 396 _seqq._; _Ann. de la Prop.
de la Foi_, XXXVI. 301–302, 424–427; _E. Schlagintweit, Ueber die
Bon-pa Sekte in Tibet_, in the _Sitzensberichte_ of the Munich
Acad. for 1866, Heft I. pp. 1–12; _Koeppen_, II. 260; _Ladak_,
p. 358; _J. As._ sér. II. tom. i. 411–412; _Rémusat. Nouv. Mél.
Asiat._ I. 112; _Astley_, IV. 205; _Doolittle_, 191.)

NOTE 18.—Pauthier’s text has _blons_, no doubt an error for
_blous_. In the G. Text it is _bloies_. Pauthier interprets the
latter term as “blond ardent,” whilst the glossary to the G. Text
explains it as both _blue_ and _white_. _Raynouard’s Romance Dict._
explains _Bloi_ as “Blond.” Ramusio has _biave_, and I have no
doubt that _blue_ is the meaning. The same word (_bloie_) is used
in the G. Text, where Polo speaks of the bright colours of the
Palace tiles at Cambaluc, and where Pauthier’s text has “_vermeil
et jaune et vert_ et blou,” and again (_infra_, Bk. II. ch. xix.),
where the two corps of huntsmen are said to be clad respectively in
_vermeil_ and in _bloie_. Here, again, Pauthier’s text has _bleu_.
The Crusca in the description of the _Sensin_ omits the colours
altogether; in the two other passages referred to it has _bioda,
biodo_.

[“The Tao-sze, says Marco Polo, wear dresses of black and blue
linen; _i.e._ they wear dresses made of tatters of black and blue
linen, as can be seen also at the present day.” (_Palladius_,
30.)—H. C.]

NOTE 19.—[“The idols of the Tao-sze, according to Marco Polo’s
statement, have female names; in fact, there are in the pantheon
of Taoism a great many female divinities, still enjoying popular
veneration in China; such are _Tow Mu_ (the ‘Ursa major,’
constellation), _Pi-hia-yuen Kiun_ (the celestial queen), female
divinities for lying-in women, for children, for diseases of the
eyes; and others, which are to be seen everywhere. The Tao-sze
have, besides these, a good number of male divinities, bearing
the title of _Kiun_ in common with female divinities; both
these circumstances might have led Marco Polo to make the above
statement.” (_Palladius_, p. 30.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This distance is taken from a tracing of the map prepared for Dr.
Bushell’s paper quoted below. But there is a serious discrepancy
between this tracing and the observed position of Dolon-nor, which
determines that of Shang-tu, as stated to me in a letter from Dr.
Bushell. [See Note 1.]

[2] These particulars were obtained by Dr. Bushell through the
Archimandrite Palladius, from the MS. account of a Chinese
traveller who visited Shangtu about two hundred years ago, when
probably the whole inscription was above ground. The inscription is
also mentioned in the Imp. Geography of the present Dynasty, quoted
by Klaproth. This work gives the interior wall 5 _li_ to the side,
instead of 2 _li_, and the outer wall 10 _li_, instead of 4 _li_.
By Dr. Bushell’s kindness, I give a reduction of his sketch plan
(see _Itinerary Map_, No. IV. at end of this volume), and also a
plate of the heading of the inscription. The translation of this
is: “Monument conferred by the Emperor of the August Yuen (Dynasty)
in memory of His High Eminence Yun Hien (styled) Chang-Lao
(canonised as) Shou-Kung (Prince of Longevity).” [See _Missions de
Chine et du Congo_, No. 28, Mars, 1891, Bruxelles.]

[3] Ramusio’s version runs thus: “The palace presents one side to the
centre of the city and the other to the city wall. And from either
extremity of the palace where it touches the city wall, there runs
another wall, which fetches a compass and encloses a good 16 miles
of plain, and so that no one can enter this enclosure except by
passing through the palace.”

[4] This narrative, translated from Chinese into Russian by Father
Palladius, and from the Russian into English by Mr. Eugene
Schuyler, Secretary of the U.S. Legation at St. Petersburg, was
obligingly sent to me by the latter gentleman, and appeared in the
_Geographical Magazine_ for January, 1875, p. 7.

[5] See Bk. II. chap. xiv. note 3.

[6] In the first edition I had supposed a derivation of the Persian
words _Jádú_ and _Jádúgari_, used commonly in India for conjuring,
from the Tartar use of _Yadah_. And Pallas says the Kirghiz call
their witches _Jádugar_. (_Voy._ II. 298.) But I am assured by Sir
H. Rawlinson that this etymology is more than doubtful, and that at
any rate the Persian (_Jádú_) is probably older than the Turkish
term. I see that M. Pavet de Courteille derives _Yadah_ from a
Mongol word signifying “change of weather,” etc.

[7] [See W. Foerster’s ed., _Halle_, 1887, p. 15, 386.—H. C.]

[8] A young Afghan related in the presence of Arthur Conolly at Herat
that on a certain occasion when provisions ran short the Russian
General gave orders that 50,000 men should be killed and served out
as rations! (I. 346.)

[9] Ar. _Táfir_, a sordid, squalid fellow.

[10] [Cf. Paulin Paris’s ed., 1848, II. p. 5.—H. C.]

[11] _Shen_, or coupled with _jin_ “people,” _Shenjin_, in this sense
affords another possible origin of the word _Sensin_; but it may in
fact be at bottom, as regards the first syllable, the same with the
etymology we have preferred.

[12] I do not find this allusion in Mr. Beal’s new version of Fahian.
[See Rémusat’s éd. p. 227; Klaproth says (_Ibid._ p. 230) that the
_Tao-szu_ are called in Tibetan _Bonbò_ and _Youngdhroungpa_.—H.
C.]

[13] Apparently they had at their command the whole encyclopædia of
modern “Spiritualists.” Duhalde mentions among their sorceries
the art of producing by their invocations the figures of Lao-tseu
and their divinities in the air, and of _making a pencil to write
answers to questions without anybody touching it_.

[14] It is possible that this may point to some report of the mystic
impurities of the Tantrists. The _Saktián_, or Tantrists, according
to the Dabistan, hold that the worship of a female divinity affords
a greater recompense. (II. 155.)

BOOK SECOND.

(1.) ACCOUNT OF THE GREAT KAAN CUBLAY; OF HIS PALACES AND CAPITAL; HIS
COURT, GOVERNMENT, AND SPORTS.

(2.) CITIES AND PROVINCES VISITED BY THE TRAVELLER ON ONE JOURNEY
WESTWARD FROM THE CAPITAL TO THE FRONTIERS OF MIEN IN THE DIRECTION
OF INDIA.

(3.) AND ON ANOTHER SOUTHWARD FROM THE CAPITAL TO FUCHU AND ZAYTON.

BOOK II.

PART I.—THE KAAN, HIS COURT AND CAPITAL.

CHAPTER I.

OF CUBLAY KAAN, THE GREAT KAAN NOW REIGNING, AND OF HIS
GREAT PUISSANCE.

Now am I come to that part of our Book in which I shall tell you of
the great and wonderful magnificence of the Great Kaan now reigning,
by name CUBLAY KAAN; _Kaan_ being a title which signifyeth “The Great
Lord of Lords,” or Emperor. And of a surety he hath good right to such
a title, for all men know for a certain truth that he is the most
potent man, as regards forces and lands and treasure, that existeth in
the world, or ever hath existed from the time of our First Father Adam
until this day. All this I will make clear to you for truth, in this
book of ours, so that every one shall be fain to acknowledge that he is
the greatest Lord that is now in the world, or ever hath been. And now
ye shall hear how and wherefore.{1}

NOTE 1.—According to Sanang Setzen, Chinghiz himself discerned
young Kúblái’s superiority. On his deathbed he said: “The words of
the lad Kúblái are well worth attention; see, all of you, that ye
heed what he says! One day he will sit in my seat and bring you
good fortune such as you have had in my day!” (p. 105).

The Persian history of Wassáf thus exalts Kúblái: “Although from
the frontiers of this country (’Irák) to the Centre of Empire,
the Focus of the Universe, the genial abode of the ever-Fortunate
Emperor and Just Kaan, is a whole year’s journey, yet the stories
that have been spread abroad, even in these parts, of his glorious
deeds, his institutes, his decisions, his justice, the largeness
and acuteness of his intellect, his correctness of judgment,
his great powers of administration, from the mouths of credible
witnesses, of well-known merchants and eminent travellers, are
so surpassing, that one beam of his glories, one fraction of his
great qualities, suffices to eclipse all that history tells of
the Cæsars of Rome, of the Chosroes of Persia, of the Khagans of
China, of the (Himyarite) Kails of Arabia, of the Tobbas of Yemen,
and the Rajas of India, of the monarchs of the houses of Sassan and
Búya, and of the Seljukian Sultans.” (_Hammer’s Wassaf_, orig. p.
37.)

Some remarks on Kúblái and his government by a Chinese author, in
a more rational and discriminative tone, will be found below under
ch. xxiii., note 2.

A curious Low-German MS. at Cologne, giving an account of the East,
says of the “Keyser von Kathagien—syn recht Name is der groisse
_Hunt!_” (Magnus Canis, the Big Bow-wow as it were. See _Orient und
Occident_, vol. i. p. 640.)

CHAPTER II.

CONCERNING THE REVOLT OF NAYAN, WHO WAS UNCLE TO THE
GREAT KAAN CUBLAY.

Now this Cublay Kaan is of the right Imperial lineage, being descended
from Chinghis Kaan, the first sovereign of all the Tartars. And he is
the sixth Lord in that succession, as I have already told you in this
book. He came to the throne in the year of Christ, 1256, and the Empire
fell to him because of his ability and valour and great worth, as was
right and reason.{1} His brothers, indeed, and other kinsmen disputed
his claim, but his it remained, both because maintained by his great
valour, and because it was in law and right his, as being directly
sprung of the imperial line.

Up to the year of Christ now running, to wit 1298, he hath reigned
two-and-forty years, and his age is about eighty-five, so that he must
have been about forty-three years of age when he first came to the
throne.{2} Before that time he had often been to the wars, and had
shown himself a gallant soldier and an excellent captain. But after
coming to the throne he never went to the wars in person save once.{3}
This befel in the year of Christ, 1286, and I will tell you why he went.

There was a great Tartar Chief, whose name was NAYAN,{4} a young man
[of thirty], Lord over many lands and many provinces; and he was Uncle
to the Emperor Cublay Kaan of whom we are speaking. And when he found
himself in authority this Nayan waxed proud in the insolence of his
youth and his great power; for indeed he could bring into the field
300,000 horsemen, though all the time he was liegeman to his nephew,
the Great Kaan Cublay, as was right and reason. Seeing then what great
power he had, he took it into his head that he would be the Great
Kaan’s vassal no longer; nay more, he would fain wrest his empire from
him if he could. So this Nayan sent envoys to another Tartar Prince
called CAIDU, also a great and potent Lord, who was a kinsman of his,
and who was a nephew of the Great Kaan and his lawful liegeman also,
though he was in rebellion and at bitter enmity with his sovereign Lord
and Uncle. Now the message that Nayan sent was this: That he himself
was making ready to march against the Great Kaan with all his forces
(which were great), and he begged Caidu to do likewise from his side,
so that by attacking Cublay on two sides at once with such great forces
they would be able to wrest his dominion from him.

And when Caidu heard the message of Nayan, he was right glad thereat,
and thought the time was come at last to gain his object. So he sent
back answer that he would do as requested; and got ready his host,
which mustered a good hundred thousand horsemen.

Now let us go back to the Great Kaan, who had news of all this plot.

NOTE 1.—There is no doubt that Kúblái was proclaimed Kaan in 1260
(4th month), his brother Mangku Kaan having perished during the
seige of Hochau in Szechwan in August of the preceding year. But
Kúblái had come into Cathay some years before as his brother’s
Lieutenant.

He was the _fifth_, not sixth, Supreme Kaan, as we have already
noticed. (Bk. I. ch. li. note 2.)

NOTE 2.—Kúblái was born in the eighth month of the year
corresponding to 1216, and had he lived to 1298 would have been
eighty-two years old. [According to Dr. E. Bretschneider (_Peking_,
30), quoting the _Yuen-Shi_, Kúblái died at Khanbaligh, in the
Tze-t’an tien in February, 1294.—H. C.] But by Mahomedan reckoning
he would have been close upon eighty-five. He was the fourth son of
Tuli, who was the youngest of Chinghiz’s four sons by his favourite
wife Burté Fujin. (See _De Mailla_, IX. 255, etc.)

NOTE 3.—This is not literally true; for soon after his accession
(in 1261) Kúblái led an army against his brother and rival
Arikbuga, and defeated him. And again in his old age, if we credit
the Chinese annalist, in 1289, when his grandson Kanmala (or
Kambala) was beaten on the northern frontier by Kaidu, Kúblái took
the field himself, though on his approach the rebels disappeared.

Kúblái and his brother Hulaku, young as they were, commenced their
military career on Chinghiz’s last expedition (1226–1227). His most
notable campaign was the conquest of Yunnan in 1253–1254. (_De
Mailla_, IX. 298, 441.)

NOTE 4.—NAYAN was no “uncle” of Kúblái’s, but a cousin in a junior
generation. For Kúblái was the grandson of Chinghiz, and Nayan was
the great-great-grandson of Chinghiz’s brother Uchegin, called in
the Chinese annals Pilgutai. [Belgutai was Chinghiz’s step-brother.
(_Palladius_.)—H. C.] On this brother, the great-uncle of Kúblái,
and the commander of the latter’s forces against Arikbuga in the
beginning of the reign, both Chinghiz and Kúblái had bestowed large
territories in Eastern Tartary towards the frontier of Corea, and
north of Liaotong towards the Manchu country. [“The situation
and limits of his appanage are not clearly defined in history.
According to Belgutai’s biography, it was between the Onon and
Kerulen (_Yuen shi_), and according to Shin Yao’s researches (_Lo
fung low wen kao_), at the confluence of the Argun and Shilka.
Finally, according to Harabadur’s biography, it was situated in
Abalahu, which geographically and etymologically corresponds to
modern Butkha (_Yuen shi_); Abalahu, as Kúblái himself said, was
rich in fish; indeed, after the suppression of Nayan’s rebellion,
the governor of that country used to send to the Peking Court
fishes weighing up to a thousand Chinese pounds (_kin_.). It was
evidently a country near the Amur River.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._
31.)—H. C.] Nayan had added to his inherited territory, and become
very powerful. [“History has apparently connected Nayan’s appanage
with that of Hatan (a grandson of Hachiun, brother of Chinghiz
Khan), whose _ordo_ was contiguous to Nayan’s, on the left bank of
the Amur, hypothetically east of Blagovietschensk, on the spot,
where still the traces of an ancient city can be seen. Nayan’s
possessions stretched south to Kwang-ning, which belonged to his
appanage, and it was from this town that he had the title of prince
of Kwang-ning (_Yuen shi_).” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ 31.)—H. C.] Kaidu
had gained influence over Nayan, and persuaded him to rise against
Kúblái. A number of the other Mongol princes took part with him.
Kúblái was much disquieted at the rumours, and sent his great
lieutenant BAYAN to reconnoitre. Bayan was nearly captured, but
escaped to court and reported to his master the great armament that
Nayan was preparing. Kúblái succeeded by diplomacy in detaching
some of the princes from the enterprise, and resolved to march in
person to the scene of action, whilst despatching Bayan to the
Karakorum frontier to intercept Kaidu. This was in the summer of
1287. What followed will be found in a subsequent note (ch. iv.
note 6). (For Nayan’s descent, see the Genealogical Table in the
Appendix (A).)

CHAPTER III.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN MARCHED AGAINST NAYAN.

When the Great Kaan heard what was afoot, he made his preparations in
right good heart, like one who feared not the issue of an attempt so
contrary to justice. Confident in his own conduct and prowess, he was
in no degree disturbed, but vowed that he would never wear crown again
if he brought not those two traitorous and disloyal Tartar chiefs to
an ill end. So swiftly and secretly were his preparations made, that
no one knew of them but his Privy Council, and all were completed
within ten or twelve days. In that time he had assembled good 360,000
horsemen, and 100,000 footmen,—but a small force indeed for him, and
consisting only of those that were in the vicinity. For the rest of
his vast and innumerable forces were too far off to answer so hasty a
summons, being engaged under orders from him on distant expeditions to
conquer divers countries and provinces. If he had waited to summon all
his troops, the multitude assembled would have been beyond all belief,
a multitude such as never was heard of or told of, past all counting.
In fact, those 360,000 horsemen that he got together consisted merely
of the falconers and whippers-in that were about the court!{1}

And when he had got ready this handful (as it were) of his troops,
he ordered his astrologers to declare whether he should gain the
battle and get the better of his enemies. After they had made their
observations, they told him to go on boldly, for he would conquer and
gain a glorious victory: whereat he greatly rejoiced.

So he marched with his army, and after advancing for 20 days they
arrived at a great plain where Nayan lay with all his host, amounting
to some 400,000 horse. Now the Great Kaan’s forces arrived so fast and
so suddenly that the others knew nothing of the matter. For the Kaan
had caused such strict watch to be made in every direction for scouts
that every one that appeared was instantly captured. Thus Nayan had no
warning of his coming and was completely taken by surprise; insomuch
that when the Great Kaan’s army came up, he was asleep in the arms of a
wife of his of whom he was extravagantly fond. So thus you see why it
was that the Emperor equipped his force with such speed and secrecy.

NOTE 1.—I am afraid Marco, in his desire to impress on his
readers the great power of the Kaan, is here giving the reins to
exaggeration on a great scale.

Ramusio has here the following explanatory addition:—“You must know
that in all the Provinces of Cathay and Mangi, and throughout the
Great Kaan’s dominions, there are too many disloyal folk ready to
break into rebellion against their Lord, and hence it is needful
in every province containing large cities and much population, to
maintain garrisons. These are stationed four or five miles from
the cities, and the latter are not allowed to have walls or gates
by which they might obstruct the entrance of the troops at their
pleasure. These garrisons as well as their commanders the Great
Kaan causes to be relieved every two years; and bridled in this way
the people are kept quiet, and can make no disturbance. The troops
are maintained not only by the pay which the Kaan regularly assigns
from the revenues of each province, but also by the vast quantities
of cattle which they keep, and by the sale of milk in the cities,
which furnishes the means of buying what they require. They are
scattered among their different stations, at distances of 30, 40,
or 60 days (from the capital); and had Cublay decided to summon but
the half of them, the number would have been incredible,” etc.

[Palladius says (p. 37) that in the Mongol-Chinese documents, the
Mongol garrisons cantoned near the Chinese towns are mentioned
under the name of _Aolu_, but no explanation of the term is
given.—H. C.]

The system of controlling garrisons, quartered at a few miles from
the great cities, is that which the Chinese followed at Kashgar,
Yarkand, etc. It is, in fact, our own system in India, as at
Barrackpúr, Dinapúr, Sikandarábád, Mián Mír.

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE BATTLE THAT THE GREAT KAAN FOUGHT WITH NAYAN.

What shall I say about it? When day had well broken, there was the Kaan
with all his host upon a hill overlooking the plain where Nayan lay
in his tent, in all security, without the slightest thought of any
one coming thither to do him hurt. In fact, this confidence of his was
such that he kept no vedettes whether in front or in rear; for he knew
nothing of the coming of the Great Kaan, owing to all the approaches
having been completely occupied as I told you. Moreover, the place was
in a remote wilderness, more than thirty marches from the Court, though
the Kaan had made the distance in twenty, so eager was he to come to
battle with Nayan.

And what shall I tell you next? The Kaan was there on the hill, mounted
on a great wooden bartizan,{1} which was borne by four well-trained
elephants, and over him was hoisted his standard, so high aloft that
it could be seen from all sides. His troops were ordered in battles
of 30,000 men apiece; and a great part of the horsemen had each a
foot-soldier armed with a lance set on the crupper behind him (for it
was thus that the footmen were disposed of);{2} and the whole plain
seemed to be covered with his forces. So it was thus that the Great
Kaan’s army was arrayed for battle.

When Nayan and his people saw what had happened, they were sorely
confounded, and rushed in haste to arms. Nevertheless they made them
ready in good style and formed their troops in an orderly manner. And
when all were in battle array on both sides as I have told you, and
nothing remained but to fall to blows, then might you have heard a
sound arise of many instruments of various music, and of the voices
of the whole of the two hosts loudly singing. For this is a custom of
the Tartars, that before they join battle they all unite in singing
and playing on a certain two-stringed instrument of theirs, a thing
right pleasant to hear. And so they continue in their array of battle,
singing and playing in this pleasing manner, until the great Naccara
of the Prince is heard to sound. As soon as that begins to sound the
fight also begins on both sides; and in no case before the Prince’s
Naccara sounds dare any commence fighting.{3}

So then, as they were thus singing and playing, though ordered and
ready for battle, the great Naccara of the Great Khan began to sound.
And that of Nayan also began to sound. And thenceforward the din of
battle began to be heard loudly from this side and from that. And they
rushed to work so doughtily with their bows and their maces, with their
lances and swords, and with the arblasts of the footmen, that it was
a wondrous sight to see. Now might you behold such flights of arrows
from this side and from that, that the whole heaven was canopied with
them and they fell like rain. Now might you see on this side and on
that full many a cavalier and man-at-arms fall slain, insomuch that
the whole field seemed covered with them. From this side and from that
such cries arose from the crowds of the wounded and dying that had God
thundered, you would not have heard Him! For fierce and furious was the
battle, and quarter there was none given.{4}

But why should I make a long story of it? You must know that it was
the most parlous and fierce and fearful battle that ever has been
fought in our day. Nor have there ever been such forces in the field
in actual fight, especially of horsemen, as were then engaged—for,
taking both sides, there were not fewer than 760,000 horsemen, a mighty
force! and that without reckoning the footmen, who were also very
numerous. The battle endured with various fortune on this side and on
that from morning till noon. But at the last, by God’s pleasure and
the right that was on his side, the Great Khan had the victory, and
Nayan lost the battle and was utterly routed. For the army of the
Great Kaan performed such feats of arms that Nayan and his host could
stand against them no longer, so they turned and fled. But this availed
nothing for Nayan; for he and all the barons with him were taken
prisoners, and had to surrender to the Kaan with all their arms.

Now you must know that Nayan was a baptized Christian, and bore the
cross on his banner; but this nought availed him, seeing how grievously
he had done amiss in rebelling against his Lord. For he was the Great
Kaan’s liegeman,{5} and was bound to hold his lands of him like all his
ancestors before him.{6}

NOTE 1.—“_Une grande_ bretesche.” _Bretesche, Bertisca_ (whence
old English _Brattice_, and _Bartizan_), was a term applied to
any boarded structure of defence or attack, but especially to
the timber parapets and roofs often placed on the top of the
flanking-towers in mediæval fortifications; and this use quite
explains the sort of structure here intended. The term and its
derivative _Bartizan_ came later to be applied to projecting
_guérites_ or watch-towers of masonry. _Brattice_ in English is
now applied to a fence round a pit or dangerous machinery. (See
_Muratori_, _Dissert._ I. 334; _Wedgwood’s Dict. of Etym._ sub. v.
_Brattice_; _Viollet le Duc_, by _Macdermott_, p. 40; _La Curne de
Sainte-Palaye, Dict._; _F. Godefroy, Dict._)

[John Ranking (_Hist. Res. on the Wars and Sports of the Mongols
and Romans_) in a note regarding this battle writes (p. 60): “It
appears that it is an old custom in Persia, to use four elephants
a-breast.” The Senate decreed Gordian III. to represent him
triumphing after the Persian mode, with chariots drawn with four
elephants. _Augustan Hist._ vol. ii. p. 65. See plate, p. 52.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—This circumstance is mentioned in the extract below
from Gaubil. He _may_ have taken it from Polo, as it is not in
Pauthier’s Chinese extracts; but Gaubil has other facts not noticed
in these.

[Elephants came from the Indo-Chinese Kingdoms, Burma, Siam,
Champa. —H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The specification of the Tartar instrument of two strings
is peculiar to Pauthier’s texts. It was no doubt what Dr. Clarke
calls “the _balalaika_ or two-stringed lyre,” the most common
instrument among the Kalmaks.

The sounding of the Nakkára as the signal of action is an old
Pan-Asiatic custom, but I cannot find that this very striking
circumstance of the whole host of Tartars playing and singing in
chorus, when ordered for battle and waiting the signal from the
boom of the Big Drum, is mentioned by any other author.

The _Naḳḳárah_ or _Nagárah_ was a great kettledrum, formed
like a brazen caldron, tapering to the bottom and covered with
buffalo-hide—at least 3½ or 4 feet in diameter. Bernier, indeed,
tells of _Naḳḳáras_ in use at the Court of Delhi that were not
less than a fathom across; and Tod speaks of them in Rájpútána
as “about 8 or 10 feet in diameter.” The Tartar Naḳḳárahs were
usually, I presume, carried on a camel; but as Kúblái had begun to
use elephants, his may have been carried on an elephant, as is
sometimes the case in India. Thus, too, P. della Valle describes
those of an Indian Embassy at Ispahan: “The Indian Ambassador was
also accompanied by a variety of warlike instruments of music
of strange kinds, and particularly by certain Naccheras of such
immense size that each pair had an elephant to carry them, whilst
an Indian astride upon the elephant between the two Naccheras
played upon them with both hands, dealing strong blows on this one
and on that; what a din was made by these vast drums, and what a
spectacle it was, I leave you to imagine.”

Joinville also speaks of the Nakkara as the signal for action:
“So he was setting his host in array till noon, and then he made
those drums of theirs to sound that they call _Nacaires_, and
then they set upon us horse and foot.” The Great Nakkara of the
Tartars appears from several Oriental histories to have been called
_Ḳúrḳah_. I cannot find this word in any dictionary accessible to
me, but it is in the _Ain Akbari_ (_Kawargah_) as distinct from
the _Naḳḳárah_. Abulfazl tells us that Akbar not only had a rare
knowledge of the science of music, but was likewise an excellent
performer—especially on the _Naḳḳárah!_

[Illustration: Nakkaras. (From a Chinese original.)]

The privilege of employing the Nakkara in personal state was one
granted by the sovereign as a high honour and reward.

The crusades naturalised the word in some form or other in most
European languages, but in our own apparently with a transfer of
meaning. For Wright defines _Naker_ as “a cornet or horn of brass.”
And Chaucer’s use seems to countenance this:—

“Pipes, Trompes, Nakeres, and Clariounes,
That in the Bataille blowen blody sounes.”
—_The Knight’s Tale_.

On the other hand, Nacchera, in Italian, seems always to have
retained the meaning of _kettle-drum_, with the slight exception of
a local application at Siena to a metal circle or triangle struck
with a rod. The fact seems to be that there is a double origin, for
the Arabic dictionaries not only have _Naḳḳárah_, but _Naḳír_ and
_Náḳúr_, “cornu, tuba.” The orchestra of Bibars Bunduḳdári, we are
told, consisted of 40 pairs of kettle-drums, 4 drums, 4 hautbois,
and 20 trumpets (_Naḳír_). (_Sir B. Frere; Della Valle_, II. 21;
_Tod’s Rájasthán_, I. 328; _Joinville_, p. 83; _N. et E._ XIV.
129, and following note; Blochmann’s _Ain-i-Akbari_, pp. 50–51;
_Ducange_, by Haenschel, s.v.; _Makrizi_, I. 173.)

[Dozy (_Supp. aux Dict. Arabes_) has نقّارة [_naqqārè_] “petit
tambour ou timbale, bassin de cuivre ou de terre recouvert d’une
peau tendue,” and “grosses timbales en cuivre portées sur un
chameau ou un mulet.”—Devic (_Dict. Étym._) writes: “Bas Latin,
_nacara_; bas grec, ἀνάχαρα. Ce n’est point comme on l’a dit,
l’Arabe نقير _naqïr_ ou ناقور _náqör_, qui signifient _trompette_,
_clairon_, mais le persan نقاره, en arabe, نقارة _naqāra_,
_timbale_.” It is to be found also in Abyssinia and south of
Gondokoro; it is mentioned in the _Sedjarat Malayu_.

In French, it gives _nacaire_ and _gnacare_ from the Italian
_gnacare_. “Quatre jouent de la guitare, quatre des castagnettes,
quatre des gnacares.” (MOLIÈRE, _Pastorale Comique_.)—H. C.]

[Illustration: Nakkaras. (From an Indian original.)]

NOTE 4.—This description of a fight will recur again and again till
we are very tired of it. It is difficult to say whether the style
is borrowed from the historians of the East or the romancers of the
West. Compare the two following parallels. First from an Oriental
history:—

“The Ear of Heaven was deafened with the din of the great _Kurkahs_
and Drums, and the Earth shook at the clangour of the Trumpets and
Clarions. The shafts began to fall like the rain-drops of spring,
and blood flowed till the field looked like the Oxus.” (_J. A. S._
sér. IV. tom. xix. 256.)

Next from an Occidental Romance:—

“Now rist grete tabour betyng,
Blaweyng of pypes, and ek trumpyng,
Stedes lepyng, and ek arnyng,
Of sharp speres, and avalyng
Of stronge knighttes, and wyghth meetyng;
Launces breche and increpyng;
Knighttes fallyng, stedes lesyng;
Herte and hevedes thorough kervyng;
Swerdes draweyng, lymes lesyng
Hard assaylyng, strong defendyng,
Stiff withstondyng and wighth fleigheyng.
Sharp of takyng armes spoylyng;
So gret bray, so gret crieyng,
Ifor the folk there was dyeyng;
_So muche dent, noise of sweord,
The thondur blast no myghte beo hirde_,
No the sunne hadde beo seye,
For the dust of the poudré!
_No the weolkyn seon be myght,
So was arewes and quarels flyght_.”
—_King Alisaunder, in Weber_, I. 93–94.

And again:—

“The eorthe quaked heom undur,
_No scholde mon have herd the thondur_.”
—_Ibid._ 142.

Also in a contemporary account of the fall of Acre (1291):
“Renovatur ergo bellum terribile inter alterutros ... clamoribus
interjectis hinc et inde ad terrorem; _ita ut nec Deus tonans in
sublime coaudiri potuisset_.” (_De Excidio Acconis_, in _Martene et
Durand_, V. 780.)

NOTE 5.—“_Car il estoit_ homme _au Grant Kaan_.” (See note 2, ch.
xiv., in Prologue.)

NOTE 6.—In continuation of note 4, chap. ii., we give Gaubil’s
conclusion of the story of Nayan: “The Emperor had gone ahead with
a small force, when Nayan’s General came forward with 100,000 men
to make a reconnaissance. The Sovereign, however, put on a bold
front, and though in great danger of being carried off, showed
no trepidation. It was night, and an urgent summons went to call
troops to the Emperor’s aid. They marched at once, the horsemen
taking the foot soldiers on the crupper behind them. Nayan all
this while was taking it quietly in his camp, and his generals did
not venture to attack the Emperor, suspecting an ambuscade. Liting
then took ten resolute men, and on approaching the General’s camp,
caused a Fire-_Pao_ to be discharged; the report caused a great
panic among Nayan’s troops, who were very ill disciplined at the
best. Meanwhile the Chinese and Tartar troops had all come up,
and Nayan was attacked on all sides: by Liting at the head of the
Chinese, by Yusitemur at the head of the Mongols, by Tutuha and
the Emperor in person at the head of his guards and the troops
of _Kincha_ (Kipchak). The presence of the Emperor rendered the
army invincible, and Nayan’s forces were completely defeated. That
prince himself was taken, and afterwards put to death. The battle
took place in the vicinity of the river Liao, and the Emperor
returned in triumph to Shangtu” (207). The Chinese record given in
detail by Pauthier is to the like effect, except as to the Kaan’s
narrow escape, of which it says nothing.

As regards the Fire-_Pao_ (the latter word seems to have been
applied to military machines formerly, and now to artillery), I
must refer to Favé and Reinaud’s very curious and interesting
treatise on the Greek fire (_du Feu Grégeois_). They do not seem
to assent to the view that the arms of this description which are
mentioned in the Mongol wars were cannon, but rather of the nature
of rockets.

[Dr. G. Schlegel (_T’oung Pao_, No. 1, 1902), in a paper entitled,
_On the Invention and Use of Fire-Arms and Gunpowder in China,
prior to the Arrival of Europeans_, says that “now, notwithstanding
all what has been alleged by different European authors against
the use of gunpowder and fire-arms in China, I maintain that not
only the Mongols in 1293 had cannon, but that they were already
acquainted with them in 1232.” Among his many examples, we quote
the following from the Books of the Ming Dynasty: “What were
anciently called _P’ao_ were all machines for hurling stones. In
the beginning of the Mongol Dynasty (A.D. 1260), _p’ao_ (catapults)
of the Western regions were procured. In the siege [in 1233] of the
city of _Ts’ai chow_ of the _Kin_ (Tatars), fire was for the first
time employed (in these _p’ao_), but the art of making them was not
handed down, and they were afterwards seldom used.”—H. C.]

CHAPTER V.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSED NAYAN TO BE PUT TO DEATH.

And when the Great Kaan learned that Nayan was taken right glad was
he, and commanded that he should be put to death straightway and in
secret, lest endeavours should be made to obtain pity and pardon for
him, because he was of the Kaan’s own flesh and blood. And this was the
way in which he was put to death: he was wrapt in a carpet, and tossed
to and fro so mercilessly that he died. And the Kaan caused him to be
put to death in this way because he would not have the blood of his
Line Imperial spilt upon the ground or exposed in the eye of Heaven and
before the Sun.{1}

And when the Great Kaan had gained this battle, as you have heard,
all the Barons and people of Nayan’s provinces renewed their fealty
to the Kaan. Now these provinces that had been under the Lordship of
Nayan were four in number; to wit, the first called CHORCHA; the second
CAULY; the third BARSCOL; the fourth SIKINTINJU. Of all these four
great provinces had Nayan been Lord; it was a very great dominion.{2}

And after the Great Kaan had conquered Nayan, as you have heard, it
came to pass that the different kinds of people who were present,
Saracens and Idolaters and Jews,{3} and many others that believed not
in God, did gibe those that were Christians because of the cross that
Nayan had borne on his standard, and that so grievously that there
was no bearing it. Thus they would say to the Christians: “See now
what precious help this God’s Cross of yours hath rendered Nayan, who
was a Christian and a worshipper thereof.” And such a din arose about
the matter that it reached the Great Kaan’s own ears. When it did so,
he sharply rebuked those who cast these gibes at the Christians; and
he also bade the Christians be of good heart, “for if the Cross had
rendered no help to Nayan, in that It had done right well; nor could
that which was good, as It was, have done otherwise; for Nayan was a
disloyal and traitorous Rebel against his Lord, and well deserved that
which had befallen him. Wherefore the Cross of your God did well in
that It gave him no help against the right.” And this he said so loud
that everybody heard him. The Christians then replied to the Great
Kaan: “Great King, you say the truth indeed, for our Cross can render
no one help in wrong-doing; and therefore it was that It aided not
Nayan, who was guilty of crime and disloyalty, for It would take no
part in his evil deeds.”

And so thenceforward no more was heard of the floutings of the
unbelievers against the Christians; for they heard very well what the
Sovereign said to the latter about the Cross on Nayan’s banner, and its
giving him no help.

NOTE 1.—Friar Ricold mentions this Tartar maxim: “One Khan will
put another to death, to get possession of the throne, but he
takes great care that the blood be not spilt. For they say that
it is highly improper that the blood of the Great Khan should be
spilt upon the ground; so they cause the victim to be smothered
somehow or other.” The like feeling prevails at the Court of Burma,
where a peculiar mode of execution without bloodshed is reserved
for Princes of the Blood. And Kaempfer, relating the conspiracy
of Faulcon at the Court of Siam, says that two of the king’s
brothers, accused of participation, were beaten to death with clubs
of sandal-wood, “for the respect entertained for the blood-royal
forbids its being shed.” See also note 6, ch. vi. Bk. I., on the
death of the Khalif Mosta’sim Billah. (_Pereg. Quat._ p. 115;
_Mission to Ava_, p. 229; _Kaempfer_, I. 19.)

NOTE 2.—CHORCHA is the Manchu country, Niuché of the Chinese.
(_Supra_, note 2, ch. xlvi. Bk. I.) [“Chorcha is Churchin.—Nayan, as
vassal of the Mongol khans, had the commission to keep in obedience
the people of Manchuria (subdued in 1233), and to care for the
security of the country (_Yuen shi_); there is no doubt that he
shared these obligations with his relative Hatan, who stood nearer
to the native tribes of Manchuria.” (_Palladius_, 32.)—H. C.]

KAULI is properly Corea, probably here a district on the frontier
thereof, as it is improbable that Nayan had any rule over Corea.
[“The Corean kingdom proper could not be a part of the prince’s
appanage. Marco Polo might mean the northern part of Corea, which
submitted to the Mongols in A.D. 1269, with sixty towns, and
which was subordinated entirely to the central administration
in Liao-yang. As to the southern part of Corea, it was left to
the king of Corea, who, however, was a vassal of the Mongols.”
(_Palladius_, 32.) The king of Corea (_Ko rye, Kao-li_) was in 1288
Chyoung ryel wang (1274–1298); the capital was Syong-to, now Kăi
syeng (K’ai-ch’eng).—H. C.]

BARSKUL, “Leopard-Lake,” is named in Sanang Setsen (p. 217), but
seems there to indicate some place in the west of Mongolia, perhaps
the _Barkul_ of our maps. This Barskul must have been on the Manchu
frontier. [There are in the _Yuen-shi_ the names of the department
of _P’u-yü-lu_, and of the place _Pu-lo-ho_, which, according to
the system of Chinese transcription, approach to Barscol; but it
is difficult to prove this identification, since our knowledge of
these places is very scanty; it only remains to identify Barscol
with Abalahu, which is already known; a conjecture all the more
probable as the two names of P’u-yü-lu and Pu-lo-ho have also some
resemblance to Abalahu. (_Palladius_, 32.) Mr. E. H. Parker says
(_China Review_, xviii. p. 261) that Barscol may be Pa-la ssŭ or
Bars Koto [in Tsetsen]. “This seems the more probable in that Cauly
and Chorcha are clearly proved to be Corea and Niuché or Manchuria,
so that Bars Koto would naturally fall within Nayan’s appanage.”
—H. C.]

The reading of the fourth name is doubtful, _Sichuigiu_,
_Sichingiu_ (G. T.), _Sichin-tingiu_, etc. The Chinese name of
Mukden is _Shing-king_, but I know not if it be so old as our
author’s time. I think it very possible that the real reading
is _Sinchin-tingin_, and that it represents SHANGKING-TUNGKING,
expressing the two capitals of the Khitan Dynasty in this region,
the position of which will be found indicated in No. IV. map of
Polo’s itineraries. (See _Schott, Aelteste Nachrichten von Mongolen
und Tartaren_, Berlin Acad. 1845, pp. 11–12.)

[Sikintinju is Kien chau “belonging to a town which was in Nayan’s
appanage, and is mentioned in the history of his rebellion. There
were two Kien-chow, one in the time of the Kin in the modern aimak
of Khorchin; the other during the Mongol Dynasty, on the upper
part of the river Ta-ling ho, in the limits of the modern aimak
of Kharachin (_Man chow yuen lew k’ao_); the latter depended
on Kuang-ning (_Yuen-shi_). Mention is made of Kien-chow, in
connection with the following circumstance. When Nayan’s rebellion
broke out, the Court of Peking sent orders to the King of Corea,
requiring from him auxiliary troops; this circumstance is mentioned
in the Corean Annals, under the year 1288 (_Kao li shi_, ch. xxx.
f. 11) in the following words:—‘In the present year, in the fourth
month, orders were received from Peking to send five thousand men
with provisions to Kien-chow, which is 3000 _li_ distant from the
King’s residence.’ This number of _li_ cannot of course be taken
literally; judging by the distances estimated at the present
day, it was about 2000 _li_ from the Corean K’ai-ch’eng fu (then
the Corean capital) to the Mongol Kien-chow; and as much to the
Kien-chow of the Kin (through Mukden and the pass of Fa-k’u mun in
the willow palisade). It is difficult to decide to which of these
two cities of the same name the troops were ordered to go, but at
any rate, there are sufficient reasons to identify Sikintinju of
Marco Polo with Kien-chow.” (_Palladius_, 33.)—H. C.]

We learn from Gaubil that the rebellion did not end with the
capture of Nayan. In the summer of 1288 several of the princes of
Nayan’s league, under Hatan (apparently the _Abkan_ of Erdmann’s
genealogies), the grandson of Chinghiz’s brother Kajyun [Hachiun],
threatened the provinces north-east of the wall. Kúblái sent his
grandson and designated heir, Teimur, against them, accompanied by
some of his best generals. After a two days’ fight on the banks
of the River Kweilei, the rebels were completely beaten. The
territories on the said River _Kweilei_, the _Tiro_, or _Torro_,
and the _Liao_, are mentioned both by Gaubil and De Mailla as among
those which had belonged to Nayan. As the Kweilei and Toro appear
on our maps and also the better-known Liao, we are thus enabled to
determine with tolerable precision Nayan’s country. (See _Gaubil_,
p. 209, and _De Mailla_, 431 _seqq._)

[“The rebellion of Nayan and Hatan is incompletely and
contradictorily related in Chinese history. The suppression of both
these rebellions lasted four years. In 1287 Nayan marched from his
_ordo_ with sixty thousand men through Eastern Mongolia. In the 5th
moon (_var._ 6th) of the same year Khubilai marched against him
from Shangtu. The battle was fought in South-Eastern Mongolia, and
gained by Khubilai, who returned to Shangtu in the 8th month. Nayan
fled to the south-east, across the mountain range, along which a
willow palisade now stands; but forces had been sent beforehand
from Shin-chow (modern Mukden) and Kuang-ning (probably to watch
the pass), and Nayan was made prisoner.

“Two months had not passed, when Hatan’s rebellion broke out
(so that it took place in the same year 1287). It is mentioned
under the year 1288, that Hatan was beaten, and that the whole of
Manchuria was pacified; but in 1290, it is again recorded that
Hatan disturbed Southern Manchuria, and that he was again defeated.
It is to this time that the narratives in the biographies of
Liting, Yuesi Femur, and Mangwu ought to be referred. According to
the first of these biographies, Hatan, after his defeat by Liting
on the river Kui lui (Kuilar?), fled, and perished. According to
the second biography, Hatan’s dwelling (on the Amur River) was
destroyed, and he disappeared. According to the third, Mangwu and
Naimatai pursued Hatan to the extreme north, up to the eastern
sea-coast (the mouth of the Amur). Hatan fled, but two of his
wives and his son Lao-ti were taken; the latter was executed, and
this was the concluding act of the suppression of the rebellion in
Manchuria. We find, however, an important _variante_ in the history
of Corea; it is stated there that in 1290, Hatan and his son Lao-ti
were carrying fire and slaughter to Corea, and devastated that
country; they slew the inhabitants and fed on human flesh. The
King of Corea fled to the Kiang-hwa island. The Coreans were not
able to withstand the invasion. The Mongols sent to their aid in
1291, troops under the command of two generals, Seshekan (who was
at that time governor of Liao-tung) and Namantai (evidently the
above-mentioned Naimatai). The Mongols conjointly with the Coreans
defeated the insurgents, who had penetrated into the very heart of
the country; their corpses covered a space 30 _li_ in extent; Hatan
and his son made their way through the victorious army and fled,
finding a refuge in the Niuchi (Djurdji) country, from which Laotai
made a later incursion into Corea. Such is the discrepancy between
historians in relating the same fact. The statement found in the
Corean history seems to me more reliable than the facts given by
Chinese history.” (_Palladius_, 35–37.)—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—This passage, and the extract from Ramusio’s version
attached to the following chapter, contain the only allusions by
Marco to Jews in China. John of Monte Corvino alludes to them,
and so does Marignolli, who speaks of having held disputations
with them at Cambaluc; Ibn Batuta also speaks of them at Khansa or
Hangchau. Much has been written about the ancient settlement of
Jews at Kaifungfu, in Honan. One of the most interesting papers
on the subject is in the _Chinese Repository_, vol. xx. It gives
the translation of a Chinese-Jewish Inscription, which in some
respects forms a singular parallel to the celebrated Christian
Inscription of Si-ngan fu, though it is of far more modern date
(1511). It exhibits, as that inscription does, the effect of
Chinese temperament or language, in modifying or diluting doctrinal
statements. Here is a passage: “With respect to the Israelitish
religion, we find on inquiry that its first ancestor, Adam, came
originally from India, and that during the (period of the) Chau
State the Sacred Writings were already in existence. The Sacred
Writings, embodying Eternal Reason, consist of 53 sections. The
principles therein contained are very abstruse, and the Eternal
Reason therein revealed is very mysterious, being treated with the
same veneration as Heaven. The founder of the religion is Abraham,
who is considered the first teacher of it. Then came Moses, who
established the Law, and handed down the Sacred Writings. After his
time, during the Han Dynasty (B.C. 206 to A.D. 221), this religion
entered China. In (A.D.) 1164, a synagogue was built at P’ien. In
(A.D.) 1296, the old Temple was rebuilt, as a place in which the
Sacred Writings might be deposited with veneration.”

[According to their oral tradition, the Jews came to China from
_Si Yĭh_ (Western Regions), probably Persia, by Khorasan and
Samarkand, during the first century of our era, in the reign of
the Emperor Ming-ti (A.D. 58–75) of the Han Dynasty. They were at
times confounded with the followers of religions of India, _T’ien
Chu kiao_, and very often with the Mohammedans _Hwui-Hwui_ or
_Hwui-tzŭ_; the common name of their religion was _Tiao kin kiao_,
“Extract Sinew Religion.” However, three lapidary inscriptions,
kept at Kaï-fung, give different dates for the arrival of the Jews
in China: one dated 1489 (2nd year Hung Che, Ming Dynasty) says
that seventy Jewish families arrived at P’ien liang (Kaï-fung) at
the time of the Sung (A.D. 960–1278); one dated 1512 (7th year
Chêng Têh) says that the Jewish religion was introduced into China
under the Han Dynasty (B.C. 206–A.D. 221), and the last one dated
1663 (2nd year K’ang-hi) says that this religion was first preached
in China under the Chau Dynasty (B.C. 1122–255); this will not bear
discussion.

The synagogue, according to these inscriptions, was built in 1163,
under the Sung Emperor Hiao; under the Yuen, in 1279, the rabbi
rebuilt the ancient temple known as _Ts’ing Chen sse_, probably
on the site of a ruined mosque; the synagogue was rebuilt in 1421
during the reign of Yung-lo; it was destroyed by an inundation of
the Hwang-ho in 1642, and the Jews began to rebuild it once more in
1653.

The first knowledge Europeans had of a colony of Jews at K’aï-fung
fu, in the Ho-nan province, was obtained through the Jesuit
missionaries at Peking, at the beginning of the 17th century;
the celebrated Matteo Ricci having received the visit of a young
Jew, the Jesuits Aleni (1613), Gozani (1704), Gaubil and Domenge
who made in 1721 two plans of the synagogue, visited Kaï-fung
and brought back some documents. In 1850, a mission of enquiry
was sent to that place by the _London Society for promoting
Christianity among the Jews_; the results of this mission were
published at Shang-haï, in 1851, by Bishop G. Smith of Hongkong;
fac-similes of the Hebrew manuscripts obtained at the synagogue of
Kaï-fung were also printed at Shang-haï at the London Missionary
Society’s Press, in the same year. The Jewish merchants of London
sent in 1760 to their brethren of Kaï-fung a letter written in
Hebrew; a Jewish merchant of Vienna, J. L. Liebermann, visited the
Kaï-fung colony in 1867. At the time of the T’aï-P’ing rising,
the rebels marched against Kaï-fung in 1857, and with the rest of
the population, the Jews were dispersed. (_J. Tobar, Insc. juives
de Kaï-fong-fou_, 1900; _Henri Cordier_, _Les Juifs en Chine_,
and _Fung and Wagnall’s Jewish Encyclopedia_.) Palladius writes
(p. 38), “The Jews are mentioned for the first time in the _Yuen
shi_ (ch. xxxiii. p. 7), under the year 1329, on the occasion of
the re-establishment of the law for the collection of taxes from
dissidents. Mention of them is made again under the year 1354, ch.
xliii. fol. 10, when on account of several insurrections in China,
rich Mahommetans and Jews were invited to the capital in order to
join the army. In both cases they are named _Chu hu_ (Djuhud).”
—H. C.]

The synagogue at Kaifungfu has recently been demolished for the
sake of its materials, by the survivors of the Jewish community
themselves, who were too poor to repair it. The tablet that
once adorned its entrance, bearing in gilt characters the name
ESZLOYIH (Israel), has been appropriated by a mosque. The 300 or
400 survivors seem in danger of absorption into the Mahomedan or
heathen population. The last Rabbi and possessor of the sacred
tongue died some thirty or forty years ago, the worship has ceased,
and their traditions have almost died away.

(_Cathay_, 225, 341, 497; _Ch. Rep._ XX. 436; _Dr. Martin_, in _J.
N. China Br. R. A. S._ 1866, pp. 32–33.)

CHAPTER VI.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN WENT BACK TO THE CITY OF CAMBALUC.

And after the Great Kaan had defeated Nayan in the way you have heard,
he went back to his capital city of Cambaluc and abode there, taking
his ease and making festivity. And the other Tartar Lord called Caydu
was greatly troubled when he heard of the defeat and death of Nayan,
and held himself in readiness for war; but he stood greatly in fear of
being handled as Nayan had been.{1}

I told you that the Great Kaan never went on a campaign but once, and
it was on this occasion; in all other cases of need he sent his sons
or his barons into the field. But this time he would have none go in
command but himself, for he regarded the presumptuous rebellion of
Nayan as far too serious and perilous an affair to be otherwise dealt
with.

NOTE 1.—Here Ramusio has a long and curious addition. Kúblái, it
says, remained at Cambaluc till March, “in which our Easter occurs;
and learning that this was one of our chief festivals, he summoned
all the Christians, and bade them bring with them the Book of
the Four Gospels. This he caused to be incensed many times with
great ceremony, kissing it himself most devoutly, and desiring
all the barons and lords who were present to do the same. And he
always acts in this fashion at the chief Christian festivals,
such as Easter and Christmas. And he does the like at the chief
feasts of the Saracens, Jews, and Idolaters. On being asked why,
he said: ‘There are Four Prophets worshipped and revered by all
the world. The Christians say their God is Jesus Christ; the
Saracens, Mahommet; the Jews, Moses; the Idolaters, Sogomon Borcan
[_Sakya-Muni Burkhan_ or Buddha], who was the first god among the
idols; and I worship and pay respect to all four, and pray that
he among them who is greatest in heaven in very truth may aid
me.’ But the Great Khan let it be seen well enough that he held
the Christian Faith to be the truest and best—for, as he says, it
commands nothing that is not perfectly good and holy. But he will
not allow the Christians to carry the Cross before them, because on
it was scourged and put to death a person so great and exalted as
Christ.

“Some one may say: ‘Since he holds the Christian faith to be best,
why does he not attach himself to it, and become a Christian?’
Well, this is the reason that he gave to Messer Nicolo and Messer
Maffeo, when he sent them as his envoys to the Pope, and when they
sometimes took occasion to speak to him about the faith of Christ.
He said: ‘How would you have me to become a Christian? You see that
the Christians of these parts are so ignorant that they achieve
nothing and can achieve nothing, whilst you see the Idolaters can
do anything they please, insomuch that when I sit at table the
cups from the middle of the hall come to me full of wine or other
liquor without being touched by anybody, and I drink from them.
They control storms, causing them to pass in whatever direction
they please, and do many other marvels; whilst, as you know, their
idols speak, and give them predictions on whatever subjects they
choose. But if I were to turn to the faith of Christ and become a
Christian, then my barons and others who are not converted would
say: “What has moved you to be baptised and to take up the faith of
Christ? What powers or miracles have you witnessed on His part?”
(You know the Idolaters here say that their wonders are performed
by the sanctity and power of their idols.) Well, I should not know
what answer to make; so they would only be confirmed in their
errors, and the Idolaters, who are adepts in such surprising arts,
would easily compass my death. But now you shall go to your Pope,
and pray him on my part to send hither an hundred men skilled in
your law, who shall be capable of rebuking the practices of the
Idolaters to their faces, and of telling them that they too know
how to do such things but will not, because they are done by the
help of the devil and other evil spirits, and shall so control the
Idolaters that these shall have no power to perform such things in
their presence. When we shall witness this we will denounce the
Idolaters and their religion, and then I will receive baptism; and
when I shall have been baptised, then all my barons and chiefs
shall be baptised also, and their followers shall do the like, and
thus in the end there will be more Christians here than exist in
your part of the world!’

“And if the Pope, as was said in the beginning of this book, had
sent men fit to preach our religion, the Grand Kaan would have
turned Christian; for it is an undoubted fact that he greatly
desired to do so.”

In the simultaneous patronage of different religions, Kúblái
followed the practice of his house. Thus Rubruquis writes of his
predecessor Mangku Kaan: “It is his custom, on such days as his
diviners tell him to be festivals, or any of the Nestorian priests
declare to be holydays, to hold a court. On these occasions the
Christian priests enter first with their paraphernalia, and pray
for him, and bless his cup. They retire, and then come the Saracen
priests and do likewise; the priests of the Idolaters follow. He
all the while believes in none of them, though they all follow his
court as flies follow honey. He bestows his gifts on all of them,
each party believes itself to be his favourite, and all prophesy
smooth things to him.” Abulfaragius calls Kúblái “a just prince and
a wise, who loved Christians and honoured physicians of learning,
whatsoever their nation.”

There is a good deal in Kúblái that reminds us of the greatest
prince of that other great Mongol house, Akbar. And if we trusted
the first impression of the passage just quoted from Ramusio, we
might suppose that the grandson of Chinghiz too had some of that
real wistful regard towards the Lord Jesus Christ, of which we seem
to see traces in the grandson of Baber. But with Kúblái, as with
his predecessors, religion seems to have been only a political
matter; and this aspect of the thing will easily be recognised in
a re-perusal of his conversation with Messer Nicolas and Messer
Maffeo. The Kaan must be obeyed; how man shall worship God is
indifferent; this was the constant policy of his house in the days
of its greatness. Kúblái, as Koeppen observes, the first of his
line to raise himself above the natural and systematic barbarism
of the Mongols, probably saw in the promotion of Tibetan Buddhism,
already spread to some extent among them, the readiest means of
civilising his countrymen. But he may have been quite sincere
in saying what is here ascribed to him in _this_ sense, viz.:
that if the Latin Church, with its superiority of character and
acquirement, had come to his aid as he had once requested, he would
gladly have used _its_ missionaries as his civilising instruments
instead of the Lamas and their trumpery. (_Rubr._ 313; _Assemani_,
III. pt. ii. 107; _Koeppen_, II. 89, 96.)

CHAPTER VII.

HOW THE KAAN REWARDED THE VALOUR OF HIS CAPTAINS.

So we will have done with this matter of Nayan, and go on with our
account of the great state of the Great Kaan.

We have already told you of his lineage and of his age; but now I must
tell you what he did after his return, in regard to those barons who
had behaved well in the battle. Him who was before captain of 100 he
made captain of 1000; and him who was captain of 1000 men he made to
be captain of 10,000, advancing every man according to his deserts
and to his previous rank. Besides that, he also made them presents of
fine silver plate and other rich appointments; gave them Tablets of
Authority of a higher degree than they held before; and bestowed upon
them fine jewels of gold and silver, and pearls and precious stones;
insomuch that the amount that fell to each of them was something
astonishing. And yet ’twas not so much as they had deserved; for never
were men seen who did such feats of arms for the love and honour of
their Lord, as these had done on that day of the battle.{1}

Now those Tablets of Authority, of which I have spoken, are ordered in
this way. The officer who is a captain of 100 hath a tablet of silver;
the captain of 1000 hath a tablet of gold or silver-gilt; the commander
of 10,000 hath a tablet of gold, with a lion’s head on it. And I will
tell you the weight of the different tablets, and what they denote.
The tablets of the captains of 100 and 1000 weigh each of them 120
_saggi_; and the tablet with the lion’s head engraven on it, which is
that of the commander of 10,000, weighs 220 _saggi_. And on each of
the tablets is inscribed a device, which runs: “_By the strength of
the great God, and of the great grace which He hath accorded to our
Emperor, may the name of the Kaan be blessed; and let all such as will
not obey him be slain and be destroyed_.” And I will tell you besides
that all who hold these tablets likewise receive warrants in writing,
declaring all their powers and privileges.

I should mention too that an officer who holds the chief command of
100,000 men, or who is general-in-chief of a great host, is entitled to
a tablet that weighs 300 _saggi_. It has an inscription thereon to the
same purport that I have told you already, and below the inscription
there is the figure of a lion, and below the lion the sun and moon.
They have warrants also of their high rank, command, and power.{2}
Every one, moreover, who holds a tablet of this exalted degree is
entitled, whenever he goes abroad, to have a little golden canopy, such
as is called an umbrella, carried on a spear over his head in token of
his high command. And whenever he sits, he sits in a silver chair.{3}

To certain very great lords also there is given a tablet with
gerfalcons on it; this is only to the very greatest of the Kaan’s
barons, and it confers on them his own full power and authority; so
that if one of those chiefs wishes to send a messenger any whither,
he can seize the horses of any man, be he even a king, and any other
chattels at his pleasure.{4}

NOTE 1.—So Sanang Setzen relates that Chinghiz, on returning from
one of his great campaigns, busied himself in reorganising his
forces and bestowing rank and title, according to the deserts of
each, on his nine _Orlok_, or marshals, and all who had done good
service. “He named commandants over hundreds, over thousands, over
ten thousands, over hundred thousands, and opened his treasury to
the multitude of the people” (p. 91).

NOTE 2.—We have several times already had mention of these tablets.
(See Prologue, ch. viii. and xviii.) The earliest European allusion
to them is in Rubruquis: “And Mangu gave to the Moghul (whom he
was going to send to the King of France) a bull of his, that is
to say, a golden plate of a palm in breadth and half a cubit in
length, on which his orders were inscribed. Whosoever is the bearer
of that may order what he pleases, and his order shall be executed
straightway.”

These golden bulls of the Mongol Kaans appear to have been
originally tokens of high favour and honour, though afterwards they
became more frequent and conventional. They are often spoken of by
the Persian historians of the Mongols under the name of _Páïzah_,
and sometimes _Páïzah Sir-i-Sher_, or “Lion’s Head Paizah.” Thus,
in a firmán of Ghazan Khan, naming a viceroy to his conquests
in Syria, the Khan confers on the latter “the sword, the august
standard, the drum, and _the Lion’s Head Paizah_.” Most frequently
the grant of this honour is coupled with _Yarlígh_; “to such an
one were granted _Yarlígh_ and _Páïzah_,” the former word (which is
still applied in Turkey to the Sultan’s rescripts) denoting the
written patent which accompanies the grant of the tablet, just as
the sovereign’s warrant accompanies the badge of a modern Order.
Of such written patents also Marco speaks in this passage, and
as he uttered it, no doubt the familiar words _Yarlígh u Páïzah_
were in his mind. The Armenian history of the Orpelians, relating
the visit of Prince Sempad, brother of King Hayton, to the court
of Mangku Kaan, says: “They gave him also a _P’haiza_ of gold,
_i.e._ a tablet whereon the name of God is written by the Great Kaan
himself; and this constitutes the greatest honour known among the
Mongols. Farther, they drew up for him a sort of patent, which the
Mongols call _Iarlekh_,” etc. The Latin version of a grant by Uzbek
Khan of Kipchak to the Venetian Andrea Zeno, in 1333,[1] ends with
the words: “_Dedimus_ baisa _et_ privilegium _cum bullis rubeis_,”
where the latter words no doubt represent the _Yarlígh al-tamghá_,
the warrant with the red seal or stamp,[2] as it may be seen upon
the letter of Arghun Khan. (See plate at ch. xvii. of Bk. IV.)
So also Janibek, the son of Uzbek, in 1344, confers privileges on
the Venetians, “_eisdem dando_ baissinum _de auro_”; and again
Bardibeg, son, murderer, and successor of Janibeg, in 1358, writes:
“Avemo dado comandamento [_i.e._ Yarlíg] cum le bolle rosse, et lo
_paysam_.”

[Illustration: Seljukian Coin with the Lion and Sun.]

Under the Persian branch, at least, of the house the degree of
honour was indicated by the _number_ of lions’ heads upon the
plate, which varied from 1 to 5. The Lion and Sun, a symbol which
survives, or has been revived, in the modern Persian decoration so
called, formed the emblem of the Sun in Leo, _i.e._ in highest power.
It had already been used on the coins of the Seljukian sovereigns
of Persia and Iconium; it appears on coins of the Mongol Ilkhans
Ghazan, Oljaïtu, and Abusaid, and it is also found on some of those
of Mahomed Uzbek Khan of Kipchak.

Hammer gives regulations of Ghazan Khan’s on the subject of the
Paizah, from which it is seen that the latter were of different
_kinds_ as well as degrees. Some were held by great governors
and officers of state, and these were cautioned against letting
the Paizah out of their own keeping; others were for officers
of inferior order; and, again, “for persons travelling on state
commissions with post-horses, particular paizah (which Hammer says
were of brass) are appointed, on which their names are inscribed.”
These last would seem therefore to be merely such permissions to
travel by the Government post-horses as are still required in
Russia, perhaps in lineal derivation from Mongol practice. The
terms of Ghazan’s decree and other contemporary notices show that
great abuses were practised with the Paizah, as an authority for
living at free quarters and making other arbitrary exactions.

The word _Paizah_ is said to be Chinese, _Pai-tseu_, “a tablet.”
A trace of the name and the thing still survives in Mongolia. The
horse-_Bai_ is the name applied to a certain ornament on the horse
caparison, which gives the rider a title to be furnished with
horses and provisions on a journey.

[Illustration: “TABLE D’OR DE COMMANDEMENT,”
THE PAÏZA OF THE MONGOLS
FROM A SPECIMEN FOUND IN
E. SIBERIA.]

Where I have used the Venetian term _saggio_, the French texts
have here and elsewhere _saics_ and _saies_, and sometimes _pois_.
_Saic_ points to _saiga_, which, according to Dupré de St. Maur, is
in the Salic laws the equivalent of a denier or the twelfth part of
a sol. _Saggio_ is possibly the same word, or rather may have been
confounded with it, but the saggio was a recognised Venetian weight
equal to ⅙ of an ounce. We shall see hereafter that Polo appears to
use it to indicate the _misḳál_, a weight which may be taken at 74
grains Troy. On that supposition the smallest tablet specified in
the text would weigh 18½ ozs. Troy.

I do not know if any gold Paizah has been discovered, but several
of silver have been found in the Russian dominions; one near the
Dnieper, and two in Eastern Siberia. The first of our plates
represents one of these, which was found in the Minusinsk circle
of the Government of Yenisei in 1846, and is now in the Asiatic
Museum of the Academy of St. Petersburg. For the sake of better
illustration of our text, I have taken the liberty to represent
the tablet as of gold, instead of silver with only the inscription
gilt. The moulded ring inserted in the orifice, to suspend the
plate by, is of iron. On the reverse side the ring bears some
Chinese characters engraved, which are interpreted as meaning
“Publication No. 42.” The inscription on the plate itself is in the
Mongol language and Baspa character (_supra_, Prologue, note 1, ch.
xv.), and its purport is a remarkable testimony to the exactness
of Marco’s account, and almost a proof of his knowledge of the
language and character in which the inscriptions were engraved.
It runs, according to Schmidt’s version: “_By the strength of the
eternal heaven! May the name of the Khagan be holy! Who pays him
not reverence is to be slain, and must die!_” The inscriptions on
the other plates discovered were essentially similar in meaning.
Our second plate shows one of them with the inscription in the
Uighúr character.

The superficial dimensions of the Yenisei tablet, as taken from
Schmidt’s full-size drawing, are 12·2 in. by 3·65 in. The weight is
not given.

In the French texts nothing is said of the size of the tablets. But
Ramusio’s copy in the Prologue, where the tables given by Kiacatu
are mentioned (_supra_, p. 35), says that they were a cubit in
length and 5 fingers in breadth, and weighed 3 to 4 marks each,
_i.e._ 24 to 32 ounces.

(_Dupré de St. Maur_, _Essai sur les Monnoies_, etc., 1746,
p. viii.; also (on _saiga_) see _Pertz_, _Script._ XVII. 357;
_Rubruq._ 312; _Golden Horde_, 219–220, 521; _Ilch._ II. 166
_seqq._, 355–356; _D’Ohsson_, III. 412–413; _Q. R._ 177–180; _Ham.
Wassáf_, 154, 176; _Makrizi_, IV. 158; _St. Martin_, _Mém. sur
l’Arménie_, II. 137, 169; _M. Mas Latrie_ in _Bibl. de l’Éc. des
Chartes_, IV. 585 _seqq._; _J. As._ sér. V. tom. xvii. 536 _seqq._;
_Schmidt, über eine Mongol. Quadratinschrift_, etc., Acad. St. P.,
1847; Russian paper by _Grigorieff_ on same subject, 1846.)

[“The History tells us (_Liao Shih_, Bk. LVII. f. 2) that the
official silver tablets _p’ai tzŭ_ of the period were 600 in
number, about a foot in length, and that they were engraved with an
inscription like the above [‘Our imperial order for post horses.
Urgent.’] in national characters (_kuo tzŭ_), and that when there
was important state business the Emperor personally handed the
tablet to the envoy, which entitled him to demand horses at the
post stations, and to be treated as if he were the Emperor himself
travelling. When the tablet was marked ‘Urgent,’ he had the right
to take private horses, and was required to ride, night and day,
700 _li_ in twenty-four hours. On his return he had to give back
the tablet to the Emperor, who handed it to the prince who had the
custody of the state tablets and seals.” (_Dr. S. W. Bushell, Actes
XI. Cong. Int. Orient._, Paris, p. 17.)

“The Kin, in the thirteenth century, used badges of office made
of silver. They were rectangular, bore the imperial seal, and an
inscription indicative of the duty of the bearer. (_Chavannes,
Voyageurs chez les Khitans_, 102.) The Nü-chên at an earlier
date used wooden _pai-tzŭ_ tied to each horseman and horse, to
distinguish them by. (_Ma Tuan-lin_, Bk. 327, 11.)” (_Rockhill,
Rubruck_, p. 181, note.)

“Tiger’s tablets—_Sinice Hu fu_, and _p’ai tsze_ in the common
language. The Mongols had them of several kinds, which differed
by the metal, of which they were made, as well as by the number
of pearls (one, two, or three in number), which were incrusted in
the upper part of the tablet. Falcon’s tablets with the figure of
a falcon were round, and used to be given only to special couriers
and envoys of the Khan. [_Yuen shi lui pien_ and _Yuen ch’ao tien
chang_.] The use of the _Hu-fu_ was adopted by the Mongols probably
from the Kin.” (_Palladius_, _l.c._ p. 39.)

Rubruquis (Rockhill’s ed. pp. 153–154) says:—“And whenever
the principal envoy [of Longa] came to court he carried a
highly-polished tablet of ivory about a cubit long and half a palm
wide. Every time he spoke to the chan or some great personage, he
always looked at that tablet as if he found there what he had to
say, nor did he look to the right or the left, nor in the face
of him with whom he was talking. Likewise, when coming into the
presence of the Lord, and when leaving it, he never looked at
anything but his tablet.” Mr. Rockhill observes: “These tablets
are called _hu_ in Chinese, and were used in China and Korea; in
the latter country down to quite recent times. They were made of
jade, ivory, bamboo, etc., according to the rank of the owner, and
were about three feet long. The _hu_ was originally used to make
memoranda on of the business to be submitted by the bearer to the
Emperor or to write the answers to questions he had had submitted
to them. Odoric also refers to ‘the tablets of white ivory which
the Emperor’s barons held in their hands as they stood silent
before him.’”

(Cf. the golden tablets which were of various classes with a tiger
for image and pearls for ornaments, _Devéria, Epigraphie_, p. 15 et
seq.) —H. C.]

NOTE 3.—_Umbrella_. The phrase in Pauthier’s text is “_Palieque
que on dit_ ombrel.” The Latin text of the Soc. de Géographie has
“_unum pallium_ de auro,” which I have adopted as probably correct,
looking to Burma, where the old etiquettes as to umbrellas are in
full force. These etiquettes were probably in both countries of
old Hindu origin. _Pallium_, according to Muratori, was applied in
the Middle Ages to a kind of square umbrella, by which is probably
meant rather a canopy on four staves, which was sometimes assigned
by authority as an honourable privilege.

But the genuine umbrella would seem to have been used also, for
Polo’s contemporary, Martino da Canale, says that, when the Doge
goes forth of his palace, “_si vait apres lui un damoiseau qui
porte une umbrele de dras à or sur son chief_,” which umbrella had
been given by “_Monseigneur l’Apostoille_.” There is a picture by
Girolamo Gambarota, in the Sala del Gran Consiglio, at Venice,
which represents the investiture of the Doge with the umbrella by
Pope Alexander III., and Frederick Barbarossa (concerning which see
_Sanuto_ Junior, in _Muratori_, XXII. 512).

The word _Parasol_ also occurs in the Petrarchian vocabulary,
(14th century) as the equivalent of _saioual_ (Pers. _sáyában_ or
_sáiwán_, an umbrella). Carpini notices that umbrellas (_solinum
vel tentoriolum in hastâ_) were carried over the Tartar nobles
and their wives, even on horseback; and a splendid one, covered
with jewels, was one of the presents made to Kuyuk Kaan on his
enthronement.

With respect to the honorary character attaching to umbrellas in
China, I may notice that recently an English resident of Ningpo, on
his departure for Europe, was presented by the Chinese citizens,
as a token of honour, with a pair of _Wan min sàn_, umbrellas of
enormous size.

The umbrella must have gone through some curious vicissitudes;
for at one time we find it familiar, at a later date apparently
unknown, and then reintroduced as some strange novelty. Arrian
speaks of the σκιάδια, or umbrellas, as used by all Indians of
any consideration; but the thing of which he spoke was familiar
to the use of Greek and Roman ladies, and many examples of it,
borne by slaves behind their mistresses, are found on ancient
vase-paintings. Athenaeus quotes from Anacreon the description of a
“beggar on horseback” who

“like a woman bears
An ivory parasol over his delicate head.”

[Illustration: Second Example of a MONGOL PAÏZA, with
Superscription in the _Uighúr_ Character, found near the River
Dnieper, 1845.]

An Indian prince, in a Sanskrit inscription of the 9th century,
boasts of having wrested from the King of Márwár the two umbrellas
pleasing to Parvati, and white as the summer moonbeams. Prithi
Ráj, the last Hindu king of Delhi, is depicted by the poet Chand
as shaded by a white umbrella on a golden staff. An unmistakable
umbrella, copied from a Saxon MS. in the Harleian collection, is
engraved in _Wright’s History of Domestic Manners_, p. 75. The fact
that the gold umbrella is one of the paraphernalia of high church
dignitaries in Italy seems to presume acquaintance with the thing
from a remote period. A decorated umbrella also accompanies the
host when sent out to the sick, at least where I write, in Palermo.
Ibn Batuta says that in his time all the people of Constantinople,
civil and military, great and small, carried great umbrellas over
their heads, summer and winter. Ducange quotes, from a MS. of the
Paris Library, the Byzantine court regulations about umbrellas,
which are of the genuine Pan-Asiatic spirit;—σκιάδια χρυσοκóκκινα
extend from the Hypersebastus to the grand Stratopedarchus, and
so on; exactly as used to be the case, with different titles, in
Java. And yet it is curious that John Marignolli, Ibn Batuta’s
contemporary in the middle of the 14th century, and Barbosa in the
16th century, are alike at pains to describe the umbrella as some
strange object. And in our own country it is commonly stated that
the umbrella was first used in the last century, and that Jonas
Hanway (died 1786) was one of the first persons who made a practice
of carrying one. The word _umbrello_ is, however, in Minsheu’s
dictionary. [See _Hobson-Jobson_, s.v. _Umbrella_.—H. C.]

(_Murat. Dissert._ II. 229; _Archiv. Storic. Ital._ VIII. 274, 560;
_Klapr. Mém._ III.; _Carp._ 759; _N. and Q., C. and J._ II. 180;
_Arrian, Indica_, XVI.; _Smith’s Dict., G. and R. Ant._, s.v.
_umbraculum_; _J. R. A. S._ v. 351; _Rás Mála_, I. 221; _I. B._ II.
440; _Cathay_, 381; _Ramus._ I. f. 301.)

Alexander, according to Athenaeus, feasted his captains to the
number of 6000, and made them all sit upon silver chairs. The same
author relates that the King of Persia, among other rich presents,
bestowed upon Entimus the Gortynian, who went up to the king in
imitation of Themistocles, _a silver chair and a gilt umbrella_.
(Bk. I. Epit. ch. 31, and II. 31.)

The silver chair has come down to our own day in India, and is much
affected by native princes.

NOTE 4.—I have not been able to find any allusion, except in our
author, to tablets, with gerfalcons (_shonḳár_). The _shonḳár_
appears, however, according to Erdmann, on certain coins of the
Golden Horde, struck at Sarai.

There is a passage from Wassáf used by Hammer, in whose words
it runs that the Sayad Imámuddín, appointed (A.D. 683) governor
of Shiraz by Arghun Khan, “was invested with _both_ the Mongol
symbols of delegated sovereignty, the Golden Lion’s Head, and
the golden _Cat’s Head_.” It would certainly have been more
satisfactory to find “Gerfalcon’s Head” in lieu of the latter;
but it is probable that the same object is meant. The cut below
exhibits the conventional effigy of a gerfalcon as sculptured over
one of the gates of Iconium, Polo’s Conia. The head might easily
pass for a conventional representation of a cat’s head, and is
indeed strikingly like the grotesque representation that bears that
name in mediæval architecture. (_Erdmann, Numi Asiatici_, I. 339;
_Ilch._ I. 370.)

[Illustration: Sculptured Gerfalcon. (From the Gate of Iconium.)]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] “In anno Simiae, octavâ lunâ, die quarto exeunte, juxta fluvium
Cobam (_the Ḳuban_), apud Ripam Rubeam existentes scripsimus.” The
original was in _linguâ Persaycâ_.

[2] See _Golden Horde_, p. 218.

CHAPTER VIII.

CONCERNING THE PERSON OF THE GREAT KAAN.

The personal appearance of the Great Kaan, Lord of Lords, whose name
is Cublay, is such as I shall now tell you. He is of a good stature,
neither tall nor short, but of a middle height. He has a becoming
amount of flesh, and is very shapely in all his limbs. His complexion
is white and red, the eyes black and fine,{1} the nose well formed and
well set on. He has four wives, whom he retains permanently as his
legitimate consorts; and the eldest of his sons by those four wives
ought by rights to be emperor;—I mean when his father dies. Those four
ladies are called empresses, but each is distinguished also by her
proper name. And each of them has a special court of her own, very
grand and ample; no one of them having fewer than 300 fair and charming
damsels. They have also many pages and eunuchs, and a number of other
attendants of both sexes; so that each of these ladies has not less
than 10,000 persons attached to her court.{2}

When the Emperor desires the society of one of these four consorts, he
will sometimes send for the lady to his apartment and sometimes visit
her at her own. He has also a great number of concubines, and I will
tell you how he obtains them.

You must know that there is a tribe of Tartars called UNGRAT, who are
noted for their beauty. Now every year an hundred of the most beautiful
maidens of this tribe are sent to the Great Kaan, who commits them to
the charge of certain elderly ladies dwelling in his palace. And these
old ladies make the girls sleep with them, in order to ascertain if
they have sweet breath [and do not snore], and are sound in all their
limbs. Then such of them as are of approved beauty, and are good and
sound in all respects, are appointed to attend on the Emperor by turns.
Thus six of these damsels take their turn for three days and nights,
and wait on him when he is in his chamber and when he is in his bed,
to serve him in any way, and to be entirely at his orders. At the
end of the three days and nights they are relieved by other six. And
so throughout the year, there are reliefs of maidens by six and six,
changing every three days and nights.{3}

[Illustration: Portrait of Kúblái Kaan. (From a Chinese Engraving.)]

NOTE 1.—We are left in some doubt as to the colour of Kúblái’s
eyes, for some of the MSS. read _vairs_ and _voirs_, and others
_noirs_. The former is a very common epithet for eyes in the
mediæval romances. And in the ballad on the death of St. Lewis, we
are told of his son Tristram:—

“Droiz fu comme un rosel, _iex vairs comme faucon_,
Dès le tens Moysel ne nasqui sa façon.”

The word has generally been interpreted _bluish-grey_, but in
the passage just quoted, Fr.-Michel explains it by _brillans_.
However, the evidence for _noirs_ here seems strongest. Rashiduddin
says that when Kúblái was born Chinghiz expressed surprise at the
child’s being so _brown_, as its father and all his other sons were
fair. Indeed, we are told that the descendants of Yesugai (the
father of Chinghiz) were in general distinguished by blue eyes and
reddish hair. (_Michel’s Joinville_, p. 324; _D’Ohsson_, II. 475;
_Erdmann_, 252.)

NOTE 2.—According to Hammer’s authority (Rashid?) Kúblái had
_seven_ wives; Gaubil’s Chinese sources assign him _five_, with the
title of empress (_Hwang-heu_). Of these the best beloved was the
beautiful Jamúi Khátún (Lady or Empress Jamúi, illustrating what
the text says of the manner of styling these ladies), who bore him
four sons and five daughters. Rashiduddin adds that she was called
_Ḳún Ḳú_, or the great consort, evidently the term _Hwang-heu_.
(Gen. Tables in _Hammer’s Ilkhans_; _Gaubil_, 223; _Erdmann_, 200.)

[“Kúblái’s four wives, _i.e._ the empresses of the first, second,
third, and fourth _ordos_. _Ordo_ is, properly speaking, a separate
palace of the Khan, under the management of one of his wives.
Chinese authors translate therefore the word _ordo_ by ‘harem.’
The four _Ordo_ established by Chingis Khan were destined for the
empresses, who were chosen out of four different nomad tribes.
During the reign of the first four Khans, who lived in Mongolia,
the four _ordo_ were considerably distant one from another, and the
Khans visited them in different seasons of the year; they existed
nominally as long as China remained under Mongol domination. The
custom of choosing the empress out of certain tribes, was in the
course of time set aside by the Khans. The empress, wife of the
last Mongol Khan in China, was a Corean princess by birth; and
she contributed in a great measure to the downfall of the Mongol
Dynasty.” (_Palladius_, 40.)

I do not believe that Rashiduddin’s _Kún Kú_ is the term
_Hwang-keu_; it is the term _Kiūn Chu_, King or Queen, a
sovereign.—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—_Ungrat_, the reading of the Crusca, seems to be that to
which the others point, and I doubt not that it represents the
great Mongol tribe of ḲUNGURAT, which gave more wives than any
other to the princes of the house of Chinghiz; a conclusion in
which I find I have been anticipated by De Mailla or his editor
(IX. 426). To this tribe (which, according to Vámbéry, took its
name from (Turki) _Kongur-At_, “Chestnut Horse”) belonged Burteh
Fujin, the favourite wife of Chinghiz himself, and mother of his
four heirs; to the same tribe belonged the two wives of Chagatai,
two of Hulaku’s seven wives, one of Mangku Kaan’s, two at least
of Kúblái’s including the beloved Jamúi Khátún, one at least of
Abaka’s, two of Ahmed Tigudar’s, two of Arghun’s, and two of
Ghazan’s.

The seat of the Ḳungurats was near the Great Wall. Their name
is still applied to one of the tribes of the Uzbeks of Western
Turkestan, whose body appears to have been made up of fractions of
many of the Turk and Mongol tribes. Kungurat is also the name of
a town of Khiva, near the Sea of Aral, perhaps borrowed from the
Uzbek clan.

The conversion of _Ḳungurat_ into _Ungrat_ is due, I suppose, to
that Mongol tendency to soften gutturals which has been before
noticed. (_Erdm._ 199–200; _Hammer, passim; Burnes_, III. 143, 225.)

The Ramusian version adds here these curious and apparently genuine
particulars:—

“The Great Kaan sends his commissioners to the Province to select
four or five hundred, or whatever number may be ordered, of the
most beautiful young women, according to the scale of beauty
enjoined upon them. And they set a value upon the comparative
beauty of the damsels in this way. The commissioners on arriving
assemble all the girls of the province, in presence of appraisers
appointed for the purpose. These carefully survey the points of
each girl in succession, as (for example) her hair, her complexion,
eyebrows, mouth, lips, and the proportion of all her limbs. They
will then set down some as estimated at 16 carats, some at 17,
18, 20, or more or less, according to the sum of the beauties or
defects of each. And whatever standard the Great Kaan may have
fixed for those that are to be brought to him, whether it be 20
carats or 21, the commissioners select the required number from
those who have attained that standard, and bring them to him. And
when they reach his presence he has them appraised anew by other
parties, and has a selection made of 30 or 40 of those, who then
get the highest valuation.”

Marsden and Murray miss the meaning of this curious statement in a
surprising manner, supposing the carat to represent some absolute
value, 4 grains of gold according to the former, whence the damsel
of 20 carats was estimated at 13_s._ 4_d._! This is sad nonsense;
but Marsden would not have made the mistake had he not been
fortunate enough to live before the introduction of Competitive
Examinations. This Kungurat business was in fact a competitive
examination in beauty; total marks attainable 24; no candidate to
pass who did not get 20 or 21. _Carat_ expresses _n_ ÷ 24, not any
absolute value.

Apart from the mode of valuation, it appears that a like system of
selection was continued by the Ming, and that some such selection
from the daughters of the Manchu nobles has been maintained till
recent times. Herodotus tells that the like custom prevailed among
the Adyrmachidae, the Libyan tribe next Egypt. Old Eden too relates
it of the “Princes of Moscovia.” (_Middle Km._ I. 318; _Herod._ IV.
168, Rawl.; _Notes on Russia_, Hak. Soc. II. 253.)

CHAPTER IX.

CONCERNING THE GREAT KAAN’S SONS.

The Emperor hath, by those four wives of his, twenty-two male children;
the eldest of whom was called CHINKIN for the love of the good Chinghis
Kaan, the first Lord of the Tartars. And this Chinkin, as the Eldest
Son of the Kaan, was to have reigned after his father’s death; but, as
it came to pass, he died. He left a son behind him, however, whose name
is TEMUR, and he is to be the Great Kaan and Emperor after the death
of his Grandfather, as is but right; he being the child of the Great
Kaan’s eldest son. And this Temur is an able and brave man, as he hath
already proven on many occasions.{1}

The Great Kaan hath also twenty-five other sons by his concubines; and
these are good and valiant soldiers, and each of them is a great chief.
I tell you moreover that of his children by his four lawful wives there
are seven who are kings of vast realms or provinces, and govern them
well; being all able and gallant men, as might be expected. For the
Great Kaan their sire is, I tell you, the wisest and most accomplished
man, the greatest Captain, the best to govern men and rule an Empire,
as well as the most valiant, that ever has existed among all the Tribes
of Tartars.{2}

NOTE 1.—Kúblái had a son older than CHIMKIN or CHINGKIM, to
whom Hammer’s Genealogical Table gives the name of _Jurji_, and
attributes a son called Ananda. The Chinese authorities of Gaubil
and Pauthier call him _Turchi_ or _Torchi_, _i.e._ _Dorjé_, “Noble
Stone,” the Tibetan name of a sacred Buddhist emblem in the form
of a dumb-bell, representing the _Vajra_ or Thunderbolt. Probably
Dorjé died early, as in the passage we shall quote from Wassáf
also Chingkim is styled the Eldest Son: Marco is probably wrong in
connecting the name of the latter with that of Chinghiz. Schmidt
says that he does not know what _Chingkim_ means.

[Mr. Parker says that Chen kim was the _third_ son of Kúblái
(_China Review_, xxiv. p. 94). Teimur, son of Chen kim, wore the
temple name (_miao-hao_) of _Ch’êng Tsung_ and the title of reign
(_nien-hao_) of _Yuen Chêng_ and _Ta Téh._—H. C.]

Chingkim died in the 12th moon of 1284–1285, aged 43. He had
received a Chinese education, and the Chinese Annals ascribe to him
all the virtues which so often pertain in history to heirs apparent
who have not reigned.

“When Kúblái approached his 70th year,” says Wassáf, “he desired to
raise his eldest son Chimkin to the position of his representative
and declared successor, during his own lifetime; so he took counsel
with the chiefs, in view to giving the Prince a share of his
authority and a place on the Imperial Throne. The chiefs, who are
the Pillars of Majesty and Props of the Empire, represented that
His Majesty’s proposal to invest his Son, during his own lifetime,
with Imperial authority, was not in accordance with the precedents
and Institutes (_Yasa_) of the World-conquering Padshah Chinghiz
Khan; but still they would consent to execute a solemn document,
securing the Kaanship to Chimkin, and pledging themselves to
lifelong obedience and allegiance to him. It was, however, the
Divine Fiat that the intended successor should predecease him who
bestowed the nomination.... The dignitaries of the Empire then
united their voices in favour of TEIMUR, the son of Chimkin.”

Teimur, according to the same authority, was the third son of
Chimkin; but the eldest, Kambala, _squinted_; the second, Tarmah
(properly _Tarmabala_ for _Dharmaphala_, a Buddhist Sanskrit name)
was rickety in constitution; and on the death of the old Kaan
(1294) Teimur was unanimously named to the Throne, after some
opposition from Kambala, which was put down by the decided bearing
of the great soldier Bayan. (_Schmidt_, p. 399; _De Mailla_, IX.
424; _Gaubil_, 203; _Wassáf_, 46.)

[The Rev. W. S. Ament (_Marco Polo in Cambaluc_, p. 106), makes
the following remarks regarding this young prince (Chimkin): “The
historians give good reasons for their regard for Chen Chin.
He had from early years exhibited great promise and had shown
great proficiency in the military art, in government, history,
mathematics, and the Chinese classics. He was well acquainted with
the condition and numbers of the inhabitants of Mongolia and China,
and with the topography and commerce of the Empire (Howorth).
He was much beloved by all, except by some of his father’s own
ministers, whose lives were anything but exemplary. That Kúblái had
full confidence in his son is shown by the fact that he put the
collecting of taxes in his hands. The native historians represent
him as economical in the use of money and wise in the choice of
companions. He carefully watched the officers in his charge, and
would tolerate no extortion of the people. After droughts, famines
or floods, he would enquire into the condition of the people and
liberally supply their needs, thus starting them in life again.
Polo ascribes all these virtues to the Khan himself. Doubtless he
possessed them in greater or less degree, but father and son were
one in all these benevolent enterprises.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—The Chinese Annals, according to Pauthier and Gaubil,
give only _ten_ sons to Kúblái, at least by his legitimate wives;
Hammer’s Table gives _twelve_. It is very probable that xxii. was
an early clerical error in the texts of Polo for xii. _Dodeci_
indeed occurs in one MS. (No. 37 of our Appendix F), though not one
of much weight.

Of these legitimate sons Polo mentions, in different parts of his
work, five by name. The following is the list from Hammer and
D’Ohsson, with the Chinese forms from Pauthier in parentheses.
The seven whose names are in capitals had the title of _Wang_ or
“King” of particular territories, as M. Pauthier has shown from the
Chinese Annals, thus confirming Marco’s accuracy on that point.

I. Jurji or Dorjé (Torchi). II. CHIMKIN or CHINGKIM (Yu Tsung,
King of Yen, _i.e._ Old Peking). III. MANGALAI (Mankola, “King of
the Pacified West”), mentioned by Polo (_infra_, ch. xli.) as King
of Kenjanfu or Shensi. IV. NUMUGAN (Numukan, “Pacifying King of
the North”), mentioned by Polo (Bk. IV. ch. ii.) as with King
George joint leader of the Kaan’s army against Kaidu. V. Kuridai
(not in Chinese List). VI. HUKAJI (Hukochi, “King of Yunnan”),
mentioned by Polo (_infra_, ch. xlix.) as King of Carajan. VII.
AGHRUKJI or UKURUJI (Gaoluchi, “King of Siping” or Tibet). VIII.
Abaji (Gaiyachi?). IX. KUKJU or GEUKJU (Khokhochu, “King of Ning”
or Tangut). X. Kutuktemur (Hutulu Temurh). XI. TUKAN (Thohoan,
“King of Chinnan”). His command lay on the Tungking frontier,
where he came to great grief in 1288, in consequence of which he
was disgraced. (See _Cathay_, p. 272.) XII. Temkan (not in Chinese
List). Gaubil’s Chinese List omits _Hutulu Temurh_, and introduces
a prince called _Gantanpouhoa_ as 4th son.

M. Pauthier lays great stress on Polo’s intimate knowledge of
the Imperial affairs (p. 263) because he knew the name of the
Hereditary Prince to be Teimur; this being, he says, the private
name which could not be known until after the owner’s death, except
by those in the most confidential intimacy. The public only then
discovered that, like the Irishman’s dog, his real name was Turk,
though he had always been called Toby! But M. Pauthier’s learning
has misled him. At least the secret must have been very badly kept,
for it was known in Teimur’s lifetime not only to Marco, but to
Rashiduddin in Persia, and to Hayton in Armenia; to say nothing of
the circumstance that the name _Temur Khaghan_ is also used during
that Emperor’s life by Oljaitu Khan of Persia in writing to the
King of France a letter which M. Pauthier himself republished and
commented upon. (See his book, p. 780.)

CHAPTER X.

CONCERNING THE PALACE OF THE GREAT KAAN.

You must know that for three months of the year, to wit December,
January, and February, the Great Kaan resides in the capital city of
Cathay, which is called CAMBALUC, [and which is at the north-eastern
extremity of the country]. In that city stands his great Palace, and
now I will tell you what it is like.

It is enclosed all round by a great wall forming a square, each side of
which is a mile in length; that is to say, the whole compass thereof
is four miles. This you may depend on; it is also very thick, and a
good ten paces in height, whitewashed and loop-holed all round.{1} At
each angle of the wall there is a very fine and rich palace in which
the war-harness of the Emperor is kept, such as bows and quivers,{2}
saddles and bridles, and bowstrings, and everything needful for an
army. Also midway between every two of these Corner Palaces there is
another of the like; so that taking the whole compass of the enclosure
you find eight vast Palaces stored with the Great Lord’s harness of
war.{3} And you must understand that each Palace is assigned to only
one kind of article; thus one is stored with bows, a second with
saddles, a third with bridles, and so on in succession right round.{4}

The great wall has five gates on its southern face, the middle one
being the great gate which is never opened on any occasion except when
the Great Kaan himself goes forth or enters. Close on either side of
this great gate is a smaller one by which all other people pass; and
then towards each angle is another great gate, also open to people in
general; so that on that side there are five gates in all.{5}

Inside of this wall there is a second, enclosing a space that is
somewhat greater in length than in breadth. This enclosure also has
eight palaces corresponding to those of the outer wall, and stored like
them with the Lord’s harness of war. This wall also hath five gates on
the southern face, corresponding to those in the outer wall, and hath
one gate on each of the other faces, as the outer wall hath also. In
the middle of the second enclosure is the Lord’s Great Palace, and I
will tell you what it is like.{6}

You must know that it is the greatest Palace that ever was. [Towards
the north it is in contact with the outer wall, whilst towards the
south there is a vacant space which the Barons and the soldiers are
constantly traversing.{7} The Palace itself] hath no upper story,
but is all on the ground floor, only the basement is raised some ten
palms above the surrounding soil [and this elevation is retained by
a wall of marble raised to the level of the pavement, two paces in
width and projecting beyond the base of the Palace so as to form a
kind of terrace-walk, by which people can pass round the building,
and which is exposed to view, whilst on the outer edge of the wall
there is a very fine pillared balustrade; and up to this the people
are allowed to come]. The roof is very lofty, and the walls of the
Palace are all covered with gold and silver. They are also adorned with
representations of dragons [sculptured and gilt], beasts and birds,
knights and idols, and sundry other subjects. And on the ceiling too
you see nothing but gold and silver and painting. [On each of the four
sides there is a great marble staircase leading to the top of the
marble wall, and forming the approach to the Palace.]{8}

The Hall of the Palace is so large that it could easily dine 6000
people; and it is quite a marvel to see how many rooms there are
besides. The building is altogether so vast, so rich, and so beautiful,
that no man on earth could design anything superior to it. The outside
of the roof also is all coloured with vermilion and yellow and green
and blue and other hues, which are fixed with a varnish so fine and
exquisite that they shine like crystal, and lend a resplendent lustre
to the Palace as seen for a great way round.{9} This roof is made too
with such strength and solidity that it is fit to last for ever.

[On the interior side of the Palace are large buildings with halls and
chambers, where the Emperor’s private property is placed, such as his
treasures of gold, silver, gems, pearls, and gold plate, and in which
reside the ladies and concubines. There he occupies himself at his own
convenience, and no one else has access.]

Between the two walls of the enclosure which I have described, there
are fine parks and beautiful trees bearing a variety of fruits. There
are beasts also of sundry kinds, such as white stags and fallow deer,
gazelles and roebucks, and fine squirrels of various sorts, with
numbers also of the animal that gives the musk, and all manner of other
beautiful creatures,{10} insomuch that the whole place is full of them,
and no spot remains void except where there is traffic of people going
and coming. [The parks are covered with abundant grass; and the roads
through them being all paved and raised two cubits above the surface,
they never become muddy, nor does the rain lodge on them, but flows off
into the meadows, quickening the soil and producing that abundance of
herbage.]

From that corner of the enclosure which is towards the north-west there
extends a fine Lake, containing foison of fish of different kinds which
the Emperor hath caused to be put in there, so that whenever he desires
any he can have them at his pleasure. A river enters this lake and
issues from it, but there is a grating of iron or brass put up so that
the fish cannot escape in that way.{11}

Moreover on the north side of the Palace, about a bow-shot off, there
is a hill which has been made by art [from the earth dug out of the
lake]; it is a good hundred paces in height and a mile in compass.
This hill is entirely covered with trees that never lose their leaves,
but remain ever green. And I assure you that wherever a beautiful tree
may exist, and the Emperor gets news of it, he sends for it and has it
transported bodily with all its roots and the earth attached to them,
and planted on that hill of his. No matter how big the tree may be, he
gets it carried by his elephants; and in this way he has got together
the most beautiful collection of trees in all the world. And he has
also caused the whole hill to be covered with the ore of azure,{12}
which is very green. And thus not only are the trees all green, but the
hill itself is all green likewise; and there is nothing to be seen on
it that is not green; and hence it is called the GREEN MOUNT; and in
good sooth ’tis named well.{13}

On the top of the hill again there is a fine big palace which is all
green inside and out; and thus the hill, and the trees, and the palace
form together a charming spectacle; and it is marvellous to see their
uniformity of colour! Everybody who sees them is delighted. And the
Great Kaan had caused this beautiful prospect to be formed for the
comfort and solace and delectation of his heart.

You must know that beside the Palace (that we have been describing),
_i.e._ the Great Palace, the Emperor has caused another to be built
just like his own in every respect, and this he hath done for his son
when he shall reign and be Emperor after him.{14} Hence it is made
just in the same fashion and of the same size, so that everything can
be carried on in the same manner after his own death. [It stands on
the other side of the lake from the Great Kaan’s Palace, and there is
a bridge crossing the water from one to the other.]{15} The Prince
in question holds now a Seal of Empire, but not with such complete
authority as the Great Kaan, who remains supreme as long as he lives.

Now I am going to tell you of the chief city of Cathay, in which these
Palaces stand; and why it was built, and how.

NOTE 1.—[According to the _Ch’ue keng lu_, translated by
Bretschneider, 25, “the wall surrounding the palace ... is
constructed of bricks, and is 35 _ch’i_ in height. The construction
was begun in A.D. 1271, on the 17th of the 8th month, between three
and five o’clock in the afternoon, and finished next year on the
15th of the 3rd month.”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—_Tarcasci_ (G. T.). This word is worthy of note as the
proper form of what has become in modern French _carquois_. The
former is a transcript of the Persian _Tărkăsh_; the latter appears
to be merely a corruption of it, arising perhaps clerically from
the constant confusion of _c_ and _t_ in MSS. (See _Defrémery_,
quoted by Pauthier, _in loco._) [Old French _tarquais_ (13th
century), Hatzfeldt and Darmesteter’s _Dict._ gives; “Coivres orent
ceinz et tarchais.” (WACE, _Rou_, III., 7698; 12th century).]

NOTE 3.—[“It seems to me [Dr. Bretschneider] that Polo took the
towers, mentioned by the Chinese author, in the angles of the
galleries and of the Kung-ch’eng for palaces; for further on he
states, that ‘over each gate [of Cambaluc] there is a great and
handsome palace.’ I have little doubt that over the gates of
Cambaluc, stood lofty buildings similar to those over the gates of
modern Peking. These tower-like buildings are called _lou_ by the
Chinese. It may be very likely, that at the time of Marco Polo,
the war harness of the Khan was stored in these towers of the
palace wall. The author of the _Ch’ue keng lu_, who wrote more than
fifty years later, assigns to it another place.” (_Bretschneider,
Peking_, 32.) —H. C.]

[Illustration: IDEAL PLAN of the ANCIENT PALACES of the MONGOL
EMPERORS AT KHANBALIGH according to Dʳ. Bretschneider]

NOTE 4.—The stores are now outside the walls of the “Prohibited
City,” corresponding to Polo’s Palace-Wall, but within the walls of
the “Imperial City.” (_Middle Kingdom_, I. 61.) See the cut at p.
376.

NOTE 5.—The two gates near the corners apparently do not exist in
the Palace now. “On the south side there are three gates to the
Palace, both in the inner and the outer walls. The middle one is
absolutely reserved for the entrance or exit of the Emperor; all
other people pass in and out by the gate to the right or left of
it.” (_Trigautius_, Bk. I. ch. vii.) This custom is not in China
peculiar to Royalty. In private houses it is usual to have three
doors leading from the court to the guest-rooms, and there is a
great exercise of politeness in reference to these; the guest after
much pressing is prevailed on to enter the middle door, whilst
the host enters by the side. (See _Deguignes, Voyages_, I. 262.)
[See also _H. Cordier’s Hist. des Relat. de la Chine_, III. ch. x.
_Audience Impériale_.]

[“It seems Polo took the three gateways in the middle gate
(_Ta-ming men_) for three gates, and thus speaks of five gates
instead of three in the southern wall.” (_Bretschneider, Peking_,
27, note.)—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—Ramusio’s version here diverges from the old MSS. It makes
the inner enclosure a mile square; and the second (the city of
Taidu) six miles square, as here, but adds, at a mile interval,
a third of eight miles square. Now it is remarkable that Mr. A.
Wylie, in a letter dated 4th December 1873, speaking of a recent
visit to Peking, says: “I found from various inquiries that there
are several remains of a very much larger city wall, inclosing the
present city; but time would not allow me to follow up the traces.”

Pauthier’s text (which I have corrected by the G. T.), after
describing the _outer inclosure_ to be a _mile every way_, says
that the inner inclosure lay at _an interval of a mile within it_!

[Dr. Bretschneider observes “that in the ancient Chinese works,
three concentric inclosures are mentioned in connection with
the palace. The innermost inclosed the _Ta-nei_, the middle
inclosure, called _Kung-ch’eng_ or _Huang-ch’eng_, answering to
the wall surrounding the present prohibited city, and was about 6
_li_ in circuit. Besides this there was an outer wall (a rampart
apparently) 20 _li_ in circuit, answering to the wall of the
present imperial city (which now has 18 _li_ in circuit).” The
_Huang-ch’eng_ of the Yuen was measured by imperial order, and
found to be 7 _li_ in circuit; the wall of the Mongol palace was 6
_li_ in circuit, according to the _Ch’ue keng lu_. (_Bretschneider,
Peking_, 24.)—Marco Polo’s mile could be approximately estimated
= 2·77 Chinese _li_. (_Ibid._ 24, note.) The common Chinese _li_
= 360 _pu_, or 180 _chang_, or 1800 _ch’i_ (feet); 1 _li_ = 1894
English feet or 575 mètres; at least according to the old Venice
measures quoted in _Yule’s Marco Polo_, II., one pace = 5 feet.
Besides the common _li_, the Chinese have another _li_, used for
measuring fields, which has only 240 _pu_ or 1200 _ch’i_. This is
the _li_ spoken of in the _Ch’ue keng lu_. (_Ibid._ 13, note.)—H. C.]

NOTE 7.—[“Near the southern face of the wall are barracks for
the Life Guards.” (_Ch’ue keng lu_, translated by Bretschneider,
25.)—H. C.]

NOTE 8.—This description of palace (see opposite cut), an elevated
basement of masonry with a superstructure of timber (in general
carved and gilded), is still found in Burma, Siam, and Java, as
well as in China. If we had any trace of the palaces of the ancient
Asokas and Vikramadityas of India, we should probably find that
they were of the same character. It seems to be one of those things
that belonged to some ancient Panasiatic fashion, as the palaces of
Nineveh were of a somewhat similar construction. In the Audience
Halls of the Moguls at Delhi and Agra we can trace the ancient
form, though the superstructure has there become an arcade of
marble instead of a pavilion on timber columns.

[“The _Ta-ming tien_ (Hall of great brightness) is without doubt
what Marco Polo calls ‘the Lord’s Great Palace.’... He states, that
it ‘hath no upper story’; and indeed, the palace buildings which
the Chinese call _tien_ are always of one story. Polo speaks also
of a ‘very fine pillared balustrade’ (the _chu lang_, pillared
verandah, of the Chinese author). Marco Polo states that the
basement of the great palace ‘is raised some ten palms above the
surrounding soil.’ We find in the _Ku kung i lu_: ‘The basement of
the Ta-ming tien is raised about 10 _ch’i_ above the soil.’ There
can also be no doubt that the Ta-ming tien stood at about the same
place where now the _T’ai-ho tien_, the principal hall of the
palace, is situated.” (_Bretschneider, Peking_, 28, note.)

[Illustration: _A. Housselin d._

Palace at Khan-baligh. (From the _Livre des Merveilles_.)]

[Illustration: Winter Palace at Peking.]

The _Ch’ue keng lu_, translated by Bretschneider, 25, contains long
articles devoted to the description of the palace of the Mongols
and the adjacent palace grounds. They are too long to be reproduced
here.—H. C.]

NOTE 9.—“As all that one sees of these palaces is varnished in
those colours, when you catch a distant view of them at sunrise, as
I have done many a time, you would think them all made of, or at
least covered with, pure gold enamelled in azure and green, so that
the spectacle is at once majestic and charming.” (_Magaillans_, p.
353.)

NOTE 10.—[This is the _Ling yu_ or “Divine Park,” to the east of
the _Wan-sui shan_, “in which rare birds and beasts are kept.
Before the Emperor goes to Shangtu, the officers are accustomed
to be entertained at this place.” (_Ch’ue keng lu_, quoted by
Bretschneider, 36.)—H. C.]

NOTE 11.—“On the west side, where the space is amplest, there
is a lake very full of fish. It is in the form of a fiddle, and
is an Italian mile and a quarter in length. It is crossed at
the narrowest part, which corresponds to gates in the walls, by
a handsome bridge, the extremities of which are adorned by two
triumphal arches of three openings each.... The lake is surrounded
by palaces and pleasure houses, built partly in the water and
partly on shore, and charming boats are provided on it for the
use of the Emperor when he chooses to go a-fishing or to take an
airing.” (_Ibid._ 282–283.) The marble bridge, as it now exists,
consists of nine arches, and is 600 feet long. (_Rennie’s Peking_,
II. 57.)

Ramusio specifies another lake in the _city_, fed by the same
stream before it enters the palace, and used by the public for
watering cattle.

[“The lake which Marco Polo saw is the same as the _T’ai-yi ch’i_
of our days. It has, however, changed a little in its form. This
lake and also its name _T’ai-yi ch’i_ date from the twelfth
century, at which time an Emperor of the Kin first gave orders to
collect together the water of some springs in the hills, where now
the summer palaces stand, and to conduct it to a place north of
his capital, where pleasure gardens were laid out. The river which
enters the lake and issues from it exists still, under its ancient
name _Kin-shui_.” (_Bretschneider, Peking_, 34.)—H. C.]

NOTE 12.—The expression here is in the Geog. Text, “_Roze_ de
_l’açur_,” and in Pauthier’s “_de rose et de l’asur_.” _Rose
Minerale_, in the terminology of the alchemists, was a red powder
produced in the sublimation of gold and mercury, but I can find no
elucidation of the term Rose of Azure. The Crusca Italian has in
the same place _Terra dello Azzurro_. Having ventured to refer the
question to the high authority of Mr. C. W. King, he expresses the
opinion that _Roze_ here stands for _Roche_, and that probably the
term _Roche de l’azur_ may have been used loosely for _blue-stone_,
_i.e._ carbonate of copper, which would assume a green colour through
moisture. He adds: “Nero, according to Pliny, actually used
_chrysocolla_, the siliceous carbonate of copper, in powder, for
strewing the circus, to give the course the colour of his favourite
faction, the _prasine_ (or green). There may be some analogy
between this device and that of Kúblái Khan.” This parallel is a
very happy one.

NOTE 13.—Friar Odoric gives a description, short, but closely
agreeing in substance with that in the Text, of the Palace, the
Park, the Lake, and the Green Mount.

A green mount, answering to the description, and about 160 feet in
height, stands immediately in rear of the palace buildings. It is
called by the Chinese _King-Shan_, “Court Mountain,” _Wan-su-Shan_,
“Ten Thousand Year Mount,” and _Mei-Shan_, “Coal Mount,” the last
from the material of which it is traditionally said to be composed
(as a provision of fuel in case of siege).[1] Whether this is
Kúblái’s Green Mount does not seem to be quite certain. Dr.
Lockhart tells me that, according to the information he collected
when living at Peking, it is not so, but was formed by the Ming
Emperors from the excavation of the existing lake on the site which
the Mongol Palace had occupied. There is another mount, he adds,
adjoining the east shore of the lake, which must be of older date
even than Kúblái, for a Dagoba standing on it is ascribed to the
_Kin_.

[Illustration: Mei Shan.]

[The “Green Mount” was an island called _K’iung-hua_ at the time
of the Kin; in 1271 it received the name of _Wan-sui shan_; it is
about 100 feet in height, and is the only hill mentioned by Chinese
writers of the Mongol time who refer to the palace grounds. It
is not the present _King-shan_, north of the palace, called also
_Wan-sui-shan_ under the Ming, and now the _Mei-shan_, of more
recent formation. “I have no doubt,” says Bretschneider (_Peking_,
_l.c._ 35), “that Marco Polo’s handsome palace on the top of the
Green Mount is the same as the _Kuang-han tien_” of the _Ch’ue
keng lu_. It was a hall in which there was a jar of black jade,
big enough to hold more than 30 piculs of wine; this jade had
white veins, and in accordance with these veins, fish and animals
have been carved on the jar. (_Ibid._ 35.) “The _Ku kung i lu_, in
describing the _Wan-sui-shan_, praises the beautiful shady green of
the vegetation there.” (_Ibid._ 37.) —H. C.]

[“Near the eastern end of the bridge (_Kin-ao yü-tung_ which
crosses the lake) the visitor sees a circular wall, which is called
_yüan ch’eng_ (round wall). It is about 350 paces in circuit.
Within it is an imperial building _Ch’eng-kuang tien_, dating from
the Mongol time. From this circular enclosure, another long and
beautifully executed marble bridge leads northwards, to a charming
hill, covered with shady trees, and capped by a magnificent white
_suburga_.” (_Bretschneider_, p. 22.)—H. C.]

In a plate attached to next chapter, I have drawn, on a small
scale, the existing cities of Peking, as compared with the Mongol
and Chinese cities in the time of Kúblái. The plan of the latter
has been constructed (1) from existing traces, as exhibited
in the Russian Survey republished by our War Office; (2) from
information kindly afforded by Dr. Lockhart; and (3) from Polo’s
description and a few slight notices by Gaubil and others. It will
be seen, even on the small scale of these plans, that the general
arrangement of the palace, the park, the lakes (including that in
the city, which appears in Ramusio’s version), the bridge, the
mount, etc., in the existing Peking, very closely correspond with
Polo’s indications; and I think the strong probability is that the
Ming really built on the old traces, and that the lake, mount,
etc., as they now stand, are substantially those of the Great
Mongol, though Chinese policy or patriotism may have spread the
belief that the foreign traces were obliterated. Indeed, if that
belief were true, the Mongol Palace must have been very much out
of the axis of the City of Kúblái, which is in the highest degree
improbable. The _Bulletin de la Soc. de Géographie_ for September
1873, contains a paper on Peking by the physician to the French
Embassy there. Whatever may be the worth of the meteorological
and hygienic details in that paper, I am bound to say that the
historical and topographical part is so inaccurate as to be of no
value.

NOTE 14.—For son, read grandson. But the G. T. actually names the
Emperor’s son Chingkim, whose death our traveller has himself
already mentioned.

NOTE 15.—[“Marco Polo’s bridge, crossing the lake from one side to
the other, must be identified with the wooden bridge mentioned in
the _Ch’ue keng lu_. The present marble bridge spanning the lake
was only built in 1392.” “A marble bridge connects this island
(an islet with the hall _I-t’ien tien_) with the _Wan-sui shan_.
Another bridge, made of wood, 120 _ch’i_ long and 22 broad, leads
eastward to the wall of the Imperial Palace. A third bridge, a
wooden draw-bridge 470 _ch’i_ long, stretches to the west over the
lake to its western border, where the palace _Hing-sheng kung_
[built in 1308] stands.” (_Bretschneider_, _Peking_, 36.)—H. C.]

[Illustration: Yüan ch’eng.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Some years ago, in Calcutta, I learned that a large store of
charcoal existed under the soil of Fort William, deposited there, I
believe, in the early days of that fortress.

[“The _Jihia_ says that the name of _Mei shan_ (Coal hill) was
given to it from the stock of coal buried at its foot, as a
provision in case of siege.” (_Bretschneider, Peking_, 38.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XI.

CONCERNING THE CITY OF CAMBALUC.

Now there was on that spot in old times a great and noble city called
CAMBALUC, which is as much as to say in our tongue “The city of the
Emperor.”{1} But the Great Kaan was informed by his Astrologers that
this city would prove rebellious, and raise great disorders against his
imperial authority. So he caused the present city to be built close
beside the old one, with only a river between them.{2} And he caused
the people of the old city to be removed to the new town that he had
founded; and this is called TAIDU. [However, he allowed a portion of
the people which he did not suspect to remain in the old city, because
the new one could not hold the whole of them, big as it is.]

As regards the size of this (new) city you must know that it has a
compass of 24 miles, for each side of it hath a length of 6 miles, and
it is four-square. And it is all walled round with walls of earth which
have a thickness of full ten paces at bottom, and a height of more
than 10 paces;{3} but they are not so thick at top, for they diminish
in thickness as they rise, so that at top they are only about 3 paces
thick. And they are provided throughout with loop-holed battlements,
which are all whitewashed.

There are 12 gates, and over each gate there is a great and handsome
palace, so that there are on each side of the square three gates and
five palaces; for (I ought to mention) there is at each angle also a
great and handsome palace. In those palaces are vast halls in which are
kept the arms of the city garrison.{4}

The streets are so straight and wide that you can see right along them
from end to end and from one gate to the other. And up and down the
city there are beautiful palaces, and many great and fine hostelries,
and fine houses in great numbers. [All the plots of ground on which
the houses of the city are built are four-square, and laid out with
straight lines; all the plots being occupied by great and spacious
palaces, with courts and gardens of proportionate size. All these plots
were assigned to different heads of families. Each square plot is
encompassed by handsome streets for traffic; and thus the whole city is
arranged in squares just like a chess-board, and disposed in a manner
so perfect and masterly that it is impossible to give a description
that should do it justice.]{5}

Moreover, in the middle of the city there is a great clock—that is to
say, a bell—which is struck at night. And after it has struck three
times no one must go out in the city, unless it be for the needs
of a woman in labour, or of the sick.{6} And those who go about on
such errands are bound to carry lanterns with them. Moreover, the
established guard at each gate of the city is 1000 armed men; not that
you are to imagine this guard is kept up for fear of any attack, but
only as a guard of honour for the Sovereign, who resides there, and to
prevent thieves from doing mischief in the town.{7}

NOTE 1.—✛ The history of the city on the site of Peking goes back
to very old times, for it had been [under the name of _Ki_] the
capital of the kingdom of Yen, previous to B.C. 222, when it was
captured by the Prince of the T’sin Dynasty. [Under the T’ang
dynasty (618–907) it was known under the name of Yu-chau.] It
became one of the capitals of the Khitans in A.D. 936, and of the
Kin sovereigns, who took it in 1125, in 1151 under the name of
Chung-tu. Under the name of Yenking, [given to this city in 1013]
it has a conspicuous place in the wars of Chinghiz against the
latter dynasty. He captured it in 1215. In 1264, Kúblái adopted it
as his chief residence, and founded in 1267, the new city of TATU
(“Great Court”), called by the Mongols TAIDU or DAITU since 1271
(see Bk. I. ch. lxi. note 1), at a little distance—Odoric says half
a mile—to the north-east of the old Yenking. Tatu was completed in
the summer of 1267.

Old Yenking had, when occupied by the Kin, a circuit of 27 _li_
(commonly estimated at 9 miles, but in early works the _li_ is not
more than ⅕ of a mile), afterwards increased to 30 _li_. But there
was some kind of outer wall about the city and its suburbs, the
circuit of which is called 75 _li_. [“At the time of the Yuen the
walls still existed, and the ancient city of the Kin was commonly
called Nan-ch’eng (Southern city), whilst the Mongol capital was
termed the northern city.” _Bretschneider, Peking_, 10.—H. C.]
(_Lockhart_; and see _Amyot_, II. 553, and note 6 to last chapter.)

Polo correctly explains the name _Cambaluc_, _i.e._ _Kaan-baligh_,
“The City of the Kaan.”

NOTE 2.—The river that ran between the old and new city must have
been the little river _Yu_, which still runs through the modern
Tartar city, and fills the city ditches.

[Dr. Bretschneider (_Peking_, 49) thinks that there is a strong
probability that Polo speaks of the _Wen-ming ho_, a river which,
according to the ancient descriptions, ran near the southern wall
of the Mongol capital.—H. C.]

[Illustration: South Gate of Imperial City at Peking.

“=Elle a douze portes, et sor chascune porte a une grandisme palais
et biaus.=”]

NOTE 3.—This height is from Pauthier’s Text; the G. Text has,
“_twenty_ paces,” _i.e._ 100 feet. A recent French paper states the
dimensions of the existing walls as 14 mètres (45½ feet) high,
and 14·50 (47¼ feet) thick, “the top forming a paved promenade,
unique of its kind, and recalling the legendary walls of Thebes and
Babylon.” (_Ann. d’Hygiène Publique_, 2nd s. tom. xxxii. for 1869,
p. 21.)

[According to the French astronomers (Fleuriais and Lapied) sent
to Peking for the Transit of Venus in December, 1875, the present
Tartar city is 23 kil. 55 in circuit, viz. if 1 _li_ = 575 m., 41
_li_; from the north to the south 5400 mètres; from east to west
6700 mètres; the wall is 13 mètres in height and 12 mètres in
width.—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—Our attempted plan of Cambaluc, as in 1290, differs
somewhat from this description, but there is no getting over
certain existing facts.

[Illustration: PEKING As it is and As it was, about 1290]

[Illustration: A.D. 1290.]

The existing Tartar city of Peking (technically _Neï-ch’ing_, “The
Interior City,” or _King-ch’ing_, “City of the Court”) stands on
the site of Taidu, and represents it. After the expulsion of the
Mongols (1368) the new native Dynasty of Ming established their
capital at Nanking. But this was found so inconvenient that the
third sovereign of the Dynasty re-occupied Taidu or Cambaluc, the
repairs of which began in 1409. He reduced it in size by cutting
off nearly a third part of the city at the north end. The remains
of this abandoned portion of wall are, however, still in existence,
approaching 30 feet in height all round. This old wall is called
by the Chinese _The Wall of the Yuen_ (_i.e._ the Mongol Dynasty),
and it is laid down in the Russian Survey. [The capital of the Ming
was 40 _li_ in circuit, according to the _Ch’ang an k’o hua_.]
The existing walls were built, or restored rather (the north wall
being in any case, of course, entirely new), in 1437. There seems
to be no doubt that the present south front of the Tartar city was
the south front of Taidu. The whole outline of Taidu is therefore
still extant, and easily measurable. If the scale on the War Office
edition of the Russian Survey be correct, the long sides measure
close upon 5 miles and 500 yards; the short sides, 3 miles and 1200
yards. Hence the whole perimeter was just about 18 English miles,
or less than 16 Italian miles. If, however, a pair of compasses
be run round Taidu and Yenking (as we have laid the latter down
from such data as could be had) _together_, the circuit will be
something like 24 Italian miles, and this may have to do with
Polo’s error.

[“The _Yuen shi_ states that _Ta-tu_ was 60 _li_ in circumference.
The _Ch’ue keng lu_, a work published at the close of the Yuen
Dynasty, gives the same number of _li_ for the circuit of the
capital, but explains that _li_ of 240 _pu_ each are meant. If this
statement be correct, it would give only 40 common or geographical
_li_ for the circuit of the Mongol town.” (_Bretschneider_,
_Peking_, 13.) Dr. Bretschneider writes (p. 20): “The outlines
of Khanbaligh, partly in contradiction with the ancient Chinese
records, if my view be correct, would have measured about 50 common
_li_ in circuit (13 _li_ and more from north to south, 11·64 from
east to west.”)—H. C.]

Polo [and Odoric] again says that there were 12 gates—3 to every
side. Both Gaubil and Martini also say that there were 12 gates.
But I believe that both are trusting to Marco. There are 9 gates
in the present Tartar city—viz. 3 on the south side and 2 on each
of the other sides. The old Chinese accounts say there were 11
gates in Taidu. (See _Amyot_, _Mém._ II. 553.) I have in my plan,
therefore, assumed that one gate on the east and one on the west
were obliterated in the reduction of the _enceinte_ by the Ming.
But I must observe that Mr. Lockhart tells me he did not find the
traces of gates in those positions, whilst the 2 gates on the
_north_ side of the old Mongol rampart are quite distinct, with the
barbicans in front, and the old Mongol bridge over the ditch still
serving for the public thoroughfare.[1]

[“The _Yuen shi_ as well as the _Ch’ue keng lu_, and other works
of the Yuen, agree in stating that the capital had eleven gates.
They are enumerated in the following order: Southern wall—(1) The
gate direct south (mid.) was called _Li-cheng men_; (2) the gate
to the left (east), _Wen-ming men_; (3) the gate to the right
(west), _Shun-ch’eng men_. Eastern wall—(4) The gate direct east
(mid.), _Ch’ung-jen men_; (5) the gate to the south-east, _Ts’i-hua
men_; (6) the gate to the north-east, _Kuang-hi men_. Western
wall—(7) The gate direct west (mid.), _Ho-i men_; (8) the gate to
the south-west, _P’ing-tse men_; (9) the gate to the north-west,
_Su-ts’ing men_. Northern Wall—(10) The gate to the north-west,
_K’ien-te men_; (11) the gate to the north-east, _An-chen men_.”
(_Bretschneider_, _Peking_, 13–14.)—H. C.]

When the Ming established themselves on the old Mongol site,
population seems to have gathered close about the southern
wall, probably using material from the remains of Yenking. This
excrescence was inclosed by a new wall in 1554, and was called
the “Outer Town.” It is what is called by Europeans the _Chinese
City_. Its western wall exhibits in the base sculptured stones,
which seem to have belonged to the old palace of Yenking. Some
traces of Yenking still existed in Gaubil’s time; the only relic
of it now pointed out is a pagoda outside of the Kwang-An-Măn, or
western gate of the Outer City, marked in the War Office edition of
the Russian Map as “Tower.” (Information from _Dr. Lockhart._)

The “Great Palaces” over the gates and at the corner bastions are
no doubt well illustrated by the buildings which still occupy those
positions. There are two such lofty buildings at each of the gates
of the modern city, the outer one (shown on p. 376) forming an
elevated redoubt.

NOTE 5.—The French writer cited under note 3 says of the city as it
stands: “La ville est de la sorte coupée en échiquier à peu près
régulier dont les quadres circonscrits par des larges avenues sont
percés eux-mêmes d’une multitude de rues et ruelles ... qui toutes
à peu près sont orientées N. et S., E. et O. Une seule volonté a
évidemment présidé à ce plan, et jamais édilité n’a eu à exécuter
d’un seul coup aussi vaste entreprise.”

NOTE 6.—Martini speaks of the public clock-towers in the Chinese
cities, which in his time were furnished with water-clocks.
A watchman struck the hour on a great gong, at the same time
exhibiting the hour in large characters. The same person watched
for fires, and summoned the public with his gong to aid in
extinguishing them.

[The Rev. G. B. Farthing mentions (_North-China Herald_, 7th
September, 1884) at T’ai-yuen fu the remains of an object in
the bell-tower, which was, and is still known, as one of the
eight wonders of this city; it is a vessel of brass, a part of a
water-clock from which water formerly used to flow down upon a drum
beneath and mark off time into equal divisions.—H. C.]

The tower indicated by Marco appears still to exist. It occupies
the place which I have marked as Alarm Tower in the plan of Taidu.
It was erected in 1272, but probably rebuilt on the Ming occupation
of the city. [“The _Yuen yi t’ung chi_, or ‘Geography of the
Mongol Empire’ records: ‘In the year 1272, the bell-tower and the
drum-tower were built in the _middle_ of the capital.’ A bell-tower
(_chung-lou_) and a drum-tower (_ku-lou_) exist still in Peking,
in the northern part of the Tartar City. The _ku-lou_ is the same
as that built in the thirteenth century, but the bell-tower dates
only from the last century. The bell-tower of the Yuen was a little
to the east of the drum-tower, where now the temple _Wan-ning sse_
stands. This temple is nearly in the middle of the position I
(Bretschneider) assign to Khanbaligh.” (_Bretschneider, Peking_,
20.)—H. C.] In the Court of the Old Observatory at Peking there
is preserved, with a few other ancient instruments, which date
from the Mongol era, a very elaborate water-clock, provided with
four copper basins embedded in brickwork, and rising in steps one
above the other. A cut of this courtyard, with its instruments and
aged trees, also ascribed to the Mongol time, will be found in ch.
xxxiii. (_Atlas Sinensis_, p. 10; _Magaillans_, 149–151; _Chine
Moderne_, p. 26; _Tour du Monde_ for 1864, vol. ii. p. 34.)

NOTE 7.—“Nevertheless,” adds the Ramusian, “there does exist I know
not what uneasiness about the people of Cathay.”

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Mr. Wylie confirms my assumption: “Whilst in Peking I traced the
old mud wall, ... and found it quite in accordance with the outline
in your map. Mr. Gilmour (a missionary to the Mongols) and I rode
round it, he taking the outside and I the inside.... Neither of
us observed the arch that Dr. Lockhart speaks of.... _There_ are
_gate-openings about the middle of the east and west sides_, but no
barbicans.” (4th December 1873.)

CHAPTER XII.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN MAINTAINS A GUARD OF TWELVE THOUSAND
HORSE, WHICH ARE CALLED KESHICAN.

You must know that the Great Kaan, to maintain his state, hath a guard
of twelve thousand horsemen, who are styled KESHICAN, which is as much
as to say “Knights devoted to their Lord.” Not that he keeps these
for fear of any man whatever, but merely because of his own exalted
dignity. These 12,000 men have four captains, each of whom is in
command of 3000; and each body of 3000 takes a turn of three days and
nights to guard the palace, where they also take their meals. After the
expiration of three days and nights they are relieved by another 3000,
who mount guard for the same space of time, and then another body takes
its turn, so that there are always 3000 on guard. Thus it goes until
the whole 12,000, who are styled (as I said) Keshican, have been on
duty; and then the tour begins again, and so runs on from year’s end to
year’s end.{1}

NOTE 1.—I have _deduced_ a reading for the word _Quescican_
(Keshican), which is not found precisely in any text. Pauthier
reads _Questiau_ and _Quesitau_; the G. Text has _Quesitam_ and
_Quecitain_; the Crusca _Questi Tan_; Ramusio, _Casitan_; the
Riccardiana, _Quescitam_. Recollecting the constant clerical
confusion between _c_ and _t_, what follows will leave no doubt I
think that the true reading to which all these variations point is
_Quescican_.[1]

In the Institutes of Ghazan Khan, we find established among other
formalities for the authentication of the royal orders, that they
should be stamped on the back, in black ink, with the seals of
the _Four Commanders_ of the _Four Kiziks_, or _Corps of the Life
Guard_.

Wassáf also, in detailing the different classes of the great
dignitaries of the Mongol monarchy, names (1) the _Noyáns_ of the
Ulus, or princes of the blood; (2) the great chiefs of the tribes;
(3) the _Amírs of the four Keshik_, or _Corps of the Body Guard_;
(4) the officers of the army, commanding ten thousands, thousands,
and so on.

Moreover, in Rashiduddin, we find the identical plural form used
by our author. He says that, after the sack of Baghdad, Hulaku,
who had escaped from the polluted atmosphere of the city, sent
“Ilká Noyán and Ḳarábúgá, with 3000 Moghul horse into Baghdad, in
order to have the buildings repaired, and to put things generally
in order. These chiefs posted sentries from the KISHÍKÁN (كشي
كان), and from their own followings in the different quarters of
the town, had the carcases of beasts removed from the streets, and
caused the bazaars to be rebuilt.”

We find _Kishik_ still used at the court of Hindustan, under the
great kings of Timur’s House, for the corps on tour of duty at the
palace; and even for the sets of matchlocks and sabres, which were
changed weekly from Akbar’s armoury for the royal use. The royal
guards in Persia, who watch the king’s person at night, are termed
_Keshikchi_, and their captain _Keshikchi Bashi_. [“On the night
of the 11th of Jemady ul Sany, A.H. 1160 (or 8th June, 1747), near
the city of Khojoon, three days’ journey from Meshed, Mohammed
Kuly Khan Ardemee, who was of the same tribe with Nadir Shah, his
relation, and Kushukchee Bashee, with seventy of the _Kukshek_ or
guard, ... bound themselves by an oath to assassinate Nadir Shah.”
(_Memoirs of Khojeh Abdulkurreem ... transl. by F. Gladwin_,
Calcutta, 1788, pp. 166–167).]

Friar Odoric speaks of the four barons who kept watch by the Great
Kaan’s side as the _Cuthé_, which probably represents the Chinese
form _Kiesie_ (as in De Mailla), or _Kuesie_ (as in Gaubil). The
latter applies the term to four devoted champions of Chinghiz,
and their descendants, who were always attached to the Kaan’s
body-guard, and he identifies them with the _Quesitan_ of Polo, or
rather with the captains of the latter; adding expressly that the
word _Kuesie_ is Mongol.

I see _Kishik_ is a proper name among the Kalmak chiefs; and
_Keshikten_ also is the name of a Mongol tribe, whose territory
lies due north of Peking, near the old site of Shangtu. (Bk. I.
ch. lxi.) [_Keshikhteng_, a tribe (_pu_; mong. _aimak_) of the
Chao Uda League (_mêng_; mong. _chogolgân_) among the twenty-four
tribes of the _Nei Mung-ku_ (Inner Mongols). (See _Mayers’ Chinese
Government_, p. 81.)—H. C.] In Kovalevsky, I find the following:—

(No. 2459) “_Keshik_, grace, favour, bounty, benefit, good fortune,
charity.”

(No. 2461) “_Keshikten_, fortunate, happy, blessed.”

(No. 2541) “_Kichyeku_, to be zealous, assiduous, devoted.”

(No. 2588) “_Kushiku_, to hinder, to bar the way to,” etc.

The third of these corresponds closely with Polo’s etymology of
“knights devoted to their lord,” but perhaps either the first or
the last may afford the real derivation.

In spite of the different initials (ق instead of ک), it can
scarcely be doubted that the _Ḳalchi_ and _Ḳalaḳchi_ of Timur’s
Institutes are mere mistranscriptions of the same word, _e.g._: “I
ordered that 12,000 _Ḳalchi_, men of the sword completely armed,
should be cantoned in the Palace; to the right and to the left,
to the front, and in the rear of the imperial diwán; thus, that
1000 of those 12,000 should be every night upon guard,” etc. The
translator’s note says of _Ḳalchi_, “A Mogul word supposed to mean
_guards_.” We see that even the traditional number of 12,000, and
its division into four brigades, are maintained. (See _Timour’s
Inst._, pp. 299 and 235, 237.)

I must add that Professor Vámbéry does not assent to the form
_Keshikán_, on the ground that this Persian plural is impossible
in an old Tartar dialect, and he supposes the true word to be
_Kechilan_ or _Kechiklen_, “the night-watchers,” from _Kiche_ or
_Kichek_ (Chag. and Uighúr), = “night.”

I believe, however, that Persian was the colloquial language of
foreigners at the Kaan’s court, who would not scruple to make a
Persian plural when wanted; whilst Rashid has exemplified the
actual use of this one.

(_D’Ohsson_, IV. 410; _Gold. Horde_, 228, 238; _Ilch._ II. 184;
_Q. R._ pp. 308–309; _Ayeen Aḳb._ I. 270, and _Blochmann’s_, p.
115; _J. As._ sér. IV. tom. xix. 276; _Olearius_, ed. 1659, I. 656;
_Cathay_, 135; _De Mailla_, ix. 106; _Gaubil_, p. 6; _Pallas_,
_Samml._ I. 35.)

[“By _Keshican_ in _Colonel Yule’s Marco Polo_, _Keshikten_ is
evidently meant. This is a general Mongol term to designate
the Khan’s lifeguard. It is derived from the word _Keshik_,
meaning a guard by turns; a corps on tour of duty. _Keshik_ is
one of the archaisms of the Mongol language, for now this word
has another meaning in Mongol. Colonel Yule has brought together
several explanations of the term. It seems to me that among his
suppositions the following is the most consistent with the ancient
meaning of the word:—

“We find _Kishik_ still used at the court of Hindustan, under the
great kings of Timur’s House, for the corps on tour of duty at the
palace.... The royal guards in Persia, who watch the King’s person
at night, are termed _Keshikchi_.”

“The Keshikten was divided into a day-watch called _Turgaut_ and
a night-watch _Kebteul_. The Kebte-ul consisted of pure Mongols,
whilst the Turgaut was composed of the sons of the vassal princes
and governors of the provinces, and of hostages. The watch of
the Khan was changed every three days, and contained 400 men. In
1330 it was reduced to 100 men.” (_Palladius_, 42–43.) Mr. E. H.
Parker writes in the _China Review_, XVIII. p. 262, that they “are
evidently the ‘body guards’ of the modern viceroys, now pronounced
Kashïha, but, evidently, originally _Kêshigha_.” —H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] One of the nearest readings is that of the Brandenburg Latin
collated by Müller, which has _Quaesicam_.

CHAPTER XIII.

THE FASHION OF THE GREAT KAAN’S TABLE AT HIS HIGH FEASTS.

And when the Great Kaan sits at table on any great court occasion, it
is in this fashion. His table is elevated a good deal above the others,
and he sits at the north end of the hall, looking towards the south,
with his chief wife beside him on the left. On his right sit his sons
and his nephews, and other kinsmen of the Blood Imperial, but lower, so
that their heads are on a level with the Emperor’s feet. And then the
other Barons sit at other tables lower still. So also with the women;
for all the wives of the Lord’s sons, and of his nephews and other
kinsmen, sit at the lower table to his right; and below them again the
ladies of the other Barons and Knights, each in the place assigned by
the Lord’s orders. The tables are so disposed that the Emperor can see
the whole of them from end to end, many as they are.{1} [Further, you
are not to suppose that everybody sits at table; on the contrary, the
greater part of the soldiers and their officers sit at their meal in
the hall on the carpets.] Outside the hall will be found more than
40,000 people; for there is a great concourse of folk bringing presents
to the Lord, or come from foreign countries with curiosities.

In a certain part of the hall near where the Great Kaan holds his
table, there [is set a large and very beautiful piece of workmanship
in the form of a square coffer, or buffet, about three paces each way,
exquisitely wrought with figures of animals, finely carved and gilt.
The middle is hollow, and in it] stands a great vessel of pure gold,
holding as much as an ordinary butt; and at each corner of the great
vessel is one of smaller size [of the capacity of a firkin], and from
the former the wine or beverage flavoured with fine and costly spices
is drawn off into the latter. [And on the buffet aforesaid are set all
the Lord’s drinking vessels, among which are certain pitchers of the
finest gold,] which are called _verniques_,{2} and are big enough to
hold drink for eight or ten persons. And one of these is put between
every two persons, besides a couple of golden cups with handles, so
that every man helps himself from the pitcher that stands between him
and his neighbour. And the ladies are supplied in the same way. The
value of these pitchers and cups is something immense; in fact, the
Great Kaan has such a quantity of this kind of plate, and of gold and
silver in other shapes, as no one ever before saw or heard tell of, or
could believe.{3}

[There are certain Barons specially deputed to see that foreigners, who
do not know the customs of the Court, are provided with places suited
to their rank; and these Barons are continually moving to and fro in
the hall, looking to the wants of the guests at table, and causing the
servants to supply them promptly with wine, milk, meat, or whatever
they lack. At every door of the hall (or, indeed, wherever the Emperor
may be) there stand a couple of big men like giants, one on each
side, armed with staves. Their business is to see that no one steps
upon the threshold in entering, and if this does happen, they strip
the offender of his clothes, and he must pay a forfeit to have them
back again; or in lieu of taking his clothes, they give him a certain
number of blows. If they are foreigners ignorant of the order, then
there are Barons appointed to introduce them, and explain it to them.
They think, in fact, that it brings bad luck if any one touches the
threshold. Howbeit, they are not expected to stick at this in going
forth again, for at that time some are like to be the worse for liquor,
and incapable of looking to their steps.{4}]

And you must know that those who wait upon the Great Kaan with his
dishes and his drink are some of the great Barons. They have the mouth
and nose muffled with fine napkins of silk and gold, so that no breath
nor odour from their persons should taint the dish or the goblet
presented to the Lord. And when the Emperor is going to drink, all the
musical instruments, of which he has vast store of every kind, begin
to play. And when he takes the cup all the Barons and the rest of the
company drop on their knees and make the deepest obeisance before him,
and then the Emperor doth drink. But each time that he does so the
whole ceremony is repeated.{5}

I will say nought about the dishes, as you may easily conceive that
there is a great plenty of every possible kind. But you should know
that in every case where a Baron or Knight dines at those tables,
their wives also dine there with the other ladies. And when all have
dined and the tables have been removed, then come in a great number
of players and jugglers, adepts at all sorts of wonderful feats,{6}
and perform before the Emperor and the rest of the company, creating
great diversion and mirth, so that everybody is full of laughter and
enjoyment. And when the performance is over, the company breaks up and
every one goes to his quarters.

NOTE 1.—We are to conceive of rows of small tables, at each of
which were set probably but two guests. This seems to be the modern
Chinese practice, and to go back to some very old accounts of the
Tartar nations. Such tables we find in use in the tenth century, at
the court of the King of Bolghar (see _Prologue_, note 2, ch. ii.),
and at the Chinese entertainments to Shah Rukh’s embassy in the
fifteenth century. Megasthenes described the guests at an Indian
banquet as having a table set before each individual. (_Athenaeus_,
IV. 39, _Yonge’s Transl._)

[Compare Rubruck’s account, Rockhill’s ed., p. 210: “The Chan sits
in a high place to the north, so that he can be seen by all....”
(See also Friar Odoric, _Cathay_, p. 141.)—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—This word (G. T. and Ram.) is in the Crusca Italian
transformed into an adjective, “_vaselle_ vernicate _d’oro_,” and
both Marsden and Pauthier have substantially adopted the same
interpretation, which seems to me in contradiction with the text.
In Pauthier’s text the word is _vernigal_, pl. _vernigaux_, which
he explains, I know not on what authority, as “_coupes sans anses
vernies ou laquées d’or_.” There is, indeed, a Venetian sea-term,
_Vernegal_, applied to a wooden bowl in which the food of a mess is
put, and it seems possible that this word may have been substituted
for the unknown _Vernique_. I suspect the latter was some Oriental
term, but I can find nothing nearer than the Persian _Bărni_, Ar.
_Al-Bărníya_, “vas fictile in quo quid recondunt,” whence the
Spanish word _Albornia_, “a great glazed vessel in the shape of
a bowl, with handles.” So far as regards the form, the change of
_Barniya_ into _Vernique_ would be quite analogous to that change
of _Hundwáníy_ into _Ondanique_, which we have already met with.
(See _Dozy et Engelmann, Glos. des Mots Espagnols_, etc., 2nd ed.,
1867, p. 73; and _Boerio, Diz. del. Dial. Venez._)

[_F. Godefroy, Dict., s.v. Vernigal_, writes: “Coupe sans anse,
vernie ou laquée d’or,” and quotes, besides Marco Polo, the _Regle
du Temple_, p. 214, éd. Soc. Hist. de France:

“Les _vernigaus_ et les escuelles.”

About _vernegal_, cf. _Rockhill, Rubruck_, p. 86, note. Rubruck
says (_Soc. de Géog._ p. 241): “Implevimus unum _veringal_ de
biscocto et platellum unum de pomis et aliis fructibus.” Mr.
Rockhill translates _veringal_ by _basket_.

Dr. Bretschneider (_Peking_, 28) mentions “a large jar made of wood
and _varnished_, the inside lined with silver,” and he adds in a
note “perhaps this statement may serve to explain Marco Polo’s
_verniques_ or _vaselle_ vernicate _d’oro_, big enough to hold
drink for eight or ten persons.”—H. C.]

A few lines above we have “of the capacity of a _firkin_.” The word
is _bigoncio_, which is explained in the _Vocab. Univ. Ital._ as a
kind of tub used in the vintage, and containing 3 _mine_, each of
half a _stajo_. This seems to point to the _Tuscan_ mina, or half
stajo, which is = ⅓ of a bushel. Hence the _bigoncio_ would = a
bushel, or, in old liquid measure, about a firkin.

NOTE 3.—A buffet, with flagons of liquor and goblets, was an
essential feature in the public halls or tents of the Mongols
and other Asiatic races of kindred manners. The ambassadors of
the Emperor Justin relate that in the middle of the pavilion
of Dizabulus, the Khan of the Turks, there were set out
drinking-vessels, and flagons and great jars, all of gold;
corresponding to the _coupes_ (or _hanas à mances_), the
_verniques_, and the _grant peitere_ and _petietes peiteres_ of
Polo’s account. Rubruquis describes in Batu Khan’s tent a buffet
near the entrance, where _Kumiz_ was set forth, with great goblets
of gold and silver, etc., and the like at the tent of the Great
Kaan. At a festival at the court of Oljaitu, we are told, “Before
the throne stood golden buffets ... set out with full flagons and
goblets.” Even in the private huts of the Mongols there was a
buffet of a humbler kind exhibiting a skin of _Kumiz_, with other
kinds of drink, and cups standing ready; and in a later age at
the banquets of Sháh Abbás we find the great buffet in a slightly
different form, and the golden flagon still set to every two
persons, though it no longer contained the liquor, which was handed
round. (_Cathay_, clxiv., cci.; _Rubr._ 224, 268, 305; _Ilch._ II.
183; _Della Valle_, I. 654 and 750–751.)

[Referring to the “large and very beautiful piece of workmanship,”
Mr. Rockhill, _Rubruck_, 208–209, writes: “Similar works of art
and mechanical contrivances were often seen in Eastern courts. The
earliest I know of is the golden plane-tree and grape vine with
bunches of grapes in precious stones, which was given to Darius by
Pythius the Lydian, and which shaded the king’s couch. (Herodotus,
IV. 24.) The most celebrated, however, and that which may have
inspired Mangu with the desire to have something like it at his
court, was the famous Throne of Solomon (Σολομώντεος Θρóνος) of the
Emperor of Constantinople, Theophilus (A.D. 829–842).... Abulfeda
states that in A.D. 917 the envoys of Constantine Porphyrogenitus
to the Caliph el Moktader saw in the palace of Bagdad a tree with
eighteen branches, some of gold, some of silver, and on them were
gold and silver birds, and the leaves of the tree were of gold
and silver. By means of machinery, the leaves were made to rustle
and the birds to sing. Mirkhond speaks also of a tree of gold and
precious stones in the city of Sultanieh, in the interior of which
were conduits through which flowed drinks of different kinds.
Clavijo describes a somewhat similar tree at the court of Timur.”

Dr. Bretschneider (_Peking_, 28, 29) mentions a clepsydra with a
lantern. By means of machinery put in motion by water, at fixed
times a little man comes forward exhibiting a tablet, which
announces the hours. He speaks also of a musical instrument which
is connected, by means of a tube, with two peacocks sitting on a
cross-bar, and when it plays, the mechanism causes the peacocks to
dance.—H. C.]

Odoric describes the great jar of liquor in the middle of the
palace hall, but in his time it was made of a great mass of jade
(p. 130).

NOTE 4.—This etiquette is specially noticed also by Odoric, as well
as by Makrizi, by Rubruquis, and by Plano Carpini. According to the
latter the breach of it was liable to be punished with death. The
prohibition to tread on the threshold is also specially mentioned
in a Mahomedan account of an embassy to the court of Barka Khan.
And in regard to the tents, Rubruquis says he was warned not
to touch the ropes, for these were regarded as representing
the threshold. A Russo-Mongol author of our day says that the
memory of this etiquette or superstition is still preserved by
a Mongol proverb: “Step not on the threshold; it is a sin!” But
among some of the Mongols more than this survives, as is evident
from a passage in Mr. Michie’s narrative: “There is a right and
a wrong way of approaching a _yourt_ also. Outside the door there
are generally ropes lying on the ground, held down by stakes, for
the purpose of tying up the animals when they want to keep them
together. There is a way of getting over or round these ropes that
I never learned, but on one occasion the ignorant breach of the
rule on our part excluded us from the hospitality of the family.”
The feeling or superstition was in full force in Persia in the 17th
century, at least in regard to the threshold of the king’s palace.
It was held a sin to tread upon it in entering. (_Cathay_, 132;
_Rubr._ 255, 268, 319; _Plan. Carp._ 625, 741; _Makrizi_, I. 214;
_Mél. Asiat. Ac. St. Petersb._ II. 660; _The Siberian Overland
Route_, p. 97; _P. Della Valle_, II. 171.)

[Mr. Rockhill writes (_Rubruck_, p. 104): “The same custom existed
among the Fijians, I believe. I may note that it also prevailed in
ancient China. It is said of Confucius ‘when he was standing he
did not occupy the middle of the gate-way; when he passed in or
out, he did not tread on the threshold.’ (_Lun-yü_, Bk. X. ch. iv.
2.) In China, the bride’s feet must not touch the threshold of the
bridegroom’s house. (Cf. _Dennys’ Folk-lore in China_, p. 18.)

“The author of the _Ch’ue keng lu_ mentions also the athletes with
clubs standing at the door, at the time of the khan’s presence in
the hall. He adds, that next to the Khan, two other life-guards
used to stand, who held in their hands ‘natural’ axes of jade (axes
found fortuitously in the ground, probably primitive weapons).”
(_Palladius_, p. 43.)—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—Some of these etiquettes were probably rather Chinese than
Mongol, for the regulations of the court of Kúblái apparently
combined the two. In the visit of Shah Rukh’s ambassadors to the
court of the Emperor Ch’êng Tsu of the Ming Dynasty in 1421, we
are told that by the side of the throne, at an imperial banquet,
“there stood two eunuchs, each having a band of thick paper over
his mouth, and extending to the tips of his ears.... Every time
that a dish, or a cup of _darassun_ (rice-wine) was brought to the
emperor, all the music sounded.” (_N. et Ext._ XIV. 408, 409.) In
one of the Persepolitan sculptures, there stands behind the King an
eunuch bearing a fan, and with his mouth covered; at least so says
Heeren. (_Asia_, I. 178.)

NOTE 6.—“_Jongleours et entregetours de maintes plusieurs manieres
de granz experimenz_” (P.); “_de Giuculer et de Tregiteor_”
(G. T.). Ital. _Tragettatore_, a juggler; Romance, _Trasjitar,
Tragitar_, to juggle. Thus Chaucer:—

“There saw I playing Jogelours,
Magiciens, and _Tragetours_,
And Phetonisses, Charmeresses,
Old Witches, Sorceresses,” etc.
—_House of Fame_, III. 169.

And again:—

“For oft at festes have I wel herd say,
That _Tregetoures_, within an halle large,
Have made come in a water and a barge,
And in the halle rowen up and doun.
Somtime hath semed come a grim leoun;
• • • • •
Somtime a Castel al of lime and ston,
And whan hem liketh, voideth it anon.”
—_The Franklin’s Tale_, II. 454.

Performances of this kind at Chinese festivities have already been
spoken of in note 9 to ch. lxi. of Book I. Shah Rukh’s people,
Odoric, Ysbrandt Ides, etc., describe them also. The practice of
introducing such _artistes_ into the dining-hall after dinner seems
in that age to have been usual also in Europe. See, for example,
_Wright’s Domestic Manners_, pp. 165–166, and the Court of the
Emperor Frederic II., in _Kington’s Life_ of that prince, I. 470.
(See also _N. et E._ XIV. 410; _Cathay_, 143; _Ysb. Ides_, p. 95.)

CHAPTER XIV.

CONCERNING THE GREAT FEAST HELD BY THE GRAND KAAN EVERY
YEAR ON HIS BIRTHDAY.

You must know that the Tartars keep high festival yearly on their
birthdays. And the Great Kaan was born on the 28th day of the
September moon, so on that day is held the greatest feast of the year
at the Kaan’s Court, always excepting that which he holds on New Year’s
Day, of which I shall tell you afterwards.{1}

Now, on his birthday, the Great Kaan dresses in the best of his robes,
all wrought with beaten gold;{2} and full 12,000 Barons and Knights on
that day come forth dressed in robes of the same colour, and precisely
like those of the Great Kaan, except that they are not so costly; but
still they are all of the same colour as his, and are also of silk and
gold. Every man so clothed has also a girdle of gold; and this as well
as the dress is given him by the Sovereign. And I will aver that there
are some of these suits decked with so many pearls and precious stones
that a single suit shall be worth full 10,000 golden bezants.

And of such raiment there are several sets. For you must know that
the Great Kaan, thirteen times in the year, presents to his Barons
and Knights such suits of raiment as I am speaking of.{3} And on each
occasion they wear the same colour that he does, a different colour
being assigned to each festival. Hence you may see what a huge business
it is, and that there is no prince in the world but he alone who could
keep up such customs as these.

On his birthday also, all the Tartars in the world, and all the
countries and governments that owe allegiance to the Kaan, offer him
great presents according to their several ability, and as prescription
or orders have fixed the amount. And many other persons also come with
great presents to the Kaan, in order to beg for some employment from
him. And the Great Kaan has chosen twelve Barons on whom is laid the
charge of assigning to each of these supplicants a suitable answer.

On this day likewise all the Idolaters, all the Saracens, and all
the Christians and other descriptions of people make great and solemn
devotions, with much chaunting and lighting of lamps and burning of
incense, each to the God whom he doth worship, praying that He would
save the Emperor, and grant him long life and health and happiness.

And thus, as I have related, is celebrated the joyous feast of the
Kaan’s birthday.{4}

Now I will tell you of another festival which the Kaan holds at the New
Year, and which is called the White Feast.

NOTE 1.—The Chinese Year commences, according to Duhalde, with
the New Moon nearest to the Sun’s Passage of the middle point of
Aquarius; according to Pauthier, with the New Moon immediately
preceding the Sun’s entry into Pisces. (These would almost always
be identical, but not always.) Generally speaking, the first month
will include part of February and part of March. The eighth month
will then be September–October (_v. ante_, ch. ii. note 2).

[According to Dr. S. W. Williams (_Middle Kingdom_, II. p. 70):
“The year is lunar, but its commencement is regulated by the sun.
New Year falls on the first new moon after the sun enters Aquarius,
which makes it come not before January 21st nor after February
19th.” “The beginning of the civil year, writes Peter Hoang
(_Chinese Calendar_, p. 13), depends upon the good pleasure of the
Emperors. Under the Emperor Hwang-ti (2697 B.C.) and under the Hsia
Dynasty (2205 B.C.), it was made to commence with the 3rd month
_yin-yüeh_ [Pisces]; under the Shang Dynasty (1766 B.C.) with the
2nd month _ch’ou-yüeh_ [Aquarius], and under the Chou Dynasty (1122
B.C.) with the 1st month _tzu-yüeh_ [Capricorn].”—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—The expression “_à or batuz_” as here applied to robes,
is common among the mediæval poets and romance-writers, _e.g._
Chaucer:—

“Full yong he was and merry of thought,
And in samette with birdes wrought
And with gold beaten full fetously,
His bodie was clad full richely.”
—_Rom. of the Rose_, 836–839.

M. Michel thinks that in a stuff so termed the gold wire was
_beaten out_ after the execution of the embroidery, a process which
widened the metallic surface and gave great richness of appearance.
The fact was rather, however, according to Dr. Rock, that the gold
used in weaving such tissues was _not_ wire but beaten sheets of
gold cut into narrow strips. This would seem sufficient to explain
the term “beaten gold,” though Dr. Rock in another passage refers
it to a custom which he alleges of sewing goldsmith’s work upon
robes. (_Fr. Michel_, _Recherches_, II. 389, also I. 371; _Rock’s
Catalogue_, pp. xxv. xxix. xxxviii. cvi.)

NOTE 3.—The number of these festivals and distributions of dresses
is _thirteen_ in all the old texts, except the Latin of the Geog.
Soc., which has _twelve_. Thirteen would seem therefore to have
been in the original copy. And the Ramusian version expands this
by saying, “Thirteen great feasts that the Tartars keep with much
solemnity to each of the thirteen moons of the year.”[1] It is
possible, however, that this latter sentence is an interpolated
gloss; for, besides the improbability of munificence so frequent,
Pauthier has shown some good reasons why _thirteen_ should be
regarded as an error for _three_. The official History of the
Mongol Dynasty, which he quotes, gives a detail of raiment
distributed in presents on great state occasions _three_ times a
year. Such a mistake might easily have originated in the first
dictation, _treize_ substituted for _trois_, or rather for the
old form _tres_; but we must note that the number 13 is repeated
and corroborated in ch. xvi. Odoric speaks of _four_ great yearly
festivals, but there are obvious errors in what he says on this
subject. Hammer says the great Mongol Feasts were three, viz. New
Year’s Day, the Kaan’s Birthday, and the Feast of the Herds.

Something like the changes of costume here spoken of is mentioned
by Rubruquis at a great festival of four days’ duration at the
court of Mangku Kaan: “Each day of the four they appeared in
different raiment, suits of which were given them for each day of
a different colour, but everything on the same day of one colour,
from the boots to the turban.” So also Carpini says regarding
the assemblies of the Mongol nobles at the inauguration of Kuyuk
Kaan: “The first day they were all clad in white pourpre (? _albis
purpuris_, see Bk. I. ch. vi. note 4), the second day in ruby
pourpre, the third day in blue pourpre, the fourth day in the
finest baudekins.” (_Cathay_, 141; _Rubr._ 368; _Pl. Car._ 755.)

[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 247, note) makes the following
remarks: “Odoric, however, says that the colours differed according
to the rank. The custom of presenting _khilats_ is still observed
in Central Asia and Persia. I cannot learn from any other authority
that the Mongols ever wore turbans. Odoric says the Mongols of the
imperial feasts wore ‘coronets’ (_in capite coronati_).”—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—[“The accounts given by Marco Polo regarding the feasts of
the Khan and the festival dresses at his Court, agree perfectly
with the statements on the same subject of contemporary Chinese
writers. Banquets were called in the common Mongol language
_chama_, and festival dresses _chisun_. General festivals used to
be held at the New Year and at the Birthday of the Khan. In the
_Mongol-Chinese Code_, the ceremonies performed in the provinces on
the Khan’s Birthday are described. One month before that day the
civil and military officers repaired to a temple, where a service
was performed to the Khan’s health. On the morning of the Birthday
a sumptuously adorned table was placed in the open air, and the
representatives of all classes and all confessions were obliged
to approach the table, to prostrate themselves and exclaim three
times: _Wan-sui_ (_i.e._ ‘Ten thousand years’ life to the Khan).
After that the banquet took place. In the same code (in the article
on the _Ye li ke un_ [Christians, _Erke-un_]) it is stated, that in
the year 1304,—owing to a dispute, which had arisen in the province
of Kiang-nan between the _ho-shang_ (Buddhist priests) and the
Christian missionaries, as to precedence in the above-mentioned
ceremony,—a special edict was published, in which it was decided
that in the rite of supplication, Christians should follow the
Buddhist and Taouist priests.” (_Palladius_, pp. 44–45.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] There are thirteen months to the Chinese year in seven out of every
nineteen.

[“This interval of 10 years comprises 235 lunar months, generally
125 _long_ months of 30 days, 110 _short_ months of 29 days, (but
sometimes 124 _long_ and 111 _short_ months), and 7 _intercalary_
months. The year of twelve months is called a common year, that
of thirteen months, an _intercalary_ year.” (_P. Hoang, Chinese
Calendar_, p. 12. —H. C.)]

CHAPTER XV.

OF THE GREAT FESTIVAL WHICH THE KAAN HOLDS ON NEW
YEAR’S DAY.

The beginning of their New Year is the month of February, and on that
occasion the Great Kaan and all his subjects made such a Feast as I now
shall describe.

It is the custom that on this occasion the Kaan and all his subjects
should be clothed entirely in white; so, that day, everybody is in
white, men and women, great and small. And this is done in order that
they may thrive all through the year, for they deem that white clothing
is lucky.{1} On that day also all the people of all the provinces
and governments and kingdoms and countries that own allegiance to
the Kaan bring him great presents of gold and silver, and pearls
and gems, and rich textures of divers kinds. And this they do that
the Emperor throughout the year may have abundance of treasure and
enjoyment without care. And the people also make presents to each other
of white things, and embrace and kiss and make merry, and wish each
other happiness and good luck for the coming year. On that day, I can
assure you, among the customary presents there shall be offered to the
Kaan from various quarters more than 100,000 white horses, beautiful
animals, and richly caparisoned. [And you must know ’tis their custom
in offering presents to the Great Kaan (at least when the province
making the present is able to do so), to present nine times nine
articles. For instance, if a province sends horses, it sends nine times
nine or 81 horses; of gold, nine times nine pieces of gold, and so
with stuffs or whatever else the present may consist of.]{2}

On that day also, the whole of the Kaan’s elephants, amounting fully to
5000 in number, are exhibited, all covered with rich and gay housings
of inlaid cloth representing beasts and birds, whilst each of them
carries on his back two splendid coffers; all of these being filled
with the Emperor’s plate and other costly furniture required for the
Court on the occasion of the White Feast.{3} And these are followed by
a vast number of camels which are likewise covered with rich housings
and laden with things needful for the Feast. All these are paraded
before the Emperor, and it makes the finest sight in the world.

Moreover, on the morning of the Feast, before the tables are set, all
the Kings, and all the Dukes, Marquesses, Counts, Barons, Knights, and
Astrologers, and Philosophers, and Leeches, and Falconers, and other
officials of sundry kinds from all the places round about, present
themselves in the Great Hall before the Emperor; whilst those who can
find no room to enter stand outside in such a position that the Emperor
can see them all well. And the whole company is marshalled in this
wise. First are the Kaan’s sons, and his nephews, and the other Princes
of the Blood Imperial; next to them all Kings; then Dukes, and then all
others in succession according to the degree of each. And when they are
all seated, each in his proper place, then a great prelate rises and
says with a loud voice: “Bow and adore!” And as soon as he has said
this, the company bow down until their foreheads touch the earth in
adoration towards the Emperor as if he were a god. And this adoration
they repeat four times, and then go to a highly decorated altar, on
which is a vermilion tablet with the name of the Grand Kaan inscribed
thereon, and a beautiful censer of gold. So they incense the tablet
and the altar with great reverence, and then return each man to his
seat.{4}

When all have performed this, then the presents are offered, of which
I have spoken as being so rich and costly. And after all have been
offered and been seen by the Emperor, the tables are set, and all take
their places at them with perfect order as I have already told you. And
after dinner the jugglers come in and amuse the Court as you have heard
before; and when that is over, every man goes to his quarters.

NOTE 1.—The first month of the year is still called by the Mongols
_Chaghan_ or _Chaghan Sara_, “the White” or the “White Month”; and
the wearing of white clothing on this festive occasion must have
been purely a Mongol custom. For when Shah Rukh’s ambassadors were
present at the New Year’s Feast at the Court of the succeeding
_Chinese_ Dynasty (2nd February, 1421) they were warned that _no
one_ must wear white, as that among the Chinese was the colour of
mourning. (_Koeppen_, I. 574, II. 309; _Cathay_, p. ccvii.)

NOTE 2.—On the mystic importance attached to the number 9 on all
such occasions among the Mongols, see _Hammer’s Golden Horde_, p.
208; _Hayton_, ch. iii. in Ramusio II.; _Not. et Ext._ XIV. Pt. I.
32; and _Strahlenberg_ (II. 210 of Amsterd. ed. 1757). Vámbéry,
speaking of the _Ḳálín_ or marriage price among the Uzbegs, says:
“The question is always how many times _nine_ sheep, cows, camels,
or horses, or how many times nine ducats (as is the custom in
a town), the father is to receive for giving up his daughter.”
(_Sketches of Cent. Asia_, p. 103.) Sheikh Ibrahim of Darband,
making offerings to Timur, presented _nines_ of everything else,
but of slaves _eight_ only. “Where is the ninth?” enquired the
court official. “Who but I myself?” said the Sheikh, and so won the
heart of Timur. (_A. Arabsiadis ... Timuri Hist._ p. 357.)

NOTE 3.—The elephant stud of the Son of Heaven had dwindled till
in 1862 Dr. Rennie found but one animal; now none remain. [Dr. S.
W. Williams writes (_Middle Kingdom_, I. pp. 323–324): “Elephants
are kept at Peking for show, and are used to draw the state chariot
when the Emperor goes to worship at the Altars of Heaven and Earth,
but the sixty animals seen in the days of Kienlung, by Bell, have
since dwindled to one or two. Van Braam met six going into Peking,
sent thither from Yun-Nan.” These were no doubt carrying tribute
from Burmah.—H. C.] It is worth noticing that the housings of cut
cloth or _appliqué_ work (“_draps entaillez_”) are still in fashion
in India for the caparison of elephants.

NOTE 4.—In 1263 Kúblái adopted the Chinese fashion of worshipping
the tablets of his own ancestors, and probably at the same time the
adoration of his own tablet by his subjects was introduced. Van
Braam ingenuously relates how he and the rest of the Dutch Legation
of 1794 performed the adoration of the Emperor’s Tablet on first
entering China, much in the way described in the text.

There is a remarkable amplification in the last paragraph of the
chapter as given by Ramusio: “When all are in their proper places,
a certain great personage, or high prelate as it were, gets up
and says with a loud voice: ‘Bow yourselves and adore!’ On this
immediately all bend and bow the forehead to the ground. Then the
prelate says again: ‘God save and keep our Lord the Emperor, with
length of years and with mirth and happiness.’ And all answer: ‘So
may it be!’ And then again the prelate says: ‘May God increase and
augment his Empire and its prosperity more and more, and keep all
his subjects in peace and goodwill, and may all things go well
throughout his Dominion!’ And all again respond: ‘So may it be!’
And this adoration is repeated four times.”

One of Pauthier’s most interesting notes is a long extract from the
official Directory of Ceremonial under the Mongol Dynasty, which
admirably illustrates the chapters we have last read. I borrow
a passage regarding this adoration: “The Musician’s Song having
ceased, the Ministers shall recite with a loud voice the following
Prayer: ‘Great Heaven, that extendest over all! Earth which art
under the guidance of Heaven! We invoke You and beseech You to heap
blessings upon the Emperor and the Empress! Grant that they may
live ten thousand, a hundred thousand years!’

“Then the first Chamberlain shall respond: ‘May it be as the prayer
hath said!’ The Ministers shall then prostrate themselves, and when
they rise return to their places, and take a cup or two of wine.”

The K’o-tow (_Khéu-théu_) which appears repeatedly in this
ceremonial and which in our text is indicated by the four
prostrations, was, Pauthier alleges, not properly a Chinese form,
but only introduced by the Mongols. Baber indeed speaks of it as
the _Ḳornish_, a Moghul ceremony, in which originally “the person
who performed it kneeled nine times and touched the earth with his
brow each time.” He describes it as performed very elaborately
(nine times _twice_) by his younger uncle in visiting the elder.
But in its essentials the ceremony must have been of old date
at the Chinese Court; for the Annals of the Thang Dynasty, in a
passage cited by M. Pauthier himself,[1] mention that ambassadors
from the famous Hárún ar Rashíd in 798 had to perform the “ceremony
of kneeling and striking the forehead against the ground.” And M.
Pauthier can scarcely be right in saying that the practice was
disused by the Ming Dynasty and only reintroduced by the Manchus;
for in the story of Shah Rukh’s embassy the performance of the
K’o-tow occurs repeatedly.

[“It is interesting to note,” writes Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p.
22), “that in A.D. 981 the Chinese Envoy, Wang Yen-tê, sent to the
Uigur Prince of Kao-chang, refused to make genuflexions (_pai_) to
him, as being contrary to the established usages as regards envoys.
The prince and his family, however, on receiving the envoy, all
faced eastward (towards Peking) and made an obeisance (_pai_) on
receiving the imperial presents (_shou-tzŭ_).” (_Ma Twan-lin_, Bk.
336, 13.)—H. C.]

(_Gaubil_, 142; _Van Braam_, I. 20–21; _Baber_, 106; _N. et E._
XIV. Pt. I. 405, 407, 418.)

The enumeration of _four_ prostrations in the text is, I fancy,
quite correct. There are several indications that this number was
used instead of the three times three of later days. Thus Carpini,
when introduced to the Great Kaan, “bent the left knee four times.”
And in the Chinese bridal ceremony of “Worshipping the Tablets,”
the genuflexion is made four times. At the court of Sháh Abbás an
obeisance evidently identical was repeated four times. (_Carp._
759; _Doolittle_, p. 60; _P. Della Valle_, I. 646.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Gaubil_, cited in _Pauthier’s Hist. des Relations Politiques de la
Chine_, etc., p. 226.

CHAPTER XVI.

CONCERNING THE TWELVE THOUSAND BARONS WHO RECEIVE ROBES OF CLOTH OF
GOLD FROM THE EMPEROR ON THE GREAT FESTIVALS, THIRTEEN CHANGES
A-PIECE.

Now you must know that the Great Kaan hath set apart 12,000 of his
men who are distinguished by the name of _Keshican_, as I have told
you before; and on each of these 12,000 Barons he bestows thirteen
changes of raiment, which are all different from one another: I mean
that in one set the 12,000 are all of one colour; the next 12,000 of
another colour, and so on; so that they are of thirteen different
colours. These robes are garnished with gems and pearls and other
precious things in a very rich and costly manner.{1} And along with
each of these changes of raiment, _i.e._ 13 times in the year, he
bestows on each of those 12,000 Barons a fine golden girdle of great
richness and value, and likewise a pair of boots of _Camut_, that is to
say of _Borgal_, curiously wrought with silver thread; insomuch that
when they are clothed in these dresses every man of them looks like a
king!{2} And there is an established order as to which dress is to be
worn at each of those thirteen feasts. The Emperor himself also has
his thirteen suits corresponding to those of his Barons; in _colour_,
I mean (though his are grander, richer, and costlier), so that he is
always arrayed in the same colour as his Barons, who are, as it were,
his comrades. And you may see that all this costs an amount which it is
scarcely possible to calculate.

Now I have told you of the thirteen changes of raiment received from
the Prince by those 12,000 Barons, amounting in all to 156,000 suits of
so great cost and value, to say nothing of the girdles and the boots
which are also worth a great sum of money. All this the Great Lord
hath ordered, that he may attach the more of grandeur and dignity to
his festivals.

And now I must mention another thing that I had forgotten, but which
you will be astonished to learn from this Book. You must know that on
the Feast Day a great Lion is led to the Emperor’s presence, and as
soon as it sees him it lies down before him with every sign of the
greatest veneration, as if it acknowledged him for its lord; and it
remains there lying before him, and entirely unchained. Truly this must
seem a strange story to those who have not seen the thing!{3}

NOTE 1.—On the _Keshican_, see note 1 to chap. xii., and on the
changes of raiment note 3 to chap. xiv., and the remarks there as
to the number of distributions. I confess that the stress laid upon
the number 13 in this chapter makes the supposition of error more
difficult. But there is something odd and unintelligible about the
whole of the chapter except the last paragraph. For the 12,000
_Keshican_ are here all elevated to _Barons_; and at the same time
the statement about their changes of raiment seems to be merely
that already made in chapter xiv. This repetition occurs only in
the French MSS., but as it is in all these we cannot reject it.

NOTE 2.—The words _Camut_ and _Borgal_ appear both to be used
here for what we call _Russia-Leather_. The latter word in one
form or another, _Bolghár, Borgháli_, or _Bulkál_, is the term
applied to that material to this day nearly all over Asia. Ibn
Batuta says that in travelling during winter from Constantinople
to the Wolga he had to put on three pairs of boots, one of wool
(which we should call stockings), a second of wadded linen, and a
third of _Borgháli_, “_i.e._ of horse-leather lined with wolf-skin.”
Horse-leather seems to be still the favourite material for boots
among all the Tartar nations. The name was undoubtedly taken from
_Bolghar_ on the Wolga, the people of which are traditionally said
to have invented the art of preparing skins in that manner. This
manufacture is still one of the staple trades of Kazan, the city
which in position and importance is the nearest representative of
Bolghar now.

_Camut_ is explained by Klaproth to be “leather made from the
back-skin of a camel.” It appears in Johnson’s Persian Dictionary
as _Kámú_, but I do not know from what language it originally
comes. The word is in the Latin column of the Petrarchian
Vocabulary with the Persian rendering _Sagri_. This shows us
what is meant, for _Saghrí_ is just our word _Shagreen_, and is
applied to a fine leather granulated in that way, which is much
used for boots and the like by the people of Central Asia. [In
Turkish _ṣāghri_ or _saghri_ is the name both for the buttocks of
a horse and the leather called _shagreen_ prepared with them. (See
_Devic, Dict. Étym._)—H. C.] In the commercial lists of our Indian
north-west frontier we find as synonymous _Saghri_ or _Kímukht_,
“Horse or Ass-hide.” No doubt this latter word is a form of _Kámú_
or _Camut_. It appears (as _Keimukht_, “a sort of leather”) in a
detail of imports to Aden given by _Ibn al Wardi_, a geographer of
the 13th century.

Instead of Camut, Ramusio has _Camoscia_, _i.e._ Chamois, and the
same seems to be in all the editions based on Fra Pipino’s version.
It may be a misrendering of _camutum_ or _camutium_; or is there
any real connexion between the Oriental _Kámú Kímukht_, and the
Italian _camoscia_? (_I. B._ II. 445; _Klapr. Mém._ vol. III.;
_Davies’s Trade Report_, App. p. ccxx.; _Vámbéry’s Travels_, 423;
_Not. et Ext._ II. 43.)

Fraehn (writing in 1832) observes that he knew no use of the word
_Bolghár_, in the sense of Russian leather, older than the 17th
century. But we see that both Marco and Ibn Batuta use it. (_F. on
the Wolga Bulghars_, pp. 8–9.)

Pauthier in a note (p. 285) gives a list of the garments issued to
certain officials on these ceremonial occasions under the Mongols,
and sure enough this list includes “pairs of boots in red leather.”
Odoric particularly mentions the broad golden girdles worn at the
Kaan’s court.

[La Curne, _Dict._, has _Bulga_, leather bag; old Gallic word from
which are derived _bouge_ et _bougete, bourse_; he adds in a note,
“Festus writes: ‘_Bulgas_ galli sacculos scorteos vocant.’”—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—“Then come mummers leading lions, which they cause to
salute the Lord with reverence.” (_Odoric_, p. 143.) A lion sent by
Mirza Baisangar, one of the Princes of Timur’s House, accompanied
Shah Rukh’s embassy as a present to the Emperor; and like presents
were frequently repeated. (See _Amyot_, XIV. 37, 38.)

CHAPTER XVII.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN ENJOINETH HIS PEOPLE TO SUPPLY HIM
WITH GAME.

The three months of December, January, and February, during which the
Emperor resides at his Capital City, are assigned for hunting and
fowling, to the extent of some 40 days’ journey round the city; and
it is ordained that the larger game taken be sent to the Court. To be
more particular: of all the larger beasts of the chase, such as boars,
roebucks, bucks, stags, lions, bears, etc., the greater part of what
is taken has to be sent, and feathered game likewise. The animals are
gutted and despatched to the Court on carts. This is done by all the
people within 20 or 30 days’ journey, and the quantity so despatched
is immense. Those at a greater distance cannot send the game, but they
have to send the skins after tanning them, and these are employed in
the making of equipments for the Emperor’s army.{1}

NOTE 1.—So Magaillans: “Game is so abundant, especially at the
capital, that every year during the three winter months you see
at different places, intended for despatch thither, besides great
piles of every sort of wildfowl, rows of four-footed game of a
gunshot or two in length: the animals being all frozen and standing
on their feet. Among other species you see three sundry kinds
of bears ... and great abundance of other animals, as stags and
deer of different sorts, boars, elks, hares, rabbits, squirrels,
wild-cats, rats, geese, ducks, very fine jungle-fowl, etc., and all
so cheap that I never could have believed it” (pp. 177–178). As
this writer mentions _wild-cats_, we may presume that the “lions”
of Polo also were destined to be eaten.

[“Kubilai Khan kept a whole army, 14,000 men, huntsmen, distributed
in Peking and other cities in the present province of Chili
(_Yuen-shi_). The Khan used to hunt in the Peking plain from the
beginning of spring, until his departure to Shang-tu. There are in
the Peking department many low and marshy places, stretching often
to a considerable extent and abounding in game. In the biography
of _Ai-sie_ (_Yuen shi_, chap. cxxxiv.), who was a Christian, it
is mentioned that Kubilai was hunting also in the department of
Pao-ting fu.” (_Palladius_, p. 45.)—H. C.]

CHAPTER XVIII.

OF THE LIONS AND LEOPARDS AND WOLVES THAT THE KAAN KEEPS
FOR THE CHASE.

The Emperor hath numbers of leopards{1} trained to the chase, and hath
also a great many lynxes taught in like manner to catch game, and which
afford excellent sport.{2} He hath also several great Lions, bigger
than those of Babylonia, beasts whose skins are coloured in the most
beautiful way, being striped all along the sides with black, red, and
white. These are trained to catch boars and wild cattle, bears, wild
asses, stags, and other great or fierce beasts. And ’tis a rare sight,
I can tell you, to see those lions giving chase to such beasts as I
have mentioned! When they are to be so employed the Lions are taken
out in a covered cart, and every Lion has a little doggie with him.
[They are obliged to approach the game against the wind, otherwise the
animals would scent the approach of the Lion and be off.]{3}

There are also a great number of eagles, all broken to catch wolves,
foxes, deer, and wild goats, and they do catch them in great numbers.
But those especially that are trained to wolf-catching are very large
and powerful birds, and no wolf is able to get away from them.{4}

NOTE 1.—The Cheeta or Hunting-Leopard, still kept for the chase
by native noblemen in India, is an animal very distinct from the
true leopard. It is much more lanky and long-legged than the pure
felines, is unable to climb trees, and has claws only partially
retractile. Wood calls it a link between the feline and canine
races. One thousand Cheetas were attached to Akbar’s hunting
establishment; and the chief one, called Semend-Manik, was carried
to the field in a palankin with a kettledrum beaten before him.
Boldensel in the first half of the 14th century speaks of the
Cheeta as habitually used in Cyprus; but, indeed, a hundred years
before, these animals had been constantly employed by the Emperor
Frederic II. in Italy, and accompanied him on all his marches. They
were introduced into France in the latter part of the 15th century,
and frequently employed by Lewis XI., Charles VIII., and Lewis XII.
The leopards were kept in a ditch of the Castle of Amboise, and the
name still borne by a gate hard by, _Porte des Lions_, is supposed
to be due to that circumstance. The _Mœurs et Usages du Moyen
Age_ (Lacroix), from which I take the last facts, gives copy of a
print by John Stradanus representing a huntsman with the leopard
on his horse’s crupper, like Kúblái’s (_supra_, Bk. I. ch. lxi.);
Frederic II. used to say of his Cheetas, “they knew how to ride.”
This way of taking the Cheeta to the field had been first employed
by the Khalif Yazid, son of Moáwiyah. The Cheeta often appears in
the pattern of silk damasks of the 13th and 14th centuries, both
Asiatic and Italian. (_Ayeen Akbery_, I. 304, etc.; _Boldensel_,
in _Canisii Thesaurus_, by _Basnage_, vol. IV. p. 339; _Kington’s
Fred. II._ I. 472, II. 156; _Bochart_, _Hierozoica_, 797; _Rock’s
Catalogue_, _passim_.)

[The hunting equipment of the Sultan consisted of about thirty
falconers on horseback who carried each a bird on his fist. These
falconers were in front of seven horsemen, who had behind a kind
of tamed tiger at times employed by His Highness for hare-hunting,
notwithstanding what may be said to the contrary by those who are
inclined not to believe the fact. It is a thing known by everybody
here, and cannot be doubted except by those who admit that they
believe nothing of foreign customs. These tigers were each covered
with a brocade cloth—and their peaceful attitude, added to their
ferocious and savage looks, caused at the same time astonishment
and fear in the soul of those whom they looked upon. (_Journal
d’Antoine Galland_, trad. par Ch. Schefer, I. p. 135.) The Cheeta
(_Gueparda jubata_) was, according to Sir W. Jones, first employed
in hunting antelopes by Hushing, King of Persia, 865 B.C.—H. C.]

NOTE 2.—The word rendered Lynxes is _Leu cervers_ (G. Text), _Louz
serviers_ of Pauthier’s MS. C, though he has adopted from another
_Loups_ simply, which is certainly wrong. The _Geog. Latin_ has
“_Linceos i.e. lupos cerverios_.” There is no doubt that the
_Loup-cervier_ is the Lynx. Thus Brunetto Latini, describing the
Loup-cervier, speaks of its remarkable powers of vision, and refers
to its agency in the production of the precious stone called
_Liguire_ (_i.e._ _Ligurium_), which the ancients fancied to come
from _Lync-urium_; the tale is in Theophrastus. Yet the quaint
Bestiary of Philip de Thaun, published by Mr. Wright, identifies it
with the Greek Hyena:—

“_Hyena_ e Griu num, que nus beste apellum,
Ceo est _Lucervere_, oler fait et mult est fere.”

[The Abbé Armand David writes (_Missions Cathol._ XXI. 1889, p.
227) that there is in China, from the mountains of Manchuria to
the mountains of Tibet, a lynx called by the Chinese _T’u-pao_
(earth-coloured panther); a lynx somewhat similar to the
_loup-cervier_ is found on the western border of China, and has
been named _Lyncus Desgodinsi_.—H. C.]

Hunting Lynxes were used at the Court of Akbar. They are also
mentioned by A. Hamilton as so used in Sind at the end of the
17th century. This author calls the animal a _Shoe-goose_! _i.e._
_Siya-gosh_ (Black-ear), the Persian name of the Lynx. It is
still occasionally used in the chase by natives of rank in India.
(_Brunetto Lat. Tresor_, p. 248; _Popular Treatises on Science
written during Mid. Ages_, 94; _Ayeen Akbery_, u.s.; _Hamilt. E.
Indies_, I. 125; _Vigne_, I. 42.)

NOTE 3.—The conception of a Tiger seems almost to have dropped
out of the European mind during the Middle Ages. Thus in a
mediæval Bestiary, a chapter on the Tiger begins: “_Une Beste
est qui est apelée Tigre c’est une manière de_ Serpent.” Hence
Polo can only call the Tigers, whose portrait he draws here not
incorrectly, _Lions_. So also nearly 200 years later Barbaro gives
a like portrait, and calls the animal _Leonza_. Marsden supposes
judiciously that the confusion may have been promoted by the
ambiguity of the Persian _Sher_.

[Illustration: The Búrgút Eagle. (After Atkinson.)

“=Il a encore aiglies qe sunt afaités à prendre leus et voupes et
dain et chavriou, et en prennent assez.=”]

The Chinese pilgrim, Sung-Yun (A.D. 518), saw two young lions
at the Court of Gandhára. He remarks that the pictures of these
animals common in China, were not at all good likenesses. (_Beal_,
p. 200.)

We do not hear in modern times of Tigers trained to the chase, but
Chardin says of Persia: “In hunting the larger animals they make
use of beasts of prey trained for the purpose, _lions_, leopards,
_tigers_, panthers, ounces.”

NOTE 4.—This is perfectly correct. In Eastern Turkestan, and among
the Kirghiz to this day, eagles termed _Búrgút_ (now well known to
be the Golden Eagle) are tamed and trained to fly at wolves, foxes,
deer, wild goats, etc. A Kirghiz will give a good horse for an
eagle in which he recognises capacity for training. Mr. Atkinson
gives vivid descriptions and illustrations of this eagle (which he
calls “Bear coote”), attacking both deer and wolves. He represents
the bird as striking one claw into the neck, and the other into the
back of its large prey, and then tearing out the liver with its
beak. In justice both to Marco Polo and to Mr. Atkinson, I have
pleasure in adding a vivid account of the exploits of this bird, as
witnessed by one of my kind correspondents, the Governor-General’s
late envoy to Kashgar. And I trust Sir Douglas Forsyth will pardon
my quoting his own letter just as it stands[1]:—“Now for a story
of the _Burgoot_—Atkinson’s ‘Bearcoote.’ I think I told you it was
the Golden Eagle and supposed to attack wolves and even bears.
One day we came across a wild hog of enormous size, far bigger
than any that gave sport to the Tent Club in Bengal. The Burgoot
was immediately let loose, and went straight at the hog, which it
kicked, and flapped with its wings, and utterly _flabbergasted_,
whilst our Kashgaree companions attacked him with sticks and
brought him to the ground. As Friar Odoric would say, I, T. D.
F., have seen this with mine own eyes.”—Shaw describes the rough
treatment with which the Búrgút is tamed. Baber, when in the Bajaur
Hills, notices in his memoirs: “This day Búrgút took a deer.”
(_Timkowski_, I. 414; _Levchine_, p. 77; _Pallas_, _Voyages_,
I. 421; _J. R. A. S._ VII. 305; _Atkinson’s Siberia_, 493; and
_Amoor_, 146–147; _Shaw_, p. 157; _Baber_, p. 249.)

[The Golden Eagle (_Aquila chrysaetus_) is called at Peking _Hoy
tiao_ (black eagle). (_David et Oustalet_, _Oiseaux de la Chine_,
p. 8.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Dated Yangi Hissar, 10th April, 1874.

CHAPTER XIX.

CONCERNING THE TWO BROTHERS WHO HAVE CHARGE OF THE
KAAN’S HOUNDS.

The Emperor hath two Barons who are own brothers, one called Baian and
the other Mingan; and these two are styled _Chinuchi_ (or _Cunichi_),
which is as much as to say, “The Keepers of the Mastiff Dogs.”{1}
Each of these brothers hath 10,000 men under his orders; each body
of 10,000 being dressed alike, the one in red and the other in blue,
and whenever they accompany the Lord to the chase, they wear this
livery, in order to be recognized. Out of each body of 10,000 there
are 2000 men who are each in charge of one or more great mastiffs, so
that the whole number of these is very large. And when the Prince goes
a-hunting, one of those Barons, with his 10,000 men and something like
5000 dogs, goes towards the right, whilst the other goes towards the
left with his party in like manner. They move along, all abreast of
one another, so that the whole line extends over a full day’s journey,
and no animal can escape them. Truly it is a glorious sight to see the
working of the dogs and the huntsmen on such an occasion! And as the
Lord rides a-fowling across the plains, you will see these big hounds
coming tearing up, one pack after a bear, another pack after a stag, or
some other beast, as it may hap, and running the game down now on this
side and now on that, so that it is really a most delightful sport and
spectacle.

[The Two Brothers I have mentioned are bound by the tenure of their
office to supply the Kaan’s Court from October to the end of March with
1000 head of game daily, whether of beasts or birds, and not counting
quails; and also with fish to the best of their ability, allowing fish
enough for three persons to reckon as equal to one head of game.]

Now I have told you of the Masters of the Hounds and all about them,
and next will I tell you how the Lord goes off on an expedition for the
space of three months.

NOTE 1.—Though this particular Bayan and Mingan are not likely to
be mentioned in history, the names are both good Mongol names;
_Bayan_ that of a great soldier under Kúblái, of whom we shall hear
afterwards; and _Mingan_ that of one of Chinghiz’s generals.

The title of “Master of the Mastiffs” belonged to a high Court
official at Constantinople in former days, _Sámsúnji Báshi_, and I
have no doubt Marco has given the exact interpretation of the title
of the two Barons: though it is difficult to trace its elements.
It is read variously _Cunici_ (_i.e._ _Kunichi_) and _Cinuci_ (_i.e._
_Chinuchi_). It is evidently a word of analogous structure to
_Kushchi_, the Master of the Falcons; _Parschi_, the Master of
the Leopards. Professor Schiefner thinks it is probably corrupted
from _Noghaichi_, which appears in Kovalevski’s Mongol Dict. as
“_chasseur qui a soins des chiens courants_.” This word occurs, he
points out, in Sanang Setzen, where Schmidt translates it _Aufseher
über Hunde_. (See _S. S._ p. 39.)

The metathesis of _Noghai_-chi into _Kuni_-chi is the only drawback
to this otherwise apt solution. We generally shall find Polo’s
Oriental words much more accurately expressed than this would
imply—as in the next chapter. I have hazarded a suggestion of
(Or. Turkish) _Chong-It-chi_, “Keeper of the Big Dogs,” which
Professor Vámbéry thinks possible. (See “_chong_, big, strong,”
in his _Tschagataische Sprachstudien_, p. 282, and note in _Lord
Strangford’s Selected Writings_, II. 169.) In East Turkestan they
call the Chinese _Chong Káfir_, “The Big Heathen.” This would
exactly correspond to the rendering of Pipino’s Latin translation,
“_hoc est canum magnorum Praefecti_.” _Chinuchi_ again would be
(in Mongol) “Wolf-keepers.” It is at least possible that the great
dogs which Polo terms mastiffs may have been known by such a name.
We apply the term Wolf-dog to several varieties, and in Macbeth’s
enumeration we have—

————“Hounds, and greyhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs,
Shoughs, water rugs, and _Demi-Wolves_.”

Lastly the root-word may be the Chinese _Kiuen_, “dog,” as Pauthier
says. The mastiffs were probably Tibetan, but may have come through
China, and brought a name with them, like _Boule-dogues_ in France.

[Palladius (p. 46) says that _Chinuchi_ or _Cunici_ “have no
resemblance with any of the names found in the _Yuen shi_, ch.
xcix., article _Ping chi_ (military organisation), and relating to
the hunting staff of the Khan, viz.: _Si pao ch’i_ (falconers), _Ho
r ch’i_ (archers), and _Ke lien ch’i_ (probably those who managed
the hounds).”—H. C.]

CHAPTER XX.

HOW THE EMPEROR GOES ON A HUNTING EXPEDITION.

After he has stopped at his capital city those three months that I
mentioned, to wit, December, January, February, he starts off on
the 1st day of March, and travels southward towards the Ocean Sea,
a journey of two days.{1} He takes with him full 10,000 falconers,
and some 500 gerfalcons besides peregrines, sakers, and other hawks
in great numbers; and goshawks also to fly at the water-fowl.{2} But
do not suppose that he keeps all these together by him; they are
distributed about, hither and thither, one hundred together, or two
hundred at the utmost, as he thinks proper. But they are always fowling
as they advance, and the most part of the quarry taken is carried to
the Emperor. And let me tell you when he goes thus a-fowling with his
gerfalcons and other hawks, he is attended by full 10,000 men who are
disposed in couples; and these are called _Toscaol_, which is as much
as to say, “Watchers.” And the name describes their business.{3} They
are posted from spot to spot, always in couples, and thus they cover a
great deal of ground! Every man of them is provided with a whistle and
hood, so as to be able to call in a hawk and hold it in hand. And when
the Emperor makes a cast, there is no need that he follow it up, for
those men I speak of keep so good a look out that they never lose sight
of the birds, and if these have need of help they are ready to render
it.

All the Emperor’s hawks, and those of the Barons as well, have a little
label attached to the leg to mark them, on which is written the names
of the owner and the keeper of the bird. And in this way the hawk, when
caught, is at once identified and handed over to its owner. But if not,
the bird is carried to a certain Baron, who is styled the _Bularguchi_,
which is as much as to say “The Keeper of Lost Property.” And I tell
you that whatever may be found without a known owner, whether it be a
horse, or a sword, or a hawk, or what not, it is carried to that Baron
straightway, and he takes charge of it. And if the finder neglects
to carry his trover to the Baron, the latter punishes him. Likewise
the loser of any article goes to the Baron, and if the thing be in
his hands it is immediately given up to the owner. Moreover, the said
Baron always pitches on the highest spot of the camp, with his banner
displayed, in order that those who have lost or found anything may have
no difficulty in finding their way to him. Thus nothing can be lost but
it shall be incontinently found and restored.{4}

And so the Emperor follows this road that I have mentioned, leading
along in the vicinity of the Ocean Sea (which is within two days’
journey of his capital city, Cambaluc), and as he goes there is many
a fine sight to be seen, and plenty of the very best entertainment in
hawking; in fact, there is no sport in the world to equal it!

The Emperor himself is carried upon four elephants in a fine chamber
made of timber, lined inside with plates of beaten gold, and outside
with lions’ skins [for he always travels in this way on his fowling
expeditions, because he is troubled with gout]. He always keeps beside
him a dozen of his choicest gerfalcons, and is attended by several of
his Barons, who ride on horseback alongside. And sometimes, as they may
be going along, and the Emperor from his chamber is holding discourse
with the Barons, one of the latter shall exclaim: “Sire! Look out for
Cranes!” Then the Emperor instantly has the top of his chamber thrown
open, and having marked the cranes he casts one of his gerfalcons,
whichever he pleases; and often the quarry is struck within his view,
so that he has the most exquisite sport and diversion, there as he
sits in his chamber or lies on his bed; and all the Barons with him
get the enjoyment of it likewise! So it is not without reason I tell
you that I do not believe there ever existed in the world or ever will
exist, a man with such sport and enjoyment as he has, or with such rare
opportunities.{5}

And when he has travelled till he reaches a place called CACHAR
MODUN,{6} there he finds his tents pitched, with the tents of his Sons,
and his Barons, and those of his Ladies and theirs, so that there
shall be full 10,000 tents in all, and all fine and rich ones. And I
will tell you how his own quarters are disposed. The tent in which he
holds his courts is large enough to give cover easily to a thousand
souls. It is pitched with its door to the south, and the Barons and
Knights remain in waiting in it, whilst the Lord abides in another
close to it on the west side. When he wishes to speak with any one he
causes the person to be summoned to that other tent. Immediately behind
the great tent there is a fine large chamber where the Lord sleeps;
and there are also many other tents and chambers, but they are not
in contact with the Great Tent as these are. The two audience-tents
and the sleeping-chamber are constructed in this way. Each of the
audience-tents has three poles, which are of spice-wood, and are most
artfully covered with lions’ skins, striped with black and white and
red, so that they do not suffer from any weather. All three apartments
are also covered outside with similar skins of striped lions, a
substance that lasts for ever.{7} And inside they are all lined with
ermine and sable, these two being the finest and most costly furs in
existence. For a robe of sable, large enough to line a mantle, is worth
2000 bezants of gold, or 1000 at least, and this kind of skin is called
by the Tartars “The King of Furs.” The beast itself is about the size
of a marten.{8} These two furs of which I speak are applied and inlaid
so exquisitely, that it is really something worth seeing. All the
tent-ropes are of silk. And in short I may say that those tents, to wit
the two audience-halls and the sleeping-chamber, are so costly that it
is not every king could pay for them.

Round about these tents are others, also fine ones and beautifully
pitched, in which are the Emperor’s ladies, and the ladies of the
other princes and officers. And then there are the tents for the hawks
and their keepers, so that altogether the number of tents there on
the plain is something wonderful. To see the many people that are
thronging to and fro on every side and every day there, you would take
the camp for a good big city. For you must reckon the Leeches, and the
Astrologers, and the Falconers, and all the other attendants on so
great a company; and add that everybody there has his whole family with
him, for such is their custom.

The Lord remains encamped there until the spring, and all that time he
does nothing but go hawking round about among the canebrakes along the
lakes and rivers that abound in that region, and across fine plains on
which are plenty of cranes and swans, and all sorts of other fowl. The
other gentry of the camp also are never done with hunting and hawking,
and every day they bring home great store of venison and feathered game
of all sorts. Indeed, without having witnessed it, you would never
believe what quantities of game are taken, and what marvellous sport
and diversion they all have whilst they are in camp there.

There is another thing I should mention; to wit, that for 20 days’
journey round the spot nobody is allowed, be he who he may, to keep
hawks or hounds, though anywhere else whosoever list may keep them. And
furthermore throughout all the Emperor’s territories, nobody however
audacious dares to hunt any of these four animals, to wit, hare,
stag, buck, and roe, from the month of March to the month of October.
Anybody who should do so would rue it bitterly. But those people are
so obedient to their Lord’s command, that even if a man were to find
one of those animals asleep by the roadside he would not touch it
for the world! And thus the game multiplies at such a rate that the
whole country swarms with it, and the Emperor gets as much as he could
desire. Beyond the term I have mentioned, however, to wit that from
March to October, everybody may take these animals as he list.{9}

After the Emperor has tarried in that place, enjoying his sport as I
have related, from March to the middle of May, he moves with all his
people, and returns straight to his capital city of Cambaluc (which is
also the capital of Cathay, as you have been told), but all the while
continuing to take his diversion in hunting and hawking as he goes
along.

NOTE 1.—“_Vait vers midi jusques à la Mer Occeane, ou il y a
deux journées._” It is not possible in any way to reconcile this
description as it stands with truth, though I do not see much room
for doubt as to the direction of the excursion. Peking is 100
miles as the crow flies from the nearest point of the coast, at
least six or seven days’ march for such a camp, and the direction
is south-east, or nearly so. The last circumstance would not be
very material as Polo’s compass-bearings are not very accurate. We
shall find that he makes the general line of bearing from Peking
towards Kiangnan, _Sciloc_ or S. East, hence his _Midi_ ought in
consistency to represent _S. West_, an impossible direction for
the Ocean. It is remarkable that Ramusio has _Greco_ or _N. East_,
which would by the same relative correction represent _East_.
And other circumstances point to the frontier of Liao-tong as
the direction of this excursion. Leaving the _two days_ out of
question, therefore, I should suppose the “Ocean Sea” to be struck
at Shan-hai-kwan near the terminus of the Great Wall, and that the
site of the standing hunting-camp is in the country to the north
of that point. The Jesuit Verbiest accompanied the Emperor Kanghi
on a tour in this direction in 1682, and almost immediately after
passing the Wall the Emperor and his party seem to have struck
off to the left for sport. Kúblái started on the “1st of March,”
probably however the 1st of the second Chinese month. Kanghi
started from Peking on the 23rd of March, on the hunting-journey
just referred to.

NOTE 2.—We are told that Bajazet had 7000 falconers and 6000
dog-keepers; whilst Sultan Mahomed Tughlak of India in the
generation following Polo’s, is said to have had 10,000 falconers,
and 3000 other attendants as beaters. (_Not. et Ext._ XIII. p. 185.)

The Oriental practice seems to have assigned one man to the
attendance on every hawk. This Kaempfer says was the case at the
Court of Persia at the beginning of last century. There were about
800 hawks, and each had a special keeper. The same was the case
with the Emperor Kanghi’s hawking establishment, according to
Gerbillon. (_Am. Exot._ p. 83; _Gerb._ 1st Journey, in _Duhalde_.)

NOTE 3.—The French MSS. read _Toscaor_; the reading in the text
I take from Ramusio. It is Turki, _Tosḳáúl_, توسقاول, defined as
“Gardien, surveillant de la route; Wächter, Wache, Wegehüter.” (See
_Zenker_, and _Pavet de Courteille_.) The word is perhaps also
Mongol, for Rémusat has _Tosiyal_ = “Veille.” (_Mél. As._ I. 231.)
Such an example of Polo’s correctness both in the form and meaning
of a Turki word is worthy of especial note, and shows how little he
merits the wild and random treatment which has been often applied
to the solution of like phrases in his book.

[Palladius (p. 47) says that he has heard from men well acquainted
with the customs of the Mongols, that at the present day in
“battues,” the leaders of the two flanks which surround the game,
are called _toscaul_ in Mongol.—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—The remark in the previous note might be repeated here. The
_Bularguji_ was an officer of the Mongol camp, whose duties are
thus described by Mahomed Hindú Shah in a work on the offices of
the Perso-Mongol Court. “He is an officer appointed by the Council
of State, who, at the time when the camp is struck, goes over the
ground with his servants, and collects slaves of either sex, or
cattle, such as horses, camels, oxen, and asses, that have been
left behind, and retains them until the owners appear and prove
their claim to the property, when he makes it over to them. The
_Bularguji_ sticks up a flag by his tent or hut to enable people to
find him, and so recover their lost property.” (_Golden Horde_, p.
245.) And in the Appendix to that work (p. 476) there is a copy of
a warrant to such a Bularguji or Provost Marshal. The derivation
appears therein as from _Bularghu_, “Lost property.” Here again
it was impossible to give both form and meaning of the word more
exactly than Polo has done. Though Hammer writes these terminations
in _ji_ (_dschi_), I believe _chi_ (_tschi_) is preferable. We
have this same word _Bularghu_ in a grant of privileges to the
Venetians by the Ilkhan Abusaid, 22nd December, 1320, which has
been published by M. Mas Latrie: “_Item, se algun cavalo_ bolargo
_fosse trovado apreso de algun vostro veneciano_,” etc.—“If any
stray horse shall be found in the possession of a Venetian,” etc.
(See _Bibl. de l’École des Chartes_, 1870—_tirage à part_, p. 26.)

[“There are two Mongol terms, which resemble this word
_Bularguchi_, viz. _Balagachi_ and _Buluguchi_. But the first was
the name used for the door-keeper of the tent of the Khan. By
Buluguchi the Mongols understood a hunter and especially sable
hunters. No one of these terms can be made consistent with the
accounts given by M. Polo regarding the Bularguchi. In the _Kui
sin tsa shi_, written by Chow Mi, in the former part of the 14th
century, interesting particulars regarding Mongol hunting are
found.” (_Palladius_, 47.) In chapter 101, _Djan-ch’i_, of the
_Yuen-shi_, Falconers are called _Ying fang pu lie_, and a certain
class of the Falconers are termed _Bo-lan-ghi_. (_Bretschneider,
Med. Res._ I. p. 188.)—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—A like description is given by Odoric of the mode in which
a successor of Kúblái travelled between Cambaluc and Shangtu, with
his falcons also in the chamber beside him. What Kúblái had adopted
as an indulgence to his years and gout, his successors probably
followed as a precedent without these excuses.

[With regard to the gout of Kúblái Khan, Palladius (p. 48) writes:
“In the Corean history allusion is made twice to the Khan’s
suffering from this disease. Under the year 1267, it is there
recorded that in the 9th month, envoys of the Khan with a letter
to the King arrived in Corea. Kubilai asked for the skin of the
_Akirho munho_, a fish resembling a cow. The envoy was informed
that, as the Khan suffered from swollen feet it would be useful for
him to wear boots made of the skin of this animal, and in the 10th
month, the king of Corea forwarded to the Khan seventeen skins of
it. It is further recorded in the Corean history, that in the 8th
month of 1292, sorcerers and _Shaman_ women from Corea were sent at
the request of the Khan to cure him of a disease of the feet and
hands. At that time the king of Corea was also in Peking, and the
sorcerers and Shaman women were admitted during an audience the
King had of the Khan. They took the Khan’s hands and feet and began
to recite exorcisms, whilst Kubilai was laughing.”—H. C.]

NOTE 6.—Marsden and Pauthier identify Cachar Modun with _Tchakiri
Mondou_, or _Moudon_, which appears in D’Anville’s atlas as the
title of a “Levée de terre naturelle,” in the extreme east of
Manchuria, and in lat. 44°, between the Khinga Lake and the sea.
This position is out of the question. It is more than 900 miles,
_in a straight line_ from Peking, and the mere journey thither and
back would have taken Kúblái’s camp something like six months. The
name _Kachar Modun_ is probably Mongol, and as _Katzar_ is = “land,
region,” and _Modun_ = “wood” or “tree,” a fair interpretation lies
on the surface. Such a name indeed has little individuality. But
the Jesuit maps have a _Modun Khotan_ (“Wood-ville”) just about
the locality supposed, viz. in the region north of the eastern
extremity of the Great Wall.

[Captain Gill writes (_River of Golden Sand_, I. p. 111): “This
country around Urh-Chuang is admirably described [in _Marco Polo_,
pp. 403, 406], and I should almost imagine that the Kaan must have
set off south-east from Peking, and enjoyed some of his hawking not
far from here, before he travelled to Cachar Modun, wherever that
may have been.”

“With respect to Cachar Modun, Marco Polo intends perhaps by
this name Ho-si wu, which place, together with Yang-ts’un, were
comprised in the general name _Ma t’ou_ (perhaps the _Modun_
of M. Polo). Ma-t’ou is even now a general term for a jetty in
Chinese. Ho-si in the Mongol spelling was Ha-shin. D’Ohsson, in his
translation of Rashid-eddin renders _Ho-si_ by _Co-shi_ (_Hist.
des Mongols_, I. p. 95), but Rashid in that case speaks not of
Ho-si wu, but of the Tangut Empire, which in Chinese was called
Ho-si, meaning west of the (Yellow) River. (See _supra_, p. 205).
Ho-si wu, as well as Yang-ts’un, both exist even now as villages
on the Pei-ho River, and near the first ancient walls can be seen.
Ho-si wu means: ‘Custom’s barrier west of the (Pei-ho) river.’”
(_Palladius_, p. 45.) This identification cannot be accepted on
account of the position of Ho-si wu. —H. C.]

NOTE 7.—I suppose the best accessible illustration of the Kaan’s
great tent may be that in which the Emperor Kienlung received Lord
Macartney in the same region in 1793, of which one view is given in
Staunton’s plates. Another exists in the Staunton Collection in the
B. M., of which I give a reduced sketch.

Kúblái’s great tent, after all, was but a fraction of the size
of Akbar’s audience-tents, the largest of which held 10,000
people, and took 1000 _farráshes_ a week’s work to pitch it, with
machines. But perhaps the manner of _holding_ people is differently
estimated. (_Aín Akb._ 53.)

In the description of the tent-poles, Pauthier’s text has “_trois
coulombes de fust_ de pieces _moult bien encuierées_,” etc. The G.
T. has “_de leing_ d’especies _mout bien curés_,” etc. The Crusca,
“_di_ spezie _molto belle_,” and Ramusio going off at a tangent,
“_di legno intagliate con grandissimo artificio e indorate_.” I
believe the translation in the text to indicate the true reading.
It might mean camphor-wood, or the like. The tent-covering of
tiger-skins is illustrated by a passage in Sanang Setzen, which
speaks of a tent covered with panther-skins, sent to Chinghiz by
the Khan of the Solongos (p. 77).

[Illustration: The Tents of the Emperor Kienlung.]

[Grenard (pp. 160–162) gives us his experience of Tents in Central
Asia (Khotan). “These Tents which we had purchased at Tashkent
were the ‘tentes-abris’ which are used in campaign by Russian
military workshops, only we made them larger by a third. They were
made of grey Kirghiz felt, which cannot be procured at Khotan. The
felt manufactured in this town not having enough consistency or
solidity, we took Aksu felt, which is better than this of Khotan,
though inferior to the felt of Russian Turkestan. These felt tents
are extremely heavy, and, once damp, are dried with difficulty.
These drawbacks are not compensated by any important advantage; it
would be an illusion to believe that they preserve from the cold
any better than other tents. In fact, I prefer the Manchu tent in
use in the Chinese army, which is, perhaps, of all military tents
the most practical and comfortable. It is made of a single piece of
double cloth of cotton, very strong, waterproof for a long time,
white inside, blue outside, and weighs with its three tipped sticks
and its wooden poles, 25 kilog. Set up, it forms a ridge roof 7
feet high and shelters fully ten men. It suits servants perfectly
well. For the master who wants to work, to write, to draw,
occasionally to receive officials, the ideal tent would be one of
the same material, but of larger proportions, and comprising two
parallel vertical partitions and surmounted by a ridge roof. The
round form of Kirghiz and Mongol tents is also very comfortable,
but it requires a complicated and inconvenient wooden frame-work,
owing to which it takes some considerable time to raise up the
tent.”—H. C.]

NOTE 8.—The expressions about the sable run in the G. T., “_et
l’apellent les Tartarz les_ roi des pelaines,” etc. This has been
curiously misunderstood both in versions based on Pipino, and
in the Geog. Latin and Crusca Italian. The Geog. Latin gives us
“_vocant eas Tartari_ Lenoidae Pellonae”; the Crusca, “_chiamanle
li Tartari_ Leroide Pelame”; Ramusio in a very odd way combines
both the genuine and the blundered interpretation: “_E li Tartari
la chiamano_ Regina delle Pelli; _e gli animali si chiamano_
Rondes.” Fraehn ingeniously suggested that this _Rondes_ (which
proves to be merely a misunderstanding of the French words _Roi
des_) was a mistake for _Kunduz_, usually meaning a “beaver,” but
also a “sable.” (See _Ibn Foszlan_, p. 57.) _Condux_, no doubt with
this meaning, appears coupled with _vair_, in a Venetian Treaty
with Egypt (1344), quoted by Heyd. (II. 208.)

Ibn Batuta puts the ermine above the sable. An ermine pelisse,
he says, was worth in India 1000 dinárs of that country, whilst
a sable one was worth only 400 dinárs. As Ibn Batuta’s Indian
dinárs are _Rupees_, the estimate of price is greatly lower than
Polo’s. Some years ago I find the price of a _Sack_, as it is
technically called by the Russian traders, or robe of fine sables,
stated to be in the Siberian market about 7000 banco rubels, _i.e._
I believe about 350_l._ The same authority mentions that in 1591
the Tzar Theodore Ivanovich made a present of a pelisse valued at
the equivalent of 5000 _silver_ rubels of modern Russian money,
or upwards of 750_l._ Atkinson speaks of a _single_ sable skin of
the highest quality, for which the trapper demanded 18_l._ The
great mart for fine sables is at Olekma on the Lena. (See _I. B._
II. 401–402; _Baer’s Beiträge_, VII. 215 _seqq._; _Upper and Lower
Amoor_, 390.)

NOTE 9.—Hawking is still common in North China. Pétis de la Croix
the elder, in his account of the _Yasa_, or institutes of Chinghiz,
quotes one which lays down that between March and October “no one
should take stags, deer, roebucks, hares, wild asses, nor some
certain birds,” in order that there might be ample sport in winter
for the court. This would be just the reverse of Polo’s statement,
but I suspect it is merely a careless adoption of the latter. There
are many such traps in Pétis de la Croix. (Engl. Vers. 1722, p. 82.)

CHAPTER XXI.

REHEARSAL OF THE WAY THE YEAR OF THE GREAT KAAN IS
DISTRIBUTED.

On arriving at his capital of Cambaluc,{1} he stays in his palace
there three days and no more; during which time he has great court
entertainments and rejoicings, and makes merry with his wives. He then
quits his palace at Cambaluc, and proceeds to that city which he has
built, as I told you before, and which is called Chandu, where he has
that grand park and palace of cane, and where he keeps his gerfalcons
in mew. There he spends the summer, to escape the heat, for the
situation is a very cool one. After stopping there from the beginning
of May to the 28th of August, he takes his departure (that is the time
when they sprinkle the white mares’ milk as I told you), and returns
to his capital Cambaluc. There he stops, as I have told you also, the
month of September, to keep his Birthday Feast, and also throughout
October, November, December, January, and February, in which last month
he keeps the grand feast of the New Year, which they call the White
Feast, as you have heard already with all particulars. He then sets out
on his march towards the Ocean Sea, hunting and hawking, and continues
out from the beginning of March to the middle of May; and then comes
back for three days only to the capital, during which he makes merry
with his wives, and holds a great court and grand entertainments. In
truth, ’tis something astonishing, the magnificence displayed by the
Emperor in those three days; and then he starts off again as you know.

Thus his whole year is distributed in the following manner: six months
at his chief palace in the royal city of Cambaluc, to wit, _September_,
_October_, _November_, _December_, _January_, _February_;

Then on the great hunting expedition towards the sea, _March_, _April_,
_May_;

Then back to his palace at Cambaluc for _three days_;

Then off to the city of Chandu which he has built, and where the Cane
Palace is, where he stays _June_, _July_, _August_;

Then back again to his capital city of Cambaluc.

So thus the whole year is spent; six months at the capital, three
months in hunting, and three months at the Cane Palace to avoid the
heat. And in this way he passes his time with the greatest enjoyment;
not to mention occasional journeys in this or that direction at his own
pleasure.

NOTE 1.—This chapter, with its wearisome and whimsical
reiteration, reminding one of a game of forfeits, is peculiar to
that class of MSS. which claims to represent the copy given to
Thibault de Cepoy by Marco Polo.

Dr. Bushell has kindly sent me a notice of a Chinese document (his
translation of which he had unfortunately mislaid), containing a
minute contemporary account of the annual migration of the Mongol
Court to Shangtu. Having traversed the Kiu Yung Kwan (or Nankau)
Pass, where stands the great Mongol archway represented at the
end of this volume, they left what is now the Kalgan post-road at
Tumuyi, making straight for Chaghan-nor (_supra_, p. 304), and
thence to Shangtu. The return journey in autumn followed the same
route as far as Chaghan-nor, where some days were spent in fowling
on the lakes, and thence by Siuen-hwa fu (“_Sindachu_,” _supra_, p.
295) and the present post-road to Cambaluc.

CHAPTER XXII.

CONCERNING THE CITY OF CAMBALUC, AND ITS GREAT TRAFFIC
AND POPULATION.

You must know that the city of Cambaluc hath such a multitude of
houses, and such a vast population inside the walls and outside, that
it seems quite past all possibility. There is a suburb outside each
of the gates, which are twelve in number;{1} and these suburbs are
so great that they contain more people than the city itself [for the
suburb of one gate spreads in width till it meets the suburb of the
next, whilst they extend in length some three or four miles]. In those
suburbs lodge the foreign merchants and travellers, of whom there are
always great numbers who have come to bring presents to the Emperor, or
to sell articles at Court, or because the city affords so good a mart
to attract traders. [There are in each of the suburbs, to a distance
of a mile from the city, numerous fine hostelries{2} for the lodgment
of merchants from different parts of the world, and a special hostelry
is assigned to each description of people, as if we should say there
is one for the Lombards, another for the Germans, and a third for the
Frenchmen.] And thus there are as many good houses outside of the
city as inside, without counting those that belong to the great lords
and barons, which are very numerous.

[Illustration: Plain of Cambaluc; the City in the distance; from the
Hills on the north-west.]

You must know that it is forbidden to bury any dead body inside the
city. If the body be that of an Idolater it is carried out beyond the
city and suburbs to a remote place assigned for the purpose, to be
burnt. And if it be of one belonging to a religion the custom of which
is to bury, such as the Christian, the Saracen, or what not, it is also
carried out beyond the suburbs to a distant place assigned for the
purpose. And thus the city is preserved in a better and more healthy
state.

Moreover, no public woman resides inside the city, but all such abide
outside in the suburbs. And ’tis wonderful what a vast number of these
there are for the foreigners; it is a certain fact that there are more
than 20,000 of them living by prostitution. And that so many can live
in this way will show you how vast is the population.

[Guards patrol the city every night in parties of 30 or 40, looking
out for any persons who may be abroad at unseasonable hours,
_i.e._ after the great bell hath stricken thrice. If they find any
such person he is immediately taken to prison, and examined next
morning by the proper officers. If these find him guilty of any
misdemeanour they order him a proportionate beating with the stick.
Under this punishment people sometimes die; but they adopt it in
order to eschew bloodshed; for their _Bacsis_ say that it is an
evil thing to shed man’s blood.]

To this city also are brought articles of greater cost and rarity,
and in greater abundance of all kinds, than to any other city in the
world. For people of every description, and from every region, bring
things (including all the costly wares of India, as well as the fine
and precious goods of Cathay itself with its provinces), some for the
sovereign, some for the court, some for the city which is so great,
some for the crowds of Barons and Knights, some for the great hosts of
the Emperor which are quartered round about; and thus between court and
city the quantity brought in is endless.

As a sample, I tell you, no day in the year passes that there do not
enter the city 1000 cart-loads of silk alone, from which are made
quantities of cloth of silk and gold, and of other goods. And this is
not to be wondered at; for in all the countries round about there is no
flax, so that everything has to be made of silk. It is true, indeed,
that in some parts of the country there is cotton and hemp, but not
sufficient for their wants. This, however, is not of much consequence,
because silk is so abundant and cheap, and is a more valuable substance
than either flax or cotton.

Round about this great city of Cambaluc there are some 200 other cities
at various distances, from which traders come to sell their goods and
buy others for their lords; and all find means to make their sales and
purchases, so that the traffic of the city is passing great.

NOTE 1.—It would seem to have been usual to reckon _twelve_ suburbs
to Peking down to modern times. (See _Deguignes_, III. 38.)

NOTE 2.—The word here used is _Fondaco_, often employed in mediæval
Italian in the sense nearly of what we call a _factory_. The word
is from the Greek πανδοκεῖον, but through the Arabic _Fandúḳ_. The
latter word is used by Ibn Batuta in speaking of the hostelries at
which the Mussulman merchants put up in China.

CHAPTER XXIII.

[CONCERNING THE OPPRESSIONS OF ACHMATH THE BAILO, AND THE
PLOT THAT WAS FORMED AGAINST HIM.{1}

You will hear further on how that there are twelve persons appointed
who have authority to dispose of lands, offices, and everything else
at their discretion. Now one of these was a certain Saracen named
ACHMATH, a shrewd and able man, who had more power and influence
with the Grand Kaan than any of the others; and the Kaan held him in
such regard that he could do what he pleased. The fact was, as came
out after his death, that Achmath had so wrought upon the Kaan with
his sorcery, that the latter had the greatest faith and reliance on
everything he said, and in this way did everything that Achmath wished
him to do.

This person disposed of all governments and offices, and passed
sentence on all malefactors; and whenever he desired to have any one
whom he hated put to death, whether with justice or without it, he
would go to the Emperor and say: “Such an one deserves death, for
he hath done this or that against your imperial dignity.” Then the
Lord would say: “Do as you think right,” and so he would have the man
forthwith executed. Thus when people saw how unbounded were his powers,
and how unbounded the reliance placed by the Emperor on everything that
he said, they did not venture to oppose him in anything. No one was so
high in rank or power as to be free from the dread of him. If any one
was accused by him to the Emperor of a capital offence, and desired to
defend himself, he was unable to bring proofs in his own exculpation,
for no one would stand by him, as no one dared to oppose Achmath. And
thus the latter caused many to perish unjustly.{2}

Moreover, there was no beautiful woman whom he might desire, but he
got hold of her; if she were unmarried, forcing her to be his wife, if
otherwise, compelling her to consent to his desires. Whenever he knew
of any one who had a pretty daughter, certain ruffians of his would go
to the father, and say: “What say you? Here is this pretty daughter of
yours; give her in marriage to the Bailo Achmath (for they called him
‘the Bailo,’ or, as we should say, ‘the Vicegerent’),{3} and we will
arrange for his giving you such a government or such an office for
three years.” And so the man would surrender his daughter. And Achmath
would go to the Emperor, and say: “Such a government is vacant, or will
be vacant on such a day. So-and-So is a proper man for the post.” And
the Emperor would reply: “Do as you think best;” and the father of the
girl was immediately appointed to the government. Thus either through
the ambition of the parents, or through fear of the Minister, all the
beautiful women were at his beck, either as wives or mistresses. Also
he had some five-and-twenty sons who held offices of importance, and
some of these, under the protection of their father’s name, committed
scandals like his own, and many other abominable iniquities. This
Achmath also had amassed great treasure, for everybody who wanted
office sent him a heavy bribe.

In such authority did this man continue for two-and-twenty years.
At last the people of the country, to wit the Cathayans, utterly
wearied with the endless outrages and abominable iniquities which he
perpetrated against them, whether as regarded their wives or their
own persons, conspired to slay him and revolt against the government.
Amongst the rest there was a certain Cathayan named Chenchu, a
commander of a thousand, whose mother, daughter, and wife had all
been dishonoured by Achmath. Now this man, full of bitter resentment,
entered into parley regarding the destruction of the Minister with
another Cathayan whose name was Vanchu, who was a commander of 10,000.
They came to the conclusion that the time to do the business would be
during the Great Kaan’s absence from Cambaluc. For after stopping there
three months he used to go to Chandu and stop there three months; and
at the same time his son Chinkin used to go away to his usual haunts,
and this Achmath remained in charge of the city; sending to obtain the
Kaan’s orders from Chandu when any emergency arose.

So Vanchu and Chenchu, having come to this conclusion, proceeded to
communicate it to the chief people among the Cathayans, and then by
common consent sent word to their friends in many other cities that
they had determined on such a day, at the signal given by a beacon,
to massacre all the men with beards, and that the other cities should
stand ready to do the like on seeing the signal fires. The reason
why they spoke of massacring the bearded men was that the Cathayans
naturally have no beard, whilst beards are worn by the Tartars,
Saracens, and Christians. And you should know that all the Cathayans
detested the Grand Kaan’s rule because he set over them governors who
were Tartars, or still more frequently Saracens, and these they could
not endure, for they were treated by them just like slaves. You see the
Great Kaan had not succeeded to the dominion of Cathay by hereditary
right, but held it by conquest; and thus having no confidence in the
natives, he put all authority into the hands of Tartars, Saracens,
or Christians who were attached to his household and devoted to his
service, and were foreigners in Cathay.

Wherefore, on the day appointed, the aforesaid Vanchu and Chenchu
having entered the palace at night, Vanchu sat down and caused a number
of lights to be kindled before him. He then sent a messenger to Achmath
the Bailo, who lived in the Old City, as if to summon him to the
presence of Chinkin, the Great Kaan’s son, who (it was pretended) had
arrived unexpectedly. When Achmath heard this he was much surprised,
but made haste to go, for he feared the Prince greatly. When he arrived
at the gate he met a Tartar called Cogatai, who was Captain of the
12,000 that formed the standing garrison of the City; and the latter
asked him whither he was bound so late? “To Chinkin, who is just
arrived.” Quoth Cogatai, “How can that be? How could he come so privily
that I know nought of it?” So he followed the Minister with a certain
number of his soldiers. Now the notion of the Cathayans was that, if
they could make an end of Achmath, they would have nought else to be
afraid of. So as soon as Achmath got inside the palace, and saw all
that illumination, he bowed down before Vanchu, supposing him to be
Chinkin, and Chenchu who was standing ready with a sword straightway
cut his head off. As soon as Cogatai, who had halted at the entrance,
beheld this, he shouted “Treason!” and instantly discharged an arrow
at Vanchu and shot him dead as he sat. At the same time he called his
people to seize Chenchu, and sent a proclamation through the city
that any one found in the streets would be instantly put to death.
The Cathayans saw that the Tartars had discovered the plot, and that
they had no longer any leader, since Vanchu was killed and Chenchu was
taken. So they kept still in their houses, and were unable to pass
the signal for the rising of the other cities as had been settled.
Cogatai immediately dispatched messengers to the Great Kaan giving an
orderly report of the whole affair, and the Kaan sent back orders for
him to make a careful investigation, and to punish the guilty as their
misdeeds deserved. In the morning Cogatai examined all the Cathayans,
and put to death a number whom he found to be ringleaders in the plot.
The same thing was done in the other cities, when it was found that the
plot extended to them also.

After the Great Kaan had returned to Cambaluc he was very anxious to
discover what had led to this affair, and he then learned all about
the endless iniquities of that accursed Achmath and his sons. It was
proved that he and seven of his sons (for they were not all bad) had
forced no end of women to be their wives, besides those whom they had
ravished. The Great Kaan then ordered all the treasure that Achmath
had accumulated in the Old City to be transferred to his own treasury
in the New City, and it was found to be of enormous amount. He also
ordered the body of Achmath to be dug up and cast into the streets for
the dogs to tear; and commanded those of his sons that had followed the
father’s evil example to be flayed alive.{4}

These circumstances called the Kaan’s attention to the accursed
doctrines of the Sect of the Saracens, which excuse every crime,
yea even murder itself, when committed on such as are not of their
religion. And seeing that this doctrine had led the accursed Achmath
and his sons to act as they did without any sense of guilt, the Kaan
was led to entertain the greatest disgust and abomination for it. So
he summoned the Saracens and prohibited their doing many things which
their religion enjoined. Thus, he ordered them to regulate their
marriages by the Tartar Law, and prohibited their cutting the throats
of animals killed for food, ordering them to rip the stomach in the
Tartar way.

Now when all this happened Messer Marco was upon the spot.]{5}

NOTE 1.—This narrative is from Ramusio’s version, and constitutes
one of the most notable passages peculiar to that version.

The name of the oppressive Minister is printed in Ramusio’s
Collection _Achmach_. But the _c_ and _t_ are so constantly
interchanged in MSS. that I think there can be no question this was
a mere clerical error for _Achmath_, and so I write it. I have also
for consistency changed the spelling of _Xandu_, _Chingis_, etc.,
to that hitherto adopted in our text of _Chandu_, _Chinkin_, etc.

NOTE 2.—The remarks of a Chinese historian on Kúblái’s
administration may be appropriately quoted here: “Hupilai Han
must certainly be regarded as one of the greatest princes that
ever existed, and as one of the most successful in all that he
undertook. This he owed to his judgment in the selection of his
officers, and to his talent for commanding them. He carried his
arms into the most remote countries, and rendered his name so
formidable that not a few nations spontaneously submitted to his
supremacy. Nor was there ever an Empire of such vast extent.
He cultivated literature, protected its professors, and even
thankfully received their advice. Yet he never placed a Chinese in
his cabinet, and he employed foreigners only as Ministers. These,
however, he chose with discernment, _always excepting the Ministers
of Finance_. He really loved his subjects; and if they were not
always happy under his government, it is because they took care
to conceal their sufferings. There were in those days no Public
Censors whose duty it is to warn the Sovereign of what is going on:
and no one dared to speak out for fear of the resentment of the
Ministers, who were the depositaries of the Imperial authority, and
the authors of the oppressions under which the people laboured.
Several Chinese, men of letters and of great ability, who lived
at Hupilai’s court, might have rendered that prince the greatest
service in the administration of his dominions, but they never
were intrusted with any but subordinate offices, and they were
not in a position to make known the malversations of those public
blood-suckers.” (_De Mailla_, IX. 459–460.)

AHMAD was a native of Fenáket (afterwards Sháh-Rúkhia), near the
Jaxartes, and obtained employment under Kúblái through the Empress
Jamui Khatun, who had known him before her marriage. To her Court
he was originally attached, but we find him already employed in
high financial office in 1264. Kúblái’s demands for money must
have been very large, and he eschewed looking too closely into
the character of his financial agents or the means by which they
raised money for him. Ahmad was very successful in this, and being
a man of great talent and address, obtained immense influence over
the Emperor, until at last nothing was done save by his direction,
though he always _appeared_ to be acting under the orders of
Kúblái. The Chinese authorities in Gaubil and De Mailla speak
strongly of his oppressions, but only in general terms, and without
affording such particulars as we derive from the text.

The Hereditary Prince Chingkim was strongly adverse to Ahmad;
and some of the high Chinese officials on various occasions made
remonstrance against the Minister’s proceedings; but Kúblái turned
a deaf ear to them, and Ahmad succeeded in ruining most of his
opponents. (_Gaubil_, 141, 143, 151; _De Mailla_, IX. 316–317;
_D’Ohsson_, II. 468–469.)

[The Rev. W. S. Ament (_Marco Polo in Cambaluc_, 105) writes: “No
name is more execrated than that of Ah-ha-ma (called Achmath by
Polo), a Persian, who was chosen to manage the finances of the
Empire. He was finally destroyed by a combination against him while
the Khan was absent with Crown Prince Chen Chin, on a visit to
Shang Tu.” Achmath has his biography under the name of _A-ho-ma_
(Ahmed) in the ch. 205 of the _Yuen-shi_, under the rubric
“Villanous Ministers.” (_Bretschneider, Med. Res._ I. p. 272.)
—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—This term _Bailo_ was the designation of the representative
of Venetian dignity at Constantinople, called _Podestà_ during
the period of the Latin rule there, and it has endured throughout
the Turkish Empire to our own day in the form _Balios_ as the
designation of a Frank Consul. [There was also a Venetian _bailo_
in Syria.—H. C.] But that term itself could scarcely have been in
use at Cambaluc, even among the handful of Franks, to designate the
powerful Minister, and it looks as if Marco had confounded the word
in his own mind with some Oriental term of like sound, possibly
the Arabic _Wáli_, “a Prince, Governor of a Province, ... a chief
Magistrate.” (_F. Johnson._) In the _Roteiro_ of the Voyage of
Vasco da Gama (2nd ed. Lisbon, 1861, pp. 53–54) it is said that on
the arrival of the ships at Calicut the King sent “a man who was
called the _Bale_, which is much the same as _Alquaide_.” And the
Editor gives the same explanation that I have suggested.

I observe that according to Pandit Manphul the native governor
of Kashgar, under the Chinese Amban, used to be called the _Baili
Beg_. [In this case _Baili_ stands for _beilêh_.—H. C.] (_Panjab
Trade Report_, App. p. cccxxxvii.)

NOTE 4.—The story, as related in De Mailla and Gaubil, is as
follows. It contains much less detail than the text, and it differs
as to the manner of the chief conspirator’s death, whilst agreeing
as to his name and the main facts of the episode.

In the spring of 1282 (Gaubil, 1281) Kúblái and Prince Chingkim
had gone off as usual to Shangtu, leaving Ahmad in charge at the
Capital. The whole country was at heart in revolt against his
oppressions. Kúblái alone knew, or would know, nothing of them.

WANGCHU, a chief officer of the city, resolved to take the
opportunity of delivering the Empire from such a curse, and was
joined in his enterprise by a certain sorcerer called Kao Hoshang.
They sent two Lamas to the Council Board with a message that the
Crown Prince was returning to the Capital to take part in certain
Buddhist ceremonies, but no credit was given to this. Wangchu then,
pretending to have received orders from the Prince, desired an
officer called CHANG-Y (perhaps the Chenchu of Polo’s narrative)
to go in the evening with a guard of honour to receive him. Late
at night a message was sent to summon the Ministers, as the Prince
(it was pretended) had already arrived. They came in haste with
Ahmad at their head, and as he entered the Palace Wangchu struck
him heavily with a copper mace and stretched him dead. Wangchu
was arrested, or according to one account surrendered, though he
might easily have escaped, confident that the Crown Prince would
save his life. Intelligence was sent off to Kúblái, who received
it at Chaghan-Nor. (See Book I. ch. lx.) He immediately despatched
officers to arrest the guilty and bring them to justice. Wangchu,
Chang-y, and Kao Hoshang were publicly executed at the Old City;
Wangchu dying like a hero, and maintaining that he had done the
Empire an important service which would yet be acknowledged. (_De
Mailla_, IX. 412–413; _Gaubil_, 193–194; _D’Ohsson_, II. 470.) [Cf.
_G. Phillips_, in _T’oung-Pao_, I. p. 220.—H. C.]

NOTE 5.—And it is a pleasant fact that Messer Marco’s presence, and
his upright conduct upon this occasion, have not been forgotten in
the Chinese Annals: “The Emperor having returned from Chaghan-Nor
to Shangtu, desired POLO, Assessor of the Privy Council, to explain
the reasons which had led Wangchu to commit this murder. Polo spoke
with boldness of the crimes and oppressions of Ahama (Ahmad), which
had rendered him an object of detestation throughout the Empire.
The Emperor’s eyes were opened, and he praised the courage of
Wangchu. He complained that those who surrounded him, in abstaining
from admonishing him of what was going on, had thought more of
their fear of displeasing the Minister than of the interests of
the State.” By Kúblái’s order, the body of Ahmad was taken up, his
head was cut off and publicly exposed, and his body cast to the
dogs. His son also was put to death with all his family, and his
immense wealth confiscated. 714 persons were punished, one way or
other, for their share in Ahmad’s malversations. (_De Mailla_, IX.
413–414.)

What is said near the end of this chapter about the Kaan’s
resentment against the Saracens has some confirmation in
circumstances related by Rashiduddin. The refusal of some Mussulman
merchants, on a certain occasion at Court, to eat of the dishes
sent them by the Emperor, gave great offence, and led to the
revival of an order of Chinghiz, which prohibited, under pain
of death, the slaughter of animals by cutting their throats.
This endured for seven years, and was then removed on the strong
representation made to Kúblái of the loss caused by the cessation
of the visits of the Mahomedan merchants. On a previous occasion
also the Mahomedans had incurred disfavour, owing to the ill-will
of certain Christians, who quoted to Kúblái a text of the Koran
enjoining the killing of polytheists. The Emperor sent for the
Mullahs, and asked them why they did not act on the Divine
injunction? All they could say was that the time was not yet come!
Kúblái ordered them for execution, and was only appeased by the
intercession of Ahmad, and the introduction of a divine with
more tact, who smoothed over obnoxious applications of the text.
(_D’Ohsson_, II. 492–493.)

CHAPTER XXIV.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSETH THE BARK OF TREES, MADE INTO SOMETHING
LIKE PAPER, TO PASS FOR MONEY OVER ALL HIS COUNTRY.

Now that I have told you in detail of the splendour of this City of the
Emperor’s, I shall proceed to tell you of the Mint which he hath in
the same city, in the which he hath his money coined and struck, as I
shall relate to you. And in doing so I shall make manifest to you how
it is that the Great Lord may well be able to accomplish even much more
than I have told you, or am going to tell you, in this Book. For, tell
it how I might, you never would be satisfied that I was keeping within
truth and reason!

The Emperor’s Mint then is in this same City of Cambaluc, and the way
it is wrought is such that you might say he hath the Secret of Alchemy
in perfection, and you would be right! For he makes his money after
this fashion.

He makes them take of the bark of a certain tree, in fact of the
Mulberry Tree, the leaves of which are the food of the silkworms,—these
trees being so numerous that whole districts are full of them. What
they take is a certain fine white bast or skin which lies between the
wood of the tree and the thick outer bark, and this they make into
something resembling sheets of paper, but black. When these sheets
have been prepared they are cut up into pieces of different sizes. The
smallest of these sizes is worth a half tornesel; the next, a little
larger, one tornesel; one, a little larger still, is worth half a
silver groat of Venice; another a whole groat; others yet two groats,
five groats, and ten groats. There is also a kind worth one Bezant of
gold, and others of three Bezants, and so up to ten. All these pieces
of paper are [issued with as much solemnity and authority as if they
were of pure gold or silver; and on every piece a variety of officials,
whose duty it is, have to write their names, and to put their seals.
And when all is prepared duly, the chief officer deputed by the Kaan
smears the Seal entrusted to him with vermilion, and impresses it on
the paper, so that the form of the Seal remains printed upon it in red;
the Money is then authentic. Any one forging it would be punished with
death.] And the Kaan causes every year to be made such a vast quantity
of this money, which costs him nothing, that it must equal in amount
all the treasure in the world.

With these pieces of paper, made as I have described, he causes
all payments on his own account to be made; and he makes them to
pass current universally over all his kingdoms and provinces and
territories, and whithersoever his power and sovereignty extends. And
nobody, however important he may think himself, dares to refuse them on
pain of death. And indeed everybody takes them readily, for wheresoever
a person may go throughout the Great Kaan’s dominions he shall find
these pieces of paper current, and shall be able to transact all
sales and purchases of goods by means of them just as well as if they
were coins of pure gold. And all the while they are so light that ten
bezants’ worth does not weigh one golden bezant.

Furthermore all merchants arriving from India or other countries, and
bringing with them gold or silver or gems and pearls, are prohibited
from selling to any one but the Emperor. He has twelve experts chosen
for this business, men of shrewdness and experience in such affairs;
these appraise the articles, and the Emperor then pays a liberal price
for them in those pieces of paper. The merchants accept his price
readily, for in the first place they would not get so good an one from
anybody else, and secondly they are paid without any delay. And with
this paper-money they can buy what they like anywhere over the Empire,
whilst it is also vastly lighter to carry about on their journeys. And
it is a truth that the merchants will several times in the year bring
wares to the amount of 400,000 bezants, and the Grand Sire pays for
all in that paper. So he buys such a quantity of those precious things
every year that his treasure is endless, whilst all the time the money
he pays away costs him nothing at all. Moreover, several times in the
year proclamation is made through the city that any one who may have
gold or silver or gems or pearls, by taking them to the Mint shall get
a handsome price for them. And the owners are glad to do this, because
they would find no other purchaser give so large a price. Thus the
quantity they bring in is marvellous, though these who do not choose to
do so may let it alone. Still, in this way, nearly all the valuables in
the country come into the Kaan’s possession.

When any of those pieces of paper are spoilt—not that they are so very
flimsy neither—the owner carries them to the Mint, and by paying three
per cent. on the value he gets new pieces in exchange. And if any
Baron, or any one else soever, hath need of gold or silver or gems or
pearls, in order to make plate, or girdles, or the like, he goes to the
Mint and buys as much as he list, paying in this paper-money.{1}

Now you have heard the ways and means whereby the Great Kaan may have,
and in fact _has_, more treasure than all the Kings in the World; and
you know all about it and the reason why. And now I will tell you of
the great Dignitaries which act in this city on behalf of the Emperor.

NOTE 1.—It is surprising to find that, nearly two centuries ago,
Magaillans, a missionary who had lived many years in China, and
was presumably a Chinese scholar, should have utterly denied the
truth of Polo’s statements about the paper-currency of China. Yet
the fact even then did not rest on Polo’s statement only. The
same thing had been alleged in the printed works of Rubruquis,
Roger Bacon, Hayton, Friar Odoric, the Archbishop of Soltania, and
Josaphat Barbaro, to say nothing of other European authorities that
remained in manuscript, or of the numerous Oriental records of the
same circumstance.

The issue of paper-money in China is at least as old as the
beginning of the 9th century. In 1160 the system had gone to
such excess that government paper equivalent in nominal value to
43,600,000 ounces of silver had been issued in six years, and there
were local notes besides; so that the Empire was flooded with
rapidly depreciating paper.

The _Kin_ or “Golden” Dynasty of Northern Invaders who immediately
preceded the Mongols took to paper, in spite of their title, as
kindly as the native sovereigns. Their notes had a course of seven
years, after which new notes were issued to the holders, with a
deduction of 15 per cent.

The Mongols commenced their issues of paper-money in 1236, long
before they had transferred the seat of their government to China.
Kúblái made such an issue in the first year of his reign (1260),
and continued to issue notes copiously till the end. In 1287 he
put out a complete new currency, one note of which was to exchange
against _five_ of the previous series of equal nominal value!
In both issues the paper-money was, in official valuation, only
equivalent to half its nominal value in silver; a circumstance not
very easy to understand. The paper-money was called _Chao_.

The notes of Kúblái’s first issue (1260–1287) with which Polo may be
supposed most familiar, were divided into three classes; (1) _Notes
of Tens_, viz. of 10, 20, 30, and 50 _tsien_ or cash; (2) _Notes
of Hundreds_, viz. of 100, 200, and 500 _tsien_; and (3) _Notes of
Strings_ or _Thousands_ of cash, or in other words of _Liangs_ or
ounces of silver (otherwise _Tael_), viz. of 1000 and 2000 _tsien_.
There were also notes printed on silk for 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 ounces
each, valued at par in silver, but these would not circulate. In
1275, it should be mentioned, there had been a supplementary issue
of small notes for 2, 3, and 5 cash each.

Marsden states an equation between Marco’s values of the Notes and
the actual Chinese currency, to which Biot seems to assent. I doubt
its correctness, for his assumed values of the groat or _grosso_
and tornesel are surely wrong. The grosso ran at that time 18 to
the gold ducat or sequin, and allowing for the then higher relative
value of silver, should have contained about 5_d._ of silver. The
ducat was also equivalent to 2 _lire_, and the _tornese_ (_Romanin_,
III. 343) was 4 deniers. Now the denier is always, I believe ¹⁄₂₄₀
of the _líra_. Hence the _tornese_ would be ⁹⁄₆₀ of the _grosso_.

But we are not to look for _exact_ correspondences, when we see
Polo applying round figures in European coinage to Chinese currency.

[Illustration: Bank-Note of the Ming Dynasty.]

His bezant notes, I agree with Marsden, here represent the
Chinese notes for one and more ounces of silver. And here the
correspondence of value is much nearer than it seems at first
sight. The Chinese _liang_ or ounce of silver is valued commonly
at 6_s._ 7_d._, say roundly 80_d._[1] But the relation of gold
and silver in civilized Asia was then (see ch. I. note 4, and
also _Cathay_, pp. ccl. and 442) as 10 to 1, not, as with us now,
more than 15 to 1. Wherefore the _liang_ in relation to gold would
be worth 120_d._ or 10_s._, a little over the Venetian ducat and
somewhat less than the bezant or dínár. We shall then find the
table of Chinese issues, as compared with Marco’s equivalents, to
stand thus:—

CHINESE ISSUES, AS RECORDED. MARCO POLO’S STATEMENT.

For 10 ounces of silver (viz. . }
the Chinese _Ting_)[2] . . } 10 bezants.

For 1 ounce of silver, _i.e._ 1 _liang_,}
or 1000 _tsien_ (cash) } 1 „

For 500 _tsien_ . . . . 10 groats.
200 „ . . . . . 5 „ (should have been 4).
100 „ . . . . . 2 „
50 „ . . . . . 1 „
30 „ . . . . . ½ „ (but the proportionate
equivalent of half a
groat would be 25
_tsien_).
20 „ . . . . .
10 „ . . . . . 1 tornesel (but the
proportionate
equivalent would be 7½
_tsien_).
5 „ . . . . . ½ „ (but prop. equivalent
3¾ _tsien_).

Pauthier has given from the Chinese Annals of the Mongol Dynasty a
complete Table of the Issues of Paper-Money during every year of
Kúblái’s reign (1260–1294), estimated at their nominal value in
_Ting_ or tens of silver ounces. The lowest issue was in 1269, of
228,960 _ounces_, which at the rate of 120_d._ to the ounce (see
above) = 114,480_l._, and the highest was in 1290, viz. 50,002,500
ounces, equivalent at the same estimate to 25,001,250_l._! whilst
the total amount in the 34 years was 249,654,290 ounces or
124,827,144_l._ in nominal value. Well might Marco speak of the
vast quantity of such notes that the Great Kaan issued annually!

To complete the history of the Chinese paper-currency so far as we
can:

In 1309, a new issue took place with the same provision as in
Kúblái’s issue of 1287, _i.e._ each note of the new issue was to
exchange against 5 of the old of the same nominal value. And it was
at the same time prescribed that the notes should exchange at par
with metals, which of course it was beyond the power of Government
to enforce, and so the notes were abandoned. Issues continued from
time to time to the end of the Mongol Dynasty. The paper-currency
is spoken of by Odoric (1320–30), by Pegolotti (1330–40), and by
Ibn Batuta (1348), as still the chief, if not sole, currency of the
Empire. According to the Chinese authorities, the credit of these
issues was constantly diminishing, as it is easy to suppose. But
it is odd that all the Western Travellers speak as if the notes
were as good as gold. Pegolotti, writing for mercantile men, and
from the information (as we may suppose) of mercantile men, says
explicitly that there was no depreciation.

The Ming Dynasty for a time carried on the system of paper-money;
with the difference that while under the Mongols no other currency
had been admitted, their successors made payments in notes, but
accepted only hard cash from their people![3] In 1448 the _chao_ of
1000 cash was worth but 3. Barbaro still heard talk of the Chinese
paper-currency from travellers whom he met at Azov about this time;
but after 1455 there is said to be no more mention of it in Chinese
history.

I have never heard of the preservation of any note of the Mongols;
but some of the Ming survive, and are highly valued as curiosities
in China. The late Sir G. T. Staunton appears to have possessed
one; Dr. Lockhart formerly had two, of which he gave one to Sir
Harry Parkes, and retains the other. The paper is so dark as to
explain Marco’s description of it as black. By Dr. Lockhart’s
kindness I am enabled to give a reduced representation of this
note, as near a facsimile as we have been able to render it, but
with some _restoration_, _e.g._ of the _seals_, of which on the
original there is the barest indication remaining.

[Mr. Vissering (_Chinese Currency_, Addenda, I.–III.) gives a
facsimile and a description of a Chinese banknote of the Ming
Dynasty belonging to the collection of the Asiatic Museum of the
Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg. “In the eighth year of the
period _Hung-wu_ (1375), the Emperor Tai-tsu issued an order to
his minister of finances to make the _Pao-tsao_ (precious bills)
of the _Ta-Ming_ Dynasty, and to employ as raw material for the
composition of those bills the fibres of the mulberry tree.”—H. C.]

Notwithstanding the disuse of Government issues of paper-money
from that time till recent years, there had long been in some of
the cities of China a large use of private and local promissory
notes as currency. In Fuchau this was especially the case; bullion
was almost entirely displaced, and the banking-houses in that city
were counted by hundreds. These were under no government control;
any individual or company having sufficient capital or credit
could establish a bank and issue their bills, which varied in
amount from 100 cash to 1000 dollars. Some fifteen years ago the
Imperial Government seems to have been induced by the exhausted
state of the Treasury, and these large examples of the local use
of paper-currency, to consider projects for resuming that system
after the disuse of four centuries. A curious report by a Committee
of the Imperial Supreme Council, on a project for such a currency,
appears among the papers published by the Russian Mission at
Peking. It is unfavourable to the particular project, but we gather
from other sources that the Government not long afterwards did
open banks in the large cities of the Empire for the issue of a
new paper-currency, but that it met with bad success. At Fuchau,
in 1858, I learn from one notice, the dollar was worth from 18,000
to 20,000 cash in Government Bills. Dr. Rennie, in 1861, speaks of
the dollar at Peking as valued at 15,000, and later at 25,000 paper
cash. Sushun, the Regent, had issued a vast number of notes through
banks of his own in various parts of Peking. These he failed to
redeem, causing the failure of all the banks, and great consequent
commotion in the city. The Regent had led the Emperor [Hien Fung]
systematically into debauched habits which ended in paralysis. On
the Emperor’s death the Empress caused the arrest and execution of
Sushun. His conduct in connection with the bank failures was so
bitterly resented that when the poor wretch was led to execution
(8th November, 1861), as I learn from an eye-witness, the defrauded
creditors lined the streets and cheered.[4]

The Japanese also had a paper-currency in the 14th century. It
is different in form from that of China. That figured by Siebold
is a strip of strong paper doubled, 6¼ in. long by 1¾ in. wide,
bearing a representation of the tutelary god of riches, with long
inscriptions in Chinese characters, seals in black and red, and an
indication of value in ancient Japanese characters. I do not learn
whether notes of considerable amount are still used in Japan; but
Sir R. Alcock speaks of banknotes for small change from 30 to 500
cash and more, as in general use in the interior.

Two notable and disastrous attempts to imitate the Chinese system
of currency took place in the Middle Ages; one of them in Persia,
apparently in Polo’s very presence, the other in India some 36
years later.

The first was initiated in 1294 by the worthless Kaikhatu
Khan, when his own and his ministers’ extravagance had emptied
the Treasury, on the suggestion of a financial officer called
’Izzuddín Muzaffar. The notes were direct copies of Kúblái’s,
even the Chinese characters being imitated as part of the device
upon them.[5] The Chinese name _Chao_ was applied to them, and
the Mongol Resident at Tabriz, Pulad Chingsang, was consulted in
carrying out the measure. Expensive preparations were made for this
object; offices called _Cháo-Khánahs_ were erected in the principal
cities of the provinces, and a numerous staff appointed to carry
out the details. Ghazan Khan in Khorasan, however, would have none
of it, and refused to allow any of these preparations to be made
within his government. After the constrained use of the Chao for
two or three days Tabriz was in an uproar; the markets were closed;
the people rose and murdered ’Izzuddín; and the whole project had
to be abandoned. Marco was in Persia at this time, or just before,
and Sir John Malcolm not unnaturally suggests that he might have
had something to do with the scheme; a suggestion which excites a
needless commotion in the breast of M. Pauthier. We may draw from
the story the somewhat notable conclusion that _Block-printing_ was
practised, at least for this one purpose, at Tabriz in 1294.

The other like enterprise was that of Sultan Mahomed Tughlak of
Delhi, in 1330–31. This also was undertaken for like reasons,
and was in professed imitation of the Chao of Cathay. Mahomed,
however, used copper tokens instead of paper; the copper being
made apparently of equal weight to the gold or silver coin which
it represented. The system seems to have had a little more vogue
than at Tabriz, but was speedily brought to an end by the ease with
which forgeries on an enormous scale were practised. The Sultan, in
hopes of reviving the credit of his currency, ordered that every
one bringing copper tokens to the Treasury should have them cashed
in gold or silver. “The people who in despair had flung aside their
copper coins like stones and bricks in their houses, all rushed to
the Treasury and exchanged them for gold and silver. In this way
the Treasury soon became empty, but the copper coins had as little
circulation as ever, and a very grievous blow was given to the
State.”

An odd issue of currency, not of paper, but of leather, took place
in Italy a few years before Polo’s birth. The Emperor Frederic
II., at the siege of Faenza in 1241, being in great straits for
money, issued pieces of leather stamped with the mark of his mint
at the value of his Golden Augustals. This leather coinage was very
popular, especially at Florence, and it was afterwards honourably
redeemed by Frederic’s Treasury. Popular tradition in Sicily
reproaches William the Bad among his other sins with having issued
money of leather, but any stone is good enough to cast at a dog
with such a surname.

[Ma Twan-lin mentions that in the fourth year of the period Yuen
Show (B.C. 119), a currency of white metal and _deer-skin_ was
made. Mr. Vissering (_Chinese Currency_, 38) observes that the
skin-tallies “were purely tokens, and have had nothing in common
with the leather-money, which was, during a long time, current
in Russia. This Russian skin-money had a truly representative
character, as the parcels were used instead of the skins from which
they were cut; the skins themselves being too bulky and heavy to be
constantly carried backward and forward, only a little piece was
cut off, to figure as a token of possession of the whole skin. The
ownership of the skin was proved when the piece fitted in the hole.”

Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 201 note) says: “As early as B.C. 118,
we find the Chinese using ‘leather-money’ (_p’i pi_). These were
pieces of white deer-skin, a foot square, with a coloured border.
Each had a value of 40,000 cash. (_Ma Twan-lin_, Bk. 8, 5.)”

Mr. Charles F. Keary (_Coins and Medals_, by S. Lane Poole, 128)
mentions that “in the reign of Elizabeth there was a very extensive
issue of private tokens in lead, tin, latten, and _leather_.”—H. C.]

(_Klapr._ in _Mém. Rel. à l’Asie_, I. 375 _seqq._; _Biot_, in
_J. As._ sér. III. tom. iv.; _Marsden_ and _Pauthier_, in loco;
_Parkes_, in _J. R. A. S._ XIII. 179; _Doolittle_, 452 _seqq._;
_Wylie, J. of Shanghai Lit. and Scient. Soc._ No. I.; _Arbeiten
der kais. russ. Gesandsch. zu Peking_, I. p. 48; _Rennie,
Peking_, etc., I. 296, 347; _Birch_, in. _Num. Chron._ XII. 169;
Information from _Dr. Lockhart_; _Alcock_, II. 86; _D’Ohsson_, IV.
53; _Cowell_, in _J. A. S. B._ XXIX. 183 _seqq._; _Thomas, Coins
of Patan Sovs. of Hind._, (from _Numism. Chron._ 1852), p. 139
_seqq._; _Kington’s Fred. II._ II. 195; _Amari_, III. 816; _W.
Vissering, On Chinese Currency_, Leiden, 1877.)

[“Without doubt the Mongols borrowed the bank-note system from the
Kin. Up to the present time there is in Si-ngan-fu a block kept,
which was used for printing the bank-notes of the Kin Dynasty. I
have had the opportunity of seeing a print of those bank-notes,
they were of the same size and shape as the bank-notes of the Ming.
A reproduction of the text of the Kin bank-notes is found in the
_Kin shi ts’ui pien_. This copy has the characters _pao küan_
(precious charter) and the years of reign _Chêng Yew_, 1213–1216.
The first essay of the Mongols to introduce bank-notes dates from
the time of Ogodai Khan (1229–1242), but Chinese history only
mentions the fact without giving details. At that time silk in
skeins was the only article of a determinate value in the trade
and on the project of _Ye lü ch’u ts’ai_, minister of Ogodai, the
taxes were also collected in silk delivered by weight. It can
therefore be assumed that the name _sze ch’ao_ (_i.e._ bank-notes
referring to the weight of silk) dates back to the same time.
At any rate, at a later time, as, under the reign of Kubilai,
the issuing of banknotes was decreed, silk was taken as the
standard to express the value of silver and 1000 _liang_ silk was
estimated = 50 _liang_ (or 1 _ting_) silver. Thus, in consequence
of those measures, it gradually became a rule to transfer the
taxes and rents originally paid in silk, into silver. The wealth
of the Mongol Khans in precious metals was renowned. The accounts
regarding their revenues, however, which we meet with occasionally
in Chinese history, do not surprise by their vastness. In the year
1298, for instance, the amount of the revenue is stated in the _Siu
t’ung Kien_ to have been:—

19,000 _liang_ of gold = (190,000 _liang_ of silver, according to
the exchange of that time at the rate of 1 to 10).

60,000 _liang_ of silver.

3,600,000 _ting_ of silver in bank-notes (_i.e._ 180 millions
_liang_); altogether 180,250,000 _liang_ of silver.

The number seems indeed very high for that time. But if the
exceedingly low exchange of the bank-notes be taken into
consideration, the sum will be reduced to a modest amount.”
(_Palladius_, pp. 50–51.)—H. C.]

[Dr. Bretschneider (_Hist. Bot. Disc._, I. p. 4) makes the
following remark:—“Polo states (I. 409) that the Great Kaan causeth
the bark of great Mulberry-trees, made into something like paper,
to pass for money.” He seems to be mistaken. Paper in China is not
made from mulberry-trees but from the _Broussonetia papyrifera_,
which latter tree belongs to the same order of Moraceae. The same
fibres are used also in some parts of China for making cloth, and
Marco Polo alludes probably to the same tree when stating (II.
108) “that in the province of Cuiju (Kwei chau) they manufacture
stuff of the bark of certain trees, which form very fine summer
clothing.”—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Even now there are at least eight different _taels_ (or liangs) in
extensive use over the Empire, and varying as much as from 96 to
106; and besides these are many local _taels_, with about the same
limits of variation.—(_Williamson’s Journeys_, I. 60.)

[2] [The Archimandrite Palladius (_l.c._, p. 50, note) says that “the
_ting_ of the Mongol time, as well as during the reign of the Kin,
was a unit of weight equivalent to fifty _liang_, but not to ten
_liang_. Cf. _Ch’u keng lu_, and _Yuen-shi_, ch. xcv. The _Yuen
pao_, which as everybody in China knows, is equivalent to fifty
_liang_ (taels) of silver, is the same as the ancient _ting_,
and the character _Yuen_ indicates that it dates from the _Yuen_
Dynasty.”—H. C.]

[3] This is also, as regards Customs payments, the system of the
Government of modern Italy.

[4] The first edition of this work gave a facsimile of one of this
unlucky minister’s notes.

[5] On both sides, however, was the Mahomedan formula, and beneath
that the words _Yiranjín Túrjí_, a title conferred on the kings of
Persia by the Kaan. There was also an inscription to the following
effect: that the Emperor in the year 693 (A.H.) had issued these
auspicious _chao_, that all who forged or uttered false notes
should be summarily punished, with their wives and children, and
their property confiscated; and that when these auspicious notes
were once in circulation, poverty would vanish, provisions become
cheap, and rich and poor be equal (_Cowell_). The use of the term
_chao_ at Tabriz may be compared with that of _Bănklōt_, current in
modern India.

CHAPTER XXV.

CONCERNING THE TWELVE BARONS WHO ARE SET OVER ALL THE
AFFAIRS OF THE GREAT KAAN.

You must know that the Great Kaan hath chosen twelve great Barons to
whom he hath committed all the necessary affairs of thirty-four great
provinces; and now I will tell you particulars about them and their
establishments.

You must know that these twelve Barons reside all together in a very
rich and handsome palace, which is inside the city of Cambaluc, and
consists of a variety of edifices, with many suites of apartments. To
every province is assigned a judge and several clerks, and all reside
in this palace, where each has his separate quarters. These judges and
clerks administer all the affairs of the provinces to which they are
attached, under the direction of the twelve Barons. Howbeit, when an
affair is of very great importance, the twelve Barons lay in before
the Emperor, and he decides as he thinks best. But the power of those
twelve Barons is so great that they choose the governors for all those
thirty-four great provinces that I have mentioned, and only after
they have chosen do they inform the Emperor of their choice. This he
confirms, and grants to the person nominated a tablet of gold such as
is appropriate to the rank of his government.

Those twelve Barons also have such authority that they can dispose
of the movements of the forces, and send them whither, and in such
strength, as they please. This is done indeed with the Emperor’s
cognizance, but still the orders are issued on their authority. They
are styled SHIENG, which is as much as to say “The Supreme Court,”
and the palace where they abide is also called _Shieng_. This body
forms the highest authority at the Court of the Great Kaan; and indeed
they can favour and advance whom they will. I will not now name the
thirty-four provinces to you, because they will be spoken of in detail
in the course of this Book.{1}

NOTE 1.—Pauthier’s extracts from the Chinese Annals of the Dynasty,
in illustration of this subject, are interesting. These, as he
represents them, show the Council of Ministers usually to have
consisted of twelve high officials, viz.: two _Ch’ing-siang_
[丞 相] or (chief) ministers of state, one styled, “of the
Right,” and the other “of the Left”; four called _P’ing-chang
ching-ssé_, which seems to mean something like ministers in charge
of special departments; four assistant ministers; two Counsellors.

Rashiduddin, however, limits the Council to the first two
classes: “Strictly speaking, the Council of State is composed of
four Ch’ing-sang (_Ch’ing-siang_) or great officers (_Wazírs_
he afterwards terms them), and four Fanchán (_P’ing-chang_)
or associated members, taken from the nations of the Tajiks,
Cathayans, Ighurs, and Arkaun” (_i.e._ Nestorian Christians).
(Compare p. 418, _supra_.)

[A Samarkand man, Seyyd Tadj Eddin Hassan ben el Khallal, quoted in
the _Masálak al Absár_, says: “Near the Khan are two amírs who are
his ministers; they are called _Djing San_ جينكصان (Ch’ing-siang).
After them come the two _Bidjan_ بجان (P’ing Chang), then the two
_Zoudjin_ زوجين (Tso Chen), then the two _Yudjin_ يوجين (Yu Chen),
and at last the _Landjun_ لنجون (Lang Chang), head of the scribes,
and secretary of the sovereign. The Khan holds a sitting every
day in the middle of a large building called _Chen_ شن (Sheng),
which is very like our Palace of Justice.” (_C. Schefer, Cent. Ec.
Langues Or._, pp. 18–19.)—H. C.]

In a later age we find the twelve Barons reappearing in the
pages of Mendoza: “The King hath in this city of Tabin (Peking),
where he is resident, a royal council of twelve counsellors and
a president, chosen men throughout all the kingdom, and such as
have had experience in government many years.” And also in the
early centuries of the Christian era we hear that the Khan of the
Turks had his twelve grandees, divided into those of the Right and
those of the Left, probably a copy from a Chinese order then also
existing.

But to return to Rashiduddin: “As the Kaan generally resides
at the capital, he has erected a place for the sittings of the
Great Council, called _Sing_.... The dignitaries mentioned above
are expected to attend daily at the Sing, and to make themselves
acquainted with all that passes there.”

The _Sing_ of Rashid is evidently the Shieng or Sheng (_Scieng_) of
Polo. M. Pauthier is on this point somewhat contemptuous towards
Neumann, who, he says, confounds Marco Polo’s twelve Barons or
Ministers of State with the chiefs of the twelve great provincial
governments called _Sing_, who had their residence at the chief
cities of those governments; whilst in fact Polo’s _Scieng_ (he
asserts) has nothing to do with the _Sing_, but represents the
Chinese word _Siang_ “a minister,” and “the office of a minister.”
[There was no doubt a confusion between _Siang_ 相 and _Sheng_
省.—H. C.]

It is very probable that two different words, _Siang_ and _Sing_,
got confounded by the non-Chinese attachés of the Imperial Court;
but it seems to me quite certain that they applied the same word,
Sing or Sheng, to both institutions, viz. to the High Council
of State, and to the provincial governments. It also looks as
if Marco Polo himself had made that very confusion with which
Pauthier charges Neumann. For whilst here he represents the
twelve Barons as forming a Council of State at the capital, we
find further on, when speaking of the city of Yangchau, he says:
“_Et si siet en ceste cité uns des xii Barons du Grant Kaan; car
elle est esleue pour un des xii sieges_,” where the last word is
probably a mistranscription of _Sciengs_, or _Sings_, and in any
case the reference is to a distribution of the empire into twelve
governments.

To be convinced that _Sing_ was used by foreigners in the double
sense that I have said, we have only to proceed with Rashiduddin’s
account of the administration. After what we have already quoted,
he goes on: “The _Sing_ of Khanbaligh is the most eminent, and the
building is very large.... _Sings_ do not exist in all the cities,
but only in the capitals of great provinces.... In the whole empire
of the Kaan there are twelve of these Sings; but that of Khanbaligh
is the only one which has Ching-sangs amongst its members.” Wassáf
again, after describing the greatness of Khanzai (Kinsay of Polo)
says: “These circumstances characterize the capital itself, but
four hundred cities of note, and embracing ample territories,
are dependent on its jurisdiction, insomuch that the most
inconsiderable of those cities surpasses Baghdad and Shiraz. In
the number of these cities are Lankinfu and Zaitun, and Chinkalán;
for they call Khanzai a _Shing_, _i.e._ a great city in which the
high and mighty Council of Administration holds its meetings.”
Friar Odoric again says: “This empire hath been divided by the Lord
thereof into twelve parts, each one thereof is termed a Singo.”

Polo, it seems evident to me, knew nothing of Chinese. His _Shieng_
is no direct attempt to represent _any_ Chinese word, but simply
the term that he had been used to employ in talking Persian or
Turki, in the way that Rashiduddin and Wassáf employ it.

I find no light as to the thirty-four provinces into which Polo
represents the empire as divided, unless it be an enumeration of
the provinces and districts which he describes in the second and
third parts of Bk. II., of which it is not difficult to reckon
thirty-three or thirty-four, but not worth while to repeat the
calculation.

[China was then divided into twelve _Sheng_ or provinces:
Cheng-Tung, Liao-Yang, Chung-Shu, Shen-Si, Ling-Pe (Karakorum),
Kan-Suh, Sze-ch’wan, Ho-Nan Kiang-Pe, Kiang-Ché, Kiang-Si, Hu-Kwang
and Yun-Nan. Rashiduddin (_J. As._, XI. 1883, p. 447) says that of
the twelve Sing, Khanbaligh was the only one with _Chin-siang_. We
read in _Morrison’s Dict._ (Pt. II. vol. i. p. 70): “Chin-seang, a
Minister of State, was so called under the Ming Dynasty.” According
to Mr. E. H. Parker (_China Review_, xxiv. p. 101), _Ching Siang_
were abolished in 1395. I imagine that the thirty-four provinces
refer to the _Fu_ cities, which numbered however _thirty-nine_,
according to _Oxenham’s Historical Atlas_.—H. C.]

(_Cathay_, 263 _seqq._ and 137; _Mendoza_, I. 96; _Erdmann_, 142;
_Hammer’s Wassáf_, p. 42, but corrected.)

CHAPTER XXVI.

HOW THE KAAN’S POSTS AND RUNNERS ARE SPED THROUGH MANY
LANDS AND PROVINCES.

Now you must know that from this city of Cambaluc proceed many
roads and highways leading to a variety of provinces, one to one
province, another to another; and each road receives the name of the
province to which it leads; and it is a very sensible plan.{1} And
the messengers of the Emperor in travelling from Cambaluc, be the
road whichsoever they will, find at every twenty-five miles of the
journey a station which they call _Yamb_,{2} or, as we should say,
the “Horse-Post-House.” And at each of those stations used by the
messengers, there is a large and handsome building for them to put up
at, in which they find all the rooms furnished with fine beds and all
other necessary articles in rich silk, and where they are provided
with everything they can want. If even a king were to arrive at one of
these, he would find himself well lodged.

At some of these stations, moreover, there shall be posted some four
hundred horses standing ready for the use of the messengers; at others
there shall be two hundred, according to the requirements, and to
what the Emperor has established in each case. At every twenty-five
miles, as I said, or anyhow at every thirty miles, you find one of
these stations, on all the principal highways leading to the different
provincial governments; and the same is the case throughout all the
chief provinces subject to the Great Kaan.{3} Even when the messengers
have to pass through a roadless tract where neither house nor hostel
exists, still there the station-houses have been established just
the same, excepting that the intervals are somewhat greater, and the
day’s journey is fixed at thirty-five to forty-five miles, instead
of twenty-five to thirty. But they are provided with horses and all
the other necessaries just like those we have described, so that
the Emperor’s messengers, come they from what region they may, find
everything ready for them.

And in sooth this is a thing done on the greatest scale of magnificence
that ever was seen. Never had emperor, king, or lord, such wealth as
this manifests! For it is a fact that on all these posts taken together
there are more than 300,000 horses kept up, specially for the use of
the messengers. And the great buildings that I have mentioned are more
than 10,000 in number, all richly furnished, as I told you. The thing
is on a scale so wonderful and costly that it is hard to bring oneself
to describe it.{4}

But now I will tell you another thing that I had forgotten, but which
ought to be told whilst I am on this subject. You must know that by
the Great Kaan’s orders there has been established between those
post-houses, at every interval of three miles, a little fort with some
forty houses round about it, in which dwell the people who act as the
Emperor’s foot-runners. Every one of those runners wears a great wide
belt, set all over with bells, so that as they run the three miles from
post to post their bells are heard jingling a long way off. And thus
on reaching the post the runner finds another man similarly equipt,
and all ready to take his place, who instantly takes over whatsoever
he has in charge, and with it receives a slip of paper from the clerk,
who is always at hand for the purpose; and so the new man sets off and
runs his three miles. At the next station he finds his relief ready in
like manner; and so the post proceeds, with a change at every three
miles. And in this way the Emperor, who has an immense number of these
runners, receives despatches with news from places ten days’ journey
off in one day and night; or, if need be, news from a hundred days
off in ten days and nights; and that is no small matter! (In fact in
the fruit season many a time fruit shall be gathered one morning in
Cambaluc, and the evening of the next day it shall reach the Great Kaan
at Chandu, a distance of ten days’ journey.{5} The clerk at each of
the posts notes the time of each courier’s arrival and departure; and
there are often other officers whose business it is to make monthly
visitations of all the posts, and to punish those runners who have
been slack in their work.{6}) The Emperor exempts these men from all
tribute, and pays them besides.

Moreover, there are also at those stations other men equipt similarly
with girdles hung with bells, who are employed for expresses when
there is a call for great haste in sending despatches to any governor
of a province, or to give news when any Baron has revolted, or in
other such emergencies; and these men travel a good two hundred or two
hundred and fifty miles in the day, and as much in the night. I’ll tell
you how it stands. They take a horse from those at the station which
are standing ready saddled, all fresh and in wind, and mount and go at
full speed, as hard as they can ride in fact. And when those at the
next post hear the bells they get ready another horse and a man equipt
in the same way, and he takes over the letter or whatever it be, and is
off full-speed to the third station, where again a fresh horse is found
all ready, and so the despatch speeds along from post to post, always
at full gallop, with regular change of horses. And the speed at which
they go is marvellous. (By night, however, they cannot go so fast as by
day, because they have to be accompanied by footmen with torches, who
could not keep up with them at full speed.)

Those men are highly prized; and they could never do it, did they not
bind hard the stomach, chest and head with strong bands. And each of
them carries with him a gerfalcon tablet, in sign that he is bound on
an urgent express; so that if perchance his horse break down, or he
meet with other mishap, whomsoever he may fall in with on the road, he
is empowered to make him dismount and give up his horse. Nobody dares
refuse in such a case; so that the courier hath always a good fresh nag
to carry him.{7}

Now all these numbers of post-horses cost the Emperor nothing at all;
and I will tell you the how and the why. Every city, or village, or
hamlet, that stands near one of those post-stations, has a fixed demand
made on it for as many horses as it can supply, and these it must
furnish to the post. And in this way are provided all the posts of
the cities, as well as the towns and villages round about them; only
in uninhabited tracts the horses are furnished at the expense of the
Emperor himself.

(Nor do the cities maintain the full number, say of 400 horses, always
at their station, but month by month 200 shall be kept at the station,
and the other 200 at grass, coming in their turn to relieve the first
200. And if there chance to be some river or lake to be passed by the
runners and horse-posts, the neighbouring cities are bound to keep
three or four boats in constant readiness for the purpose.)

And now I will tell you of the great bounty exercised by the Emperor
towards his people twice a year.

NOTE 1.—The G. Text has “_et ce est mout sçue chouse_”; Pauthier’s
Text, “_mais il est moult celé_.” The latter seems absurd. I have no
doubt that _sçue_ is correct, and is an Italianism, _saputo_ having
sometimes the sense of prudent or judicious. Thus P. della Valle
(II. 26), speaking of Sháh Abbás: “_Ma noti V.S. i tiri di questo
re_, saputo insieme e bizzarro,” “acute with all his eccentricity.”

NOTE 2.—Both Neumann and Pauthier seek Chinese etymologies of this
Mongol word, which the Tartars carried with them all over Asia. It
survives in Persian and Turki in the senses both of a post-house
and a post-horse, and in Russia, in the former sense, is a relic
of the Mongol dominion. The ambassadors of Shah Rukh, on arriving
at Sukchu, were lodged in the _Yám-Khána_, or post-house, by the
city gate; and they found ninety-nine such Yams between Sukchu and
Khanbaligh, at each of which they were supplied with provisions,
servants, beds, night-clothes, etc. Odoric likewise speaks of the
hostelries called _Yam_, and Rubruquis applies the same term to
quarters in the imperial camp, which were assigned for the lodgment
of ambassadors. (_Cathay_, ccii., 137; _Rubr._ 310.)

[Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, 101, note) says that these post-stations
were established by Okkodai in 1234 throughout the Mongol empire.
(_D’Ohsson_, ii. 63.) Dr. G. Schlegel (_T’oung Pao_, II. 1891,
265, note) observes that _iam_ is not, as Pauthier supposed,
a contraction of _yi-mà_, horse post-house (_yi-mà_ means
post-horse, and Pauthier makes a mistake), but represents the
Chinese character 站, pronounced at present _chán_, which means
in fact a road station, a post. In Annamite, this character 站
is pronounced _trạm_, and it means, according to _Bonet’s Dict.
Annamite-Français_: “Relais de poste, station de repos.” (See
_Bretschneider, Med. Res._ I. p. 187 note.)—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—Martini and Magaillans, in the 17th century, give nearly
the same account of the government hostelries.

NOTE 4.—Here Ramusio has this digression: “Should any one find it
difficult to understand how there should be such a population as
all this implies, and how they can subsist, the answer is that all
the Idolaters, and Saracens as well, take six, eight, or ten wives
apiece when they can afford it, and beget an infinity of children.
In fact, you shall find many men who have each more than thirty
sons who form an armed retinue to their father, and this through
the fact of his having so many wives. With us, on the other hand,
a man hath but one wife; and if she be barren, still he must abide
by her for life, and have no progeny; thus we have not such a
population as they have.

“And as regards food, they have abundance; for they generally
consume rice, panic, and millet (especially the Tartars, Cathayans,
and people of Manzi); and these three crops in those countries
render an hundred-fold. Those nations use no bread, but only boil
those kinds of grain with milk or meat for their victual. Their
wheat, indeed, does not render so much, but this they use only to
make vermicelli, and pastes of that description. No spot of arable
land is left untilled; and their cattle are infinitely prolific, so
that when they take the field every man is followed by six, eight,
or more horses for his own use. Thus you may clearly perceive how
the population of those parts is so great, and how they have such
an abundance of food.”

NOTE 5.—The Burmese kings used to have the odoriferous _Durian_
transmitted by horse-posts from Tenasserim to Ava. But the most
notable example of the rapid transmission of such dainties, and the
nearest approach I know of to their despatch by telegraph, was that
practised for the benefit of the Fatimite Khalif Aziz (latter part
of 10th century), who had a great desire for a dish of cherries of
Balbek. The Wazir Yakub ben-Kilis caused six hundred pigeons to be
despatched from Balbek to Cairo, each of which carried attached to
either leg a small silk bag containing a cherry! (_Quat. Makrizi_,
IV. 118.)

NOTE 6.—“Note is taken at every post,” says Amyot, in speaking of
the Chinese practice of last century, “of the time of the courier’s
arrival, in order that it may be known at what point delays have
occurred.” (_Mém._ VIII. 185.)

NOTE 7.—The post-system is described almost exactly as in the text
by Friar Odoric and the Archbishop of Soltania, in the generation
after Polo, and very much in the same way by Magaillans in the
17th century. Posts had existed in China from an old date. They
are spoken of by Mas’udi and the _Relations_ of the 9th century.
They were also employed under the ancient Persian kings; and they
were in use in India, at least in the generation after Polo. The
Mongols, too, carried the institution wherever they went.

Polo describes the couriers as changed at short intervals, but more
usually in Asiatic posts the same man rides an enormous distance.
The express courier in Tibet, as described by “the Pandit,” rides
from Gartokh to Lhasa, a distance of 800 miles, travelling day and
night. The courier’s coat is _sealed_ upon him, so that he dares
not take off his clothes till the seal is officially broken on his
arrival at the terminus. These messengers had faces cracked, eyes
bloodshot and sunken, and bodies raw with vermin. (_J. R. G. S._
XXXVIII. p. 149.) The modern Turkish post from Constantinople to
Baghdad, a distance of 1100 miles, is done in twenty days by four
Tartars riding night and day. The changes are at Sivas, Diarbekir,
and Mosul. M. Tchihatcheff calculates that the night riding
accomplishes only one quarter of the whole. (_Asie Mineure_, 2ᵈᵉ
Ptie. 632–635.)—See I. p. 352, _paï tze_.

CHAPTER XXVII.

HOW THE EMPEROR BESTOWS HELP ON HIS PEOPLE, WHEN THEY
ARE AFFLICTED WITH DEARTH OR MURRAIN.

Now you must know that the Emperor sends his Messengers over all his
Lands and Kingdoms and Provinces, to ascertain from his officers if
the people are afflicted by any dearth through unfavourable seasons,
or storms or locusts, or other like calamity; and from those who have
suffered in this way no taxes are exacted for that year; nay more, he
causes them to be supplied with corn of his own for food and seed. Now
this is undoubtedly a great bounty on his part. And when winter comes,
he causes inquiry to be made as to those who have lost their cattle,
whether by murrain or other mishap, and such persons not only go scot
free, but get presents of cattle. And thus, as I tell you, the Lord
every year helps and fosters the people subject to him.

[There is another trait of the Great Kaan I should tell you; and that
is, that if a chance shot from his bow strike any herd or flock,
whether belonging to one person or to many, and however big the flock
may be, he takes no tithe thereof for three years. In like manner, if
the arrow strike a boat full of goods, that boat-load pays no duty;
for it is thought unlucky that an arrow strike any one’s property; and
the Great Kaan says it would be an abomination before God, were such
property, that has been struck by the divine wrath, to enter into his
Treasury.{1}]

NOTE 1.—The Chinese author already quoted as to Kúblái’s character
(Note 2, ch. xxiii. _supra_) says: “This Prince, at the sight
of some evil prognostic, or when there was dearth, would remit
taxation, and cause grain to be distributed to those who were
in destitution. He would often complain that there never lacked
informers if balances were due, or if _corvées_ had been ordered,
but when the necessities of the people required to be reported, not
a word was said.”

Wassáf tells a long story in illustration of Kúblái’s justice and
consideration for the peasantry. One of his sons, with a handful
of followers, had got separated from the army, and halted at a
village in the territory of Bishbaligh, where the people gave them
sheep and wine. Next year two of the party came the same way and
_demanded_ a sheep and a stoup of wine. The people gave it, but
went to the Kaan and told the story, saying they feared it might
grow into a perpetual exaction. Kúblái sharply rebuked the Prince,
and gave the people compensation and an order in their favour. (_De
Mailla_, ix. 460; _Hammer’s Wassaf_, 38–39.)]

CHAPTER XXVIII.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSES TREES TO BE PLANTED BY THE
HIGHWAYS.

The Emperor moreover hath taken order that all the highways travelled
by his messengers and the people generally should be planted with rows
of great trees a few paces apart; and thus these trees are visible
a long way off, and no one can miss the way by day or night. Even
the roads through uninhabited tracts are thus planted, and it is the
greatest possible solace to travellers. And this is done on all the
ways, where it can be of service. [The Great Kaan plants these trees
all the more readily, because his astrologers and diviners tell him
that he who plants trees lives long.{1}

But where the ground is so sandy and desert that trees will not grow,
he causes other landmarks, pillars or stones, to be set up to show the
way.]

NOTE 1.—In this Kúblái imitated the great King Asoka, or
Priyadarsi, who in his graven edicts (_circa_ B.C. 250) on the Delhi
Pillar, says: “Along the high roads I have caused fig-trees to be
planted, that they may be for shade to animals and men. I have
also planted mango-trees; and at every half-coss I have caused
wells to be constructed, and resting-places for the night. And how
many hostels have been erected by me at various places for the
entertainment of man and beast.” (_J. A. S. B._ IV. 604.) There are
still remains of the fine avenues of Kúblái and his successors in
various parts of Northern China. (See _Williamson_, i. 74.)

CHAPTER XXIX.

CONCERNING THE RICE-WINE DRUNK BY THE PEOPLE OF CATHAY.

Most of the people of Cathay drink wine of the kind that I shall now
describe. It is a liquor which they brew of rice with a quantity of
excellent spice, in such fashion that it makes better drink than any
other kind of wine; it is not only good, but clear and pleasing to the
eye.{1} And being very hot stuff, it makes one drunk sooner than any
other wine.

NOTE 1.—The mode of making Chinese rice-wine is described in
Amyot’s _Mémoires_, V. 468 _seqq._ A kind of yeast is employed,
with which is often mixed a flour prepared from fragrant herbs,
almonds, pine-seeds, dried fruits, etc. Rubruquis says this liquor
was not distinguishable, except by smell, from the best wine of
Auxerre; a wine so famous in the Middle Ages, that the Historian
Friar, Salimbene, went from Lyons to Auxerre on purpose to drink
it.[1] Ysbrandt Ides compares the rice-wine to Rhenish; John Bell
to Canary; a modern traveller quoted by Davis, “in colour, and
a little in taste, to Madeira.” [Friar Odoric (_Cathay_, i. p.
117) calls this wine _bigni_; Dr. Schlegel (_T’oung Pao_, ii. p.
264) says Odoric’s wine was probably made with the date _Mi-yin_,
pronounced _Bi-im_ in old days. But Marco’s wine is made of rice,
and is called _shao hsing chiu_. Mr. Rockhill (_Rubruck_, p. 166,
note) writes: “There is another stronger liquor distilled from
millet, and called _shao chiu_: in Anglo-Chinese, _samshu_; Mongols
call it _araka_, _arrak_, and _arreki_. Ma Twan-lin (Bk. 327) says
that the Moho (the early Nu-chên Tartars) drank rice wine (_mi
chiu_), but I fancy that they, like the Mongols, got it from the
Chinese.”

Dr. Emil Bretschneider (_Botanicon Sinicum_, ii. pp. 154–158)
gives a most interesting account of the use and fabrication of
intoxicating beverages by the Chinese. “The invention of wine or
spirits in China,” he says, “is generally ascribed to a certain I
TI, who lived in the time of the Emperor Yü. According to others,
the inventor of wine was TU K’ANG.” One may refer also to Dr.
Macgowan’s paper _On the “Mutton Wine” of the Mongols and Analogous
Preparations of the Chinese_. (_Jour. N. China Br. R. As. Soc._,
1871–1872, pp. 237–240.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Kington’s Fred. II._ II. 457. So, in a French play of the 13th
century, a publican in his _patois_ invites custom, with hot bread,
hot herrings, and wine of Auxerre in plenty:—

“Chaiens, fait bon disner chaiens;
Chi a caut pain et caus herens,
_Et vin d’Aucheurre_ à plain tonnel.”—
(_Théat. Franç. au Moyen Age_, 168.)

CHAPTER XXX.

CONCERNING THE BLACK STONES THAT ARE DUG IN CATHAY, AND ARE
BURNT FOR FUEL.

It is a fact that all over the country of Cathay there is a kind of
black stones existing in beds in the mountains, which they dig out
and burn like firewood. If you supply the fire with them at night,
and see that they are well kindled, you will find them still alight
in the morning; and they make such capital fuel that no other is used
throughout the country. It is true that they have plenty of wood also,
but they do not burn it, because those stones burn better and cost
less.{1}

[Moreover with that vast number of people, and the number of hot baths
that they maintain—for every one has such a bath at least three times
a week, and in winter if possible every day, whilst every nobleman and
man of wealth has a private bath for his own use—the wood would not
suffice for the purpose.]

NOTE 1.—There is a great consumption of coal in Northern China,
especially in the brick stoves, which are universal, even in poor
houses. Coal seems to exist in every one of the eighteen provinces
of China, which in this respect is justly pronounced to be one
of the most favoured countries in the world. Near the capital
coal is mined at Yuen-ming-yuen, and in a variety of isolated
deposits among the hills in the direction of the Kalgan road, and
in the district round Siuen-hwa-fu. (_Sindachu_ of Polo, _ante_
ch. lix.) But the most important coal-fields in relation to the
future are those of Shan-tung Hu-nan, Ho-nan, and Shan-si. The
last is eminently _the_ coal and iron province of China, and its
coal-field, as described by Baron Richthofen, combines, in an
extraordinary manner, all the advantages that can enhance the
value of such a field except (at present) that of facile export;
whilst the quantity available is so great that from Southern
Shan-si alone he estimates the whole world could be supplied,
at the present rate of consumption, for several thousand years.
“Adits, miles in length, could be driven within the body of the
coal.... These extraordinary conditions ... will eventually give
rise to some curious features in mining ... if a railroad should
ever be built from the plain to this region ... branches of it will
be constructed within the body of one or other of these beds of
anthracite.” Baron Richthofen, in the paper which we quote from,
indicates the revolution in the deposit of the world’s wealth and
power, to which such facts, combined with other characteristics
of China, point as probable; a revolution so vast that its
contemplation seems like that of a planetary catastrophe.

In the coal-fields of Hu-nan “the mines are chiefly opened where
the rivers intersect the inclined strata of the coal-measures and
allow the coal-beds to be attacked by the miner immediately at
their out-croppings.”

At the highest point of the Great Kiang, reached by Sarel and
Blakiston, they found mines on the cliffs over the river, from
which the coal was sent down by long bamboo cables, the loaded
baskets drawing up the empty ones.

[Many coal-fields have been explored since; one of the most
important is the coal-field of the Yun-nan province; the finest
deposits are perhaps those found in the bend of the Kiang; coal
is found also at Mong-Tzŭ, Lin-ngan, etc.; this rich coal region
has been explored in 1898 by the French engineer A. Leclère. (See
_Congrès int. Géog._, Paris, 1900, pp. 178–184.)—H. C.]

In various parts of China, as in Che-kiang, Sze-ch’wan, and at
Peking, they form powdered coal, mixed with mud, into bricks,
somewhat like our “patent fuel.” This practice is noticed by Ibn
Batuta, as well as the use of coal in making porcelain, though
this he seems to have misunderstood. Rashiduddin also mentions the
use of coal in China. It was in use, according to citations of
Pauthier’s, before the Christian era. It is a popular belief in
China, that every provincial capital is bound to be established
over a coal-field, so as to have a provision in case of siege. It
is said that during the British siege of Canton mines were opened
to the north of the city.

(_The Distribution of Coal in China_, by Baron Richthofen, in
_Ocean Highways_, N.S., I. 311; _Macgowan_ in _Ch. Repos._ xix.
385–387; _Blakiston_, 133, 265; _Mid. Kingdom_, I. 73, 78; _Amyot_,
xi. 334; _Cathay_, 261, 478, 482; _Notes by Rev. A. Williamson_ in
_J. N. Ch. Br. R. A. S._, December, 1867; _Hedde and Rondot_, p.
63.)

Æneas Sylvius relates as a miracle that took place before his eyes
in Scotland, that poor and almost naked beggars, when _stones_ were
given them as alms at the church doors, went away quite delighted;
for stones of that kind were imbued either with brimstone or with
some oily matter, so that they could be burnt instead of wood,
of which the country was destitute. (Quoted by _Jos. Robertson,
Statuta Eccles. Scotic._ I. xciii.)

CHAPTER XXXI.

HOW THE GREAT KAAN CAUSES STORES OF CORN TO BE MADE, TO
HELP HIS PEOPLE WITHAL IN TIME OF DEARTH.

You must know that when the Emperor sees that corn is cheap and
abundant, he buys up large quantities, and has it stored in all his
provinces in great granaries, where it is so well looked after that it
will keep for three or four years.{1}

And this applies, let me tell you, to all kinds of corn, whether
wheat, barley, millet, rice, panic, or what not, and when there is any
scarcity of a particular kind of corn, he causes that to be issued.
And if the price of the corn is at one bezant the measure, he lets
them have it at a bezant for four measures, or at whatever price will
produce general cheapness; and every one can have food in this way. And
by this providence of the Emperor’s, his people can never suffer from
dearth. He does the same over his whole Empire; causing these supplies
to be stored everywhere, according to calculation of the wants and
necessities of the people.

NOTE 1.—“_Le fait si bien_ estuier _que il dure bien trois ans ou
quatre_” (Pauthier): “_si bien_ estudier” (G. T.). The word may be
_estiver_ (It. _stivare_), to stow, but I half suspect it should
be _estuver_ in the sense of “kiln-dry,” though both the Geog.
Latin and the Crusca render it _gubernare_.[1] Lecomte says: “Rice
is always stored in the public granaries for three or four years
in advance. It keeps long if care be taken to air it and stir it
about; and although not so good to the taste or look as new rice,
it is said to be more wholesome.”

The Archbishop of Soltania (A.D. 1330) speaks of these stores. “The
said Emperor is very pitiful and compassionate ... and so when
there is a dearth in the land he openeth his garners, and giveth
forth of his wheat and his rice for half what others are selling
it at.” Kúblái Kaan’s measures of this kind are recorded in the
annals of the Dynasty, as quoted by Pauthier. The same practice is
ascribed to the sovereigns of the T’ang Dynasty by the old Arab
_Relations_. In later days a missionary gives in the _Lettres
Edifiantes_ an unfavourable account of the action of these public
granaries, and of the rascality that occurred in connection with
them. (_Lecomte_, II. 101; _Cathay_, 240; _Relat._ I. 39; _Let.
Ed._ xxiv. 76.)

[The _Yuen-shi_ in ch. 96 contains sections on dispensaries (_Hui
min yao kü_), granary regulations (_Shi ti_), and regulations for
a time of dearth (_Chen Sü_). (_Bretschneider_, _Med. Res._ I. p.
187.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Marsden observes incidentally (_Hist. of Sumatra_, 1st edition, p.
71) that he was told in Bengal they used to dry-kiln the rice for
exportation, “owing to which, or to some other process, it will
continue good for several years.”

CHAPTER XXXII.

OF THE CHARITY OF THE EMPEROR TO THE POOR.

I have told you how the Great Kaan provides for the distribution of
necessaries to his people in time of dearth, by making store in time
of cheapness. Now I will tell you of his alms and great charity to the
poor of his city of Cambaluc.

You see he causes selection to be made of a number of families in
the city which are in a state of indigence, and of such families some
may consist of six in the house, some of eight, some of ten, more or
fewer in each as it may hap, but the whole number being very great.
And each family he causes annually to be supplied with wheat and other
corn sufficient for the whole year. And this he never fails to do every
year. Moreover, all those who choose to go to the daily dole at the
Court receive a great loaf apiece, hot from the baking, and nobody is
denied; for so the Lord hath ordered. And so some 30,000 people go
for it every day from year’s end to year’s end. Now this is a great
goodness in the Emperor to take pity of his poor people thus! And they
benefit so much by it that they worship him as he were God.

[He also provides the poor with clothes. For he lays a tithe upon
all wool, silk, hemp, and the like, from which clothing can be made;
and he has these woven and laid up in a building set apart for the
purpose; and as all artizans are bound to give a day’s labour weekly,
in this way the Kaan has these stuffs made into clothing for those
poor families, suitable for summer or winter, according to the time of
year. He also provides the clothing for his troops, and has woollens
woven for them in every city, the material for which is furnished by
the tithe aforesaid. You should know that the Tartars, before they were
converted to the religion of the Idolaters, never practised almsgiving.
Indeed, when any poor man begged of them they would tell him, “Go
with God’s curse, for if He loved you as He loves me, He would have
provided for you.” But the sages of the Idolaters, and especially the
_Bacsis_ mentioned before, told the Great Kaan that it was a good work
to provide for the poor, and that his idols would be greatly pleased
if he did so. And since then he has taken to do for the poor so much as
you have heard.{1}]

NOTE 1.—This is a curious testimony to an ameliorating effect of
Buddhism on rude nations. The general establishment of medical
aid for men and animals is alluded to in the edicts of Asoka;[1]
and hospitals for the diseased and destitute were found by Fahian
at Palibothra, whilst Hiuen Tsang speaks of the distribution of
food and medicine at the _Punyasálás_ or “Houses of Beneficence,”
in the Panjáb. Various examples of a charitable spirit in Chinese
Institutions will be found in a letter by Père d’Entrecolles in
the XVth Recueil of _Lettres Edifiantes_; and a similar detail in
_Nevius’s China and the Chinese_, ch. xv. (See _Prinsep’s Essays_,
II. 15; _Beal’s Fah-hian_, 107; _Pèl. Boudd._ II. 190.) The Tartar
sentiment towards the poor survives on the Arctic shores:—“The
Yakuts regard the rich as favoured by the gods; the poor as
rejected and cast out by them.” (_Billings_, Fr. Tranls. I. 233.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] As rendered by J. Prinsep. But I see that Professor H. H. Wilson
did not admit the passage to bear that meaning.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

[CONCERNING THE ASTROLOGERS IN THE CITY OF CAMBALUC.]

[There are in the city of Cambaluc, what with Christians, Saracens, and
Cathayans, some five thousand astrologers and soothsayers, whom the
Great Kaan provides with annual maintenance and clothing, just as he
provides the poor of whom we have spoken, and they are in the constant
exercise of their art in this city.

They have a kind of astrolabe on which are inscribed the planetary
signs, the hours and critical points of the whole year. And every year
these Christian, Saracen, and Cathayan astrologers, each sect apart,
investigate by means of this astrolabe the course and character of the
whole year, according to the indications of each of its Moons, in order
to discover by the natural course and disposition of the planets, and
the other circumstances of the heavens, what shall be the nature of the
weather, and what peculiarities shall be produced by each Moon of the
year; as, for example, under which Moon there shall be thunderstorms
and tempests, under which there shall be disease, murrain, wars,
disorders, and treasons, and so on, according to the indications of
each; but always adding that it lies with God to do less or more
according to His pleasure. And they write down the results of their
examination in certain little pamphlets for the year, which are called
_Tacuin_, and these are sold for a groat to all who desire to know what
is coming. Those of the astrologers, of course whose predictions are
found to be most exact, are held to be the greatest adepts in their
art, and get the greater fame.{1}

And if any one having some great matter in hand, or proposing to make a
long journey for traffic or other business, desires to know what will
be the upshot, he goes to one of these astrologers and says: “Turn up
your books and see what is the present aspect of the heavens, for I
am going away on such and such a business.” Then the astrologer will
reply that the applicant must also tell the year, month, and hour of
his birth; and when he has got that information he will see how the
horoscope of his nativity combines with the indications of the time
when the question is put, and then he predicts the result, good or bad,
according to the aspect of the heavens.

You must know, too, that the Tartars reckon their years by twelves;
the sign of the first year being the Lion, of the second the Ox, of
the third the Dragon, of the fourth the Dog, and so forth up to the
twelfth;{2} so that when one is asked the year of his birth he answers
that it was in the year of the Lion (let us say), on such a day or
night, at such an hour, and such a moment. And the father of a child
always takes care to write these particulars down in a book. When the
twelve yearly symbols have been gone through, then they come back to
the first, and go through with them again in the same succession.]

NOTE 1.—It is odd that Marsden should have sought a Chinese
explanation of the Arabic word _Taḳwím_ even with Tavernier before
him: “They sell in Persia an annual almanac called _Tacuim_, which
is properly an ephemeris containing the longitude and latitude
of the planets, their conjunctions and oppositions, and other
such matter. The _Tacuim_ is full of predictions regarding war,
pestilence, and famine; it indicates the favourable time for
putting on new clothes, for getting bled or purged, for making a
journey, and so forth. They put entire faith in it, and whoever can
afford one governs himself in all things by its rules.” (Bk. V. ch.
xiv.)

The use of the term by Marco may possibly be an illustration of
what I have elsewhere propounded, viz. that he was not acquainted
with Chinese, but that his intercourse and conversation lay chiefly
with the foreigners at the Kaan’s Court, and probably was carried
on in the Persian language. But not long after the date of our Book
we find the word used in Italian by Jacopo Alighieri (Dante’s son):—

“A voler giudicare
Si conviene adequare
Inprimo il _Taccuino_,
Per vedere il cammino
Come i Pianeti vanno
Per tutto quanto l’anno.”
—_Rime Antiche Toscane_, III. 10.

Marco does not allude to the fact that almanacs were published by
the Government, as they were then and still are. Pauthier (515
_seqq._) gives some very curious details on this subject from the
Annals of the Yuen. In the accounts of the year 1328, it appears
that no less than 3,123,185 copies were printed in three different
sizes at different prices, besides a separate almanac for the
_Hwei-Hwei_ or Mahomedans. Had Polo not omitted to touch on the
issue of almanacs by Government he could scarcely have failed to
enter on the subject of printing, on which he has kept a silence so
singular and unaccountable.

The Chinese Government still “considers the publication of a
Calendar of the first importance and utility. It must do everything
in its power, not only to point out to its numerous subjects the
distribution of the seasons, ... but on account of the general
superstition it must mark in the almanac the lucky and unlucky
days, the best days for being married, for undertaking a journey,
for making their dresses, for buying or building, for presenting
petitions to the Emperor, and for many other cases of ordinary
life. By this means the Government keeps the people within the
limits of humble obedience; it is for this reason that the Emperors
of China established the Academy of Astronomy.” (_Timk._ I. 358.)
The acceptance of the Imperial Almanac by a foreign Prince is
considered an acknowledgment of vassalage to the Emperor.

It is a penal offence to issue a pirated or counterfeit edition of
the Government Almanac. No one ventures to be without one, lest
he become liable to the greatest misfortunes by undertaking the
important measures on black-balled days.

The price varies now, according to Williams, from 1½_d._ to 5_d._
a copy. The price in 1328 was 1 _tsien_ or cash for the cheapest
edition, and 1 _liang_ or tael of silver for the _édition de luxe_;
but as these prices were in paper-money it is extremely difficult
to say, in the varying depreciation of that currency, what the
price really amounted to.

[Illustration: Mongol “Compendium Instrument” _Keen-e_ in the
Observatory Garden.]

[Illustration: Mongol Armillary Sphere in the Observatory Garden.]

[“The Calendars for the use of the people, published by Imperial
command, are of two kinds. The first, _Wan-nien-shu, the Calendar
of Ten Thousand Years_, is an abridgment of the Calendar,
comprising 397 years, viz. from 1624 to 2020. The second and
more complete Calendar is the _Annual Calendar_, which, under
the preceding dynasties, was named _Li-je, Order of Days_, and
is now called _Shih-hsien-shu, Book of Constant Conformity (with
the Heavens)_. This name was given by the Emperor _Shun-chih_, in
the first year of his reign (1644), on being presented by Father
John Schall (_Tang Jo-wang_) with a new Calendar, calculated on
the principles of European science. This _Annual Calendar_ gives
the following indications: (1°) The cyclical signs of the current
year, of the months, and of all the days; (2°) the _long_ and
_short_ months, as well as the _intercalary_ month, as the case
may be; (3°) the designation of each day by the 5 _elements_, the
28 constellations, and the 12 _happy presages_; (4°) the day and
hour of the new moon, of the full moon, and of the two dichotomies,
_Shang-hsien_ and _Hsia-hsien_; (5°) the day and hour for the
_positions_ of the sun in the 24 zodiacal signs, calculated for the
various capitals of China as well as for Manchuria, Mongolia, and
the tributary Kingdoms; (6°) the hour of sunrise and sunset and the
length of day and night for the principal days of the month in the
several capitals; (7°) various superstitious indications purporting
to point out what days and hours are auspicious or not for such or
such affairs in different places. Those superstitious indications
are stated to have been introduced into the Calendar under the
_Yüan_ dynasty.” (_P. Hoang, Chinese Calendar_, pp. 2–3.)—H. C.]

We may note that in Polo’s time one of the principal officers of
the Mathematical Board was _Gaisue_, a native of _Folin_ or the
Byzantine Empire, who was also in charge of the medical department
of the Court. Regarding the Observatory, see note at p. 378,
_supra_.

And I am indebted yet again to the generous zeal of Mr. Wylie of
Shanghai, for the principal notes and extracts which will, I trust,
satisfy others as well as myself that the instruments in the garden
of the Observatory belong to the period of Marco Polo’s residence
in China.[1]

The objections to the alleged age of these instruments were
entirely based on an inspection of photographs. The opinion was
given very strongly that no instrument of the kind, so perfect in
theory and in execution, could have been even imagined in those
days, and that nothing of such scientific quality could have been
made except by the Jesuits. In fact it was asserted or implied that
these instruments must have been made about the year 1700, and were
therefore not earlier in age than those which stand on the terraced
roof of the Observatory, and are well known to most of us from the
representation in Duhalde and in many popular works.

The only authority that I could lay hand on was Lecomte, and what
he says was not conclusive. I extract the most pertinent passages:

“It was on the terrace of the tower that the Chinese astronomers
had set their instruments, and though few in number they occupied
the whole area. But Father Verbiest, the Director of the
Observatory, considering them useless for astronomical observation,
persuaded the Emperor to let them be removed, to make way for
several instruments of his own construction. The instruments set
aside by the European astronomers are still in a hall adjoining the
tower, buried in dust and oblivion; and we saw them only through a
grated window. They appeared to us to be very large and well cast,
in form approaching our astronomical circles; that is all that we
could make out. There was, however, thrown into a back yard by
itself, a celestial globe of bronze, of about 3 feet in diameter.
Of this we were able to take a nearer view. Its form was somewhat
oval; the divisions by no means exact, and the whole work coarse
enough.

“Besides this in a lower hall they had established a gnomon....
This observatory, not worthy of much consideration for its ancient
instruments, much less for its situation, its form, or its
construction, is now enriched by several bronze instruments which
Father Verbiest has placed there. These are large, well cast,
adorned in every case with figures of dragons,” etc. He then
proceeds to describe them:

“(1). Armillary Zodiacal Sphere of 6 feet diameter. This sphere
reposes on the heads of four dragons, the bodies of which after
various convolutions come to rest upon the extremities of two
brazen beams forming a cross, and thus bear the entire weight of
the instrument. These dragons ... are represented according to the
notion the Chinese form of them, enveloped in clouds, covered above
the horns with long hair, with a tufted beard on the lower jaw,
flaming eyes, long sharp teeth, the gaping throat ever vomiting a
torrent of fire. Four lion-cubs of the same material bear the ends
of the cross beams, and the heads of these are raised or depressed
by means of attached screws, according to what is required. The
circles are divided on both exterior and interior surface into
360 degrees; each degree into 60 minutes by transverse lines, and
the minutes into sections of 10 seconds each by the sight-edge[2]
applied to them.”

Of Verbiest’s other instruments we need give only the names: (2)
Equinoxial Sphere, 6 feet diameter. (3) Azimuthal Horizon, same
diam. (4) Great Quadrant, of 6 feet radius. (5) Sextant of about 8
feet radius. (6) Celestial Globe of 6 feet diameter.

As Lecomte gives no details of the old instruments which he
saw through a grating, and as the description of this zodiacal
sphere (No. 1) corresponds in some of its main features with
that represented in the photograph, I could not but recognize
the _possibility_ that this instrument of Verbiest’s had for
some reason or other been removed from the Terrace, and that the
photograph might therefore possibly _not_ be a representation of
one of the ancient instruments displaced by him.[3]

The question having been raised it was very desirable to settle
it, and I applied to Mr. Wylie for information, as I had received
the photographs from him, and knew that he had been Mr. Thomson’s
companion and helper in the matter.

“Let me assure you,” he writes (21st August, 1874), “the Jesuits
had nothing to do with the manufacture of the so-called Mongol
instruments; and whoever made them, they were certainly on the
Peking Observatory before Loyola was born. They are not made
for the astronomical system introduced by the Jesuits, but are
altogether conformable to the system introduced by Kúblái’s
astronomer Ko Show-king.... I will mention one thing which is
quite decisive as to the Jesuits. _The circle is divided into 365¼
degrees_, each degree into 100 minutes, and each minute into 100
seconds. The Jesuits always used the sexagesimal division. Lecomte
speaks of the imperfection of the division on the Jesuit-made
instruments; but _those on the Mongol instruments are immeasurably
coarser_.

“I understand it is not the ornamentation your friend objects
to?[4] If it is, I would observe that there is no evidence of
progress in the decorative and ornamental arts during the Ming
Dynasty; and even in the Jesuit instruments that part of the
work is purely Chinese, excepting in one instrument, which I am
persuaded must have been made in Europe.

“I have a Chinese work called _Luh-King-t’oo-Kaou_, ‘Illustrations
and Investigations of the Six Classics.’ This was written in A.D.
1131–1162, and revised and printed in 1165–1174. It contains a
representation of an armillary sphere, which appears to me to be
much the same as the sphere in question. There is a solid horizon
fixed to a graduated outer circle. Inside the latter is a meridian
circle, at right angles to which is a graduated colure; then the
equator, apparently a double ring, and the ecliptic; also two
diametric bars. The cut is rudely executed, but it certainly shows
that some one imagined something more perfect. The instrument
stands on a cross frame, with 4 dragon supporters and a prop in the
centre.[5]

“It should be remembered that under the Mongol Dynasty the
Chinese had much intercourse with Central Asia; and among others
Yelewchootsae, as confidential minister and astronomer, followed
Chinghiz in his Western campaign, held intercourse with the
astronomers of Samarkand, and on his return laid some astronomical
inventions before the Emperor.

“I append a notice of the Observatory taken from a popular
description of Peking, by which it will be seen that the
construction of these instruments is attributed to Ko Show-king,
one of the most renowned astronomers of China. He was the chief
astronomer under Kúblái Kaan” [to whom he was presented in 1262; he
was born in 1231.—H. C.]

“It must be remembered that there was a special vitality among the
Chinese under the Yuen with regard to the arts and sciences, and
the Emperor had the choice of artizans and men of science from
all countries. From the age of the Yuen till the arrival of the
Jesuits, we hear nothing of any new instruments having been made;
and it is well known that astronomy was never in a lower condition
than under the Ming.”[6]

Mr. Wylie then draws attention to the account given by Trigault
of the instruments that Matteo Ricci saw at Nanking, when he went
(in the year 1599) to pay a visit to some of the _literati_ of
that city. He transcribes the account from the French _Hist. de
l’Expédition Chrestienne en la Chine_, 1618. But as I have the
Latin, which is the original and is more lucid, by me, I will
translate from that.[7]

“Not only at Peking, but in this capital also (Nanking) there is a
College of Chinese Mathematicians, and this one certainly is more
distinguished by the vastness of its buildings than by the skill
of its professors. They have little talent and less learning, and
do nothing beyond the preparation of the almanacs on the rules
of calculation made by the ancients; and when it chances that
events do not agree with their calculation they assert that what
they had calculated was the regular course of things, but that
the aberrant conduct of the stars was a prognostic from heaven of
something going to happen on the earth. This something they make
out according to their fancy, and so spread a veil over their
own blunders. These gentlemen did not much trust Father Matteo,
fearing, no doubt, lest he should put them to shame; but when at
last they were freed from this apprehension they came and amicably
visited the Father in hope of learning something from him. And when
he went to return their visit he saw something that really was new
and beyond his expectation.

“There is a high hill at one side of the city, but still within the
walls. On the top of the hill there is an ample terrace, capitally
adapted for astronomical observation, and surrounded by magnificent
buildings which form the residence of the Professors.... On this
terrace are to be seen astronomical instruments of cast-metal,
well worthy of inspection whether for size or for beauty; _and we
certainly have never seen or read of anything in Europe like them_.
For nearly 250 years they have stood thus exposed to the rain, the
snow, and all other atmospheric inclemencies, and yet they have
lost absolutely nothing of their original lustre. And lest I should
be accused of raising expectations which I do not justify, I will
do my best in a digression, probably not unwelcome, to bring them
before the eyes of my readers.

“The larger of these instruments were four in number. First
we inspected a great globe [A], graduated with meridians and
parallels; we estimated that three men would hardly be able to
embrace its girth.... A second instrument was a great sphere [B],
not less in diameter than that measure of the outstretched arms
which is commonly called a geometric pace. It had a horizon and
poles; instead of circles it was provided with certain double
hoops (_armillæ_), the void space between the pair serving the
purpose of the circles of our spheres. All these were divided into
365 degrees and some odd minutes. There was no globe to represent
the earth in the centre, but there was a certain tube, bored like
a gun-barrel, which could readily be turned about and fixed to
any azimuth or any altitude so as to observe any particular star
through the tube, just as we do with our vane-sights;[8]—not at all
a despicable device! The third machine was a gnomon [C], the height
of which was twice the diameter of the former instrument, erected
on a very large and long slab of marble, on the northern side of
the terrace. The stone slab had a channel cut round the margin, to
be filled with water in order to determine whether the slab was
level or not, and the style was set vertical as in hour-dials.[9]
We may suppose this gnomon to have been erected that by its aid the
shadow at the solstices and equinoxes might be precisely noted, for
in that view both the slab and the style were graduated. The fourth
and last instrument, and the largest of all, was one consisting
as it were of three or four huge astrolabes in juxtaposition [D];
each of them having a diameter of such a geometrical pace as I
have specified. The fiducial line, or _Alhidada_, as it is called,
was not lacking, nor yet the _Dioptra_.[10] Of these astrolabes,
one having a tilted position in the direction of the south,
represented the equator; a second, which stood crosswise on the
first, in a north and south plane, the Father took for a meridian;
but it could be turned round on its axis; a third stood in the
meridian plane with its axis perpendicular, and seemed to stand
for a vertical circle; but this also could be turned round so as
to show any vertical whatever. Moreover all these were graduated,
and the degrees marked by prominent studs of iron, so that in the
night the graduation could be read by the touch without a light.
All this compound astrolabe instrument was erected on a level
marble platform with channels round it for levelling. On each
of these instruments explanations of everything were given in
Chinese characters; and there were also engraved the 24 zodiacal
constellations which answer to our 12 signs, 2 to each.[11] There
was, however, one error common to all the instruments, viz. that,
in all, the elevation of the Pole was assumed to be 36°. Now there
can be no question about the fact that the city of Nanking lies in
lat. 32¼°; whence it would seem probable that these instruments
were made for another locality, and had been erected at Nanking,
without reference to its position, by some one ill versed in
mathematical science.[12]

[Illustration: Observatory Terrace.]

[Illustration: Observatory Instruments of the Jesuits.]

“Some years afterwards Father Matteo saw similar instruments at
Peking, or rather the same instruments, so exactly alike were
they, insomuch that they had unquestionably been made by the
same artist. And indeed it is known that they were cast at the
period when the Tartars were dominant in China; and we may without
rashness conjecture that they were the work of some foreigner
acquainted with our studies. But it is time to have done with these
instruments.”—(_Lib._ IV. _cap._ 5.)

In this interesting description it will be seen that the Armillary
Sphere [B] agrees entirely with that represented in illustration
facing p. 450. And the second of his photographs in my possession,
but not, I believe, yet published, answers _perfectly_ to the
curious description of the 4th instrument [D]. Indeed, I should
scarcely have been able to translate that description intelligibly
but for the aid of the photograph before me. It shows the three
_astrolabes_ or graduated circles with travelling indexes arranged
exactly as described, and pivoted on a complex frame of bronze; (1)
circle in the plane of the equator for measuring right ascensions;
(2) circle with its axis vertical to the plane of the last, for
measuring declinations: (3) circle with vertical axis, for zenith
distances? The Gnomon [A] was seen by Mr. Wylie in one of the lower
rooms of the Observatory (see below). Of the Globe we do not now
hear; and that mentioned by Lecomte among the ancient instruments
was inferior to what Ricci describes at Peking.

I now transcribe Mr. Wylie’s translation of an extract from a
Popular Description of Peking:

“The observatory is on an elevated stage on the city wall, in the
south-east corner of the (Tartar) city, and was built in the year
(A.D. 1279). In the centre was the _Tze-wei_[13] Palace, inside
of which were a pair of scrolls, and a cross inscription, by
the imperial hand. Formerly it contained the _Hwan-t’ien-e_ [B]
‘Armillary Sphere’; the _Keen-e_ [D?] ‘Transit Instrument’ (?);
the _Tung-kew_ [A] ‘Brass Globe’; and the _Leang-t’ien-ch’ih_,
‘Sector,’ which were constructed by Ko Show-king under the Yuen
Dynasty.

“In (1673) the old instruments having stood the wear of long past
years, had become almost useless, and six new instruments were
made by imperial authority. These were the _T’ien-t’ee_ ‘Celestial
Globe’ (6); _Chih-taoue_ ‘Equinoctial Sphere’ (2); _Hwang-taoue_
‘Zodiacal Sphere’ (1); _Te-p’ing kinge_ ‘Azimuthal Horizon’ (3);
_Te-p’ing weie_ ‘Altitude Instrument’ (4); _Ke-yene_ ‘Sextant’
(5). These were placed in the Observatory, and to the present
day are respectfully used. The old instruments were at the same
time removed, and deposited at the foot of the stage. In (1715)
the _Te-ping King-wei-e_ ‘Azimuth and Altitude Instrument’ was
made;[14] and in 1744 the _Ke-hang-foo-chin-e_ (literally ‘Sphere
and Tube instrument for sweeping the heavens’). All these were
placed on the Observatory stage.

“There is a wind-index-pole called the ‘Fair-wind-pennon,’ on which
is an iron disk marked out in 28 points, corresponding in number to
the 28 constellations.”[15]

✛ Mr. Wylie justly observes that the evidence is all in accord,
and it leaves, I think, no reasonable room for doubt that the
instruments now in the Observatory garden at Peking are those
which were cast aside by Father Verbiest[16] in 1673 (or 1668);
which Father Ricci saw at Peking at the beginning of the century,
and of which he has described the duplicates at Nanking; and which
had come down from the time of the Mongols, or, more precisely, of
Kúblái Khan.

Ricci speaks of their age as nearly 250 years in 1599; Verbiest
as nearly 300 years in 1668. But these estimates evidently point
to the _termination_ of the Mongol Dynasty (1368), to which the
Chinese would naturally refer their oral chronology. We have seen
that Kúblái’s reign was the era of flourishing astronomy, and that
the instruments are referred to his astronomer Ko Shéu-king; nor
does there seem any ground for questioning this. In fact, it being
once established that the instruments existed when the Jesuits
entered China, all the objections fall to the ground.

We may observe that the _number_ of the ancient instruments
mentioned in the popular Chinese account agrees with the number of
important instruments described by Ricci, and the titles of three
at least out of the four seem to indicate the same instruments. The
catalogue of the new instruments of 1673 (or 1668) given in the
native work also agrees _exactly_ with that given by Lecomte.[17]
And in reference to my question as to the _possibility_ that one
of Verbiest’s instruments might have been removed from the terrace
to the garden, it is now hardly worth while to repeat Mr. Wylie’s
assurance that there is no ground whatever for such a supposition.
The instruments represented by Lecomte are all still on the
terrace, only their positions have been somewhat altered to make
room for the two added in last century.

Probably, says Mr. Wylie, more might have been added from Chinese
works, especially the biography of Ko Shéu-king. But my kind
correspondent was unable to travel beyond the books on his own
shelves. Nor was it needful.

It will have been seen that, beautiful as the art and casting of
these instruments is, it would be a mistake to suppose that they
are entitled to equally high rank in scientific accuracy. Mr.
Wylie mentioned the question that had been started to Freiherr
von Gumpach, who was for some years Professor of Astronomy in the
Peking College. Whilst entirely rejecting the doubts that had been
raised as to the age of the Mongol instruments, he said that he had
seen those of Tycho Brahe, and the former are quite unworthy to be
compared with Tycho’s in scientific accuracy.

The doubts expressed have been useful in drawing attention to these
remarkable reliques of the era of Kúblái’s reign, and of Marco
Polo’s residence in Cathay, though I fear they are answerable for
having added some pages to a work that required no enlargement!

[Mr. Wylie sent a most valuable paper on _The Mongol Astronomical
Instruments at Peking_ to the Congress of Orientalists held at St.
Petersburg, which was reprinted at Shanghai in 1897 in _Chinese
Researches_. Some of the astronomical instruments have been removed
to Potsdam by the Germans since the siege of the foreign Legations
at Peking in 1900.—H. C.]

On these auguries, and on diviners and fortune-tellers, see
_Semedo_, p. 118 _seqq._; _Kidd_, p. 313 (also for preceding
references, _Mid. Kingdom_, II. 152; _Gaubil_, 136).

NOTE 2.—✛ The real cycle of the Mongols, which was also that of
the Chinese, runs: 1. Rat; 2. Ox; 3. Tiger; 4. Hare; 5. Dragon; 6.
Serpent; 7. Horse; 8. Sheep; 9. Ape; 10. Cock; 11. Dog; 12. Swine.
But as such a cycle [12 earthly branches, _Ti-chih_] is too short
to avoid confusion, it is combined with a co-efficient cycle of
_ten_ epithets [celestial Stems, _T’ien-kan_] in such wise as to
produce a 60-year cycle of compound names before the same shall
recur. These co-efficient epithets are found in four different
forms: (1) From the Elements: Wood, Fire, Earth, Metal, Water,
attaching to each a masculine and feminine attribute so as to make
ten epithets. (2) From the Colours: Blue, Red, Yellow, White,
Black, similarly treated. (3) By terms without meaning in Mongol,
directly adopted or imitated from the Chinese, _Ga_, Yi, Bing,
Ting, etc. (4) By the five Cardinal Points: East, South, Middle,
West, North. Thus 1864 was the first year of a 60-year cycle:—

1864 = (Masc.) _Wood-Rat_ Year = (Masc.) _Blue-Rat_ Year.
1865 = (Fem.) _Wood-Ox_ Year = (Fem.) _Blue-Ox_ Year.
1866 = (Masc.) _Fire-Tiger_ Year = (Masc.) _Red-Tiger_ Year.
1867 = (Fem.) _Fire-Hare_ Year = (Fem.) _Red-Hare_ Year.
1923 = (Fem.) _Water-Swine_ Year = (Fem.) _Black-Swine_ Year.

And then a new cycle commences just as before.

This Calendar was carried by the Mongols into all their
dominions, and it would appear to have long survived them in
Persia. Thus a document issued in favour of Sir John Chardin by
the _Shaikh-ul-Islám_ of Ispahan, bears the strange date for a
Mahomedan luminary of “The year of the Swine.” The Hindus also had
a 60-year cycle, but with them each year had an independent name.

The Mongols borrowed their system from the Chinese, who attribute
its invention to the Emperor Hwang-ti, and its initiation to the
61st year of his reign, corresponding to B.C. 2637. [“It was
Ta-nao, Minister to the Emperor Hwang-ti, who, by command of his
Sovereign, devised the sexagenary cycle. Hwang-ti began to reign
2697 B.C., and the 61st year of his reign was taken for the first
cyclical sign.” _P. Hoang_, _Chinese Calendar_, p. 11.—H. C.] The
characters representing what we have called the ten co-efficient
epithets are called by the Chinese the “Heavenly Stems”; those
equivalent to the twelve animal symbols are the “Earthly Branches,”
and they are applied in their combinations not to years only, but
to cycles of months, days, and hours, such hours being equal to
two of ours. Thus every year, month, day, and hour will have two
appropriate characters, and the four pairs belonging to the time
of any man’s birth constitute what the Chinese call the “Eight
Characters” of his age, to which constant reference is made in
some of their systems of fortune-telling, and in the selection
of propitious days for the transaction of business. To this
system the text alludes. A curious account of the principles of
prognostication on such a basis will be found in _Doolittle’s
Social Life of the Chinese_ (p. 579 _seqq._; on the Calendar, see
Schmidt’s Preface to _S. Setzen_; _Pallas, Sammlungen_, II. 228
_seqq._; _Prinsep’s Essays_, _Useful Tables_, 146).

[“Kubilai Khan established in Peking two astronomical boards
and two observatories. One of them was a Chinese Observatory
(_sze t’ien t’ai_), the other a Mohammedan Observatory (_hui
hui sze t’ien t’ai_), each with its particular astronomical and
chronological systems, its particular astrology and instruments.
The first astronomical and calendar system was compiled for the
Mongols by Ye-liu Ch’u-ts’ai, who was in Chingis Khan’s service,
not only as a high counsellor, but also as an astronomer and
astrologer. After having been convinced of the obsoleteness and
incorrectness of the astronomical calculations in the _Ta ming li_
(the name of the calendar system of the Kin Dynasty), he thought
out at the time he was at Samarcand a new system, valid not only
for China, but also for the countries conquered by the Mongols in
Western Asia, and named it in memory of Chingis Khan’s expedition
_Si ching keng wu yüan li_, _i.e._ ‘Astronomical Calendar
beginning with the year _Keng wu_, compiled during the war in the
west.’ Keng-wu was the year 1210 of our era. Ye-liu Ch’u-ts’ai
chose this year, and the moment of the winter solstice, for the
beginning of his period; because, according to his calculations,
it coincided with the beginning of a new astronomical or planetary
period. He took also into consideration, that since the year 1211
Chingis Khan’s glory had spread over the whole world. Ye-liu
Ch’u-ts’ai’s calendar was not adopted in China, but the system of
it is explained in the _Yuen-shi_, in the section on Astronomy and
the Calendar.

“In the year 1267, the Mohammedans presented to Kubilai their
astronomical calendar (_wan nien li_, _i.e._), the calendar of
ten thousand years. By taking this denomination in its literal
sense, we may conclude that the Mahommedans brought to China the
ancient Persian system, founded on the period of 10,000 years.
The compilers of the _Yuen-shi_ seem not to have had access to
documents relating to this system, for they give no details
about it. Finally by order of Kubilai the astronomers _Hui-Heng_
and _Ko Show-King_ composed a new calculation under the name
of _Shou-shi-li_, which came into use from the year 1280. It is
thoroughly explained in the _Yuen-shi_. Notwithstanding the fame
this system generally enjoyed, its blemishes came soon to light.
In the sixth month of 1302 an eclipse of the sun happened, and the
calculation of the astronomer proved to be erroneous (it seems
the calculation had anticipated the real time). The astronomers
of the Ming Dynasty explained the errors in the _Shou-shi-li_ by
the circumstance, that in that calculation the period for one
degree of precession of the equinox was taken too long (eighty-one
years). But they were themselves hardly able to overcome these
difficulties.” (_Palladius_, pp. 51–53.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Besides the works quoted in the text I have only been able to
consult Gaubil’s notices, as abstracted in Lalande; and the
Introductory Remarks to Mr. J. Williams’s _Observations of Comets
... extracted from the Chinese Annals_, London, 1871.

[2] _Pinnula_. The French _pinnule_ is properly a sight-vane at the end
of a traversing bar. The _transverse lines_ imply that minutes were
read by the system of our _diagonal scales_; and these I understand
to have been subdivided still further by aid of a divided edge
attached to the sight-vane; qu. a Vernier?

[3] Verbiest himself speaks of the displaced instruments thus ... “ut
nova instrumenta astronomica facienda mihi imponeret, quæ scilicet
more Europæo affabre facta, et in specula Astroptica Pekinensi
collocata, æternam Imperii Tartarici memoriam apud posteritatem
servarent, _prioribus instrumentis Sinicis rudioris Minervæ,
quæ jam a_ trecentis _proxime_ annis _speculam occupabant, inde
amotis_. Imperator statim annuit illorum postulatis, et totius
rei curam, publico diplomate mihi imposuit. Ego itaque intra
quadriennis spatium sex diversi generis instrumenta confeci.” This
is from an account of the Observatory written by Verbiest himself,
and printed at Peking in 1668 (_Liber Organicus Astronomiæ
Europææ apud Sinas Restitutæ_, etc.). My friend Mr. D. Hanbury
made the extract from a copy of this rare book in the London
Institution Library. An enlarged edition was published in Europe.
(Dillingen, 1687.)

[4] On the contrary, he considered the photographs interesting, as
showing to how late a period the art of fine casting had endured.

[5] This ancient instrument is probably the same that is engraved in
Pauthier’s _Chine Ancienne_ under the title of “The Sphere of the
Emperor Shun” (B.C. 2255!).

[6] After the death of Kúblái astronomy fell into neglect, and when
Hongwu, the first Ming sovereign, took the throne (1368) the
subject was almost forgotten. Nor was there any revival till the
time of Ching. The latter was a prince who in 1573 associated
himself with the astronomer Hing-yun-lu to reform the state of
astronomy. (_Gaubil_.)

What Ricci has recorded (in Trigautius) of the dense ignorance
of the Chinese _literati_ in astronomical matters is entirely
consistent with the preceding statements.

[7] I had entirely forgotten to look at Trigault till Mr. Wylie sent
me the extract. The copy I use (_De Christianâ Expeditione apud
Sinas ... Auct. Nicolao Trigautio_) is of _Lugdun_. 1616. The first
edition was published at _August. Vindelicorum_ (Augsburg) in 1615:
the French, at Lyons, in 1616.

[8] “Pinnulis.”

[9] “_Et stilus eo modo quo in horologiis ad perpendiculum collocatus_.”

[10] The _Alidada_ is the traversing index bar which carries the
_dioptra_, _pinnules_, or sight-vanes. The word is found in some
older English Dictionaries, and in France and Italy is still
applied to the traversing index of a plane table or of a sextant.
Littré derives it from (Ar.) _’adád_, enumeration; but it is really
from a quite different word, _al-iḍádat_ عضادة “a door-post,” which
is found in this sense in an Arabic treatise on the Astrolabe. (See
_Dozy and Engelmann_, p. 140.)

[11] This is an error of Ricci’s, as Mr. Wylie observes, or of his
reporter.

The Chinese divide their year into 24 portions of 15 days each.
Of these 24 divisions twelve called _Kung_ mark the twelve places
in which the sun and moon come into conjunction, and are thus in
some degree analogous to our 12 signs of the Zodiac. The names of
these _Kung_ are entirely different from those of our sign, though
since the 17th century the Western Zodiac, with paraphrased names,
has been introduced in some of their books. But besides that, they
divide the heavens into 28 stellar spaces. The correspondence of
this division to the Hindu system of the 28 Lunar Mansions, called
_Nakshatras_, has given rise to much discussion. The Chinese _sieu_
or stellar spaces are excessively unequal, varying from 24° in
equatorial extent down to 24′. (_Williams_, op. cit.) [See _P.
Hoang_, _supra_ p. 449.]

[12] Mr. Wylie is inclined to distrust the accuracy of this remark, as
the only city nearly on the 36th parallel is P’ing-yang fu.

But we have noted in regard to this (Polo’s Pianfu, vol. ii. p. 17)
that a college for the education of Mongol youth was instituted
here, by the great minister Yeliu Chutsai, whose devotion to
astronomy Mr. Wylie has noticed above. In fact, two colleges were
established by him, one at Yenking, _i.e._ Peking, the other at
P’ing-yang; and astronomy is specified as one of the studies to be
pursued at these. (See _D’Ohsson_, II. 71–72, quoting _De Mailla_.)
It seems highly probable that the two sets of instruments were
originally intended for these two institutions, and that one set
was carried to Nanking, when the Ming set their capital there in
1368.

[13] The 28 _sieu_ or stellar spaces, above spoken of, do not extend to
the Pole; they are indeed very unequal in extent on the meridian
as well as on the equator. And the area in the northern sky not
embraced in them is divided into three large spaces called _Yuen_
or enclosures, of which the field of circumpolar stars (or circle
of perpetual apparition) forms one which is called _Tze-Wei_.
(_Williams_.)

The southern circumpolar stars form a fourth space, beyond the 28
_sieu_. _Ibid._

[14] “This was obviously made in France. There is nothing Chinese about
it, either in construction or ornament. It is very different from
all the others.” (_Note by Mr. Wylie._)

[15] “There follows a minute description of the brass clepsydra, and
the brass gnomon, which it is unnecessary to translate. I have seen
both these instruments, in two of the lower rooms.”—Id.

[16] [Ferdinand Verbiest, S.J., was born at Pitthens, near Courtrai; he
arrived in China in 1659 and died at Peking on the 29th January,
1688.—H. C.]

[17] We have attached letters A, B, C, to indicate the correspondences
of the ancient instruments, and cyphers 1, 2, 3, to indicate the
correspondences of the modern instruments.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

CONCERNING THE RELIGION OF THE CATHAYANS;{1} THEIR VIEWS
AS TO THE SOUL; AND THEIR CUSTOMS.

As we have said before, these people are Idolaters, and as regards
their gods, each has a tablet fixed high up on the wall of his chamber,
on which is inscribed a name which represents the Most High and
Heavenly God; and before this they pay daily worship, offering incense
from a thurible, raising their hands aloft, and gnashing their teeth{2}
three times, praying Him to grant them health of mind and body; but of
Him they ask nought else. And below on the ground there is a figure
which they call _Natigai_, which is the god of things terrestrial. To
him they give a wife and children, and they worship him in the same
manner, with incense, and gnashing of teeth,{2} and lifting up of
hands; and of him they ask seasonable weather, and the fruits of the
earth, children, and so forth.{3}

Their view of the immortality of the soul is after this fashion. They
believe that as soon as a man dies, his soul enters into another body,
going from a good to a better, or from a bad to a worse, according as
he hath conducted himself well or ill. That is to say, a poor man, if
he have passed through life good and sober, shall be born again of a
gentlewoman, and shall be a gentleman; and on a second occasion shall
be born of a princess and shall be a prince, and so on, always rising,
till he be absorbed into the Deity. But if he have borne himself ill,
he who was the son of a gentleman shall be reborn as the son of a boor,
and from a boor shall become a dog, always going down lower and lower.

The people have an ornate style of speech; they salute each other with
a cheerful countenance, and with great politeness; they behave like
gentlemen, and eat with great propriety.{4} They show great respect to
their parents; and should there be any son who offends his parents, or
fails to minister to their necessities, there is a public office which
has no other charge but that of punishing unnatural children, who are
proved to have acted with ingratitude towards their parents.{5}

Criminals of sundry kinds who have been imprisoned, are released at
a time fixed by the Great Kaan (which occurs every three years), but
on leaving prison they are branded on one cheek that they may be
recognized.

The Great Kaan hath prohibited all gambling and sharping, things more
prevalent there than in any other part of the world. In doing this, he
said: “I have conquered you by force of arms, and all that you have is
mine; if, therefore, you gamble away your property, it is in fact my
property that you are gambling away.” Not that he took anything from
them however.

I must not omit to tell you of the orderly way in which the Kaan’s
Barons and others conduct themselves in coming to his presence. In
the first place, within a half mile of the place where he is, out of
reverence for his exalted majesty, everybody preserves a mien of the
greatest meekness and quiet, so that no noise of shrill voices or loud
talk shall be heard. And every one of the chiefs and nobles carries
always with him a handsome little vessel to spit in whilst he remain
in the Hall of Audience—for no one dares spit on the floor of the
hall,—and when he hath spitten he covers it up and puts it aside.{6}
So also they all have certain handsome buskins of white leather, which
they carry with them, and, when summoned by the sovereign, on arriving
at the entrance to the hall, they put on these white buskins, and give
their others in charge to the servants, in order that they may not foul
the fine carpets of silk and gold and divers colours.]

NOTE 1.—Ramusio’s heading has _Tartars_, but it is manifestly of
the Cathayans or Chinese that the author speaks throughout this
chapter.

NOTE 2.—“_Sbattendo i denti_.” This is almost certainly, as Marsden
has noticed, due to some error of transcription. Probably _Battono
i fronti_, or something similar, was the true reading. [See
following note, p. 461.—H. C.]

NOTE 3.—The latter part of this passage has, I doubt not, been
more or less interpolated, seeing that it introduces again as a
_Chinese_ divinity the rude object of primitive Tartar worship,
of which we have already heard in Bk. I. ch. liii. And regarding
the former part of the passage, one cannot but have some doubt
whether what was taken for the symbol of the Most High was not
the ancestral tablet, which is usually placed in one of the inner
rooms of the house, and before which worship is performed at fixed
times, and according to certain established forms. Something, too,
may have been known of the Emperor’s worship of Heaven at the
great circular temple at Peking, called _T’ien-t’ân_, or Altar of
Heaven (see p. 459), where incensed offerings are made before a
tablet, on which is inscribed the name Yuh-Hwang Shang-ti, which
some interpret as “The Supreme Ruler of the Imperial Heavens,”
and regard as the nearest approach to pure Theism of which there
is any indication in Chinese worship (See _Doolittle_, pp. 170,
625; and _Lockhart_ in _J. R. G. S._, xxxvi. 142). This worship is
mentioned by the Mahomedan narrator of Shah Rukh’s embassy (1421):
“Every year there are some days on which the Emperor eats no animal
food.... He spends his time in an apartment which contains no idol,
and says that he is worshipping the God of Heaven.”[1] (_Ind.
Antiquary_, II. 81.)

[Illustration: Great Temple of Heaven, Peking.]

The charge of irreligion against the Chinese is an old one, and
is made by Hayton in nearly the same terms as it often is by
modern missionaries: “And though these people have the acutest
intelligence in all matters wherein material things are concerned,
yet you shall never find among them any knowledge or perception
of spiritual things.” Yet it is a mistake to suppose that this
insensibility has been so universal as it is often represented. To
say nothing of the considerable numbers who have adhered faithfully
to the Roman Catholic Church, the large number of Mahomedans
in China, of whom many must have been proselytes, indicates an
interest in religion; and that Buddhism itself was in China once
a spiritual power of no small energy will, I think, be plain to
any one who reads the very interesting extracts in Schott’s essay
on Buddhism in Upper Asia and China. (_Berlin Acad. of Sciences_,
1846.) These seem to be so little known that I will translate
two or three of them. “In the years _Yuan-yeu_ of the Sung (A.D.
1086–1093), a pious matron with her two servants lived entirely to
the Land of Enlightenment. One of the maids said one day to her
companion: ‘To-night I shall pass over to the Realm of Amita.’ The
same night a balsamic odour filled the house, and the maid died
without any preceding illness. On the following day the surviving
maid said to the lady: ‘Yesterday my deceased companion appeared
to me in a dream, and said to me: “Thanks to the persevering
exhortations of our mistress, I am become a partaker of Paradise,
and my blessedness is past all expression in words.”’ The matron
replied: ‘If she will appear to me also then I will believe what
you say.’ Next night the deceased really appeared to her, and
saluted her with respect. The lady asked: ‘May I, for once, visit
the Land of Enlightenment?’ ‘Yea,’ answered the Blessed Soul,
‘thou hast but to follow thy handmaiden.’ The lady followed her
(in her dream), and soon perceived a lake of immeasurable expanse,
overspread with innumerable red and white lotus flowers, of
various sizes, some blooming, some fading. She asked what those
flowers might signify? The maiden replied: ‘These are all human
beings on the earth whose thoughts are turned to the Land of
Enlightenment. The very first longing after the Paradise of Amita
produces a flower in the Celestial Lake, and this becomes daily
larger and more glorious, as the self-improvement of the person
whom it represents advances; in the contrary case, it loses in
glory and fades away.’[2] The matron desired to know the name of an
enlightened one who reposed on one of the flowers, clad in a waving
and wondrously glistening raiment. Her whilom maiden answered:
‘That is Yangkie.’ Then asked she the name of another, and was
answered: ‘That is Mahu.’ The lady then said: ‘At what place shall
I hereafter come into existence?’ Then the Blessed Soul led her a
space further, and showed her a hill that gleamed with gold and
azure. ‘Here,’ said she, ‘is your future abode. You will belong to
the first order of the blessed.’ When the matron awoke she sent
to enquire for Yangkie and Mahu. The first was already departed;
the other still alive and well. And thus the lady learned that the
soul of one who advances in holiness and never turns back, may be
already a dweller in the Land of Enlightenment, even though the
body still sojourn in this transitory world” (pp. 55–56).

What a singular counterpart the striking conclusion here forms to
Dante’s tremendous assault on a still living villain,—or enemy!

——————“che per sua opra
In anima in Cocito già si bagna,
Ed in corpo par vivo ancor di sopra.”
—_Infern._ xxxiii. 155.

Again: “I knew a man who during his life had killed many living
beings, and was at last struck with an apoplexy. The sorrows in
store for his sin-laden soul pained me to the heart; I visited
him, and exhorted him to call on the Amita; but he obstinately
refused, and spoke only of indifferent matters. His illness clouded
his understanding; in consequence of his misdeeds he had become
hardened. What was before such a man when once his eyes were
closed? Wherefore let men be converted while there is yet time! In
this life the night followeth the day, and the winter followeth
the summer; that, all men are aware of. But that life is followed
by death, no man will consider. Oh, what blindness and obduracy is
this!” (p. 93).

Again: “Hoang-ta-tie, of T’ancheu (Changshu-fu in Honan), who lived
under the Sung, followed the craft of a blacksmith. Whenever he
was at his work he used to call without intermission on the name
of Amita Buddha. One day he handed to his neighbours the following
verses of his own composing to be spread about:—

‘Ding dong! The hammer-strokes fall long and fast,
Until the Iron turns to steel at last!
Now shall the long long Day of Rest begin,
The Land of Bliss Eternal calls me in.’

Thereupon he died. But his verses spread all over Honan, and many
learned to call upon Buddha” (103).

Once more: “In my own town there lived a physician by name
Chang-yan-ming. He was a man who never took payment for his
treatment from any one in poor or indifferent circumstances; nay,
he would often make presents to such persons of money or corn to
lighten their lot. If a rich man would have his advice and paid
him a fee, he never looked to see whether it were much or little.
If a patient lay so dangerously ill that Yanming despaired of his
recovery, he would still give him good medicine to comfort his
heart, but never took payment for it. I knew this man for many a
year, and I never heard the word _Money_ pass his lips! One day
a fire broke out in the town, and laid the whole of the houses
in ashes; only that of the physician was spared. His sons and
grandsons reached high dignities” (p. 110).

Of such as this physician the apostle said: “Of a truth I perceive
that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that
feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him.”

[“By the ‘Most High and Heavenly God,’ worshipped by the Chinese,
as Marco Polo reports, evidently the Chinese _T’ien_, ‘Heaven’ is
meant, _Lao t’ien ye_ in the common language. Regarding ‘the God
of things terrestrial,’ whose figure the Chinese, according to M.
Polo, ‘placed below on the ground,’ there can also be no doubt that
he understands the _T’u-ti_, the local ‘Lar’ of the Chinese, to
which they present sacrifices on the floor, near the wall under the
table.

“M. Polo reports, that the Chinese worship their God offering
incense, raising their hands aloft, and gnashing their teeth.
Of course he means that they placed the hands together, or held
kindled joss-stick bundles in their hands, according to the Chinese
custom. The statement of M. Polo _sbattendo i denti_ is very
remarkable. It seems to me, that very few of the Chinese are aware
of the fact, that this custom still exists among the Taouists.
In the rituals of the Taouists the _K’ow-ch’i_ (_K’ow_ = ‘to
knock against,’_ch’i_ = ‘teeth’) is prescribed as a comminatory
and propitiatory act. It is effected by the four upper and lower
foreteeth. The Taouists are obliged before the service begins to
perform a certain number of _K’ow-ch’i_, turning their heads
alternately to the left and to the right, in order to drive away
mundane thoughts and aggressions of bad spirits. The _K’ow-ch’i_
repeated three times is called _ming fa ku_ in Chinese, _i.e._ ‘to
beat the spiritual drum.’ The ritual says, that it is heard by the
Most High Ruler, who is moved by it to grace.

“M. Polo observed this custom among the lay heathen. Indeed, it
appears from a small treatise, written in China more than a hundred
years before M. Polo, that at the time the Chinese author wrote,
all devout men, entering a temple, used to perform the _K’ow-ch’i_,
and considered it an expression of veneration and devotion to
the idols. Thus this custom had been preserved to the time of M.
Polo, who did not fail to mention this strange peculiarity in the
exterior observances of the Chinese. As regards the present time it
seems to me, that this custom is not known among the people, and
even with respect to the Taouists it is only performed on certain
occasions, and not in all Taouist temples.” (_Palladius_, pp.
53–54.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—“True politeness cannot of course be taught by rules
merely, but a great degree of urbanity and kindness is everywhere
shown, whether owing to the naturally placable disposition of the
people, or to the effects of their early instruction in the forms
of politeness.” (_Mid. Kingdom_, II. 68.) As regards the “ornate
style of speech,” a well-bred Chinaman never says _I_ or _You_, but
for the former “the little person,” “the disciple,” “the inferior,”
and so on; and for the latter, “the learned man,” “the master,”
or even “the emperor.” These phrases, however, are not confined
to China, most of them having exact parallels in Hindustani
courtesy. On this subject and the courteous disposition of the
Chinese, see _Fontaney_, in _Lett. Edif._ VII. 287 _seqq._; also
XI. 287 _seqq._; _Semedo_, 36; _Lecomte_, II. 48 _seqq._ There are,
however, strong differences of opinion expressed on this subject;
there is, apparently, much more genuine courtesy in the north than
in the south.

NOTE 5.—“Filial piety is the fundamental principle of the Chinese
polity.” (_Amiot_, V. 129.) “In cases of extreme unfilial conduct,
parents sometimes accuse their children before the magistrate, and
demand his official aid in controlling or punishing them; but such
instances are comparatively rare.... If the parent require his
son to be publicly whipped by the command of the magistrate, the
latter is obliged to order the infliction of the whipping.... If
after punishment the son remain undutiful and disobedient, and his
parents demand it at the hands of the magistrate, the latter must,
with the consent of the maternal uncles of the son, cause him to
be taken out to the high wall in front of the yamun, and have him
there publicly whipped to death.” (_Doolittle_, 102–103.)

NOTE 6.—[Mr. Rockhill writes to me that pocket-spitoons are still
used in China.—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] “In the worship carried on here the Emperor acts as a high priest.
HE only worships; and no subject, however high in rank, can join
in the adoration.” (_Lockhart_.) The actual temple dates from
1420–1430; but the _Institution_ is very ancient, and I think
there is evidence that such a structure existed under the Mongols,
probably only _restored_ by the Ming. [It was built during the 18th
year of the reign of the third Ming Emperor Yung Loh (1403–1425);
it was entirely restored during the 18th year of K’ien Lung;
it was struck by lightning and burnt down in 1889; it is being
rebuilt.—H. C.]

[2] In 1871 I saw in Bond Street an exhibition of (so-called) “spirit”
drawings, _i.e._ drawings alleged to be executed by a “medium” under
extraneous and invisible guidance. A number of these extraordinary
productions (for extraordinary they were undoubtedly) professed to
represent the “Spiritual Flowers” of such and such persons; and the
explanation of this as presented in the catalogue was in substance
exactly that given in the text. It is highly improbable that the
artist had any cognizance of Schott’s Essay, and the coincidence
was assuredly very striking.

END OF VOL I.

[Illustration: Archway erected under the Mongol Dynasty, at Kiu Yung
Kwan, N.W. of Peking.[1]]

[Illustration: MARCO POLO’S ITINERARIES Nᵒ. IV. (Book I, Chapter 36 to
end & chief part of Book II.)

PLAN OF SHANGTU From an Eye-Sketch by Dʳ. S. W. Bushell, 1872

Crossing of the HWANG-HO on road to SINGAN-FU]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] On the walls of this archway is engraved the inscription in six
characters, of which a representation accompanies ch. xv. of
Prologue, note 1.

INDEX

Transcriber’s Note:

- Numbers in _italics_ refer to Prefatory Material in volume I
- ‘i.’ and ‘ii.’ indicate volume referred to
- ‘n’ indicates item is in Notes on that page
- Index has been duplicated from volume II to volume I
- Only links for this volume are enabled

Aás, Asu, _see_ Alans
Abacan, a Tartar general, ii. 255, 261n, 596n
Ábah, _see_ Ávah
Abaji, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Abáḳa (Abaga), Khan of Persia, i. 33n, 36n, 91n, 103n, ii. 465–467,
474, 475, 477n, 495n
Abano, Pietro of, his notice of Polo, _119_
Abash (Habsh), _see_ Abyssinia
Abba Gregory, ii. 433n
Abbás, Sháh, i. 90n
Abbott, Consul Keith E., i. 81n, 82n, 89n, 92n, 96n, 99n, 106n, 111n,
113n, 114n, 125n
Abdul Kuri islands, ii. 405n
—— Mejid, i. 175n
Abeskun (Baxon), on the Caspian, i. 59n
Abher, i. 38n, 82n
Abkashian forests, boxwood of the, i. 57n
_Abnús_, ebony, ii. 272n
Abraha, ruler of Yemen, ii. 434n
Abraiaman, _see_ Brahmans
Abubakr, Atabeg of Fars, i. 85n, ii. 348n
—— Ibrahim, and Mahomed, engineers employed by Kúblái, ii. 168n
Abu’l Abbas Ahmed VII., Khalif of Baghdad, i. 69n
—— Fázl, i. 103n, 168n, 169n, ii. 367, 374n
Abulfeda, his geography, _4_, i. 3n, 6n, 9n, 53n, 57n, 58n, 75n, 81n,
110n, 385n, ii. 237n, 286n, 367n, 377n, 486n, 489n;
at the siege of Acre, 165n
Abulfiez Khan, king of Bokhara, i. 88n
Abu Nasr Mohammed IX., Khalif of Baghdad, i. 69n
—— Saïd, i. 86n, ii. 347n
Abyssinia (Abash), ii. 427 _seqq._, 431n;
its king’s punishment of Soldan of Aden, 428–430;
dominion on the coast, mediæval history and chronology, 434n–437n;
table of kings, 435n;
wars with Mahomedan states, 436n
Acbalec Manzi, “White City of the Manzi frontier,” ii. 33, 34n, 35n
Acbalec or Acbaluc (Cheng-ting fu), ii. 13, 14n
Accambale, king of Champa, ii. 267, 270n
Achan, i. 66n
Achin, Acheh, Achem, ii. 283n, 286n, 295n, 296n, 300n, 303n, 305n,
307n;
its gold and lign-aloes, 287n;
conversion of, 288n;
its great power at one time, 289n;
elephants at, 289n
—— Head, ii. 300n, 307n
Achmath, the Bailo, _see_ Ahmad
Acomat Soldan (Ahmad Sultan), seizes throne of Tabriz, ii. 467;
goes to encounter Argon, 468;
rejects his remonstrance, 469;
defeats and takes him, 470;
hears of Argon’s escape, is taken and put to death, 473;
notes on the history, 470n, 474n
Acorn bread, i. 122n
Acqui, Friar Jacopo d’, his notice of Polo, _54_, _67_, _119_
Acre, i. 17, 22;
Broils at, between Venetians and Genoese, _42_;
plan of, 18n;
captured by Saracens, ii. 165n, 441n;
wickedness of, 442n;
Polos at, 593n
Adam, Bishop and Pope of China, ii. 28n
—— Seth, and the Tree of Life, legend of, i. 135n
Adamodana, Castle of, i. 58n
Adam’s Apple, i. 99n
—— sepulchre on mountain (Adam’s Peak) in Ceylon, ii. 316, 328n;
rubies, 316n;
his teeth, hair, etc., 319–320;
the footmark, 321n–322n
Adel, apparently confused with Aden, ii. 433n, 435n, 440n
Aden, Horse and other Trade with India, ii. 340, 348n, 390, 407, 427,
431, 438;
Soldan’s treatment of a bishop, 428;
Vengeance of King of Abyssinia on him, 430;
confused with Adel, 433n;
account of Kingdom, 438, 439n–440n;
the Sultan, 438–439, 440n;
intercourse and trade with China, tanks, 440n;
view of, 441
Adoration of the Emperor, i. 391
_Adulis_, ii. 432n;
inscription of, 434n
Aegae, Ayas on the site of ancient, i. 16n
Aepyornis and its eggs, ii. 416n–417n
Aëtius, his prescription of musk, i. 279n, ii. 302n;
of camphor, 302n
Afghans, their use of the fat-tailed sheep, i. 100n
Africa, Sea surrounding to the South, ii. 415n
Agassiz, Professor, i. 100n
Agathocles, Coins of, i. 163n
Ἀγαθοῦ δαίμονος, island, ii. 310n
Agha Ali Sháh, present representative of the Old Man of the Mountain,
i. 148n
—— Khan Meheláti, late representative of the Old Man, i. 147n
Aghrukji or Ukuruji, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Agricola, Governor of Cappadocia, etc., i. 45n
Aguil, Mongol general, ii. 136, 138n
Ahmad (Achmath), the Bailo, of Fenaket, his power, oppressions,
death, etc., i. 415 _seqq._, 421n
—— Sultan, Khan of Persia, _see_ Acomat
Ahwaz, province, i. 65n
Aidhab, ii. 439n
Aidhej, or Mal-Amir, i. 85n
Aijaruc, Kaidu’s daughter, ii. 463;
her strength and prowess, 463 _seqq._;
her name, 463
Aikah Nowin, Engineer in Chief of Chinghiz, ii. 168n
Ai-lao (afterwards Nan-chao), ancient name of the Shans, ii. 79n
_Aín Akbari_ (_Ayeen Akbery_), i. 65n, 99n, 101n, 103n, 409n, ii.
116n
Ajmir, ii. 426n
Akbar and Kúblái, a parallel, i. 349n
Ak Bulák salt mines, i. 154n
Akhaltziké (Western Georgia), i. 58n
Akhtuba River, i. 5n, 6n
Ak-khoja, ii. 470n
Aksarai, or Ghori River, i. 152n
Aksu River, i. 172n, 175n
Aktár, i. 96n
Áktásh Valley, i. 172n, 175n
_Alabastri_, ii. 432n
Alacou, _see_ Hulákú
_Aladja_, striped cotton cloth, i. 44n
Alamút, Castle of the Ismailites, i. 141n, 142n, 145n, 148n
Alan country, Alania, i. 57n, ii. 490, 491n
Alans, or Aas, massacre at Chang-chau of, ii. 178;
employed under Mongols, 179n
Alaone, the name, _56_
Alarm Tower, at Cambaluc, i. 375, 378n;
at Kinsay, ii. 189
_Alatcha_, cotton stuff with blue and red stripes, i. 190n
Alau, _see_ Hulákú
Alá’uddin (Alaodin), _see_ Old Man of the Mountain
—— (Alawating of Mufali), an engineer in Kúblái’s service, ii. 167n
—— Khilji, Sultan of Delhi, i. 104n, ii. 163n, 169n, 333n, 398n, 400n
Albenigaras, Mt., ii. 362n
Al Biruni, i. 104n, 174n, ii. 400n
Albuquerque, _see_ D’Alboquerque.
Alchemy, Kúblái’s, i. 423
Aleppo, i. 23n
Alexander the Great, allusions to legends and romances about, _113_,
i. 14n, 129n–133n, ii. 322n, 485n;
his rampart (Iron Gate), i. 50, 53n, 56n, 57n;
the curtains at a banquet given by, 66n;
and the _ferrum candidum_, 93n;
site of his battle with Darius, 128, 138n;
his wife Roxana, 151;
kills a lion, 152n;
Princes claiming descent from (Zulcarniain), 157, 160n;
his horse Bucephalus, 158;
fixes chains on Adam’s Peak, ii. 322n;
said to have colonised Socotra, 409n;
his tower on the border of Darkness, 485n
Alexander III., Pope, i. 231n
Alexander IV., Pope, i. 8n
Alexandria, _9_, ii. 235;
trade from India to, 390, 438
_Alhinde_, _Alfinde_, _Alinde_, _Al-hint_, i. 93n
’Ali and Aliites, i. 140n–141n
Alidada, i. 452n
Alihaiya, Kúblái’s general, ii. 167n
Alinak, ii. 474n
Alligator, in Carajan, ii. 76, 81n;
mode of killing, 77;
eaten, 78, 81n;
prophecy of Bhartpúr about, 149n
Almalik, ii. 462n
Almanacs, Chinese (Tacuin), i. 447, 448n
Almonds, i. 153, 155n
Aloes, Socotrine, ii. 409n
—— wood, _see_ Lign-aloes
_Alor_, war cry, _43_
Al-Ramni, Al-Ramin, _see_ Sumatra
Altai (Altay) Mountains, i. 212, 215n;
the Khan’s burial-place, 246, 269;
used for the Khingan range, 247n, 306n
Altun-Khan, Mountain, i. 247n
—— sovereign, ii. 19n
Amazons, fable of, ii. 405n
Ambergris, ii. 308n, 406, 411, 423, 424n;
how got, 408n
_Amber-rosolli_, i. 114n
Amda Zion, king of Abyssinia, his wars _v._ Mahomedans, ii. 435n
_seqq._;
not the king mentioned by Polo, 436n
Ament, Rev. W. S., i. 361n, 421n, ii. 6, 11, 12
_Ameri_, a kind of Brazil wood, ii. 301n, 380n
Amhara, ii. 436n
Amien, Mien (Burma), ii. 98, 99n
Amita Buddha, i. 460n
Ammianus Marcellinus, ii. 180n
Amoy, ii. 231n, 232n;
harbour, ii. 240n, 241n;
languages, 244n
_Amphora_, _Anfora_, ii. 417n
Amu, Aniu, _see_ Anin
_Amuki_, devoted comrades of the king, ii. 347n
_Anamis_ (Minao) River, i. 114n
Ananda, Kúblái’s grandson, ii. 29n, 31n
Anár, i. 90n
Anaurahta, king of Burma, ii. 99n, 329n
Ancestor Worship, ii. 85, 96n
Anchors, Wooden, ii. 386, 388n
_Andaine_, _andena_, _andanicum_, _see_ Ondanique
Andaman (Angamanain) islands, ii. 306;
described, 307n, 309–312n;
people, 308n, 309, 311n;
form of the word, 310n
_Andan_, _andun_, Wotiak for steel, i. 94n
Andragiri, ii. 301n
Andreas, king of Abyssinia, ii. 435n, 436n
Andrew, Bishop of Zayton, ii. 237n
—— Grand Duke of Rostof and Susdal, i. 7n
_Andromeda ovalifolia_, poisonous, i. 218n
Angamanain, _see_ Andaman
Angan, or Hanjám, i. 115n
_’Angka_, gryphon, _see_ Ruc
Angkor, ruins of, _13_
Ani in Armenia, i. 234n
Animal Patterns, _see_ Patterns
Anin, province, ii. 119, 120n, 121n, 123, 128n, 129n, 266n
Annals of the Indo-Chinese States, ii. 106n
’An-nam, or Tong-king, ii. 120n
Anselmo, Friar, i. 131n
_Anthropoides Virgo_, the demoiselle, i. 297n
Antioch, i. 24n
Antongil Bay, Madagascar, ii. 414n
Aotonomoff, Spasski, his ascent of Ararat, i. 49n
_Apostoille_, word used for Pope, i. 12n
Apples of Paradise (Konars), i. 97, 99n, ii. 365
Apricots, ii. 210n
_’Apuhota_ (Kapukada?), ii. 380n
Apushka (Apusca), Tartar envoy from Persia, i. 32, 33n
Arababni, ii. 436n
Arab geography, _132_
—— colonies in Madagascar, ii. 414n
—— horses, early literary recognition of, ii. 349n;
trade in, _see_ Horses
—— merchants, in Southern India, ii. 376
—— Seamen’s Traditions about Java, ii. 274n
Arabi (Arabs), i. 60
Arabia, ii. 438–451
Arabic character, i. 29n
_Arachosía, arachoti_, ii. 329n, 402n
_Araines_, ii. 461, 462n
Arakan, ii. 100n, 286n, 290n, 298n
Aram (Harám), Place of the, i. 139, 141n
Ararat, Mount, i. 46;
ascents of, 49n
Arblasts, crossbows, ii. 78, 82n, 161n
Arbre Sol, or Arbre Sec, Region of the (Khorasan), _113_, i. 38n, 83,
127, 128n–139n, ii. 466, 474, 475;
tree described—_Chínár_ or Oriental plane, i. 127, 128n–138n;
various readings, 129n;
_Arbre seul_, a wrong reading, i. 129n, 138n;
Tree of the Sun legend, 129n–131n;
Christian legend of the Dry Tree, 131n;
engrafted on legends of Alexander, 132n;
Trees of Grace in Persia, 134n;
Dry Trees in Mahomedan legend, 135n;
in Rabbinical and Buddhist stories, and legends of the Wood of the
Cross, 135n–136n;
Polo’s _Arbre Sec_ to be sought near Damghan, 138n;
Sabaean apologue, 138n;
clue to the term _Arbre Sec_, 148n
Arcali, Arculin, _see_ Erculin
Architectural remains in Indo-China, _13_
Ardeshír Bábekán, first Sassanian king, i. 91n
Ardeshír, last sovereign of Shabánkára, i. 86n
Areca, ii. 309n, 374n
_Areng Saccharifera_, ii. 297n
Arezzo, i. 21n
Argaeus, Mount, i. 44n
Argali, ii. 483n
Arghún, Khan of Persia (Polo’s Argon, Lord of the Levant), _23–24_,
i. 14n, ii. 50, 466–467;
sends an embassy to Kúblái for a wife, i. 32, 33n;
is dead when she arrives, 35, 36n, 38n, 101n;
his unhappy use of the elixir vitae, ii. 369n;
advances against his uncle Ahmad, 467;
harangues his chiefs, 468;
sends Ahmad a remonstrance, 469;
is taken prisoner, 470;
released by certain chiefs, 471;
obtains sovereignty, 472;
his death, 474;
his beauty, 478n
Argons (Arghún), half-breeds, i. 101n, 284, 290n
Arii, Ariana, ii. 402n
Arikbuga, Kúblái’s brother, i. 334n
Arimaspia, ii. 419n
Arimaspian gold, ii. 419n
Ariora-Keshimur, i. 86n, 98, 104n;
meaning of _Ariora_, 104n
Ariosto, i. 17n
Aripo, ii. 335n, 337n
Aristotle, _130_, i. 87n, 130n, ii. 409n
Arjish (Arzizi), i. 45, 49n
Arkasun Noian, ii. 474n
_Arkhaiun_, applied to Oriental Christians or their Clergy, i. 290n
Armenia, Greater, i. 45, 98
Armenia (Hermenia), Lesser or Cilician, _10_, i. 16, 20, 22, 23n, 41
Armenian Christians, i. 290n
Armenians, i. 43, 45, 75
Armillary Zodiacal Sphere, i. 450n
Armour of boiled leather, _see_ Cuirbouly
Arms of Kerman, i. 90, 96n;
of the Tartars, i. 260, 263n, ii. 460
Arredon River, i. 54n
Arrow Divination, i. 243n
Arrows, Tartar, ii. 460
Artacki, i. 281n
Arts, the Seven, i. 13, 14n
Aru, Cumahā, ii. 303n
Arucki, i. 281n
Aruk, ii. 474n
Arulun Tsaghan Balghasun (Chagan-Nor), i. 297n, 306n
Arya Chakravarti, ii. 316n
Aryavartta, the Holy Lands of Indian Buddhism, i. 104n
Arzinga (Erzingan), i. 45, 46n
Arziron (Erzrum), i. 45, 48n
Arzizi (Arjísh), i. 45, 49n
Asbestos, and the Salamander, i. 212, 216n–217n
Asceticism of the Sensin, i. 303;
of the Jogis, ii. 365
Asedin Soldan (Ghaiassuddin Balban, Sultan of Delhi), i. 99, 104n,
105n
Ashar (Asciar), king of Cail, ii. 370, 373n
Ashishin, _see_ Assassins
Ashod, founder of the Bagratid dynasty, i. 53n
Ashurada, i. 59n
Asikan, Mongol general, ii. 260n
Asoka, ii. 328
_Asper_, or _akché_, about a groat, ii. 22, 23n
Assai River, i. 54n
Assassins (Ashishin, Hashíshin), Ismailites, i. 84n, 140;
how the Old Man trained them, 142;
murders by, 144n;
their destruction, 145;
survival and recent circumstances of the sect, 146n
Asses, in Persia, i. 83, 87n, 88, 89n, 123, 225n;
in Mongolia, 224, 225n, 397;
in Madagascar, ii. 413, 421n;
in Abyssinia, 431;
in Far North, 479, 481n
Asterius, Bishop of Amasia in Pontus, i. 66n
Astrakhan (Gittarchan), i. 5n, 6n
Astrolabe, i. 446
Astrology, -ers, in Tangut, i. 205;
of Chinghiz, 241;
at Kúblái’s Court, 301, 391;
at Cambaluc, 446;
of Tibet, ii. 49;
at Kinsay, 191, 203;
in Maabar, 344;
in Coilum, 376
Astronomical instruments, ancient Chinese, i. 378n, 449n–454n
Atabegs, of Mosul, i. 61n;
of Lúr, 85n;
of Fars, 85n, 121n;
of Yezd, 88;
of Kerman, 91n
Atjeh, _see_ Achin
Atkinson’s Narratives, and their credibility, i. 214n, 215n
Atlas, Chinese, in Magliabecchian Library, ii. 193n
Ἀτταγὰς (Black Partridge), i. 99
Attalus, King, i. 66n
At-Thaibi family, i. 121n
Auberoche, Siege of, ii. 163n, 165n
Audh (Oudh), ii. 427n
Aufat, Ifat, ii. 435n
Augury, _see_ Omens
Aung Khan (Unc Can), _see_ Prester John
Aurangzíb, i. 168n
Aurora, Ibn Fozlán’s account of, i. 8n
Aussa, ii. 435n
Ávah, Abah, Ava, one of the cities of the Magi, i. 80, 81n
Avarian, epithet of S. Thomas, ii. 353, 355n–356n
Avebury, Lord, on _couvade_, ii. 93n
Avicenna’s classification of Iron, i. 94n
_Avigi, ′afçi (falco montanus)_, i. 50, 57n
Axum, Inscription, ii. 432n;
Church of, 433n;
Court of, 434n
Ayas (Layas, Aiazzo, etc.), port of
Cilician Armenia, _19_, i. 16, 17n, 20, 22, 41;
Sea fight at, _43_, _46_, _54_
Ayuthia, _13_, ii. 278n, 279n
_Azumiti_, ii. 432n
Azure, Ultramarine (_lapis armenus_) Mines in Badakhshan, i. 157,
162n;
in Tenduc, 284;
ore, 365, 370n

Baba Buzurg, worshipped by the Lurs, i. 85n
Baber, E. C., on Ch’êng-tú, ii. 38n;
on wild oxen of Tibet, 52n;
Lolos, 61n–63n;
Gold River (Brius), 67n;
the word Caindu, 70n;
Talifu, 80n;
Mekong River 88n;
Zardandan, 89n;
site of battle between Kúblái and king of Mien, 105n;
descent of Mien, 108n
Baboons, etymology, ii. 385n, 431
Báb-ul-abwáh, “The Gate of Gates,” Pass of Derbend, i. 53n
Babylon, Babylonia (Cairo or Egypt), i. 22, 24n, ii. 226, 230n;
Sultan of, i. 22, ii. 439, 473
Babylonish garments, i. 66n
_Baccadeo_, indigo, ii. 382n
Baccanor, ii. 386n
Bacon, Roger, i. 94n, 426n;
as geographer, _114_, _131_
Bacsi, _see_ Bakhshi
Bactria, its relation to Greece, i. 160n
Bacu, Sea of (Caspian), i. 59n
Badakhshan (Badashan), i. 98, 104n, 154, 157;
its population, 155n, 160n;
capitals of, 156n;
Mirs of, 156n, 160n;
legend of Alexandrian pedigree of its kings, 157, 160n;
depopulation of, 156n, 163n;
scenery, 158n;
dialects, 160n;
forms of the name, 161n;
great river of (Upper Oxus), 170
Badáún, ii. 427n
Badger, Rev. Dr. G. P., i. 65n, ii. 444n
Badghís, i. 150n, ii. 467
_Badgír_, Wind-catchers, ii. 452, 453n
Badruddín Lúlú, last Atabeg of Mosul, i. 61n
_Báfk_ (Báft), i. 89n, 111n, 122n
Baghdad (Baudas), Baldac, taken by Alaü, Hulákú, i. 63;
its Khalif, 63, 64;
the miracle of the mountain, 69
—— Archbishop of, ii. 407
—— its indigo (_baccadeo_), ii. 382n
Bagratidae, of Armenia, i. 42n;
of Georgia, 52n
Bagration-Mukransky, Prince, i. 53n
Bahár, ii. 427n
Bahárak, plain, i. 156n
Bahá-uddin Ayaz, Wazir of Kalhát, i. 120n
Bahá-ul-hakh, the Saint of Multán, ii. 82n
Bahrámábád, i. 90n, 122n
Bahrámjird Village, i. 113n
Bahrein, ii. 348n
Baiberdon, i. 49n
Baiburt (Paipurth), Castle of, i. 48n, 49n
Baidu Khan, i. 14n, ii. 475n;
seizes throne of Persia, 476;
displaced and killed by Gházán, 476;
alleged to be a Christian, 476, 477n
Bailo, the title, i. 417;
etymology of, 421n
Bakhshi (Bacsi), Lamas, i. 414, 445;
their enchantments, 301, 302, 314n–318n;
various meanings of the word, 314n
Bakhtyáris of Lúristán, the, i. 87n
Baku, oil fields of, i. 46, 49n;
Sea of (Caspian), i. 59n
_Balad-ul-Falfal_ (Malabar), ii. 377n
_Baladi_, ii. 381n
_Balalaika_, a two-stringed Tartar instrument, i. 339n
_Balânjaríyah, devoted lieges_, ii. 347n
Bala-Sagun, i. 232n
Balas rubies, i. 157, 161n, ii. 362n
Baldac, _see_ Baghdad
_Baldacchini_ (_Baudekins_), brocades made at Baghdad, i. 63, 65n
Baldwin II. (de Courtenay), last Latin Emperor of Constantinople, i.
2, 3n
Bali, Island of, ii. 287n
—— in Abyssinia, ii. 436n
_Balios_, i. 421n
_Balish_ (a money of account), ii. 218n
_Balista_, always a crossbow in mediæval times, ii. 161n
Balkh (Balc), i. 151
Balkhash Lake, ii. 459n
Ballads, Genoese, on sea-fights at Ayas and Curzola, _43_ _seqq._
Ballard, Mr., ii. 382n, 387n
Balor, Balaur, Bilaur, Malaur, Bolor, i. 172, 178n–179n
_Bâlos_, Malacca boats with two rudders, i. 119n
_Balsamodendron Mukul_, ii. 397n
Balthazar, of the Magi, i. 78, 82n
Bálti, i. 160n, 178n
_Balustrade_, etymology of the word, _38_
Bamboo (always called canes by Polo), its multifarious uses, i. 299,
307n;
Kúblái’s Chandu Palace made of, 299, 306n;
great, on banks of Caramoran river, ii. 220;
explode loudly when burning, 42, 43, 46n;
large in Tibet, 48n;
ropes of, 171, 174n;
in Che kiang, 221n
Bamian, caves at, i. 156n;
huge recumbent image at, 221n
_Bám-i-Duniah_, “Roof of the World,” i. 171, 174n
Bamm, i. 113n
Bandar Abbás (Bandar-Abbási), i. 86n, 89n, 106n, 122n
Bandith, i. 98, 100n, 151
Bangala, _see_ Bengal
Banzaroff, Dorji, on Shamanism, i. 258n
Baptism, accompanied by branding, in Abyssinia, ii. 427, 432n
Bara, ii. 305n
Barac (Borrak), Khan of Chagatai, i. 9, 10n, 103n;
his war with Arghún, ii. 458n, 467
Baradaeus, Jacob, or James Zanzale, Bishop of Edessa, i. 61n
Barbaro, Josafat, i. 49n, 53n, 100n, 426n, 427n
Barbarossa, Frederic, _36_, i. 82n
Barberino, Francesco da, _36_, _118_, i. 117n
_Barda’at_, saddle-cloths, i. 61n
Bardesir, i. 112n
Bardshír, Bardsír, Bard-i-Ardeshír, i. 92n
Bargu (Barguchin Tugrum, or Barguti), plain, i. 269, 270n
_Barguerlac, Syrrhaptes Pallasii_, a kind of sand grouse, i. 269,
272n;
its migration into England, 273n
Barguzinsk, i. 270n
Barin, Mongol tribe, ii. 148n
Bark, money made from, _108_, i. 423;
fine clothes from, ii. 124, 127n
Barka (Barca), Khan, ruler of Kipchak, i. 4, 5n, 103n, ii. 491;
his war with Hulákú, i. 4, ii. 494 _seqq._
Barkul, i. 345n
_Barkút, búrgút (bearcoote)_, eagle trained to the chase, i. 397,
399n
Barlaam and Josaphat, Story of Saints, from Legend of Buddha, ii.
323n _seqq._
Barley, huskless, i. 158, 162n
Baroch, ii. 367n
_Baron-tala_, name applied by Mongols to Tibet, i. 214n
Barons (Shieng or Sing), Kaan’s twelve, ii. 430
Barozzi, Nicolo, _30_, _70_
Barros, John de, i. 110n, 120n;
geography of, _3_
Barsauma (St. Barsamo), i. 77
Barskul (Barscol), “Leopard Lake,” i. 343, 345n
Bartizan, Kúblái’s wooden, i. 337, 339n
Barus, Barros (Sumatra), its camphor, ii. 302n–303n, 304n
_Barussae insulae_, ii. 310n
_Barygaza_, ii. 397n, 408n
Bashai (Pashai), i. 165n
Bashkirds (Hungarians), i. 57n, ii. 492n
Bashpah, Lama, and the Mongol character called after him, i. 28n,
353n, ii. 46n
Basma, _see_ Pasei
_Basmuls_ (Guasmuls), half-breeds, i. 284, 292n
Basra (Bastra), noted for its date-groves, i. 63, 65n
Bathang, ii. 45n, 48n, 56n, 67n, 70n
Baths, natural hot, near Hormuz i. 110–122n;
in Cathay, 442;
public at Kinsay, ii. 189, 198n
Batigala, Batticalla, ii. 426n, 443n
Batochina, ii. 302n
Bats, large, in India, ii. 345
Battas of Sumatra, and cannibalism, ii. 288n, 298n
Batthála, Bettelar (Patlam in Ceylon), ii. 337n
Battles, Kúblái _v._ Nayan, i. 336;
Tartars _v._ king of Mien, ii. 101;
Caidu _v._ Khan’s forces, 461;
Borrak and Arghún, 467;
Arghún and Ahmad, 470n;
Hulákú and Barka, 496;
Toktai and Nogai, 499
Bátú, Khan of Kipchak, founder of Sarai, _11_, i. 5n, 6n, 245, 247n;
invades Russia, 490, 493n;
made by Polo into two kings—Sain and Patu, 491, 492n;
his character and cruelty, 492n
Baudas, _see_ Baghdad
_Baudekins_ (baldacchini), brocades made at Baghdad, i. 63, 65n
_Bauduin de Sebourc_, _121_ _seqq._, ii. 141, 144, 189, 216
Bavaria, Duke Ernest of, a mediæval Romance, ii. 418n
Bawárij, corsairs, ii. 410n
Bayan Chingsian, Kúblái’s greatest Captain, i. 10n, 334n, 361n, ii.
138n, 208n, 462n;
prophecy connected with his name, 145, 150n;
his conquest of Manzi or South China, 146;
his history and character, 148n, 149n;
his exceptional cruelty at Chang-chau, 179, 180n
Bayan, Khagan of the Avars, ii. 148n
Bayan (Baian), Kúblái’s Master of the Hounds, i. 400, 401n
Bayan, son of Nasruddin, ii. 104n
Bayezid Ilderim, i. 45n
Bdellium, ii. 397n
Beads, Hindu, ii. 338, 347n
Bears, i. 396, 397, 401, ii. 31, 37, 42, 78, 382, 411, 431;
white in Far North, 479, 481n
Beast and bird patterns, _see_ Patterns
Beaten gold, i. 387, 388n
Beaujeu, William de, Master of the Temple, i. 25n
Beauty of—Georgians, i. 50, 53n;
Khorasan women, 128;
Kashmir women, 166;
Sinju women, 276;
_Argons_, or half-breeds, 284;
the Ungrat or Kungurat tribe, 357;
people of Coloman, ii. 122;
Kinsay women, 186;
Kaidu’s daughter, 463;
Arghún Khan, 478;
the Russians, 487
Beds, their arrangement in India, ii. 346, 352n
Beef, not eaten in Maabar, except by the Govi, ii. 341, 350n;
formerly eaten in India, 350n
Bejas of the Red Sea Coast, ii. 425, 432n, 434n
Belgutai, Chinghiz’s stepbrother, i. 334n
“Belic” for “Melic,” ii. 470n
Bell at Cambaluc, great, i. 375, 378n, 414
Bellál Rajas, ii. 367n
_Belledi, balladi_, ginger so called, ii. 381n;
Spanish use of the word, _ib._
Benares, brocades of, i. 66n
Bendocquedar, _see_ Bundúkdári, Bíbars
Benedict XII., Pope, ii. 179n
Bengal (Bangala), _12_;
king of Mien (Burma) and, ii. 98;
why Polo couples these, 99n;
relations between Burma and, 99n, 114;
claim asserted by king of Burma to, 100n;
alleged Mongol invasion of, 115n;
its distance from Caugigu, 120;
its currency, 123;
confused with Pegu by Polo, 128n, 131n
Beni Búya dynasty, i. 91n
Benjamin of Tudela, on Alexander’s Rampart, i. 54n;
on the Gryphon, ii. 418n
Benzoin, etymology of, ii. 286n, 396n
Berard, Thos., Master of the Temple, i. 23, 24n
Berbera, Sea of, ii. 415n
Berchet, G., _27_, ii. 507n
Bereké, Bátu Khan’s brother, i. 5n
Bernier, on Kashmir women’s beauty, i. 169n
_Berrie_, the Arabic Băríya, a desert, i. 237n
Bettelar, rendezvous of Pearl Fishers, ii. 331, 337n
_Beyamini_, wild oxen of Tibet, ii. 50, 52n
Bezant, i. 405, 424, 425, 426n, 427n, 444, ii. 41n, 186, 218n, 346n,
349n, 479;
value of, 592n
_Bhagavata_, ii. 346n
Bhamó, and River of, ii. 70n, 105n, 107n, 108n, 113n
Bhartpúr, prophecy about, ii. 149n
Bhattis, the, i. 104n
Bháwalpúr, i. 104n
“Bhim’s Baby,” colossal idol at Dhamnár caves, i. 221n
Bianco’s, Andrea, maps, i. 133n
Biar, ii. 305n
Bibars Bundúkdári, _see_ Bundúkdári
Bielo Osero, ii. 486n
_Bigoncio_, a firkin, i. 384n
Bilúchis, i. 101n;
their robber raids, 106n;
Lumri or Numri, 114n
Binh Thuan (Champa), ii. 268n
Binkin, ii. 230n
Bintang (Pentam), ii. 280, 284
Birch-bark vessels, i. 309n;
books, ii. 124, 127n
Bír-dhúl, or Bujardawal, cap. of Ma’bar, ii. 335n
Bird-hunts, i. 269, 272n
Birdwood, Sir G., ii. 396n, 446n, 449n
Birhōrs of Chuta Nagpúr, ii. 298n
Bir-Pandi, or Pira-Bandi, ii. 333n, 334n
Birthday, celebration of Kúblái’s, i. 387
Bishbalik (Urumtsi), i. 214n, 440n
Bishop, of Male Island, ii. 404;
story of an Abyssinian, 428
Bitter bread, i. 110, 122n
—— water, i. 110, 122n, 194
Blac, Blachia (Lac, Wallach), ii. 489n
_Black-bone_, Chinese name for Lolos, ii. 63n
Black Crane (Kará Togorü), i. 296, 297n
—— Saints, White Devils in India, ii. 355, 359n
—— Sea, M. Maurum _v._ Nigrum, i. 2, 3n, 57n
—— Sect of Tibet, i. 324n
Blacker, the more beautiful, ii. 355
Blaeuw, map, i. 102n
Blochmann, Professor H., i. 114n, ii. 116n
Block-books, supposed to have been introduced from China, _139_
Block-printing in Persia, i. 429n
Blood-sucking, Tartar, i. 261, 264n
_Blous, bloies_, i. 327n
Boar’s tusks, huge (Hipp.), ii. 413
_Boccassini_, i. 62n
Bode, Baron de, i. 85n
Bodhisatva Avalok., ii. 265n
Bodleian MS. of Polo, _18_, _92_, _94_;
list of miniatures in, ii. 528n
Boeach, mistake for Locac, and its supposed position, ii. 280n
Boemond, Prince of Antioch and Tripoli, letter of Bibar to, i. 24n
Boga (Bukā), a great Mongol officer, delivers Arghún, ii. 471, 472,
474n
Boghra Khan, i. 188n
Bohea country, ii. 222n, 224n
Bohra, sect of W. India, i. 148n
Boikoff, Russian Envoy, i. 218n
Bokhara (Bocara), i. 9, 10
Boleyn, Anne, her use of buckram, i. 47n
Bolgana, Queen, _see_ Bulughán
Bolgarskoye (called also Uspenskoye), i. 7n
_Bolghar_, _borgal_, _borghal_, Russia leather, i. 6n, 394, 395n
Bolghar (Bolgara), on the Volga, i. 4, 6n, ii. 481n, 486n, 493n;
ruins of, i. 7n;
court of, 384n
Bolivar, Padre, S. J., his account of the Condor (_Rukh_) of Africa,
ii. 420n, 597n
Bolor, i. 172, 178n, 179n
Bombay, ii. 396n, 449n
Bonaparte, Prince Roland, _Recueil des Documents de l’Époque
Mongole_, i. 14n, 28n
Bonga, ii. 96n
Bonheur, Rosa, i. 277n
Boniface VIII., Pope, _44_, _52_, _54_, i. 23n
Bonin, C. E., i. 203n, 249n, 276n, 282n, 286n
Bonocio di Mestro, _67_
Bonpos, old Tibetan Sect, i. 314n, 321n, 323n
Bonús, ebony, ii. 268, 272n
Bonvalot, i. 200n
Book of Marco Polo, its contents, _80_;
original language, French, _81_;
oldest Italian MS., _82_;
“Geographic Text,” in rude French, _83_ _seqq._;
various types of Text—(1) “Geographic,” _90_;
(2) Pauthier’s MSS., _92_;
(3) Pipino s Latin, _95_;
Preface to, ii. 525n;
Grynæus’ Latin, _95_;
Müller’s reprint, _96_;
(4) Ramusio’s Italian edition, its peculiarities, _96–101_;
probable truth about it, _99_;
bases of it, _100_;
MS. and some of its peculiarities, _101_;
general view of the relations of the texts, _101_;
notice of an old Irish version, 102;
geographical data, _109_;
how far influenced in form by Rustician, _112_;
perhaps in description of battles, _113_;
diffusion and number of MSS., _116_;
basis of present version, _141_ _seqq._;
specimens of different recensions of text, ii. 522n–524n;
distribution of MSS., 526n;
miniatures in, 527n, 529n;
list of MSS., 532n–552n;
Tabular view of the filiation of chief MSS., 552;
Bibliography, 553n–582n;
titles of works cited, 582n–590n;
Spanish edition, 598n
Bore in Hang-chau Estuary, ii. 208n
_Borgal_, _see_ _Bolghar_
Bormans, Stanislas, ii. 602n, 603n
Born, Bertram de, _44_
Borneo, camphor, _see_ Camphor
—— tailed men of, ii. 302n
Boro Bodor, Buddhist Monument, Java, _13_, ii. 275n
Borrak, Amir, Prince of Kerman (Kutlugh Sultan?), i. 91n
—— Khan of Chaghatai, _see_ Barac
Borús, the, ii. 310n
Bostam, i. 138n
_Boswellia thurifera_, ii. 396n, 446n, 448n;
_serrata_, 446n;
_Carterii_, 448n;
_Bhauda-jiana_, 448n;
_papyrifera_, 448n;
_Frereana_, 448n;
_glabra_, 396n
Bouqueran, _see_ Buckram
Bourne, F. S. A., ii. 60n, 131n
Boxwood forests in Georgia, i. 50, 57n
_Bozzí_, i. 212n
Bra, the word, _45_
Bracelets, in Anin, ii. 119
Bragadino, Marco, husband of Marco Polo’s daughter, Fantina, _76_
—— Pietro, _76_
Brahmanical thread, ii. 363
Brahmans (Abraiaman), fish-charmers to the pearl fishery, ii. 332,
337n;
their character and virtues, 363, 367n;
their king, 364;
their omens, 364, 368n, 369n;
longevity, 365;
_Chughi_, 365;
Palladian legend of, 405n
Brahma’s temple, Hang-chau, ii. 212n, 213n
Brahuis, i. 101n
Brakhimof, early capital of Bulgaria, i. 7n
Brambanan, ruins at, _13_
Bran (Tibetan _tsamba_), parched barley, i. 303, 321n
Brazil wood, in Locac, ii. 276, 279n;
in Sumatra, 299;
manner of growth, _ib._, 309n;
in Ceylon, 313, 315n;
in Coilum (_Coilumin_), 375, 380n;
different kinds, _ib._;
vicissitudes of the word, 380n;
its use prohibited by Painters’ Guild, 382n
Bread, bitter, i. 110, 122n
Brephung monastery, i. 319n
_Bretesche_, i. 339n
Bretschneider, Dr. Emil (_Medical Researches_), ruins of Bolghar,
i. 7n;
the Uíghúr character, 28n;
Caucasian Wall, 54n;
use of muslin in Samarkand, 62n;
on _nakh_ and _nachetti_, 65n;
Hulákú’s expedition to West Asia, 66n, 85n, 146n, 148n;
an extract from the _Yüan Si_, 115n;
Badakhshan, 161n;
Kashgar, 183n;
Shachau, 206n;
Kamul, 211n;
Chingintalas, 214n;
the _Stipa inebrians_, 219n;
the Utikien Uigúrs, 227n;
Erdenidso Monastery, 228n;
Belasagun, 232n;
death of Chinghiz, 248n;
_tung lo_ or _kumiz_, 259n;
Kúblái’s death, 334n;
Peking, 366n, 368n, 370n, 372n, 376n–378n, ii. 5n, 6n, 8n;
_verniques_, i. 384n;
clepsydra, 385n;
the Bularguchi, 408n;
Achmath’s biography, 421n;
paper-money, 430n;
post stations, 437n;
Chinese intoxicating drinks, 441n;
regulations for time of dearth, 444n;
Lu-Ku-K’iao Bridge, ii. 8n;
introduction of plants from Asia into China, 16n;
_morus alba_, 25n;
Tibet, 46n;
bamboo explosions, 46n;
the Si-fans, 60n;
Cara-jang and Chagan-jang, 73n;
Nasr-uddin, 104n;
the Alans, 180n;
rhubarb in Tangut, 183n;
Polo’s “large pears,” 210n;
on galangal, 229n;
on sugar, 230n;
on Zayton, 238n;
on wood-oil, 252n;
on ostrich, 437n;
on Si-la-ni, 316n;
on frankincense, 449n;
on Magyars, 492n;
on Mongol invasion of Poland and Silesia, 493n
Brichu (Brius, the Upper Kiang), ii. 67n
Bridges of Pulisanghin, ii. 3;
Sindafu (Ch’êngtu), 37;
Suchau, 181;
Kinsay, 185, 187, 194n, 201, 212;
Kien-ning fu, 225, 228n;
Fuchau, 233n, 234n;
Zayton, or Chinchau, 241n
Brine-wells, _see_ Salt
Brius River (Kin-sha Kiang, Gold River), ii. 36, 40n, 56, 67n
Brown, G. G., ii. 35n
—— Sir Thomas, ii. 420n, 424n;
on Polo, _115_
Bruce’s Abyssinian Chronology, ii. 435n _seqq._
Brunetto Latini’s Book, _Li Tresor_, _88_, _117_
Brunhilda, ii. 466n
Bruun, Professor Ph., of Odessa, i. 6n, 54n, 232n–235n
Bucephala, of Alexander, i. 105n
Bucephalus, breed of, i. 158, 162n
Buckrams, of Arzinga, i. 45;
described, 47n;
etymology, 48n;
at Mardin, 61, 62n;
in Tibet, ii. 45;
at Mutfili, 361, 363n;
Malabar, 389, 395, 398, 431
Buddha, _see_ Sakya Muni
Buddhism, Buddhists, _see_ Idolatry, Idolaters
Buddhist Decalogue, i. 170n
Buffaloes in Anin, ii. 119
Buffet and vessels of Kúblái’s table, i. 382, 384n
_Bugaei_, ii. 432n
Buka (Boga), a great Mongol chief, ii. 471, 472, 474n
Buka Bosha, 1st Mongolian Governor of Bokhara, i. 10n
Búkú Khan, of the Hoei-Hu, or Uighúrs, i. 227n
Bularguji (Bularguchi), “The Keeper of Lost Property,” i. 403, 407n
Bulgaria, Great, ii. 286n
Bulughán (Bolgana), Queen, _23_, i. 32, 33n, 38n, ii. 474n
—— another, ii. 475n
Bundúkdár, Amír Aláuddín Aidekín (“The Arblaster”), i. 24n
Bundúkdári, Malik Dáhir Ruknuddín Bíbars (Bendocquedar), Mameluke
Sultan of Egypt, i. 22, 23n–25n, 145n, ii. 424n, 433n, 436n, 494n;
killed by kumiz, 259n
Buraets, or Burgats, the, i. 258n, 283n
Búrkán Káldún, i. 247n
Burma (or Ava), King of, ii. 98, 99n.
(_See_ also Mien.)
Burnell, Arthur, ii. 335n, 359n, 386n
Burning the Dead, _see_ Cremation
—— heretical books, i. 321n
—— paper-money, etc., at funerals, i. 204, 208n, 267, 268n, ii. 191
—— Widows in South India, ii. 341, 349n
Burrough, Christopher, i. 9n
Burton, Captain R. F., ii. 597n
Bushell, Dr. S. W., his visit to Shang-tu, i. 26n, 304n, 305n, 412n;
on the Khitan Scripts, 28n;
Tangut rulers, 205n;
orders for post-horses, 353n
Butchers, in Kashmir, i. 167;
Tibet, 170n;
S. India, ii. 342
Butiflis (Mutfili), ii. 362n
Butler, _Hudibras_, ii. 92n
Buyid dynasty, i. 86n

Ca’ Polo, Ca’ Milion, Corte del Millioni, the house of the Polos at
Venice, _4_, _26_ _seqq._, _53_, _70_, _77_
Caaju, castle of, i. 244
Cabs, Peking, ii. 211n
Cacanfu (Hokiang-fu), ii. 127, 132
Cachanfu (P’uchau-fu, Ho-chung-fu), ii. 22, 25n
Cachar Modun, i. 404, 408n
Cachilpatnam, ii. 387n
_Cadmia_, i. 126n
Caesalpinia, ii. 380n;
and _see_ Brazil
Caesarea of Cappadocia (Casaria, Kaisaríya), i. 43, 44n
Caichu, castle of (Kiai-chau, or Hiai-chau?), ii. 17, 19n, 26n
Caidu, _see_ Kaidu
Caiju, on the Hwang-Ho, ii. 142
—— on the Kiang, Kwachau, ii. 171, 174
Cail (Káyal), ii. 370, 372n–373n;
a great port of Commerce, 370, 373n;
the king, _ib._;
identified, 372;
meaning of name, _ib._;
remains of, _ib._
Caindu (K’ien-ch’ang), a region of Eastern Tibet, ii. 53, 70n
Caingan (Ciangan, Kiahing), ii. 184n, 185n
Cairo, ii. 439n;
museum at, 424n;
ventilators at, 452n.
(_See_ Babylon.)
Caiton, _see_ Zayton
Cala Ataperistan (Kala’ Atishparastán), “Castle of the Fire
Worshippers,” i. 78
Calachan (Kalaján), i. 281, 282n
Calaiate, Calatu, _see_ Kalhát
Calamanz, the word, ii. 272n
Calamina, city, ii. 357n
Caldwell, Rev. Dr. R., on devil-dancing among the Shanars, ii. 97n;
on name of Ceylon, 314n;
on Shahr-Mandi and Sundara Pandi, 333n;
on the Tower at Negapatam, 336n;
etymology of Chilaw, 337n;
on Pacauta, 346n;
Govis, 349n;
singular custom of arrest, 350n–351n;
rainy season, 351n;
food of horses, _ib._;
Shanar devil-images, 359n;
_choiach_, 368n;
Cail, or Kayál city, 372n, 373n;
_Kolkhoi_, 373n;
King Ashar of Cail, _ib._;
_Kollam_ 377n;
_Pinati_, 380n;
etymology of Sapong, _ib._;
Cape Comorin, 383n
Calendar, Ecclesiastical Buddhist, i. 220, 222n;
the Tartar, 447, 448n;
of Brahmans, ii. 368n–369n;
of Documents relating to Marco Polo and his family, 505n _seqq._
Calicut, ii. 380n, 381n, 388n, 391n, 440n;
King of, and his costume, 346n
Calif, _see_ Khalif
Caligine, Calizene (Khálij, a canal from Nile), ii. 439n
Camadi (City of Dakiánús), ruined, i. 97, 113n
Cambaluc (Khanbaligh, or Peking), capital of Cathay, _12_, i. 38n,
ii. 3, 132, 213n, 320;
Kúblái’s return thither after defeating Nayan, i. 348;
the palace, 362;
the city, 374;
its size, walls, gates, and streets, the Bell Tower, etc.,
375n–378n;
period of khan’s stay there, 411;
its suburbs and hostelries, 412;
cemeteries, women, patrols, 414;
its traffic, 415;
the Emperor’s Mint, 423;
palace of the Twelve Barons, 431;
roads radiating from, 433;
astrologers of, 446
Cambay (Cambaet, Cambeth, Kunbáyat), kingdom of, ii. 394n, 397, 398n,
403n, 426n, 440n, 443n
Cambuscan, of Chaucer, corruption of Chinghiz, i. 247n
Camel-bird, _see_ Ostrich
Camels, mange treated with oil, i. 46;
camlets from wool of, 281, 284;
white, 281, 283n;
incensing, 309n;
alleged to be eaten in Madagascar, ii. 411;
really eaten in Magadoxo, 413n;
ridden in war, 423, 425n
Camexu, Kamichu, _see_ Campichu
Camlets (cammellotti), i. 281, 283n, 284
Camoens, ii. 266n
Camphor (_Laurus Camphora_) trees in Fo-kien, ii. 234, 237n
—— of Sumatra, ii. 287n;
Fansuri, 299, 302n;
earliest mention of, 302n;
superstitions regarding, 303n;
description of the tree, _Dryabalanops Camphora_, 303n–304n;
value attached by Chinese to, 304n;
recent prices of, _ib._;
its use with betel, 371, 374n
—— oil, ii. 304n
Campichu (Kanchau), city of, i. 219, 220n
Camul (Kamul), province, i. 209, 211n, 214n
_Camut_, fine shagreen leather, i. 394, 395n
Canal, Grand, of China, ii. 132, 139, 140, 141n, 143n, 152n, 154n,
209n, 222n;
construction of, 174, 175n
Canale, Cristoforo, MS. by, _34_, _37_
—— Martino da, French Chronicle of Venice by, _88_
Cananor, kingdom, ii. 388n
Cananore, ii. 386n, 387n
Canara, ii. 390n, 397n
Cancamum, ii. 397n
_Canela brava_, ii. 390n
Canes, Polo’s name for bamboos, _q.v._
Cannibalism, ii. 293, 294, 298n, 311n, 312n;
ascribed to Tibetans, Kashmiris, etc., i. 301, 312n, 313n;
to Hill-people in Fo-kien, ii. 225, 228n;
to islanders in Seas of China and India, 264;
in Sumatra, 284, 288n;
regulations of the Battas, 288n;
ascribed to Andaman islanders, 309, 311n
Cannibals, _i.e._ Caribs, ii. 311n, 405n
Canonical Hours, ii. 368–369n
Cansay, _see_ Kinsay
Canton, _3_, ii. 199n, 237n
Cape Comorin, _see_ Comari, Temple at, _76_
—— Corrientes (of Currents), ii. 415n, 417n, 426n
—— Delgado, ii. 424n
—— of Good Hope, ii. 417n
_Capidoglio_ (_Capdoille_), sperm-whale, ii. 414n
Cappadocian horses, i. 44n
Capus, G., i. 129n 162n
Caracoron (Kará Korum), i. 66n, 226, 227n, 269, ii. 460, 462n
Carajan (Caraian, Karájang, or Yun-nan), province, _21_, ii. 64, 66,
67n, 72n, 76, 86
Caramoran River (Hwang-Ho), ii. 142, 143n, 144n, 151
Carans, or Scarans, i. 100n
Caraonas (Karaunahs), a robber tribe, i. 98, 101n, 121n
Carats, i. 359n
_Carbine_, etymology of, i. 101n
Cardinal’s Wit, i. 21n
Caribs, _i.e._ cannibals, ii. 311n, 405n
Carpets, of Turcomania (Turkey), i. 43, 44n;
Persian, 66n;
Kerman, 96n
Carriages, at Kinsay, ii. 205, 206;
Chinese, 211n
Carrion, shot from engines, ii. 163n
_Carta Catalana_, Catalan Map of 1375, _134_, i. 57n, 59n, 82n, 161n,
ii. 221n, 243n, 286n, 362n, 386, 396n, 494n
_Carte_, _à la_, ii. 486n
Carts, Mongol, i. 254n
Casan, _see_ Gházán Khan
Casaria (Caesarea of Cappadocia), i. 43, 44n
Cascar (Kashgar), i. 180, 182n;
_Chaukans_ of, 193n
Casem, _see_ Kishm
Caspian Sea (Sea of Ghel or Ghelan), ancient error about, _2_, _129_;
its numerous names, i. 52, 58n, 59n, ii. 494n
Cassay, _see_ Kinsay
Cassia, ii. 59n, 60n, 390n, 391n
—— buds, ii. 59n, 391n
—— fistula, ii. 398n
Castaldi, Panfilo, his alleged invention of movable types, _139–140_
Castambol, i. 45n
Castelli, P. Cristoforo di, i. 52n, 53n
Casvin (Kazvín), a kingdom of Persia, i. 83, 84n, 101n, 141n
Catalan Navy, _38–39_
Cathay (Northern China), _3_;
origin of name, _11_, _15_, i. 60, 76n, 285, 414, 418, 441, ii. 10,
127, 132, 135, 139, 140, 192, 391n, 457;
coal in, i. 442;
idols, ii. 263;
Cambaluc, the capital of, _see_ Cambaluc
Cathayans, _v_. Ahmad, i. 415 _et seqq._;
their wine, 441;
astrologers, 446;
religion, 456;
politeness, filial duty, gaol deliveries, gambling, 457
Catholics, ii. 407;
Catholicos, of Sis, i. 42n;
of the Nestorians, 61n, 62n
Cators (_chakors_), great partridges, i. 296, 297n
Cat’s Head Tablet, i. 356n
Cats in China, ii. 350n
Caucasian Wall, i. 53n, 54n
Caugigu, province, ii. 116, 120, 123, 128n, 131n
Caulking, of Chinese ships, ii. 250, 251n
Cauly, Kauli (Corea), i. 343, 345n
Causeway, south of the Yellow River, ii. 153n
Cauterising children’s heads, ii. 432n
Cave-houses, i. 154, 156n, ii. 150n
Cavo de Eli, ii. 386n
—— de Diab, ii. 417n
Cayu (Kao-yu), ii. 152
Celtic Church, ii. 370n
Census, of houses in Kinsay, ii. 192;
tickets, _ib._
Ceremonial of Mongol Court, _see_ Etiquette
Ceylon (Seilan), ii. 312–314;
circuit of, 310n;
etymology of, 314n;
customs of natives, 315;
mountain of Adam’s (_alias_ Sagamoni Borcan’s) Sepulchre, 316,
321n;
history of Buddha, 317;
origin of idolatry, 318 _seqq._;
subject to China, 392n
Ceylon, King of, his pearl-ponds, ii. 337n
Chachan (Charchan, Charchand), i. 192n, 194, 195n, 196n
Chagatai (Sigatay), Kúblái’s uncle, son of Chinghiz, _10_, i. 10n,
14n, 98, 102n, 183, 186n, ii. 457, 458n, 459
Chaghán-Jáng, ii. 72n, 73n
Chaghan-Kuren, ii. 23n
Chaghan-Nor (“White Lake”), N.E. of Kamul, i. 214n
—— (Chaghan, or Tsaghan Balghasun), site of Kúblái’s palace, i. 296,
297n, 306n, 422n, ii. 14n
Chairs, silver, i. 351, 355n
_Chakor_ (_cator_), great partridges, i. 296, 297n
Chalcedony and jasper, i. 191, 193n
Chalukya Malla kings, ii. 336n
Champa (Chamba), kingdom of, ii. 266, 268n, 424, 426n, 596n;
Kúblái’s expedition _v._, 267;
the king and his wives, 268, 271n;
products, 268, 271n–272n;
locality, 269–270n;
invaded by king of Lukyn, 279n
Chandra Banu, ii. 315n
Chandu (Shangtu), city of peace of Kúblái, i. 25, 298, 304n, 410–411,
435
Changan, ii. 182, 184n
Chang-chau (Chinginju), ii. 178, 179n
—— in Fo-kien, ii. 233n, 238n;
Zayton(?), 238n;
Christian remains at, 240n–241n
Ch’ang Ch’un, _travels_, i. 62n
Changgan (Chang-ngan), ii. 27–29n
_Chang-kia-Kau_, the gate in the Great Wall, i. 56n
Chang K’ien, ii. 16n
Chang-shan (Chanshan), ii. 198n, 199n, 219, 221n, 222n, 224n
Ch’ang Te (the Chinese traveller), _Si Shi Ki_, i. 64n, 66n
Chang Te-hui, a Chinese teacher, i. 309n
Chang-y (Chenchu), i. 417–419, 422n
Chang Yao, Chinese general, i. 211n
_Cháo de Bux_ (_Cavo di Bussi_), boxwood, i. 57n
Chaohien, Sung Prince, ii. 150n
_Cháo-Khánahs_, bank-note offices in Persia, i. 429n
Cháo Naiman Sumé Khotan, or Shangtu, “city of the 108 temples,”
i. 304n
_Cháo_, paper-money, i. 426n, 429n
_Cháo_, title of Siamese and Shan Princes, ii. 73n
Chaotong, ii. 130n
Chapu, ii. 199n
Characters, written, four acquired by Marco Polo, i. 27;
one in Manzi, but divers spoken dialects, ii. 236
Charchan (Chachan of Johnson, Charchand), i. 192n, 194, 195n, 196n
Charcoal, store in Peking, palace garden of, i. 370n
Charities, Kúblái’s, i. 439, 443, 444;
Buddhistic and Chinese, 446n;
at Kinsay, ii. 188, 198n
Charles VIII., of France, i. 398n
Chau dynasty, i. 347n
Chaucer, quoted, i. 3n, 5n, 17n, 161n, 247n, 386n, ii. 11n
_Chaukans_, temporary wives at Kashgar, i. 193
Chaul, ii. 367n
Cheapness in China, ii. 202
Cheetas, or hunting leopards, i. 397, 398n
Cheh-kiang, cremation common during Sung dynasty in, ii. 135n;
roads into Fo-kien from, 224n
Cheinan, Gulf of, ii. 266
Chenchau, or Iching hien, ii. 173n, 174n
Chenching (Cochin-China), ii. 268n–269n, 277n
Chenchu (Chang-y), conspires with Vanchu _v._ Ahmad, i. 417–419, 422n
Ch’eng-ting fu, ii. 13, 14n
Ch’êng-Tsu (Yung-lo), Emperor, ii. 392n
Ch’êng-tu (Sze-ch’wan), ii. 32n, 34n, 35n
Ch’êngtu-fu (Sindafu), ii. 36, 37n
Cheu, the Seven, ii. 277n
Chibai and Chiban, ii. 459, 462n
Chichiklik Pass, i. 172n, 175n
Chien-ch’ang (Caindu), ii. 70n.
(_See_ K’ien ch’ang.)
Chihli, plain of, ii. 14n
Chilaw, ii. 337n
Chiliánwála, battlefield of, i. 105n
Chilu-ku, last Karakhitai king, ii. 20n
Chin, Sea of, ii. 264, 265, 266n, 270n
China, _134_;
_Imperial Maritime Customs Returns for 1900_, ii. 173n;
Dominicans in, 240n;
paved roads in, 189, 198n;
relations with Korea and Japan, 262n;
the name, 265n;
king of Malacca at Court of, 282n;
trade from Arabia to, 348n;
from Sofala in Africa, 400n.
(_See_ also Cathay and Manzi.)
Chinangli (T’sinan-fu), ii. 133, 135, 137n
_Chínár_, Oriental planes, i. 128n, 138n
Chinchau, Chincheo, Chinchew, Chwanchew, Tswanchau, _see_ Zayton
Chinese, Polo ignorant of the languages, _110_, i. 29n;
epigrams, 170n;
funeral and mourning customs, 207n, ii. 191;
feeling towards Kúblái, i. 421n;
religion and irreligion, 456, 458n;
their politeness and filial piety, 457, 462n;
gambling, 457;
character for integrity, ii. 204, 210n;
written character and varieties of dialect, 236;
ships, 249 _seqq._;
pagodas at Negapatam and elsewhere, 336n;
coins found in Southern India, 337n;
pottery, 372n–373n;
trade and intercourse with Southern India, 373n, 378n, 386, 390,
392n
Chinghian-fu (Chinkiang-fu), ii. 175, 176, 177n
Chinghiz Khan, _10_, _11_, i. 5n, 10n, 12n, ii. 458n, 479, 481n;
reported to be a Christian, i. 14n;
Aung Khan’s saying of, 27n;
his use of Uíghúr character, 28n;
Erzrum taken by, 49n;
harries Balkh, 151n;
captures Talikan, 154n;
ravages Badakhshan, 163n;
his respect for Christians, 186n, 242n, 243n;
subjugates Kutchluk Khân, 189n;
his campaigns in Tangut, 206n, 218n, 225n, 281n;
Rubruquis’ account of, 237n, 239n;
made king of the Tartars, 238;
his system of conquests, 238;
and Prester John, 239–241;
divining by twigs—presage of victory, 241;
defeats and slays Prester John, 244;
his death and burial-place, 244, 245n, 249n;
his aim at conquest of the world, 245n;
his funeral, 250n;
his army, 262, 265n;
defeats the Merkits, 270n;
relations between Prester John’s and his families, 284, 288n;
the Horiad tribe, 300, 308n;
his prophecy about Kúblái, 331n;
rewards his captains, 351n;
captures Peking, ii. 8n;
defeats and slays Taiyang Khan, 20n;
his alleged invasion of Tibet, 46n;
his mechanical artillery, 168n;
his cruelty, 181n;
Table of Genealogy of his House, 505n
Chinghiz Tora, ii. 481n
Ching-hoang tower at Hangchau-fu, ii. 214n
Chinginju (Chang-chau), ii. 178
Chingintalas, province, i. 212;
its identification, 214n, 215n
Chingkim, Chinkin, Chimkin, Kúblái’s favourite son and heir-apparent,
i. 38n, 359, 360n, 418, 422n;
his palace, 366, 372n
Chingsang, Ching-siang (Chinisan), title of a Chief Minister of
State, i. 432n, ii. 145, 148n, 150n, 218n
Chingting-fu (Acbaluc), ii. 13, 14n
Chingtsu, or Yung-lo, Emperor, ii. 392n
_Chíní_, coarse sugar, ii. 230n
Chinju (Tinju), ii. 153, 154n
_Chin-tan_, or _Chínasthána_, Chinese etymology of, ii. 119n
Chinuchi, Cunichi, Kúblái’s Masters of the Hounds, i. 400, 401n
Chipangu (Japan), ii. 253, 256n;
account of Kúblái’s expedition _v._, 255, 258;
its disasters, 255–256;
history of expedition, 260n _seqq._;
relations with China and Korea, 262n
Chitral, i. 154n, 160n, 165n, 166n
_Chloroxylon Dupada_, ii. 397n
Cho-chau (Juju), ii. 10, 11n, 131n
_Choiach_, the term, ii. 364, 368n
Chola, or Sola-desam (Soli, Tanjore), ii. 335n, 336n, 364, 368n
Chonka (Fo-kien), kingdom of, ii. 231, 232n, 236;
explanation of name, 232n
Chonkwé, ii. 232n
Chorcha, _see_ Churchin
Christian, astrologers, i. 241, 446;
churches in China, early, ii. 27n;
inscription of Singanfu, 28n;
Alans in the Mongol service, ii. 178, 179n
Christianity, attributed to Chinghizide princes, i. 14n, ii. 476,
477n;
Kúblái’s views on, i. 344n
—— former, of Socotra, ii. 410n
Christians, of the Greek rite, Georgians, i. 50;
and Russians, ii. 486;
Jacobite and Nestorian, at Mosul, i. 46, 60, 61n;
among the Kurds, 60, 62n;
and the Khalif of Baghdad—the miracle of the mountain and the
one-eyed cobbler, 68–73;
Kashgar, 182, 183n;
in Samarkand, 183, 186n;
the miracle of the stone removed, 185;
Yarkand, 187;
Tangut, 203, 207n;
Chingintalas, 212;
Suh-chau, 217;
Kan-chau, 219;
in Chinghiz’s camp, 241;
Erguiul and Sinju, 274;
Egrigaia, 281;
Tenduc, 285;
Nayan and the Khan’s decision, 339, 344;
at Kúblái’s Court, 388;
in Yun-nan, ii. 66, 74n;
Cacanfu, 132;
Yang-chau, 154n;
churches at Chin-kiang fu, 177;
at Kinsay, 192;
St. Thomas’, 353–354;
Coilum, 375;
Male and Female Islands, 404;
Socotra, 406;
Abyssinia and fire baptism, 427, 432n;
of the Girdle, 432n;
in Lac (Wallachia), 487
_Chrocho_, the Rukh (_q.v._), ii. 415n _seqq._
Chronology and chronological data discussed, first journey of the
Polos, i. 3n;
war between Barka and Hulákú, 8n;
Polos’ stay at Bokhara, 10n;
their departure and their second journey from Acre, 23n;
their return voyage and arrival in Persia, 38n;
story of Nigudar, 103n;
Hormuz princes, 120n;
destruction of Ismailites, 146n;
history of Chinghiz, 239n, 242n, 247n;
Kúblái’s birth and accession, 334n;
Nayan’ rebellion, 334n, 346n;
Polo’s visit to Yun-nan, ii. 81n;
battle with the king of Mien, 104n;
wars between China and Burma, 104n–106n, 111n, 114n;
value of Indo-Chinese, 106n;
conquest of S. China, 148n, 149n;
capture of Siang-yang, 167n;
Kúblái’s dealings with Japan, 260n–261n;
with Champa, 270n;
Marco’s visit to Japan, 271n;
Kúblái’s Java expedition, 275n;
review of the Malay, 282n;
events in Ma’bar, 333n;
King Gondophares, 357n;
cessation of Chinese navigation to India, 391n;
Abyssinia, 434n _seqq._;
Kaidu’s wars, 462n, 467n;
Mongol revolutions in Persia, notes from, 470n–475n;
wars of Toktai and Noghai, 497.
(_See_ also _Dates_.)
Chrysostom, i. 81n
Chuchu, in Kiang-si, ii. 224n, 229n
Chughis, _see_ Jogis
Chung-Kiang, ii. 40n
Chungkwé, “Middle Kingdom,” ii. 232n
Chung-tu, or Yen-King (Peking, _see_ Cambaluc)
_Ch’ura_, i. 265n
Churches, Christian, in Kashgar, i. 182;
Samarkand, 185;
Egrigaia, 281;
Tenduc, 287n;
early, in China, ii. 27n;
Yang-chau, 154n;
Chin-kiang fu, 177;
Kinsay, 192;
Zayton, 238n, 240n;
St. Thomas’s, 354–355, 356n;
Coilum, 377n;
Socotra, 409n–410n
Churchin, or Niuché, Churché, Chorcha (the Manchu Country), i. 231n,
343, 344n
Cielstan, Suolstan (Shúlistán), i. 83, 85n
Cinnamon, Tibet, ii. 49, 52n;
Caindu, 56, 59n;
Ceylon, 315n;
story in Herodotus of, 363n; Malabar, 389, 390n
Circumcision of Socotrans, ii. 409n;
forcible, of a bishop, 429;
of Abyssinians, 432n
Cirophanes, or Syrophenes, story of, ii. 328n
Civet, of Sumatra, ii. 295n
Clement IV., Pope, i. 17, 18n, 21n
_Clepsydra_, i. 378n, 385n, ii. 214
Cloves, ii. 272, 306;
in Caindu, 56, 59n
Coal (Polo’s blackstone), i. 442;
in Scotland in Middle Ages, 443n;
in Kinsay, ii. 216
Cobbler, the one-eyed, and the miracle of the mountain, i. 70
Cobinan (Koh-Banán), i. 125
Cocachin (Kúkáchin), the Lady, _23–24_, i. 32, 33n, 36, 38n
Cochin-China, the mediæval Champa (_q.v._)
Coco-nut (Indian nut), i. 108, ii. 293, 306, 308n, 309n, 354, 389
Coco Islands, of Hiuen T’sang, ii. 307n
Cocos Islands, ii. 309n
Cœur de Lion, his mangonels, ii. 165n, 166n
Coffins, Chinese, in Tangut, i. 205, 209n
Cogachin (Hukaji), Kúblái’s son, King of Carajan, i. 361n, ii. 76
Cogatai, i. 419
Cogatal, a Tartar envoy to the Pope, i. 13, 15
Coiganju (Hwaingan-fu), ii. 142, 148, 151
Coilum (Kollam, Kaulam, Quilon), kingdom of, ii. 375, 382n, 403n,
413n, 426n, 440n;
identity of meaning of name, 377n;
Church of St. George at, 377n;
modern state of, 377n;
Kúblái’s intercourse with, 378n
Coilumin, _columbino_, _colomní_, so-called Brazil-wood, ii. 375;
ginger, 375, 381n
Coins of Cilician Armenia, i. 42n;
of Mosul, 61n;
Agathocles and Pantaleon, 163n;
Seljukian with Lion and Sun, 352n;
found at Siang-Yang, ii. 169n;
King Gondophares, 357n;
Tartar heathen princes with Mahomedan and Christian formulae, 477n
Coja (Koja), Tartar envoy from Persia to the Khan, i. 32–33n, 38n
Cold, intense, in Kerman, i. 91, 111n, 113n;
in Russia, ii. 487
“Cold Mountains,” i. 114n
Coleridge, verses on Kúblái’s Paradise, i. 305n
Coloman, province, ii. 122, 128n–131n
_Colombino_, _see_ Coilumin
Colon, _see_ Coilum
Colossal Buddhas, recumbent, i. 219, 221n
Columbum, _see_ Coilum
Columbus, Polo paralleled with, _3_;
remarks on, _105–106_
Comania, Comanians, i. 50, ii. 382, 383n, 490, 491n
Comari, Comori (Cape Comorin, Travancore), ii. 333n, 382, 384, 385,
403n, 426n;
temple at, 383n
Combermere, Lord, prophecy applied to, ii. 149n
_Comercque_, Khan’s custom-house, ii. 37, 41n
Compartments, in hulls of ships, ii. 249, 251n
Compass, Mariner’s, _138_
Competitive Examinations in beauty, i. 359n
Conchi, King of the North, ii. 479
Concubines, how the Khan selects, i. 357
Condor, its habits, ii. 417n;
Temple’s account of, 417n;
Padre Bolivar’s of the African, 420n
Condur and Sondur, ii. 276, 277n
_Condux_, sable or beaver, i. 410n
Conia, Coyne (Iconium), i. 43
Conjeveram, ii. 334n
Conjurers, the Kashmirian, i. 166, 168n;
weather-, 98, 105n, 166, 168n, 301, 309n–311n;
Lamas’ ex-feats, 315n–318n.
(_See_ also Sorcerers.)
Conosalmi (Kamasal), i. 99, 106n
Constantinople, i. 2, 19n, 36, ii. 165n, 487;
Straits of, 488, 490
Convents, _see_ Monasteries
Cookery, Tartar horse-, i. 264n
Cooper, T. T., traveller on Tibetan frontier, ii. 45n, 48n, 52n, 59n,
67n
Copper, token currency of Mahomed Tughlak, i. 429n;
imported to Malabar, ii. 390;
to Cambay, 398
Coral, valued in Kashmir, Tibet, etc., i. 167, 170n, ii. 49, 52n
Corea (Kauli), i. 343, 345n
Corn, Emperor’s store and distribution of, i. 443
Coromandel (Maabar), _see_ Mabar
Corsairs, _see_ Pirates
Corte del Milione, _see_ Ca’ Polo
—— Sabbionera at Venice, _27_ _seqq._
Cosmography, mediæval, _130_
_Costus_, ii. 397n
Cotan, _see_ Khotan
Cotton, stuffs of, i. 44n, 45, 47n, 48n, 60, ii. 225, 228n, 361,
363n, 395, 398, 431;
at Merdin, i. 60;
in Persia, 84;
at Kashgar, 181;
Yarkand, 187;
Khotan, 188, 190n;
Pein, 191;
Bengal, ii. 115;
bushes of gigantic size, 393, 394n
Counts in Vokhan, i. 171, 173n;
at Dofar, ii. 444
Courts of Justice, at Kinsay, ii. 203
_Couvade_, custom of, ii. 85, 91n–95n, 596n
Cow-dung, its use in Maabar, ii. 341, 365
Cowell, Professor, i. 105n
Cowries (porcelain shells, pig shells), used for money, etc., ii. 66,
74n, 76, 123;
procured from Locac, 276, 279n
_Cralantur_, its meaning(?), i. 71n
Cramoisy (quermesis), i. 44n, 63, 65n
Cranes, five kinds of, i. 296, 297n
Crawford, John, ii. 277n
Cremation, i. 204, 208n, ii. 122, 132, 134n, 135, 140, 141, 151, 152,
191, 218, 221n;
in Middle Ages, ii. 133n
Cremesor, Hot Region (Garmsir), i. 75, 99n, 112n, 114n
Çrībhõja (Çribhôdja), country, ii. 283n
Crocodiles, _see_ Alligators
Cross, legend of the Tree of the, i. 135;
gibes against, on Nayan’s defeat, 343;
on monument at Singanfu, ii. 27n
Crossbows, ii. 78, 82n, 161n
Cruelties, Tartar, i. 151n, 265n, 266n, ii. 180n
_Crusca MS._ of Polo, _82_, i. 18n, 38n, 85n, 297n, 358n, 384n,
ii. 34n, 72n
Cubeb pepper, ii. 272, 391n
Cubits, astronomical altitude estimated by, ii. 382, 389, 392
Cublay, _see_ Kúblái
Cucintana, ii. 396n
Cudgel, Tartars’ use of, i. 266, 267n, 414
Cuiju (Kwei-chau), province, ii. 124, 127n
Cuinet, Vital, on Turkman villages, i. 44n;
on Mosul Kurds, 62n
Cuirbouly, i. 260, 263n, ii. 78, 82n
Cuju, ii. 219, 221n, 224n
Cuncun (Han-Chung) province, ii. 31, 32n
Cunningham, General A., i. 12n, 104, 156n, 173n, 178n, 283n, 290n,
ii. 357n
Cups, flying, i. 301, 314n, 349n
Curds and Curdistan, i. 9n, 60, 62n, 83n, 84n, 85n, 102n, 143n, 145n
Currency, copper token, in India, i. 429n;
salt, ii. 45, 54, 57n;
leather, i. 429n;
Cowrie, _see_ Cowries
Currency, paper, in China, i. 423, 426n;
attempt to institute in Persia, 428n;
alluded to, ii. 124, 127, 132, 135, 138, 140, 141, 152, 154, 170,
174, 176, 178, 181, 187, 218
Current, strong south along East Coast of Africa, ii. 412, 415n
Currents, Cape of, or Corrientes, ii. 415n, 417n, 426n
Curtains, Persian, i. 66n
Curzola Island, Genoese victory at, _6_, _45_ _seqq._;
Polo’s galley at, _49_;
map of, _50_
Curzon, Lord, i. 64n, 84n, 86n, 128n;
list of Pamirs, ii. 594n
—— Hon. R., on invention of printing, _138_, _139_
Customs, Custom-houses, ii. 37, 41n, 170, 204, 215, 216
Cutch pirates, ii. 410n
Cuxstac, Kuhestec, i. 110n
Cuy Khan (Kuyuk), i. 14n, 245, 247n
Cycle, Chinese, i. 447, 454n
_Cynocephali_, the, ii. 228n, 309, 311n
Cypresses, sacred, of the Magians, i. 131n
Cyprus, i. 65n
Cyrus, his use of camels in battle near Sardis, ii. 104n

Dabul, ii. 443n
_Dadian_, title of Georgian kings, i. 53n
Da Gama, ii. 386n, 391n
Dagroian, kingdom of, in Sumatra, ii. 293;
probable position of, 297n
Dailiu (Tali), ii. 81n
Daïtu, Taidu, Tatu (Peking), Kúblái’s new city of Cambaluc, i. 305n,
306n, 374, 375n
Dakiánús, city of (Camadi), i. 113n
_Dalada_, tooth relique of Buddha, ii. 329n–330n
Dalai Lama, with four hands, ii. 265n
D’Alboquerque, ii. 281n, 382n, 409n, 451n
Dalivar, Dilivar, Diláwar (Lahore), a province of India, i. 99, 104n,
105n
Dalmian, ii. 297n
Damas, i. 65n
Damascus, i. 23n, 143;
siege of, ii. 166n
Damasks, with _cheetas_ in them, i. 398n;
with giraffes, ii. 424n.
(_See_ also Patterns.)
Damghan, i. 138n, 148n
Dancing dervishes, ii. 97n
Dancing girls, in Hindu temples, ii. 345, 351n
Dandolo, Andrea, Admiral of Venetian fleet at Curzola, _6_, _46_;
his captivity and suicide, _48_;
funeral at Venice, _50_
D’Anghieria, Pietro Martire, _36_, _120_
Dantapura, ii. 329n
Dante, number of MSS., _117_;
does not allude to Polo, _118_;
_Convito_, i. 14n
D’Anville’s Map, i. 25n, 88n, 155n, 224n, 228n, 297n, 408n, ii. 69n,
72n, 141n
Darábjird, i. 86n
Darah, ii. 436n
Dárápúr, i. 104n, 105n
_Dardas_, stuff embroidered in gold, i. 65n
Dariel, Pass of (Gate of the Alans), i. 53n, 54n
Darius, i. 128, 138n, 151, 157;
the Golden King, ii. 17
Dark Ocean of the South, ii. 417n
Darkness, magical, i. 98, 105n, 166
—— land of, ii. 484, 485n;
how the Tartars find their way out, 484;
the people and their peltry, 484;
Alexander’s legendary entrance into, 485;
Dumb trade of, 486n
_Darráj_, black partridge, its peculiar call, i. 99n
Darúná, salt mines, i. 154n
Darwáz, i. 160n
Dasht, or Plain, of Bahárak, i. 156n
Dashtáb, hot springs, i. 122n
Dasht-i-Lut (Desert of Lút), i. 124n, 127, 128n
Dashtistan tribe and district, i. 86n
Dates (chronology) in Polo’s book, generally erroneous, i. 2, 17, 36,
63, 145, 238, 332, ii. 98, 114, 145, 177, 259, 267, 268, 319,
354, 428, 459, 464, 474, 494
—— (trees or fruit), Basra, 63, 65n;
Báfk, 88, 89n;
Reobarles, province, 97, 111n;
Formosa Plain, 107;
Hormos, 109, 116n;
wine of, 107, 115n;
diet of fish, etc., 107, 116n, ii. 450
Daughters of Marco Polo, _69_, _71_, _73_, _76_, ii. 506n
D’Avezac, M., i. 23n, 48n, 66n, 231n, 271n
David, king of Abyssinia, ii. 435n, 436n
David, king of Georgia (Dawith), i. 50, 53n
Davids, Professor T. W. Rhys, _Buddhist Birth Stories_, ii. 326n
Davis, Sir John F., ii. 139n, 142n, 152n, 173n, 175n, 176n, 182n
Dawaro, ii. 435n, 436n
Daya, ii. 300n, 305n
Dead, disposal of the, in Tangut, i. 205, 209n;
at Cambaluc, 414;
in Coloman, ii. 122;
in China, 133n;
in Dagroian, 293;
by the Battas, 298n
—— burning of the, _see_ Cremation;
eating the, _see_ Cannibalism
De Barros, ii. 239n, 283n, 287n, 300n, 410n;
on Java, 274n;
Singhapura, 281n;
Janifs, 286n
Debt, singular arrest for, ii. 343, 350n
_Decima_, or Tithe on bequest, _71_
Decimal organisation of Tartar armies, i. 261, 264n
Decius, Emperor, i. 113n
Degháns, Dehgáns, i. 152n
Dehánah, village, i. 152n
Deh Bakri, i. 111n, 112n
De la Croix, Pétis, i. 9n, 155n, 183n, 239n, 243n, 281n, 410n
Delhi, Sultans of, _12_, ii, 426n
D’Ely, Mount, _see_ Eli
Demoiselle Crane, _anthropoides virgo_, i. 297n
Deogir, ii. 426n
Derbend, Wall of, i. 53n, ii. 495.
(_See_ also Iron Gate of.)
Deserts, haunted, i. 197, 201n, 274
Deserts of Kerman or of Lút, i. 123, 124n;
of Khorasan, 149;
of Charchan, 194;
Lop (Gobi), 196, 197, 198n–203n, 210, 212, 214n, 223;
Karakorum, 224, 226, 237n
Desgodins, Abbé, ii. 57n
Despina Khatun, ii. 477n
Devadási, ii. 351n
Devapattan, ii. 400n
Devéria, G., i. 29n, 225n, 291n, ii. 60n, 63n, 70n, 89n, 108n, 122n,
124n
Devil-dancing, i. 315n, ii. 86, 97n
Devil trees, i. 136n
Devils, White, ii. 355, 359n
D’Evreux, Father Yves, ii. 94n
Dhafar (Dofar, Thafar), ii. 340, 348n, 444;
its incense, 445;
two places of the name, 445n–446n
_Dhárani_, mystic charms, i. 315
Dhúlkarnain (Alex.), _see_ Zulkarnain
Dialects, Chinese, ii. 236, 243n–244n
Diamonds in India, how found, ii. 360–361;
mines of, 362n;
diffusion of legend about, _ib._
“Diex Terrien,” i. 141n
Diláwar, Polo’s Dihar, i. 104n
Dimitri II., Thawdadebuli, king of Georgia, i. 53n
Dínár, _see_ Bezant
Dinár of Red Gold, ii. 348n, 349n
Dinh Tiên-hwàng, king of An-nam, i. 264n
Diocletian, i. 14n
_Dioscorides insula_, ii. 408n
Dir, chief town of Panjkora, i. 104n, 164n, 165n
Dirakht-i-Fazl, i. 135n, 138n
Dirakht-i-Kush, i. 135n
Diráwal, ancient capital of the Bhattis, i. 104n
Dirhem-Kub, Shah Mahomed, founder of Hormuz dynasty, i. 115n, 121n
Dish of Sakya or of Adam, ii. 328n, 330n
Diu City, ii. 392n
Diul-Sind, Lower Sind, i. 86n
Divination by twigs or arrows, i. 241, 242n
Dixan, branding with cross at, ii. 433n
Dizabulus, pavilion of, i. 384n
Dizfúl River, i. 85n
Djao (Chao) Namian Sumé (Kaipingfu), i. 25n
Djaya, turquoises, ii. 56n
Doctors at Kinsay, ii. 203
Dofar, _see_ Dhafar
Dogana, i. 151; conjectures as to, 152n, 156n
Doghábah River, i. 152n
Dog-headed races, ii. 309, 311n
Dogs, the Khan’s mastiffs, i. 400;
of Tibet, ii. 45, 49, 52n;
fierce in Cuiju, 126
Dog-sledging in Far North, ii. 480, 481n, 482;
notes on dogs, 483n
Dolfino, Ranuzzo, husband of Polo’s daughter, Moreta, _76_
Dolonnúr, i. 26n
Dominicans, sent with Polos but turn back, i. 22, 23
_D’or plain_, the expression, i. 269n
Doráh Pass, i. 165n
Doria, family at Meloria, _56_
—— Lampa, _6_;
Admiral of Genoese Fleet sent to Adriatic, _45_;
his victory, _48_;
his tomb and descendants, _51_;
at Meloria with six sons, _56_
—— Octaviano, death of, _48_
—— Tedisio, exploring voyage of, _51_
Dorjé, i. 360n
D’Orléans, Prince Henri, i. 200n, 277n
Douglas, Rev. Dr. C., ii. 232n, 237n, 240n, 241n, 244n
Doyley, Sir Fulke, ii. 166n
Dragoian (Ta-hua-Mien), ii. 297n, 306n
_Draps entaillez_, i. 392
Drawers, enormous, of Badakhshan women, i. 160, 163n
Dreams, notable, i. 305n
Drums, sound of in certain sandy districts, 197, 202n
_Dryabalanops Camphora_, ii. 303n
Dua Khan, i. 121n, ii. 459n, 462n
Du Bose, Rev. H. C., ii. 182n–184n
Ducat, or sequin, i. 426n, ii. 591n
Dudley, _Arcano del Mare_, ii. 266n
Duel, mode in S. India of, ii. 371
Dufour, on mediæval artillery, ii. 161n, 163n
Duhalde, Plan of Ki-chau, ii. 26n;
or T’si-ning chau, ii. 139n
Duḳuz Khatun, i. 288n
Dulcarnon (Zulkarnain), i. 161n
Dulites, ii. 432n
Dumas, Alexander, i. 53n
Dumb trade, ii. 486n
Duncan, Rev. Moir, ii. 28n
_Dungen_ (_Tungăni_), or converts, i. 291n
Duplicates in geography, ii. 409n
_Dupu_, ii. 397n
Dürer’s Map of Venice, so-called, _29_, _30_
Durga Temple, ii. 383n
Dursamand, ii. 427n
_Dúsháb_, sweet liquor or syrup, i. 87n
Dust-storms, i. 105n
Duties, on Great Kiang, ii. 170;
on goods at Kinsay and Zayton, 189, 215, 216, 235;
on horses, 438;
at Hormuz, 450.
(_See_ also Customs.)
Dutthagamini, king of Ceylon, i. 169n
Dwara Samudra, ii. 294n, 367n, 427n
Dzegun-tala, name applied to Mongolia, i. 214n
Dzungaria, i. 214n

Eagle mark on shoulder of Georgian kings, i. 50
Eagles, trained to kill large game, i. 397, 399n
—— white, in the Diamond Country, ii. 360–361
Eagle-wood, origin of the name, ii. 271n.
(_See_ Lign-aloes.)
Earth honoured, ii. 341
East, its state, _circa_ 1260, _8_ _et seqq._
Ebony (bonus), ii. 268, 272n
Edkins, Rev., ii. 199n
Edward I., _59_, _62_, _63_, i. 21n, ii. 593n
Edward II., correspondence with Tartar princes, i. 36n, ii. 477n
Effeminacy, in Chinese palaces, ii. 17, 20n, 145, 207, 208
Eggs of Ruc and Aepyornis, ii. 416n, 417n
Egrigaia, province, i. 281, 282n
Ela (cardamom), ii. 388n
Elchidai, ii. 471, 474n
Elenovka, i. 58n
Elephantiasis, i. 187, 188n, ii. 350n
Elephants, Kúblái carried on a timber bartizan by four, i. 337, 404,
408n;
Kúblái’s, 391, 392n, ii. 104;
the king of Mien’s, 99;
numbers of men alleged to be carried by, 100n;
how the Tartars routed, 102;
wild, 107, 111, 117, 119n;
in Caugigu, 117;
Champa, 268, 271n;
Locac, 276, 279n;
Sumatra, 285, 289n, 290n;
Madagascar and Zanghibar, 411, 422;
trade in teeth of, _ib._;
carried off by the Ruc, 412, 417n, 419n, 421n;
in Zanghibar, 422, 423;
used in war, 429, 433n–434n;
an error, 433n;
Nubian, 424n;
fable about, _ib._;
not bred in Abyssinia, 431;
training of African, 434n;
war of the, _ib._
Eli, Ely, Elly (Hili), kingdom of, ii. 385, 386n _seqq._, 403n, 426n
Elias, Ney, i. 215n, 225n, 278n, 288n, 291n, ii. 23n, 144n
Elixir vitae of the Jogis, ii. 365, 369n
Elliot, Sir Walter, i. 38n, 48n, 56n, 65n, 96n, 102n, 104n, 105n,
121n, 165n, 265n, ii. 295n, 333n, 334n, 336n, 350n, 367n, 369n,
370n, 372n, 400n, 410n, 419n
Emad, Ed-din Abu Thaher, founder of the Kurd dynasty, i. 85n
Embroidery of silk at Kerman, i. 90, 96n;
leather in Guzerat, ii. 394, 395n
Empoli, Giovanni d’, ii. 239n
_Empusa_, the Arabian Nesnás, i. 202n
Enchanters, at Socotra, ii. 407
Enchantments, of the Caraonas, i. 98.
(_See_ also Conjurers, Sorcerers.)
Engano Island, legend, ii. 406n
Engineering feat, _50_
Engineers, their growing importance in Middle Ages, ii. 166n
England, Kúblái’s message to king of, i. 34;
correspondence of Tartar princes with kings of, 36n, ii. 477n
English trade and character in Asia, ii. 368n
Enlightenment, Land of, i. 460n
_Erba_, poisonous plant or grass, i. 217, 218n
Erculin, Arculin (an animal), ii. 481, 483n, 484, 487
Erdeni Tso (Erdenidsu), or Erdeni Chao Monastery, i. 228n–230n
Eremites (Rishis), of Kashmir, i. 166, 169n
Erguiul, province, i. 274, 282n
Erivan, i. 58n
_Erkeun_ (_Ye li ke un_), Mongol for Christians, i. 291n
Ermine, i. 257, 405, 410n, ii. 481, 484, 487
Erzinjan, Erzinga, Eriza (Arzinga), i. 45
Erzrum (Arziron), i. 45, 48n
_Eschiel_, the word, ii. 390n
Esher (Shehr, Es-shehr), ii. 442;
trade with India, incense, Ichthyophagi, 442, 443, 444n;
singular sheep, 443, 444n
Essentemur (Isentimur), Kúblái’s grandson, king of Carajan, ii. 64,
80n, 98
_Estimo_, Venetian, or forced loan, _47_, _76_
Etchmiadzin Monastery, i. 61n
Ethiopia and India, confused, ii. 432n
Ethiopian sheep, ii. 422, 424n
Etiquette of the Mongol Court, i. 382, 385n, 391, 393n, 457
Etymologies, _Balustrade_, _38_;
buckram, i. 47n–48n;
Avigi, 57n;
Geliz (Ghellé), 59n;
Jatolic, 61n;
muslin, 62n;
baudekins, 65n;
cramoisy, 65n;
ondanique, 93n;
zebu, 99n;
carbine, 101n;
Dulcarnon, 161n;
balas, 161n;
azure and lazuli, 162n;
None, 173n;
Mawmet and Mummery, 189n;
salamander, 216n;
berrie, 237n;
barguerlac, 272n;
S’ling, 276n, 283n;
siclatoun, 283n;
Argon, 290n;
Tungani, 291;
Guasmul, 292n;
chakór, 297n;
Jádú and Yadah, 309n–310n;
Tafur, 313n;
Bacsi, 314n;
Sensin, 321n;
P’ungyi, 325n;
_carquois_, 366n;
Keshikán, 380n;
vernique, 384n;
camut, borgal, shagreen, 395n;
Chinuchi or Chunichi, 401n;
Toscaol, 407n;
Bularguchi, 407n;
Fondaco, 415n;
Bailo, 421n;
comercque, ii. 41n;
porcelain, 74n;
Sangon, 138n;
Faghfur, 148n;
Manjanik, mangonel, mangle, etc., 163n–164n;
galingale, 229n;
Chini and Misri, 230n;
Satin, 241n, 242n;
eagle-wood, aloes-wood, 271n–272n;
Bonús, Calamanz, _ib._;
benzoni, 286n;
china pagoda, 336n;
Pacauca, 346n;
Balánjar, a-muck, 347n–348n;
Pariah, 349n;
Govi, _ib._;
Avarian, 355n–356n;
Abraiaman, 367n;
Choiach, 368n;
proques, 370n;
Tembul and Betel, 374n;
Sappan and Brazil, 380n–381n;
Balladi, _ib._;
Belledi, 381n;
Indigo baccadeo, 382n;
Gatpaul, baboon, 383n–385n;
Salami cinnamon, 391n;
κώμακον, _ib._;
rook (in chess), 419n;
Aranie, 462n;
Erculin and Vair, 483n;
Misḳál, 592n
—— (of Proper Names), Curd, i. 62n;
Dzungaria, 214n;
Chingintalas, _ib._;
Cambuscan, 247n;
Oirad, 308n;
Kungurat, 358n;
Manzi, ii. 144n;
Bayan, 148n;
Kinsay, 193n;
Japan, 256n;
Sornau, 279n;
Narkandam, 312n;
Ceylon, 314n;
Ma’bar, 332n;
Chilaw, 337n;
Mailapúr, 359n;
Sônagarpaṭṭanam, 372n;
Punnei-Káyal, Káyal, _ib._;
Kollam (Coilum), 377;
Hili (Ely), 386n;
Cambaet, 398n;
Mangla and Nebila, 405n;
Socotra, 408n;
Colesseeah, 410n;
Caligine, 439n;
Aijaruc, 463;
Nemej, 493n
—— Chinese, ii. 119n
Etzina, i. 223
Eunuchs, i. 356;
procured from Bengal, ii. 115n
Euphrates, i. 43n;
said to flow into the Caspian, 52, 59n
_Euphratesia_, i. 43n
Euxine, _see_ Black Sea
Evelyn’s _Diary_, i. 136n
Execution of Princes of the Blood, mode of, i. 67n, 343, 344n
Eyircayá, i. 281n

Facen, Dr. J., _139_
Faghfur (Facfur, Emperor of Southern China), ii. 145;
meaning of title, 148n;
his effeminate diversions, 207;
decay of his palace, 208
Faizabad in Badakhshan, i. 156n, 163n, 173n, 175n
Fakanúr, ii. 440n
Fakata, ii. 260n
Fakhruddin Ahmad, Prince of Hormuz, i. 121n, ii. 333n
Falconers, Kúblái’s, i. 335, 402, 407n
Falcons, of Kerman, i. 90, 96n;
Saker and Lanner, 158, 162n;
peregrine, 269;
Kúblái’s, 402
Famine, horrors, i. 313n
_Fanchán_, _P’ing-chang_, title of a second class Cabinet Minister,
i. 432n, ii. 179n
Fanchan Lake, ii. 29n
Fan-ching, siege of, ii. 167n
Fandaraina, ii. 386n, 391n, 440n
_Fang_, _see_ Squares
Fansur, in Sumatra, kingdom of, ii. 299, 302n
Fansuri camphor, ii. 299, 302n
Fan Wen-hu, or Fan-bunko, a General in Japanese Expedition, ii. 260n,
261n
Fariáb, or Pariáb, i. 106n
Faro of Constantinople, ii. 490
Farriers, none in S. India, ii. 340, 450
Fars, province, i. 85n, 92n, ii. 333n, 348n, 377n, 402n
Fashiyah, Atabeg dynasty, i. 85n, 86n
Fassa, i. 86n
Fasting days, Buddhist, i. 220, 222n
Fattan, in Ma’bar, ii. 333n, 336n
Fatteh, ’Ali Sháh, i. 146n, 179n
Fausto, Vettor, his Quinquereme, _33_
Fazl, Ibn Hassan (Fazluïeh-Hasunïeh), i. 86n
Feili, Lurs dynasty, i. 84n
Female attendants on Chinese Emperors, ii. 17, 20n, 147, 207, 208
Ferlec, in Sumatra, kingdom of (Parlák), ii. 284, 287n, 294n, 295n,
305n;
Hill people, 284, 288n
Fernandez, or Moravia, Valentine, ii. 295n
Ferrier, General, i. 68n, 100n, 106n
Festivals, Order of the Kaan’s, i. 386, 388n
Fiag, or Pog River, i. 54n
_Ficus Vasta_, i. 129n
_Fidáwí_, Ismailite adepts, i. 144n, 145n
Filial Piety in China, i. 457, 462n
Filippi, Professor F. de, Silk industry in Ghílán, i. 59n
Finn, i. 122n
Fiordelisa, daughter of younger Maffeo Polo, _17_, _65_
—— supposed to be Nicolo Polo’s second wife, _17_, _26_, _27_
—— wife of Felice Polo, _27_, _65_
Firando Island, ii. 260n
Firdús, Ismailite Castle, i. 148n
Firdúsí, i. 93n, 130n
Fire, affected by height of Pamir Plain, i. 171, 178n;
regulations at Kinsay, ii. 189
Fire-baptism, ascribed to Abyssinians, ii. 427, 432n
Fire-_Pao_ (cannon?), i. 342n, ii. 596n
Fire-worship, or rockets, in Persia, i. 78, 80;
by the Sensin in Cathay, 303, 325n
Firishta, the historian, i. 104n, 169n
Fish miracle in Georgia, i. 52, 57n, 58n;
in the Caspian, 59n;
and date diet, 107, 116n, ii. 450;
supply at Kinsay, 202;
food for cattle, 443, 444n;
stored for man and beast, 443
Fish-oil, used for rubbing ships, i. 108, 117n
Florin, or ducat, ii. 215, 591n
Flour (Sago), trees producing, ii. 300, 304n, 305n
Flückiger, Dr., ii. 226n
Fog, dry, i. 105n
Fo-kien, _see_ Fu-chau
Folin (Byzantine Empire), ii. 405n
Fondaco, i. 415n, ii. 238n
Foot-mark on Adam’s Peak, _q.v._
Foot-posts in Cathay, i. 435
Forg, i. 86n
Formosa, Plain (Harmuza), i. 107, 115n
Forsyth, Sir T. Douglas, i. 193n, 194n, 216n, 400n
Fortune, R., ii. 182n, 198, 220n, 222n, 224n, 229n, 233n
Foundlings, provision for, ii. 147, 151n
Four-horned sheep, ii. 443, 444n
Fowls with hair, ii. 126, 129n
Foxes, black, ii. 479, 481n, 484, 487
Fozlán, Ibn, i. 7n, 8n, ii. 348n, 488n
_Fra terre_ (Interior), i. 43n
Fracastoro, Jerome, _2_
Franciscan converts, in Volga region, i. 5n, 9n, ii. 491n;
at Yang-chau, 154n;
Zayton, 237n
Francolin (darráj of the Persians), black partridge, i. 97, 99n, 107,
297n
Frankincense, _see_ Incense
Frederic II., Emperor, his account of the Tartars, i. 56n;
story of implicit obedience, 144n;
his _cheetas_, 398n;
his leather money, 429n;
his giraffe, ii. 424n
French, the original language of Polo’s Book, _81_ _seqq._;
its large diffusion in that age, _86_ _seqq._, _122_
French Expedition up the Kamboja River, ii. 57n, 67n, 80n, 120n
Frenchmen, riding long like, ii. 78
French mission and missionaries in China, ii. 38n, 48n, 52n, 57n,
63n, 96n, 97n, 127n
_Frère charnel_, i. 187n
Frere, Sir B., i. 96n, 117n, 147n, ii. 395n, 424n
Froissart, i. 17n, 42n, 68n
Fu-chau (Fo-kien, Fuju), ii. 220n–222n, 224n, 226, 230, 231, 232n,
233n, 238n, 251n;
paper-money at, i. 428n;
wild hill people of, 225, 228n;
its identity, 232n, 238n;
language of, 243n;
tooth relique at, 330n
Fuen (Fen) ho River, ii. 17n
Funeral rites, Chinese, in Tangut, i. 204;
of the Kaans, 246, 250n;
at Kinsay, ii. 191.
(_See_ also Dead.)
Fungul, city of, ii. 124, 127n
Furs, of the Northern Regions, i. 257, 405, 410n, ii. 481, 483n, 484,
487
Fusang, Mexico(?), ii. 405n
Fuyang, ii. 220n
Fuzo, _see_ Fu-chau

Gabala, Bishop of, i. 231n
Gagry, maritime defile of, i. 54n
Gaisue, officer of Kúblái’s Mathematical Board, i. 449n
_Galeasse_, Venetian gallery, _36_, i. 119n
Galingale, ii. 225, 229n, 272
Galletti, Marco, _27_, ii. 512n
Galleys of the Middle Ages, war, _31_ _seqq._;
arrangement of rowers, _31–32_;
number of oars, _32_, _33_;
dimensions, _33_, _34_;
tactics in fight, _38_;
toil in rowing, _ib._;
strength and cost of crew, _39_;
staff of fleet, _39–40_;
Joinville’s description of, _40_;
customs of, _41_
Galley-slaves not usual in Middle Ages, _39_
Gambling, prohibited by Kúblái, i. 457
Game, _see_ Sport
Game Laws, Mongol, i. 396, 406, ii. 13
Game, supplied to Court of Cambaluc, i. 396, 401
Ganapati Kings, ii. 362n
Gandar, Father, ii. 139n, 153n
Gandhára, ii. 114n, 329n, 330n;
Buddhist name for Yun-nan, ii. 73n
Ganfu, port of Kinsay, ii. 189
Ganja, gate of, i. 57n
Gan-p’u, ii. 238n
Gantanpouhoa, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Gantûr, ii. 362n
Gardenia, fruit and dyes, ii, 226n
Gardiner’s (misprinted Gardner’s) _Travels_, i. 160n, 179n
Gardner, C., ii. 196n, 198n
Garmsir, Ghermseer (Cremesor), Hot Region, i. 75n, 99n, 112n, 114n
Garnier, Lieut. Francis (journey to Talifu), ii. 38n, 48n, 57n, 58n,
60n, 64n, 67n, 74n, 80n, 90n, 91n, 95n, 99n, 117n, 120n, 122n,
123n, 128n, 130n, 198n, 278n
Garrisons, Mongol, in Cathay and Manzi, i. 336n, ii. 190, 200n;
disliked the people, 205
_Garuda_, ii. 351n, 415n, 419n
Gate of Iron, ascribed to Derbend, i. 57n
Gates, of Kaan’s palace, i. 363, 368n;
of Cambaluc, 374, 377n;
of Somnath, ii. 400–401
Gat-pauls, Gatopaul, Gatos-paulas, ii. 382, 383n, 385n
_Gatto maimone_, ii. 383n
Gauenispola Island, ii. 300, 307n
Gaur (_Bos Gaurus_, _etc._), ii. 114n
Gauristan, i. 86n
Gavraz, village, i. 45n
Gazaria, ii. 490, 492n
Gedrosi, ii. 402n
Gelath in Imeretia, Iron Gate at, i. 57n
_Geliz_, Spanish for silk dealer, i. 59n
Genealogy of Polos, _13_;
errors as given by Barbaro, etc., in, _77–78_;
tabular, ii. 506n;
of House of Chinghiz, 505n
Genoa, Polo’s captivity at, _6_, _48–55_
—— and Pisa, rivalry, and wars of, _41_, _56_ _seqq._
—— and Venice, rivalry and wars of, _41_ _seqq._
Genoese, their growth in skill and splendour, _42_;
character as seamen by poet of their own, _43_;
character by old Italian author, _48_;
capture of Soldaia, i. 4n;
their navigation of the Caspian, 52, 59n;
trade in box-wood, 57n;
their merchants at Tabriz, 75;
in Fo-kien, ii. 238n
Gentile Plural names converted into local singulars, i. 58n
Geographical Text of Polo’s Book constantly quoted, its language,
_83_;
proofs that it is the original, _84_ _seqq._;
tautology, _85_;
source of other texts, _ib._
George (Jirjis, Yurji, Gurgán), king of Tenduc, of the time of
Prester John, i. 284, 287n;
a possible descendant of, 288n, ii. 460
Georgia (Georgiana), beauty of, and its inhabitants, i. 50–53n;
their kings, 50, 52n
Gerfalcons (Shonkár), i. 270, 273n, 299, 402, 404;
tablets engraved with, 35, 351, 355n, ii. 487
Gerini, Colonel, ii. 596n
German Follower of the Polos, ii. 159
Ghaiassuddin Balban (Asedin Soldan), Sultan of Delhi, i. 99, 104n,
105n
Gháran country, ruby mines in, i. 161n
Gházán (Casan) Khan of Persia, son of Arghún, i. 14n, 29n, 88n, 103n,
121n, 138n, 429n, ii. 50, 166n, 466n;
his regard for the Polos, i. 35;
marries the Lady Kukachin, 36, 38n, ii. 465n;
his mosque at Tabriz, i. 76n;
set to watch the Khorasan frontier, ii. 474, 475n;
obtains the throne, 476;
his object and accomplishments, 478n
Ghel, or Ghelan (Ghel-u-chelan), Sea of, Caspian Sea, i. 52, 58n
Ghellé (Gílí), silk of the Gíl province, i. 52, 59n
Ghes, or Kenn (formerly Kish or Kais), i. 63, 64n
_Ghez_ tree, i. 89n
Ghiuju, ii. 219, 221n, 222n
Ghiyas ed-din, last Prince of Kurd dynasty, i. 85n
Ghori, or Aksarai River, i. 152n
_Ghúls_, goblins, i. 202n
Ghúr, i. 102n
Giglioli, Professor H., _51_
Gíl, or Gílán, province, i. 59n
Gilgit, i. 160n
Gill, Captain (_River of Golden Sand_), i. 408n, ii. 40n, 57n, 59n,
80n–82n, 84n, 88n, 91n, 109n, 169n, 221n
Ginao, Mt. and Hot Springs, i. 122n
Gindanes of Herodotus, ii. 48
Ginger, ii. 22;
Shan-si, 33;
Caindu, 56;
alleged to grow in Kiangnan, 181, 183n;
Fuju, 224, 325;
Coilum, 375, 381n;
different qualities and prices of, 381n;
Ely, 385, 388n;
Malabar, 389;
Guzerat, 393
Giraffes, ii. 413, 421n, 422, 431;
mediæval notices of, 424n
Girardo, Paul, _70_, ii. 511n
Girdkuh, an Ismailite fortress, its long defence, i. 146n, 148n
Girls, consecrated to idols in India, ii. 345–346
Gittarchan, _see_ Astrakhan
Glaza (Ayas, _q.v._), _54_
Gleemen and jugglers, conquer Mien, ii. 110
Goa, ii. 358n, 451n
Gobernador, Straits of, ii. 281n
Goës, Benedict, _20_, i. 175n, 218n
Gog and Magog (Ung and Mungul), legend of, i. 56n, 57n;
rampart of, 57n;
country of, 285;
name suggested by Wall of China, 292n
Gogo, ii. 398n
Goître at Yarkand, i. 187, 188n
Golconda diamond mines, ii. 362n
Gold, Frankincense, and Myrrh, their mystic meaning, i. 79, 81n
Gold dust in Tibet, ii. 49, 52n;
exchanged for salt in Caindu, 54, 57n;
Brius River, 56;
in Kin-shia-Kiang, 72n;
and nuggets in Carajan, 76;
abundant in Yun-nan, 95n, 106;
Caugigu, 116;
Coloman, 123;
infinite in Chipangu, 253, 256;
in Sea of Chin Islands, 264;
dust in Gulf of Cheinan Islands, 266;
not found in Java, 274n;
in Locac, 276;
the Malayo-Siamese territories, 179n;
Sumatra, 284, 287n;
vast accumulations in South India, _12_, 340, 348n;
imported into Malabar, 390;
and into Cambay, 398;
purchased in Socotra, 407
Gold and silver towers of Mien, ii. 110
—— cloths of, i. 41, 50, 60, 63, 65n, 75, 84, 285, 387, ii. 23.
(_See_ Silk and Gold.)
—— of the Gryphons in Herodotus, ii. 419n
—— Teeth (Zardandan), Western Yunnan, ii. 84, 88n–91n
—— to silver, relative value of, i. 426n, ii. 95n, 256n, 591n
Golden King and Prester John, tale of the, ii. 17–22
—— Island, ii. 174n, 175, 176n, 310n
—— Horde (kings of the Ponent), ii. 486n, 492n
_Golfo, Indigo di_, ii. 382n
Gomispola, Gomispoda, _see_ Gauenispola
Gomushtapah, Wall of, i. 57n
Gomuti palm, ii. 297n
Gondophares, a king in the St. Thomas legends, ii. 357n
Gordon’s “Ever Victorious Army,” ii. 179n
Gordun Sháh, i. 120n
Göring, F., i. 74n
Goriosan, ii. 260n
_Gor Khar_, wild ass, i. 89n
Goshawks, i. 50, 57n, 96n, 252, 402;
black, ii. 285, 345
Gothia (Crimean), ii. 490;
its limit and language, 492n
Govy, a low caste in Maabar, ii. 341, 349n, 355
Goza, i. 38n
Gozurat, _see_ Guzerat
Grail, Buddhist parallel to the Holy, ii. 328n, 330n
Granaries, Imperial, i. 443
Grapes in Shan-si, ii. 13, 15n, 16n
Grass-cloths, ii. 127n
Grasso, Donato, _25_
Great Bear (Meistre), ii. 292, 296n;
and Little, force of, and application of these epithets, 286n
Great, or Greater Sea (Black Sea), i. 3n, ii. 487, 488, 490
Greece, Bactria’s relation to, i. 160n
Greek fire, _38_, ii. 165n
Greeks, in Turcomania, i. 43;
and Greek tongue in Socotra, ii. 408n, 409n;
possible relic of, 410n
Green, Rev. D. D., ii. 193n
—— Island, legendary, ii. 381n
—— Islands, ii. 417n
—— Mount, Cambaluc, i. 365, 370n
—— R., _see_ Tsien Tang
Gregorieff, his excavations at Sarai, i. 6n
Gregory X., Pope, _see_ Theobald of Piacenza
Grenard, i. 189n, 190n, 193n, 195n, 200n, 203n, 276n, 310n, 324n,
409n, ii. 5n, 27n
Grioni, Zanino, ii. 517n
_Griut_ (_kurut_), sour-curd, i. 265n
Groat, Venetian _grosso_, i. 424, 426n, ii. 22, 66, 153, 181, 201,
225, 236, 354, 591n
Groot, Professor, J. J. M. de, i. 209n, 251n, 268n, ii. 135n
Grote, Arthur, ii. 444n
Grueber and Dorville, Jesuit travellers, i. 276n
_Grus_, _cinerea_, _antigone_, _leucogeranus_, _monachus_, i. 297n
Gryphon, _see_ Ruc
Guasmul (Basmul), half-breeds, i. 284, 292n
Guchluk, i. 161n
Gudar (village), i. 113n
_Gudderi_, musk animals, Tibet, ii. 45, 49n
Gudran, i. 126n
Guebers, the, i. 88n, 96n
Gujáh, Hulákú’s chief secretary, i. 33n
_Gugal_, bdellum, ii. 397n
Guilds of craftsmen at Kinsay, ii. 186
—— Venetian, _72_
Guinea-fowl, ii. 431, 437n
Guions, a quasi-Tibetan tribe, ii. 60n
Gumish-Khának, silver mines, i. 49n
Gunpowder, _138_
Gurgán, a Tartar chief, ii. 474n
_Gurgán_, son-in-law, a title, i. 288n
Gur-Khan of Karacathay, i. 233n
Gutturals, Mongol elision of, i. 8n, 64n
Guz = 100, i. 261, 263n
Guzerat (Gozurat), ii. 389, 390, 392, 394n;
products, mediæval architecture and dress, 393;
work, 393–394, 395n

Haast, Dr., discovers a fossil Ruc, ii. 417n
Habíb-ullah of Khotan, i. 189n
Habsh (Abash), _see_ Abyssinia
Hadhramaut (_Sessania Adrumetorum_), i. 82n
Hadiah, ii. 436n
Haffer, ii. 445n
Hai-nan, Gulf of, ii. 266n
—— language of, ii. 244n
Hairy men in Sumatra, ii. 301n
Hajji Mahomed, i. 211n, 221n
Hakeddin, ii. 436n
Half-breeds, _see_ Argons
Hamd Allah Mastaufi, the geographer, i. 76n, 81n, 84n, 92n, 135n
Hamilton, Captain Alexander, i. 106n, 122n
Hammer-Purgstall on Marco Polo, _115_
Hamúm Arabs, ii. 443n
Hamza of Ispahan, i. 101n
Hamza Pantsúri, or Fantsúri, ii. 303n
Hanbury, D., ii. 183n, 226n, 229n
Han-chung (Cuncun), ii. 31, 32n, 34n, 35n
Hang-chau fu, _see_ Kinsay
Han dynasty, i. 193n, 347n, ii. 32n, 35n, 70n
—— River, ii. 34n, 35n, 149n, 167n
Hanjám, i. 115n
Han-kau, ii. 183n
Hansi, ii. 427n
Han Yü, ii. 81n
_Harám_, i. 141n
Harhaura, W. Panjáb, i. 104n
Harlez, Mgr. de, i. 305n
_Harmozeia_, i. 114n
_Harpagornis_, fossil Ruc, ii. 417n
Harran, i. 23n
Harshadeva, king of Kashmir, i. 169n
Harsuddi, temple of, ii. 349n
Haru, or Aru, ii. 303n
Hashíshín, _see_ Assassins
Hásik, ii. 444n
Hassán Kalá, hot springs at, i. 47n
Hassan, son of Sabah, founder of the Ismailites, i. 141n
Hastings, Warren, letter of, i. 57n
Hatan, rebellion of, i. 346n
Haunted deserts, i. 197, 201n, 274
Havret, Father H., ii. 155n, 212n
_Hawáríy_ (Avarian), the term, ii. 356n
Hawks, hawking in Georgia, i. 50, 57n;
Yezd and Kerman, 88, 90, 96n;
Badakhshan, 158, 162n;
Etzina, 223;
among the Tartars, 252;
on shores and islands of Northern Ocean, 269, 273n;
Kúblái’s sport at Chagannor, 296;
in mew at Chandu, 299;
trained eagles, 397, 399n;
Kúblái’s establishment of, 402, 403, 407n, ii. 13;
in Tibet, 50;
Sumatra, 285;
Maabar, 345
Hayton I. (Hethum), king of Lesser Armenia, _11_, i. 25n, 42n,
ii. 592n;
his autograph, _13_
Hazáras, the, Mongol origin of, i. 102n;
lax custom ascribed to, 212n, ii. 56n
Hazbana, king of Abyssinia, ii. 436n
Heat, great at Hormuz, i. 108, 109, 119n, ii. 452;
in India, 343, 375–376
Heaven, City of (Kinsay), ii. 182, 184n, 185, 203
Hedin, Dr. Sven, i. 188n, 190n, 193n,
198n, 203n, 225n, 276n
Heibak, caves at, i. 156n
Height, effects on fire of great, i. 171, 178n
Heikel, Professor Axel, on Buddhist monasteries in the Orkhon,
i. 228n
Hei-shui (Mongol Etsina) River, i. 225n
Hel, Ela (Cardamom), ii. 388n
Helena, Empress, i. 82n
Helli, _see_ Eli
He-lung Kiang, ii. 35n
Hemp of Kwei-chau, ii. 127
Henry II., Duke of Silesia, ii. 493n
Henry III., i. 27n, 56n
Heraclius, Emperor, said to have loosed the shut-up nations, i. 56n
Herat, i. 150n, ii. 402n
Hereditary trades, ii. 186, 196n
Hereford, Map, _132_, i. 134n
Hermenia, _see_ Armenia
Hermits of Kashmir, i. 166, 169n
Herodotus, i. 135n, ii. 104n, 109n
Hethum, _see_ Hayton
Hiai- or Kiai-chau (Caichu?), ii. 19n
Hides, ii. 398.
(_See_ Leather.)
Hili, Hili-Marawi, _see_ Ely
Hill-people of Fo-kien, wild, ii. 225, 228n
Hinaur, _see_ Hunáwar
Hind, ii. 402n
Hindu character, remarks on frequent eulogy of, ii. 367
—— Kush, i. 104n, 164n, 165n, ii. 594n
Hindus, their steel and iron, i. 93n
—— in Java, ii. 283n
Hing-hwa, language of, ii. 244n
Hippopotamus’ teeth, ii. 413, 421n
Hips, admiration of large, i. 160
Hirth, Dr. F., ii. 27n, 28n, 89n, 194n, 199n
Hiuan-Tsung, Emperor, ii. 28n
Hiuen Tsang, Dr., a Buddhist monk, i. 164n–165n, 169n, 174n,
189n–193n, 197n, 202n, 221n, 222n, 306n, 446n, ii. 28n, 60n,
594n, 595n
Hochau, in Sze-chwan, Mangku Khan’s death at, i. 245n
—— in Kansuh, ii. 29n
Hochung-fu (Cachanfu), ii. 25n
Hodgson, Mr., ii. 116n
Hoernle, Dr., i. 190n
Hojos, ii. 262n
Hokien-fu (Cacanfu), ii. 133n
Hokow, or Hokeu, ii. 224n
Holcombe, Rev. C., on Hwai-lu, ii. 15n;
on Yellow River, 23n;
on Pia-chau fu, 25n;
on road from T’ung-kwan to Si-ngan fu, 27n
Hollingworth, H. G., ii. 144n
Holy Sepulchre, ii. 429;
oil from lamp of, i. 14, 19, 26
Homeritae, ii. 432n
Homi-cheu, or Ngo-ning, ii. 122n, 128n, 129n, 131n
_Homme_, its technical use, i. 27n, 342n
Hondius map, i. 102n
Ho-nhi, or Ngo-ning (Anin) tribe, ii. 120n, 121n.
(_See_ Homi-cheu.)
Hooker, Sir Joseph, on bamboo explosion, ii. 46n
Horiad (Oirad, or Uirad) tribe, i. 300, 308n
Hormuz (Hormos, Curmosa), i. 83, 107, 110n, ii. 340, 348n, 370, 402n,
449, 451;
trade with India, a sickly place, the people’s diet, i. 107,
ii. 450;
ships, 108;
great heat and fatal wind, 108, 109, 119n, 120n;
crops, mourning customs, i. 109;
the king of, 110;
another road to Kerman from, 110, 122n;
route from Kerman to, 110n;
site of the old city, _ib._;
foundation of, 115n;
history of, 120n;
merchants, ii. 340;
horses exported to India from, 348n;
the Melik of, 449, 450, 451
—— Island, or Jerun, i. 110n, 111n, ii. 451n;
Organa of Arian, i. 115n, 121n
Hormuzdia, i. 111n
Horns of _Ovis Poli_, i. 171, 176n
Horoscopes, in China, i. 447, ii. 191;
in Maabar, 344
Horse-posts and Post-houses, i. 433, 437n
Horses, Turkish, i. 43, 44n;
Persian, 83, 86n;
of Badakhshan, strain of Bucephalus, 158, 162n;
sacrificed at Kaans’ tombs, 246;
Tartar, 260, 264n;
and white mares, 300, 308n;
presented to Kaan on New Year’s Day, 390;
of Carajan, ii. 64, 78, 81n;
their tails docked, 82n;
of Anin, 119;
tracking by, 174n;
decorated with Yaks’ tails, 355;
now bred in S. India, 340, 342, 348n, 350n, 438, 450
—— great trade and prices in importing to India from Persia, i. 83,
86n;
modes of shipment, 108, 117n;
from Carajan, ii. 78;
from Anin, 119;
from Kis, Hormuz, Dofar, Soer, and Aden, 340, 348n, 370, 395, 438;
Esher, 442;
Dofar, 444;
Calatu, 450, 451n
—— duty on, 438;
captured by pirates, 395;
their extraordinary treatment and diet in India, 340, 345,
348n–349n, 351n, 450
Horse-stealing, Tartar laws _v._, i. 266
Hosie, A., ii. 131n; on Ch’êng-tu, 40n;
brine-wells of Pai-yen-ching, 58n;
on the Si-fan, 60n, 61n;
on Caindu Lake, 72n
Hospitals, Buddhist, i. 446n
Hostelries, at Cambaluc, i. 412;
on the Cathay post-roads, 434, ii. 32n;
at Kinsay, 193
Hot springs in Armenia, i. 45, 46n;
near Hormuz, 110, 122n
Hounds, Masters of Kaan’s, i. 400–401n
Hours, struck from Cambaluc bell-tower, i. 373, 414; at Kinsay, ii.
188;
unlucky, 364, 368n;
canonical, 368n, 369n
Hsi Hsia dynasty, i. 205n
_Hsiang-Chên_, _Hsiang_, wood, ii. 301n
Hu-chau fu (Vuju), ii. 184n
Hui-hui, white and black capped, two Mohammedan sects, ii. 30n,
Hukaji (Hogáchi, Cogachin), Kúblái’s son, i. 361n, ii. 76, 80n
Hukwan-hien, ii. 230n
Hulákú Khan (Alau, Alacon), Kúblái’s brother, and founder of Mongol
dynasty in Persia, _10_, i. 5, 10, 61n, 64n, 334n;
war with Barka Khan, 8n, 103n;
takes Baghdad and puts Khalif to death, 63, 66n, 85n, 86n;
the Ismailites and the Old Man, 145, 245, 247n
—— his treachery, ii. 181n;
his descendants, 477;
battle with Barca, 494;
his followers, 495
Hullukluk, village, near Sivas, i. 45n
Human fat, used for combustion in war, ii. 180n
—— sacrifices, i. 208n
Humáyún, Emperor, i. 155n, 277n
Humboldt, _106_, _107_, _110_, _120_, i. 178n
Hunáwar (Onore, Hinaur), ii. 390n, 440n
Hundred Eyes, prophecy of the, ii. 145, 146, 149n
_Hundwáníy_ (ondanique), Indian steel, i. 93n
Hungary, Hungarians, ii. 286n, 492n
Hung Hao, Chinese author, i. 212n
Hun-ho (Sanghin River), ii. 5n, 6n
Hunting equipment and Expedition, Kúblái’s, i. 397, 398n, 404;
Kang-hi’s, 407n
—— preserves, ii. 13.
(_See_ also Sport.)
Hutton, Captain, i. 100n
Hwa-chau, ii. 29n
Hwai-lu, or Hwo-lu-h’ien (Khavailu), the Birmingham of N. Shansi,
ii. 15n
Hwai-ngan-fu (Coiganju), ii. 152n
Hwai River, ii. 143n, 152n
Hwang-ho (Yellow River), i. 245n, 282n, 286n, ii. 23n, 25n, 27n;
changes in its courses, 137n, 142n, 143n;
its embankments, 143n
Hwan-ho, ii. 6n
Hyena, i. 378n
Hyrcania, king of, i. 57n

Iabadiu, ii. 286n
Ibn-al-Furāt, i. 67n
Ibn Batuta (Moorish traveller, _circa_ A.D. 1330–1350), i. 4n–9n,
37n, 44n, 46n, 65n, 75n, 76n, 85n, 101n, 110n, 111n, 116n, 120n,
148n, 150n, 151n, 161n, 165n, 202n, 247n, 294n, 346n, 396n–410n,
ii. 116n, 163n, 214n, 282n, 286n, 312n, 322n, 337n, 346n, 380n,
391n, 413n, 440n, 444n, 445n, 465n;
his account of Chinese juggling, i. 316n;
his account of Khansa (Kinsay), 214n;
of Zayton, 238n;
in Sumatra, 289n, 294n;
on Camphor, 303n;
in Ceylon, 315n, 322n, 337n;
at Kaulam, 377n, 380n;
in Malabar, 391n;
sees Rukh, 419n;
his account of Maldives, 425n;
dog-sledges, ii. 481n, 483n;
Market in Land of Darkness, 486n;
on Silver Mines of Russia, 488n
Ibn Fozlán, _see_ Fozlán
Ichin-hien, ii. 154n, 168n, 173n
Ichthyophagous cattle and people, ii. 442, 443, 444n
Icon Amlac, king of Abyssinia, ii. 434n–436n
Iconium (Kuniyah, Conia), i. 43, 44n
Idolatry (Buddhism) and Idolaters, in Kashmir, i. 166, 168n;
their decalogue, 167, 170n;
Pashai, 172;
Tangut, 203, 207n;
Kamul, 210;
Kanchau, 219, 221n;
Chingintalas, 212;
Suhchau, 217;
Etzina, their fasting days, 220, 222n, 223;
Tartars and Cathayans, 263, 343, 445, 456;
Erguiul, 274;
Egrigaia, 281;
Tenduc, 284, 285;
Chandu, 300–303;
at Kúblái’s birthday feast, 387;
Cachanfu, ii. 23;
Kenjanfu, 24;
Acbalec Manzi, 33;
Sindafu, 37;
Tibet, 45, 49;
Caindu, 53;
Yachi, 66;
Carajan, 76;
Zardandan, 84;
Mien, 109;
Caugigu, 116;
Coloman, 122;
Cuiju, 124;
Cacanfu, 132;
Chinangli, 135;
Sinjumatu, 138;
Coiganju, 151;
Paukin, 152;
Tiju, 153;
Nanghin, 157;
Chinghianfu, 176;
Tanpiju, 218;
Chipangu, 253;
Chamba, 266;
Sumatra, 284, 292, 299;
Nicobars, 306;
Mutfili, 360;
Coilum, 375;
Eli, 385;
Malabar, 389;
Tana, 395;
Cambaet, 397;
Semenat, 398;
Far North, 479
—— Origin of, ii. 318, 319;
of Brahmans, 364;
of Jogis, 365
Idols, Tartar, i. 257, 258n, 456, ii. 479;
Tangut, 203–207n;
colossal, 219, 221n;
of Cathay, 263;
of Bacsi or Lamas, 302;
of Sensin, 303, 323n–326n;
of East generally, 263, 265n;
in India, 340, 345
Ιερόδουλοι, ii. 351n
Ieu, Gnostics of, ii. 321n
Ifat, Aufat, ii. 435n
Ig, Ij, or Irej, capital of the Shawánkárs, i. 86
Igba Zion, Iakba Siun, king of Abyssinia, ii. 435n
_Ilchi_, commissioner, i. 30n
Ilchi, modern capital of Khotan, i. 189n, 190n
Ilchigadai Khan, i. 186n
Ilija, hot springs at, i. 47n
Ilkhan, the title, _10_
Ilyáts, nomads of Persia, i. 85
Imáms of the Ismailites, i. 146n
Im Thurn, Everard, on _Couvade_, ii. 94n
Incense, Sumatran, ii. 286;
brown in West India, 395, 396n;
white (_i.e._ frankincense), in Arabia, 396n, 442, 443n, 445,
446n–449n
India, _12_, i. 1, 107, 109, 167, 414, ii. 76, 78, 107, 115, 119,
236, 249;
horse trade to, i. 83, 86n;
trade to Manzi or China from, ii. 190, 216, 390, 395;
believed to breed no horses, 340, 342, 438, 450;
trade with Persia and Arabia, 370;
western limits of, 401, 402n;
islands of, 423, 425n;
division of, 424;
sundry lists of States, 426n–427n;
trade with Aden and Egypt, 438;
with Arabian ports, 442, 444, 450;
confusion of Ethiopia and, 432n
India, the Greater, ii. 331 _seqq._, 401, 424
—— its extent, ii. 425n, 426n
—— the Lesser, ii. 424, 425n–426n
—— Middle (Abyssinia), ii. 423, 427
—— remarks on this title, ii. 431n
—— Maxima, ii. 426n
—— Tertia, ii. 425n
—— Superior, ii. 426n
—— Sea of, i. 35, 63, 108, 166, ii. 265, 424
Indian drugs to prolong life, ii. 370n
—— geography, dislocation of Polo’s, ii. 377n, 390n, 396n, 403n, 426n
—— nuts, _see_ Cocoa-nuts
—— steel (ondanique), i. 93n
Indies, the Three, and their distribution, ii. 424, 426n
Indifference, religious, of Mongol Emperors, i. 14n, 349n
Indigo, mode of manufacture at Coilum, ii. 375, 381n, 382n;
in Guzerat, 393;
Cambay, 398;
prohibited by London Painters’ Guild, 382n
Indo-China, ii. 426n
Indragiri River, ii. 283n
Infants, exposure of, ii. 147, 151n
Ingushes of Caucasus, i. 268n
Innocent IV., Pope, i. 62n
Inscription, Jewish, at Kaifungfu, i. 346n
Insult, mode of, in South India, ii. 371
Intramural interment prohibited, i. 414
Invulnerability, devices for, ii. 259, 263n
’Irák, i. 74, 84n, 86n, 145n
Irghai, i. 281n
Irish, accused of eating their dead kin, ii. 298n
—— M.S. version of Polo’s Book, _102–103_
Iron, in Kerman, i. 90, 92n, 93n, 94n;
in Cobinan, 125
Iron Gate (Derbend Pass), said to have been built by Alexander,
i. 53n, 54n;
gate ascribed to, 57n, ii. 494
Irtish River, ii. 493n
Isaac, king of Abyssinia, ii. 432n, 433n
Isabel, queen of Little Armenia, i. 42n
Isabeni, ii. 432n
Isentemur (Sentemur, Essentemur), Kúblái’s grandson, ii. 64, 80n
Ish, the prefix, i. 156n
’Ishin, i. 119n
Ish-Káshm, i. 156n, 172n;
dialect, 160n, 173n
Iskandar, Shah of Malacca, ii. 282n
Islands, of the Indian Sea, ii. 249, 424, 426n;
of China, 251, 264;
in the Gulf of Cheinan, 266n;
Male and Female, 404 _seqq._
Isle d’Orléans, ii. 277n
Isle of Rubies (Ceylon), ii. 314n
Ismaïl, Shah of Persia, i. 61n
Ismailites, _see_ Assassins
Ispahan (Istanit, Istan, Spaan), kingdom of Persia, i. 83n, 85n
Israel in China, _see_ Jews
Iteration, wearisome, ii. 133n
I-tsing, ii. 283n
Ivongo, ii. 414n
Ivory trade, ii. 423, 424n
’Izzuddín Muzaffar, suggests paper-money in Persia, i. 428n, 429n

Jacinth, ii. 362n
Jacobite Christians, at Mosul, i. 46, 60, 61n, ii. 409n, 432n–433n;
at Tauris, i. 75, 77n;
Yarkand, 187;
perhaps in China, 291n
Jacobs, Joseph, Barlaam and Josaphat, ii. 327n
_Jadah_, or _Yadah-Tásh_, i. 309n
Jade stone (jasper) of Khotan, i. 191, 193n, 194
Jaeschke, Rev. H. A., i. 209n, 243n, 314n, 324n
Jaffa, Count of, his galley, _40_, _49_
Jaipál, Raja, ii. 346n
Jájnagar, ii. 427n
Jaláluddín of Khwarizm, i. 91n, 236n
Jamáluddín-al-Thaibi, Lord of Kais, i. 65n, ii. 333n, 348n
Jamáluddin, envoy from Ma’bar to Khanbaligh, ii. 337n
Jambi River, ii. 283n
James of Aragon, king, i. 273n, ii. 163n
Jámisfulah (Gauenispola), ii. 307n
Jamúi Khátún, Kúblái’s favourite Queen, her kindness to the captured
Chinese princesses, i. 38n, 358n, ii. 151n
Jangama sect, ii. 370n
Janibeg, Khan of Sarai, i. 6n, 264n, 352n
Japan, _see_ Chipangu
Japanese paper-money, i. 428n
Jaroslawl, ii. 489n
_Jase_, stitched vessel, i. 117n
Jaspar (Gaspar), one of the Magi, i. 78, 82n
Jasper and chalcedony, i. 191, 193n
Jatolic, Játhalík, Jaselic, Gáthalík (καθολικός), i. 60, 61n
Jauchau, ii. 243n
Jaúzgún, former captain of Badakhshan, i. 156n
Java, the Great, _13_;
described, ii. 272;
circuit, empires in, 275n;
Kúblái’s expedition against, _ib._
Java, the Greater and Lesser, meaning of these terms, ii. 286n
Java, the Less, _see_ Sumatra
Jawa, Jáwi, applied by Arabs to islands and products of the
Archipelago generally, ii. 286n
Jaya-Sinhavarman II., king of Champa, ii. 271n
Jazirah, i. 61n
Jehangir (Jehan, Shah), i. 168n
Jenkinson, Anthony, i. 9n, 218n
Jerún (Zarun), island, site of the later Hormuz, i. 110n, 111n, 115n,
121n
Jerusalem, _130_, i. 19
Jesuit maps, i. 408n
Jesujabus, Nestorian Patriarch, ii. 377n, 409n
Jews, their test of Mahommed’s prophetic character, i. 56n;
shut up by Alexander, _ib._;
their connection with the Tartars, 57n;
in China, their inscription at Kaifungfu, 343, 346n, 347n;
in Coilum, ii. 375;
in Abyssinia, 427, 431n, 434n
Jibal, i. 81n
—— Naḳús, or “Hill of the Bell,” Sinai desert, i. 202n
Jibal-ul-Thabúl, “Hill of Drums,” near Mecca, i. 202n
Jíruft, i. 92n, 106n, 111n, 112n
Jogis (Chughi), ii. 365, 369n
John XXII., Pope, i. 4n, 5n, 186n
Johnson, his visit to Khotan, i. 189n, 190n, 192n, 195n, 198n
Johnston, Keith, i. 81n, ii. 67n
Johore, Sultan of, ii. 281n, 282n
Jon (Jihon, or Oxus) River, ii. 458, 466
Jordanus, Friar, i. 37n
Jor-fattan (Baliapatan), ii. 386n
Josephus, i. 49n, 57n, 66n
Jubb River, ii. 424n
Judi, Mount, i. 62n
Jugglers, at Khan’s feasts, i. 383, 386n, 392;
and gleemen conquer Mien, ii. 110, 114n
Juggling extraordinary, i. 316n, 318 _et seq._
Juji, eldest son of Chinghiz, _10_, i. 5n, 239n
Juju (Cho-chau), ii. 10, 11n, 127, 131n
Julman, ii. 485n
Junghuhu, on Batta cannibalism, ii. 288n;
on camphor trees, 303n
Junks, ii. 252n, 333n.
(_See_ also Ships.)
Jupár, i. 113n
Justice, administration of Tartar, i. 266
Justinian, Emperor, i. 49n
Juzgána (Dogana), i. 152n

Kaan, and Khan, the titles, _10_
Kaan, the Great, _see_ Kúblái
Kaans, the series of, and their burial place, i. 245, 247n–250n;
massacre of all met by funeral party, 246, 250n
Kabul, i. 104n, 165n, ii. 402n
_Kachkár_ (_Ovis Vignei_), wild sheep, i. 158, 163n
Kadapah, ii. 362n
Kafchi-kúe, ii. 128n
Káfirs of Hindu Kush, i. 165n;
their wine, 87n, 155n
_Kahgyur_, Tibetan Scripture, ii. 347n
Kahn-i-Panchur, i. 106n
Kaidu (Caidu) Khan, Kúblái’s cousin and life-long opponent, _11_,
i. 183, 186n, 187, 214n, ii. 148n;
plots with Nayan, i. 333, 334n, 348;
his differences with Kúblái, ii. 457;
and constant aggressions, 457–458;
his death, 459n;
his victorious expedition _v._ Kúblái, 459;
Kúblái’s resentment, 463;
his daughter’s valour, 463 _seqq._, 465n;
sends a host _v._ Abaga, 467
Kaifung-fu, Jews and their synagogues there, i. 346n, 347n;
siege of, ii. 158n
Kaikhatu (Kiacatu), Khan of Persia, seizes throne, i. 35, 38n;
his paper-money scheme, 428n;
his death, 428, ii. 475;
his dissolute character, i. 91n, ii. 475
Kaïkhosru I. and III., Seljukian dynasty, i. 44n
Kaïkobad I. and III., i. 44n
Kaikus, Izz ed-din, i. 44n
Káil, _see_ Cail
Kaïn (Gháín), a city of Persia, i. 86n, 124n, 141n
Kaipingfu (Keibung, Kaiminfu, Kemenfu), i. 25, 227n, 304n, 306n
Kairat-ul-Arab, i. 112n
Kais, _see_ Kish
Kaisaríya (Caesaræa, Casaria), i. 43, 44n, 49n
Kajjala, or Khajlak, a Mongol leader, i. 104n
Kakateya, dynasty, ii. 362n
Kakhyens, Kachyens, tribe in Western Yun-nan, ii. 74n, 82n, 90n, 120n
Ḳakula, ii. 279n
Kala’ Atishparastán (Cala Ataperistan), “The Castle of the
Fire-Worshippers”), i. 78, 82n
Kala’ Safed, i. 85n
Kalaján (Calachan), i. 281, 282n
Kalámúr, ii. 427n
Kalantan, ii. 279n
Ḳalchi, Ḳalaḳchi, i. 380n
Kales Devar, king of Ma’bar, ii. 333n, 335n;
his enormous wealth, 333n
Kalgan, or Chang-kia-keu, i. 295n
Kalhát (Kalhátú, Calatu, Calaiate), i. 120n, ii. 348n;
described, 449–450, 451n;
idiom of, 451n
Kalidása, the poet, on the Yak, i. 278n
Kalikut, ii. 386n, 391n, 440n
_Ḳálín_, marriage prices, i. 256n, 392n
Kalinga, ii. 329n, 330n
Kalinjar, ii. 426n
_Kalmia angustifolia_, poisonous, i. 219n
Kamál Malik, i. 68n
Ḳamárah, Ḳomar, ii. 279n
Kamasal (Conosalmi), Kahn-i-asal, “The honey canal,” i. 99, 106n
Kambala, Kúblái’s grandson, i. 361n
Kambáyat (Cambay), ii. 398n
Kamboja (Chinla), ii. 134n, 278n, 374n
Kampar, district and River, Buddhist ruins, ii. 283n
Kamul (Komal, Camul), the Mongol Khamil, Chinese Hami, i. 209, 211n,
214n
_Kanát_, or _Kárez_, underground stream, i. 123, 124n
Kanát-ul-Shám (Conosalmi), i. 106n
Kanauj, ii. 427n
Kanbalu Island, ii. 414n
Kanchau (Campichu), i. 219, 220n
Kandahár, Kandar, Gandhára, ii. 72n, 73n, 329n, 402n
Kandy, ii. 328n
Kanerkes, or Kanishka, king, i. 168n;
coins of, 173n
Kang-hi, Emperor, i. 251n, 407n, ii. 8n, 182n
Kank, i. 194n, 195n
Kanp’u (Ganpu), old Port of Hang-chau, ii. 198n, 199n
Kansan, _see_ Shen-si
Kansuh, i. 206n, 220n
Kao Hoshang, i. 422n
Kao-Tsung, Emperor, ii. 28n
Kao-yu (Cayu), ii. 153n
Kapilavastu, ii. 322n
Kapukada, Capucate, ii. 380n
_Ḳarábughá_, _Carabya_, _Calabra_, a military engine, ii. 168n
Kará Hulun, ii. 485n
Karájáng (Carajan, or Yun-nan), ii. 64, 67n, 72n, 73n, 80n
Karákásh (“black jade”) River, i. 193n
Karákhitaian Empire, i. 231n
—— Princes of Kerman, i. 91n
Kará Khoja, i. 214n
Karakorum (Caracoron), i. 66n, 226, 227n, 269, ii. 460
_Kara Kumiz_, special kind of _Kumiz_, i. 259n
Karámúren (Caramoran) River, Mongol name for the Hwang-ho, or Yellow
River, i. 245n, 282n, 286n, ii. 22, 23n
_Karana_, meaning of, i. 101n
Karáni (vulgo Cranny), i. 101n
Karanút, a Mongol sept, i, 101n
Ḳaraún Jidun, or Khidun, i. 101n
Karaunahs (Caraonas), a robber tribe, i. 98, 101n, 121n
_Karavat_, an instrument for self-decollation, ii. 349n
Karens, ii. 74n
Karmathian, heretics, i. 187n
Karnúl, ii. 362n
Karráh, ii. 427n
Karra-Mánikpúr, i. 86n
Kartazōnon, Karkaddan, rhinoceros, ii. 291n
Kaṣaidi Arabs, ii. 443n
_Kash_, jade, i. 193n
Kashan, i. 81n
Káshgar (Cascar), i. 180, 182n;
Chankans of, 193n, ii. 594n
_Kashísh_ (_Casses_), i. 70n, ii. 409n
Kashmír (Keshimur), i. 104n, 164n, 166;
Buddhism, 166, 168n;
beauty of the women, 166, 169n;
conjurers, 166, 168n;
the language of, 168n;
sorcery in, ii. 593
Kashmiris, i. 76n, 166
Kasia, people and hills, ii. 59n
Kasyapa Buddha, ii. 356n
Kataghan, breed of horses, i. 162n
Ḳaṭar pirates, ii. 409n
Kátif, ii. 348n
Kattiawár, ii. 395n;
pirates, 400n
Kaulam, _see_ Coilum
Kaulam-Malé, ii. 377n
Kauli (Cauly), Corea, i. 343, 345n
Kaunchi (Conchi), Khan, ii. 479, 481n
Káveripattanam, ii. 335n
Káveri River, delta of, ii. 335n
_Kavir_, saline swamp, i. 124n
Kavváyi, ii. 388n
Káyal, Káil, _see_ Cail
—— Pattanam, ii. 372n
—— Punnei-, ii. 372n
Kayten, ii. 234n
Kazan, i. 6n, 7n
Kazáwinah, i. 101n
Kazbek, i. 54n
Kazvín (Casvin), i. 83, 84n, 101n, 141n
Keary, C. F., i. 429n
_Kebteul_, night-watch, i. 381n
Kehran, ii. 426n
Keiaz tribe, i. 179n
Keibung (Kaipingfu), i. 25, 227n, 304n, 306n
Kelinfu (Kienning-fu), City, its bridges, ii. 225, 228n, 229n, 234n
Kemenfu, _see_ Kaipingfu
Kenjanfu (Si-ngan fu), ii. 24, 25n, 27n–29n
Keraits, a great Tartar tribe, i. 236n,
237n, 271n, 287n, 288n
Kerala, ii. 390n
Keria, _see_ Kiria
Keriza River, ii. 595n
Kermán, i. 89n, 90, 109, 110, ii. 452;
route to Hormus from, i. 91, 107, 110;
steel manufacture, its industries, 96n;
king of, Atabeg of, 107, 110;
stitched vessels of, 117n;
desert of, 123, 124n
Kerulen (K’i-lien) valley, the Khans’ burial-ground, i. 248n
Keshican (Keshikten), Kúblái’s life-guard, i. 379, 380n, 381n, 394n
Kesmacoran (Kij-Makrán), i. 86n, ii. 401, 402n;
Kij-Makrán, 402n
Keuyung Kwan, village, i. 28n
Khakán, the word, _10_
Khalif (Calif) Mosta’Sim Billah of Baghdad, i. 63;
taken by Hulákú and starved to death, 64;
plot _v._ the Christians laid by a former—the miracle of the
mountain, 69–73;
becomes secretly a Christian, 73
_Khálij_, ii. 439n
_Khàm_, stuff made with cotton thread, i. 190n
Khambavati (Cambay), ii. 398n
Khanabad (Dogana?), i. 156n
Khán Bádshah of Khotan, i. 189n
Khánbalík, _see_ Cambaluc
Khanfu, ii. 199n
Khanikoff, N. de (travels in Persia), i. 49n, 53n, 58n, 74n, 89n,
91n, 92n, 96n, 101n, 106n, 114n, 121n, 124n, 141n, 150n, 193n
_Khanjár-i-Hundwán_, hanger of Indian steel, i. 93n
_Khán-khánán_, a title, _10_
Khanoolla (Mount Royal), site of Chinghiz’s tomb, i. 247n
Khansâ, ii. 199n, 214n
Kharesem, Mount, i. 155n
Khato-tribe, ii. 120n
Khátún-gol, or “Lady’s River,” _i.e._ Hwang-ho, i. 245n, 249n
_Khatun_, title of Khan’s wives, _10_
Khavailu (Hwo-lu h’ien), ii. 15n
Khazars, the, i. 7n, ii. 492n
Khilak, i. 54n
Khimka, ii. 238n
Khinsa, Khingsai, Khinzai, ii. 144n, 175n, 214n.
(_See_ Kinsay.)
Khitan, Khitai, _11_
—— character, i. 28n
—— dynasty of Liao, i. 232n, 288n, ii. 20n
Khmer, ii. 279n
Khodabanda, Ilkhan of Kermán, i. 91n, 103n
Khojas, name of modern Ismailite sect, i. 146n, 163n
Khorasan, province, i. 38n, 128n, 131n, 135n, 150n, ii. 467n, 474n;
turquoises of, i. 92n
Khormuzda, supreme deity of the Tartars, i. 257n
Khotan (Cotan), i. 188, 195n, 197n, ii. 594n, 595n;
fruits, i. 190n;
routes between China and, 191n;
buried cities of, 192n;
its jade, 193n
Khumbavati (Cambay), ii. 398n
Khumdán, ii. 27n
Khusrú, Amír, Indian poet, i. 48n, 96n, 104n
Khutuktai Setzen, Prince of the Ordos, i. 257n
Khwarizm, i. 9n
Kiacatu, _see_ Kaikhátu
Kiahing (Ciangan, Canigan), ii. 185n
Kiai- or Hiai-chau (Caichu), ii. 19n
Kiakhta, i. 56n, 218n
Kia-k’ing, Emperor, ii. 143n
Kiang, the Great (Kian and Kian-Suy, and in its highest course Brius,
the Kinsha Kiang), ii. 36, 56, 59n, 60n, 64, 67n, 69n, 70n, 72n,
129n–131n, 149n, 154n;
its vastness, and numerous craft, 170, 171, 173n;
steamers on, 173n, 174n;
its former debouchure to the south, and changes, i. 199n
Kiang-Ché, ii. 157n, 217n, 224n;
limits of, 218n
Kiang-Hung, Xieng-Hung, ii. 117n, 127n–129n, 131n
Kiangka, ii. 48n
Kiang-mai, Xieng-mai, Zimmé, ii. 117n, 128n, 279n
Kiangshan, ii. 224n
Kiangsi, ii. 228n
Kiang-su, ii. 135n
Kiang-suy (-shui) River, ii. 36, 40n
Kiangtheu, ii. 105n, 111n, 113n
Kiang-Tung, ii. 117n, 279n
Kiao-chi (Tungking), Chinese etymology of, ii. 119n, 128n
Kia Tsing, Emperor, a great bridge builder, ii. 6n
Ki-chau Castle, ii. 26n
Kieh-Ch’a, ii. 283n
K’ien-ch’ang, Kiung-tu (Caindu), ii. 70n–72n
Kien-chau, ii. 232n
Kien-kwé, ii. 232n
Kien-lung, Emperor, ii. 8n, 196n
Kien-ning fu (Kelinfu), ii. 228n
Kiepert, _Map of Asia_, i. 197n
Kij-Makrán (Kesmacoran), i. 86n
Kila’-i-Gabr, “Gueber Castle,” i. 81n, 82n
Kilimanchi River, ii. 424n
Kiming shan Mountains, gold and silver mines, i. 295n
_Kimiz_, _kumiz_ (_kemiz_), mare’s milk,
—Tartar beverage, i. 257, 259n
Kin, or Golden Dynasty in N. China, _12_, i. 28n, 231n, 288n, ii. 8n,
19n, 168n, 190n;
their paper-money, i. 426n, 430n;
story of their Golden King, ii. 17–22
Kincha, Chinese name for Kipchak, ii. 179n
Kin-Chi, or Gold-Teeth (Zardandan), 84–90n
King of the Abraiaman, ii. 364
—— of England, Kúblái’s message to, i. 34;
intercourse with Mongol princes, 36n, ii. 177n
—— of France, Kúblái’s message to, i. 34
—— of Spain, Kúblái’s message to, i. 34, ii. 477n
—— Rev. C. W., i. 370n
Kings of Maabar, the five brothers, ii. 331, 333n, 334n, 337n,
338–339, 370, 371;
their mother’s efforts to check their broils, 371
—— subordinate, or Viceroys, in China, i. 360, 361n, ii. 24, 64, 76,
79n, 190, 199n
—— Tartar, of the Ponent, ii. 490, 492n
Kingsmill, T. W., ii. 154n, 184n, 194n, 220n
King-tê-chên, porcelain manufacture, ii. 243n
K’ing-yüan (Ning-po), ii. 238n
Kin-hwa fu, ii. 222n
Kinki, Kimkhá, ii. 238n
Kinsay (King-szé, or “Capital,” Khansá, Khinsá, Khingsai, Khanzai,
Cansay, Campsay), formerly Lin-ngan now Hang-chau fu, _11_,
ii. 146, 149n, 193n;
its surrender to Bayan, 146, 149n;
extreme public security, 147;
alleged meaning of the name, 182, 184n, 185;
described, 185–208;
bridges, 185, 187, 194n;
hereditary trades, guilds and wealthy craftsmen and their dainty
wives, 186, 196n;
the lake, islands and garden-houses, 186, 187, 196n;
stone-towers—inhabitants’ clothing and food, 187, 197n–198n;
guards and police regulations, 187–188;
fires, 188;
alarm towers, paved streets, 189;
revenue, 189, 190, 215, 216, 217n, 218n;
pavements, public baths, port of Ganfu, 189, 198n, 199n;
the province and other provinces of Manzi, garrisons, 190, 200n;
horoscopes, funeral rites, 191, 200n;
palace of the expelled king, 192;
church, house registers, 192, 200n;
hostel regulations, 193;
canals, 200;
markets and squares, 201, 209n;
fruits and fish shops, 202, 210n;
women of the town, physicians and astrologers, courts of justice,
203;
vast consumption of pepper, 204, 210n;
inhabitants’ character—their behaviour to women and foreigners,
204, 210n, 211n;
hatred of soldiers, 205;
pleasures on the lake and in carriage excursions, 205, 211n;
palace of the king, 206;
the king’s effeminacy and ruin, 207–208, 211n;
tides, 208n;
plan of, 209n;
notices by various writers of, 213n;
wealth of, 245n;
ships, 255, 260n
Kin-sha Kiang, “River of Golden Sands” (upper branch of Great Kiang,
Brius), ii. 36, 56, 64, 67n, 69n, 70n, 72n
Kinshan, _see_ Golden Island
Kinto, or Hintu, Mongol general, ii. 260n
Kipchak (Ponent), Southern Russia, events related by Polo in, _23_,
i. 5, 6n, ii. 490 _seqq._;
sovereigns, 492n;
people of, 493n;
extent of empire, _ib._
Kirghiz Kazak, i. 313n
Kirghiz, the, i. 162n, 176n, 309n, ii. 362n
Kiria, i. 192n, 195n, ii. 595n
Kirk, Sir John, and Raphia palm, ii. 597n
Kis, Kish, or Kais (Kisi), now Ghes, or Kem, island in Persian Gulf,
i. 63, 64n, 83, 452;
merchants, ii. 340;
described, 453n
Kishik, Kishikan, Kizik, Keshikchi, _see_ Keshican
Kishm (Casem), i. 153, 155n, 156n, 173n
—— or Brakht (Oaracta), island in the Persian Gulf, i. 115n, 121n
Kistna River, ii. 362n
Kitubuka, General, i. 85n
Kiu-chau, ii. 222n
Kiulan (Quilon), _see_ Coilum
Kizil Irmak, the, i. 45n
Kizil River, i. 54n
Kneeling oxen, i. 97, 99n
Kobad, the Sassanian, i. 53n
Kobdo, i. 215n
Koh-Banán (Cobinan), i. 125
Koja (Coja), a Tartar envoy from Persia, i. 32, 33n, 38n
Kokcha River, i. 154n–156n, 162n
_Kok-Tash_, greenstone of Samarkand, i. 187n
Kolastri, or Kolatiri Rajas, ii. 387n
Ko-li-ki-sze, i. 289n
Kolkhoi of Ptolemy, identified, ii. 373n
Kollam, _see_ Coilum
Koloman, _see_ Coloman
Kolyma, bird-hunting at, i. 272n
Κώμακον, ii. 391n
Ḳomár, ii. 279n, 383n
Κομάρια ἄκρον, ii. 382n
Konár tree, Marco Polo’s apples of Paradise, i. 99n
Kondachi, 337n
Konkan, Konkan-Tana, ii. 367n, 390n, 396n
_Korano_, epithet on Indo-Scythic coins, i. 101n
_Korea_, _History of_, ii. 262n
Koresh king, i. 82n
_Kornish_, or K’o-tow (Khén-théu), i. 391, 393n
Kosakio, a general against Japan, ii. 260n
Kosseir, ii. 439n
Kotcheres, Kurds of Mosul, i. 62n
Kotlogh, or Kutlugh, Sultan of Kerman, i. 91n
Kotlogh Shah, the Chaghataian prince, i. 104n, 121n
Kotrobah Island, ii. 409n
Kouyunjik, sculptures at, i. 100n
Kozlov, Lieutenant K. P., on the Lob-nor, i. 199n
Kuang-chou, ii. 239n
Kúbenán (Cobinan), a Kuh-banán “Hill of the Terebinths or Wild
Pistachios,” i. 123, 124n
Kúblái (Cublay), Káán, the Great Khán, i. 8n, 10, 11, 12, 15;
his envoys meet the two elder Polos, 10;
receives and questions the Polos, 11, 12;
sends them as envoys to the Pope, 13;
his desire for Christian teachers, and for oil from the lamp in the
Holy Sepulchre, 13, 14;
gives them a Golden Tablet, 15;
his reception of the three Polos, 26;
sends Marco on an embassy, 27;
Marco grows in favour, 30;
allows the Polos to depart with Tablets of Authority, 33–35;
rumour of his death, 38n;
sends a napkin of asbestos to the Pope, 213;
his greatness and power, 246, 247n, 331;
his milk libations, 300;
his inscription at Shangtu, 304n;
Chinghiz’s prophecy, 331n;
his lineage, age, and accession, 332;
Nayan’s revolt, 333;
Nayan’s defeat and death, 336–343;
rebukes anti-Christian gibes, 344;
returns to Cambaluc, 348;
treats four religions with equal respect, 348n;
his views on Christianity, 349n;
how he rewards his captains, 350;
his personal appearance, 356;
his wives and ladies-in-waiting, 356–358;
his palace at Cambaluc, 362;
builds Cambaluc city, 374;
his bodyguard, 379;
order of his feasts, 381;
celebration of his birthday, 387;
his distribution of robes, 387, 394;
his New Year’s feast, 390;
his elephants, 391;
the _K’o-tow_, 391, 393n;
adopts Chinese ancestor-worship, 392n;
his game laws, 396;
his hunting establishment, 397;
his masters of hounds, 400;
how he goes a-hunting, 402;
how his year is spent, 410;
Ahmad’s influence, oppression, and death, 416–420;
his treatment of Mahomedans, 422n;
his mint and paper-money, 423;
his purchase of valuables, 425;
his twelve great Barons, 430;
his posts and runners, 433;
remission of taxes, 439, 443;
his justice, 440n;
a tree planter, 440;
his store of corn, 443;
charity to the poor, 445;
his astrologers, 446;
gaol deliveries, and prohibition of gambling, 457;
his early campaign in Yun-nan, ii. 46n, 79, 80n;
and the king of Mien and Bangala, 98, 110, 114n;
Litan’s plot, 136;
sends Bayan to invade Manzi, 145;
his dealings with Bayan, 148n, 149n;
satisfied with the Polo’s mangonels, 159;
appoints Mar Sarghis governor of Chinghian-fu, 177;
the city of Kinsay, 186–190;
his revenue from Kinsay, 215;
from Zayton, 235;
his expedition against Chipangu (Japan), 255;
sends force against Chamba, 267, 270n;
attempts to gain Java, 272, 275n;
his death, 275n;
sends to buy Ceylon ruby, 313, 315n;
sends for religions of Sakya, 319;
testifies to miraculous powers of Sakya’s dish, 320;
intercourse with Ma’bar, 337n;
with Kaulam, 378n;
missions to Madagascar, 412–413;
Kaidu’s wars with him, 457 _seqq._
—— Khan, territories and people subject to (Turkistan), i. 180, 188,
191, 196;
(Tangut and Mongolia), 203, 212, 217, 269, 274, 281, 284, 285;
(Tibetan frontier and Yun-nan), ii. 50, 53, 64, 109, 116, 119, 122;
(Western China), 124, 127;
(N. Eastern China), 132, 135, 138, 140, 141;
(Manzi), 151–153;
(Sinju), 170;
(Caiju), 174;
Chinghian-fu, 176;
(Chinginju), 178;
(Suju), 181;
(Tanpigu), 218;
(Chonka), 231;
(Zayton), 234;
(Chamba), 267;
(Sumatra), 272, 285, 292, 299
Kuché character, i. 211n
_Kudatku Bilik_, an Uíghúr poem, i. 28n
Kuhistan, or Hill country of Persia, i. 86n
Kúkachin, _see_ Cocachin
Kukin-Tána, ii. 396n
Kukju (Genkju), Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Kuku-Khotan (Blue Town), depôt for Mongolian trade with China,
i. 278n, 286n, 287n
Ku-kwan, Customs’ Barrier, ii. 14n
Kuláb, lions in, i. 152n;
Salt Mines, 154n
Kulan, _Asinus Onager_, the Gor Khar of Persia, i. 89n
Kulasaikera, ii. 335n
Kumár, _see_ Ḳomár
Kumhări, Kumari, _see_ Comari
Kumiz, kimiz (kemiz), Mare’s milk, Tartar beverage, i. 257, 259n,
300;
sprinkling of, 308n, 309n, 385n, 411
Kummájar, ii. 491n
Kúnbúm Monastery, i. 319n
Kunduz, i. 152n, 154n
_Kunduz_ (beaver or sable), i. 410n
Kunduz-Baghlán, i. 86n
Kung-ki-cheng (Fei-ch’eng), ii. 6n, 8n
Kunguráts, Kunkuráts (Ungrat), a Mongol tribe, i. 38n, 101n, 359n,
360
_Kunichi_ (Cunichi, or Chinuchi), “The Keepers of the Mastiff Dogs,”
i. 400
Kuniyah (Conia), Iconium, Koniah, i. 43, 44n 356n
Kunlun (Pulo Condore), ii. 277n
Kurd dynasty, i. 85n
Kurdistan (Curdistan), i. 9n, 62n, 83, 84n
Kurds, the, i. 60, 62n, 85n
Kúreh-i-Ardeshír (Kuwáshír), i. 91n
Kuria Maria Islands, ii. 405n
Kuridai, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
_Kúrkah_, great drum, i. 340n, 341n
Kurmishi, ii. 474n
Kurshids of Lúristán, i. 85n
_Kurut_ (Curd), i. 262, 265n
Kus, Cos (in Egypt), ii. 439n
Kushluk, the Naiman, ii. 20n
Kutan, son of Okkodai, ii. 32n
Kutchluk Khan (Buddhist), Chief of the Naïmans, i. 188n
Kutuktemur, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Kutulun, Princess, ii. 465n
Kuwinji, _see_ Kaunchi
Kuyuk Khan, i. 14n, 245, 247n
Kwa-chau (Caiju), at mouth of Great Canabon Yang-tse-Kiang, ii. 144n,
175n
Kwan Hsien, ii. 41n
Kwansinfu, ii. 221n, 224n
Kwawa, _i.e._ Java, etymology, ii. 119n
Kwei-chau (Cuiju), ii. 82n, 124n, 127n, 129n
Kwei-hwa-ch’eng, or Kuku Khotan, i. 278n, 286n, 287n
Kweilei River, i. 345n
Kyŭng-sang province, ii. 262n

Lac (Wallachia), Lacz, i. 54n, ii. 487, 489n, 490, 491n
Ladies’ dresses in Badakhshan, i. 160, 163n
Ladies of Kinsay, ii. 186
Lagong, ii. 279n
Lahore (Dalivar, Dilivar), i. 99, 104n, 105n, ii. 426n, 427n
Lahsá, ii. 348n
Lájwurd mines, i. 162n
Lake, Caindu, ii. 53, 72n
—— Fanchau, ii. 29n
—— Kinsay, ii. 186, 196n, 200, 214n
—— of Palace at Cambaluc, i. 365, 370n
—— Pleasure parties on, ii. 205, 211n
—— Talifu, ii. 80
—— Yunnan-fu, ii. 66
Laknaoti, ii. 427n
Lakshamana Deva, king of Kashmir, i. 104n
Lamas of Tibetan Buddhism, i. 28n;
their superstitions and rites, 204, 207n, 220, 221n–223n, 301, 302,
314n, 315n;
their monasteries, 303, 319n;
marriage, 303, 319n.
(_See_ also Bakhshi.)
Lambri, kingdom of, ii. 299, 300n, 306, 307n;
situation of, 301n
Lances of Sago Palm, ii. 305n
Lanchang, ii. 279n
Land of Darkness, ii. 484 _seqq._;
market in, 486n
Langdarma, i. 168n, 170n
Langting Balghasun, i. 306n
Languages used in Mongol Court and administration, i. 27, 28n–30n
Lan-Ho, i. 305
Lanja Bálús, or Lankha bálús, ii. 308n
Lanka (Ceylon), ii. 320n
Lan Ki Hien (Nan-Che-hien), ii. 222n, 224n
Lanner Falcons, i. 158, 162n, ii. 50
Lan-tsang kiang (Mekong) River, ii. 88n, 128n
Lao-Kiun, or Lao-Tseu, the Philosopher, i. 322n, 325n, 326n
Laos, people of, ii. 91n, 117n, 120n, 128n
Lar, or Láṭ-Desa, ii. 367n
—— province, ii. 363, 367n, 403n
Latin version of Polo’s Book, _63_, _81_, _90_, _95_, _100_
Latins, the term, i. 10, 12, 32
Latsé, Tibetan for musk, i. 279n
Lauredano, Agnes, ii. 520n
_Laurus Camphora_, ii. 237n
Lawek, _Lawáki_, ii. 278n–279n
Laxities of marriage customs, _see_ Marriage
Layard, Mr., i. 85n
Layas, _see_ Ayas
—— Gulf of, i. 17n
Leather, i. 395, 398;
embroidered mats of Guzerat, 393–394, 395n
Leaves, used for plates, ii. 365;
green leaves said to have a soul, 366
Lecomte on Chinese war vessels, i. 37n
Lembeser, Ismaelite fortress, i. 146n
Lenzin, ii. 141n
Leon I., king of Lesser Armenia, i. 42n
Leon II., king of Lesser Armenia, i. 44n
Leon III., king of Lesser Armenia, i. 25n
Leon VI., last king of Lesser Armenia, i. 42n
Leopards, ii. 282, 411, 431;
taught to sit on horseback, i. 299;
(Cheetas) kept for the Chase by Kúblái, 397
Lepechin, Professor, i. 9n
Le Strange, Guy, i. 67n, 92n
Leung Shan, i. 245n
Levant, term applied by Polo to the kingdom of the Mongol Khans,
i. 1, 5, 8n, 10, 32, 36, 44, 63, 84, 246, 270, ii. 50, 376, 466,
477, 491, 494
Lewchew, ii. 391n
Lewis, _see_ St. Lewis
Lewis XI. and XII. (France), i. 398n
Lew-sha, old Chinese name for Lop Desert, i. 198n, 201n
Leyes, _see_ Ayas
Lhása, ii. 45n, 70n, 74n;
_Labrang_ Monastery at, i. 319n
_Li_, Chinese measure, supposed to be confounded with miles,
ii. 193n, 194n, 209n
Liampo (Ningpo), ii. 228n, 239n
Liang, or tael, i. 426n, 427n
Liang-chau in Kansuh, i. 29n, 276n, 281n
Liao dynasty, _12_, i. 232n, 288n
Liao-tong, i. 289n, 334n, 345n
Libanos, Λιβανοφόρος and Λιβανωτοφόρος χώρα, ii. 445n–446n
_Libro d’Oro_, _14_
Licinius, Emperor, i. 45n
Lidé (Liti), ii. 297n, 305n
Lieuli Ho, ii. 6n
Lign-aloes (eagle-wood), ii. 87, 268;
etymology, 271n;
in Sumatra, 284, 287n
Ligor, ii. 278n
_Ligurium_, the precious stone, _Liguire_, i. 398n
Li H’ien, Tartar ruler of Tangut, i. 206n
_Likamankwas_ of Abyssinian kings, ii. 348n
Li-kiang fu, ii. 73n, 90n
_Limyrica_, ii. 408n
Lindley, i. 99n
Lindsay, Hon. R., ii. 46n, 74n
_Linga_, ii. 370n
Linju, ii. 140, 141n
Lin-ngan (Hang-chau), ii. 149n, 195n
Lin-ngan in Yun-nan, ii. 120n, 121n, 129n
Lintching-y, or Lingchinghien, ii. 141n
Lin-t’sing chau, ii. 139n
Lion and Sun, i. 352n
Lions, black, ii. 376, 382n, 422
—— on the Oxus, i. 151;
Chinese notion of, i. 399n
—— (apparently for tigers) kept for the chase by Kúblái, i. 397,
ii. 31, 42, 56, 214, 219;
skins of striped, i. 405;
how hunted with dogs, ii. 126.
(_See_ also Tigers.)
Lion’s Head Tablets, i. 35, 350, 352n
_Lire_, various Venetian, _66_, _71_, ii. 591n–592n
—— of gold, _73_
Lisbon, ii. 391n
Lissu, or Lisau tribe, ii. 60n, 90n
Litai, ii. 301n
Litan, rebellion of, i. 313n, ii. 136, 138n
Lithang, ii. 48n, 56n, 67n
Little Orphan Rock, ii. 174n
Liu Pang, founder of 1st Han dynasty, ii. 32n
Liu Pei (Luo Pé), of the Han dynasty, ii. 32n, 38n
_Livre des Merveilles_, _121_, ii. 527n
Livres of gold, ii. 442
—— Parisis, _90_, ii. 590n
—— Tournois, i. 83, 86n, ii. 590n
Li Yuan-hao, founder of the Hsi Hsia dynasty, Tangut, i. 206n
Lo, tribes of S.W. China so-called, ii. 123n, 124n, 129n
—— Chinese name of part of Siam, ii. 278n
Lob, _see_ Lop
Locac, kingdom of, ii. 276, 277n–280n
Lockhart, Dr. W., i. 372n, 377n, ii. 8n, 27n, 82n, 124n
_Lokok_, ii. 278n—280n
Lolo tribes, ii. 60n—63n, 69n, 70n, 123n
Longevity of Brahmins and Jogis, ii. 365, 369n
Longfellow, i. 67n
Lop, city and lake, i. 194, 196;
desert, 196, 197
Lophāburi, ii. 278n
Loping, ii. 129n, 130
Lor, _see_ Lúristan
Lord, Dr. Percival, i. 160n
Löss, brownish-yellow loam, ii. 14n
Loups cerviers (lynx), i. 398n
Low castes, ii. 349—350n
Lowatong River, ii. 130n
Loyang, Bridge of, ii. 241n
Lubán, ii. 446n, 449n
Lubán-Jáwi, ii. 286n
Lubán-Shehri, ii. 449n
Lubbies, ii. 372n
Lucky and unlucky hours and days, ii. 364, 368n
Luddur Deo, ii. 362n
Luh-ho-ta Pagoda, Hang-chau, ii. 193n, 194n
Lukon-Kiao (Hun-ho, Pulisanghin River), ii. 5n, 6n, 8n
Lukyn Port, ii. 279n, 280n
Lung-yin ii. 224n
Lúristan (Lor, Lur), kingdom of Persia, i. 83, 84n;
Great and Little, 85n;
character of Lurs or people of, 87n
Lusignan, John de, i. 42n
Lút, Desert of (Dasht-i-Lut), i. 124n, 127, 128n
Lu-tzŭ tribe, ii. 82n
Lynxes, trained to hunt, i. 397, 398n;
in Cuncun, ii. 31

Ma Twan-lin, the Chinese Pliny, i.
100n, 201n
Maaden, turquoise mines at, i. 92n
Maatum, or Nubia, ii. 431n
Ma’bar (Maabar, _i.e._ Coromandel coast), province of India, ii. 331,
332n, 338;
its brother kings, 331, 333n, 335n, 370, 371;
pearl fishery, 331, 335n, 337n;
etymology, 332n;
limits, 333n;
obscurity of history, 334n;
port visited by Polo, 335n;
nakedness of people, king, his jewels, 338–346;
his wives, “Trusty Lieges,” treasure, 339, 347n;
horses imported, 340;
superstitious customs, 340;
ox-worship, 341;
Govis, _ib._;
no horses bred, 342, 350n;
other customs, 342;
mode of arrest for debt, 343, 350n;
great heat, 343;
regard for omens, 344, 351n;
astrology, treatment of boys, 344;
birds, girls consecrated to idols, 345, 351n;
customs in sleeping, 346, 352n;
ships at Madagascar, 412
Macartney’s Map, i. 173n, 292n
Macgregor, Sir C., “Journey through Khorasan,” i. 86n, 89n
Máchin, city of (Canton), ii. 175n
Máchin, Maháchin (Great China), used by Persian writers as synonymous
with Manzi, ii. 35n, 144n, 175n
Maclagan, Major-General (R.E.), i. 105n, 155n
Madagascar (Madeigascar), ii. 411, 413n;
confused with Magadoxo, 414n;
etymology, 414n;
traces of ancient Arab colonisation, 414n
Mádái, Madavi, Maudoy, ii. 387n, 388n
Madjgars, ii. 491n–492n
Madar-Des, Eastern Panjáb, i. 104n
Madras, ii. 355n, 403n
Madura, ii. 333n, 334n, 335n
Maestro, or Great Bear, said to be invisible in Sumatra, ii. 292,
296n
Magadha, ii. 356n
Magadoxo, confused with Madagascar, ii. 414n
Magapatana, near Ceylon, ii. 283n
Magi, the three, i. 78–80;
legend as told by Mas’udi, 82n;
source of fancies about, 82n;
names assigned to, 83n
Magic, of Udyana, i. 164n;
Lamaitic, 301, 314n.
(_See_ also Sorcerers.)
Magical darkness (dry fog and dust storms), i. 98, 105n
Magnet, Mount, ii. 418n
Magyars, ii. 491n–492n
Mahar Amlak, king of Abyssinia, ii. 436n
Mahávan, ii. 426n
Mahmúd Kalháti, prince of Hormuz, i. 121n
Mahmúd of Ghazni, i. 106n
Mahmudiah Canal, ii. 439n
Mahomed (Mahommet), his account of Gog and Magog, i. 56n;
his Paradise, 140;
his alleged prophecy of the Mongols, 265n;
his use of mangonels, ii. 164n
Mahomed, supposed worship of idols of, i. 189n
—— II., uses the old engines of war, ii. 163n, 166n
—— Tarabi, 106n
—— Tughlak of Delhi, his copper token currency, 429n
—— Shah of Malacca, ii. 282n
Mahomedan revolts in China, ii. 29n, 74n, 80n
—— conversion of Malacca, 282n
—— conversion of states in Sumatra, 284, 288n, 294n, 295n, 300n–303n
—— butchers in Kashmir, i. 167
—— butchers in Maabar, ii. 342
—— king of Kayal, 374n
—— merchants at Kayal, 372n
—— settlements on Abyssinian coast, 434n
Mahomedans (Saracens), i. 414, 418;
in Turcomania, 43;
in and near Mausul, 60;
their universal hatred of Christians, 68, 72;
in Tauris, 75;
in Persia, 84;
their hypocrisy about wine, 87n;
at Yezd, 88;
Hormuz, 108;
Cobinan, 125;
Tonocain, 128;
Sapurgan, 149;
Taican, 153;
Badakhshan, 157;
Wakhan, etc., 170;
Kashgar, 180;
strife with Christians in Samarkand, 183;
Yarkand, 187;
Khotan, 188;
Pein, 191;
Charchan, 194;
Lop, 196;
Tangut, 203;
Chingintalas, 212;
Kanchau, 219, 263;
Sinju, 274;
Egrigaia, 281;
Tenduc, their half-breed progeny, 284;
in northern frontier of China, alleged origin of, 288n;
their gibes at Christians, 343;
Kúblái’s dislike of, 420, 422n;
in Yun-nan, ii. 66, 67n, 74n;
in Champa, 268n;
in Sumatra, 284, 288n, 294n, 295n, 300n, 303n;
troops in Ceylon, 314;
pilgrims to Adam’s Peak, 319;
honour St. Thomas, 353;
in Kesmacoran, 401;
in Madagascar, 411;
in Abyssinia, 427;
in Aden, 428, 438;
outrage by, 428 _seqq._;
at Esher, 442;
Dufar, 444;
Calatu, 449;
Hormuz, 452;
Ahmad Sultan one, 467
Mailapúr (Shrine of St. Thomas), ii. 355n
Maiman, i. 86n
_Maistre_, the word, ii. 296n
Maitreya Buddha, ii. 330n
Majapahit, empire of (Java), ii. 275n
Majar (Menjar), ii. 491n
Major, R. H., on Australia, ii. 280n
Makdashan, _see_ Magadoxo
Malabar, Melibar, Malibar, Manibar, ii. 389, 390;
fleets, 389;
products, 389, 390n;
imports, Chinese ships in, 390, 391n
Malacca, ii. 281n;
foundation of, 282n;
chronology, 282n
Malacca, Straits of, ii. 281n
Malaiur, island and city, ii. 280, 281n,
283n, 305–306n
Mal-Amir, or Aidhej, i. 85n
Malasgird, i. 145n
Malay Peninsula, ii. 277n;
invasion of Ceylon, 215n;
chronicle, 279n, 282n, 287n, 288n, 294n, 300n;
language, 286n;
origin of many geographical names, 314n
Malayo, or Tana Malayu, ii. 281n, 283n
Malcolm, Sir John, ii. 351n
Maldive Islands, ii. 425n
Malé in Burma, ii. 113n
Male and Female Islands, ii. 401, 404 _seqq._;
legend widely diffused, 405n–406n, 415n
Malifattan, ii. 333n
Malik al Dháhir, king of Samudra, ii. 288n, 294n
—— al Mansúr, ii. 288n, 294n
—— al Sálih, king of Samudra, ii. 288n, 294n, 295n
—— Kafur, ii. 333n
Malli, the, i. 93n
Malpiero, Gasparo, _4_
Malte-Brun, _112_, i. 86n, ii. 602n
Malwa, ii. 426n, 427n
Mamaseni, i. 85n
Mamre, tree of, i. 131n, 132n, 135n
Mán, barbarians, ii. 60n, 123n, 144n, 228n
Man, Col. Henry, ii. 308n, 312n
Manchu dynasty, i. 29n
Mancopa, ii. 300n, 305n
Mandalé in Burma, ii. 329n
Mandarin language, ii. 243n
Mangalai, third son of Kúblái, _21_, i. 361n, ii. 24;
his palace, 24, 25, 31n
Mangalore, ii. 386n
Mangla and Nebila Islands, ii. 405n
Mangonels made by Polos for attack of Saianfu, ii. 159;
etymology, 164n;
account of, 168n;
a barbarous lubricant for, 180n
Mangu (Mangku, Mongu) Khan, Kúblái’s elder brother, _10_, _11_,
i. 8n, 14n, 61n, 103n, 146n, 210, 227n, ii. 32n, 42, 46n;
his death, i. 245n;
reign, massacre at his funeral, 246, 250n, 334n
Mangu-Temur (Mungultemur), ii. 491, 496, 497n
Manjáník (Manjaniki), ii. 164n
—— Kumghá, ii. 168n
Manjaníkis (Mangonellers), ii. 168n.
(_See_ Mangonels.)
Manji, _see_ Manzi
Manjushri, Bodhisatva, ii. 265n
Manphul, Pandit, i. 154n, 156n, 160n, 162n, 163n
Mansur Shah, i. 25n
Mantzé, Man-tzu, Mantszi, Aborigines, ii. 60n, 64n, 144n
Manuel, Comnenus, Emperor, i. 82n
Manufactures, Kúblái’s, i. 412, 415n
Manuscripts of Polo’s Book, _81_ _seqq._, _90_ _seqq._ ii. 526n–552n
Manzi (Facfur), king of, i. 36, ii. 145, 148;
his flight, 146;
his charity, 147, 207–208;
his effeminacy, 147;
his death, 148;
his palace at Kinsay, 191–192, 206–207.
(_See_ Faghfur.)
—— (Mangi) province, _3_, ii. 10;
White City of the Frontier, 33, 34n, 36, 49, 139, 141, 144n, 151,
176;
entrance to, 142, 152;
conquest of, 145–146, 148, 158, 178;
character of the people, 181, 204;
its nine kingdoms, 1200 cities and squares, 190, 213;
its bamboos, 219;
no sheep in, 219;
dialects, 236, 243n;
called Chin, 264, 265n;
ships and merchants in India, 386, 390, 391n
—— queen of, surrenders, ii. 146, 150n;
her report of Kinsay, 185
Map, constructed on Polo’s data, _109_, _110_;
Hereford, _127_;
Roger Bacon’s, _132_;
Marino Sanudo’s, _133_;
Medicean, _134_;
Catalan, _135_, _136_;
Fra Mauro’s, _135_;
Ruysch’s, _135_;
Mercator’s, _137_;
Sanson’s, _137_
Mapillas, or Moplahs, ii. 372n, 380n
Maps, allusions to, in Polo’s book, ii. 245n, 312, 424;
early mediæval, _132_;
of the Arabs, _132_;
in the palace at Venice, _110_
Marabia, Maravia, Maravi, ii. 386n–387n
Marah Silu, ii. 294n
Mâramangalam, site of Kolkhoi, ii, 373n
Marash, i. 23n
Maratha, ii. 426n
Mardin (Merdin), i. 60, 62n
Mare’s milk, _see_ Kumiz
Margaritone, i. 22n
Marignolli, John, ii. 23n, 144n, 180n, 193n, 194n, 213n, 239n, 321n,
356n, 358n
Market days, i. 154n, ii. 106, 107n
Markets in Kinsay, ii. 201, 202
—— Squares in Kinsay, ii. 201, 210n, 213n
Marks of Silver, i. 83, ii. 394, 591n
Marriage customs in Khotan, i. 191, 193n
—— customs in Kanchau, i. 220, 223n
—— customs of the Tartars, 252—253, 256n
—— (posthumous) amongst Tartars, 267, 268n
—— laxities of different peoples, i. 191, 193n
—— laxities in Thibet, ii. 44, 48n, 53–54, 56n, 66, 76n
Mar Sarghis, ii. 157n, 177
Marsden’s edition of Polo, _115_ and _passim_
Martin, Dr. Ernest, of French Legation at Pekin, ii. 93n
Martini, ii. 5n, 15n, 29n, 32n, 35n, 137n, 211n, 228n, 229n, 237n;
his _Atlas Sinensis_, i. 42n, ii. 69n;
his account of Kinsay, ii. 214n and _passim_
Martyrs, Franciscan, ii. 396n
_Masálak-al-Absár_, i. 5n, 86n, ii. 214, 348n
Masa’úd, Prince of Hormuz, i. 120n, 121n
Mashhad (Meshed), or Varsach River, i. 150n, 155n, 156n, 193n
Mashiz, i. 92n
Maskat, ii. 451n
Mastiff Dogs, Keepers of the, i. 400, 401n
Mastiffs of Tibet, _see_ Dogs
Mastodon, bogged, ii. 290n
Mas’ud II., Ghiath ed-din-Seljuk dynasty, i. 44n
Mas’udi, i. 53n, 59n, 62n, 82n, 99n
Masulipatam, ii. 363n
Matchlocks, manufacture at Kerman, i. 90;
at Taianfu, ii. 15n
Ma-t’eu (Matu), ii. 139n
Mati Dhivaja, _see_ Bashpah Lama
Matitánana, ii. 414n
Matityna (Martinique), ii. 405n
Mätzner, Eduard, ii. 601n
Maundevile, Sir John (John a Beard), on lying in water, i. 119n,
ii. 604n;
Cloths of Tartary, 295n;
Trees of the Sun, 130n;
Dry Tree, 131n;
his Book of Travels, ii. 598n, 605n;
English version, 601n;
his tomb, 604n
Maung Maorong, or Pong, Shan kingdom, ii. 79n, 113n
Mauro, Fra, his map, i. 6, 133, ii. 128n
Mausul (Mosul), kingdom of, i. 46, 60, 61n, 62n
_Mauvenu_ (Malvennez), the phrase, ii. 21n, 473n
Mayers, W. F., ii. 150n, 596n
Mayhew, A. L., on _Couvade_, ii. 93n
Mázanderán, province, i. 59n
_Mecchino_, Ginger, ii. 381n
Medressehs at Sivas, i. 45n
Mekhitar, i. 45n
Mekong River (Lan-tsang kiang), ii. 88n, 128n, 278n
Mekrán, often reckoned part of India, ii. 402n, 403n, 405n
Mekranis, i. 106n
Melchior, one of the Magi, i. 78, 82n
Melibar, _see_ Malabar
Melic, the title, ii. 449, 450, 470n
Melons, dried, of Shibrgán, i. 149, 150n
Menangkabau, ii. 286n, 301n
Mendoza, i. 8n
Menezes, Duarte, ii. 358n
Mengki, envoy to Java, ii. 75n
Menjar (Májar?), ii. 490, 491n
Menuvair and Grosvair, ii. 483n
Merghuz Boirúk Khan, ii. 19n
Merkit (Mecrit, Mescript), a Tartar tribe, i. 236n, 269, 271n
Meshid (more correctly Mashhad), i. 150n, 155n, 156n, 193n
Messengers, Royal Mongol, i. 36n
Mexico, ii. 405n
Meyer, Paul, _Alexandre le Grand_, i. 56n
Miafaraḳain, i. 68n
Miau-tzu, ii. 82n
Mien, Amien, Ava (Burma), king of, his battle with Tartars, ii. 98n;
City of, 99n, 109;
its gold and silver towers, 110;
how it was conquered, 110, 111n;
communications and war with Mongols, 104;
Chinese notices, 104n
Mikado, ii. 262
Military engines of the Middle Ages, dissertation on, ii. 161n;
two classes, 161n;
_Trébuchets_, 161n, 163n, 164n;
Balista, 161n;
shot used, carrion, live men, bags of gold, 163n;
_Mangonel_, 163n, 169n;
Napoleon’s experiments with heavy shot, 164n, 165n;
size and accuracy, 165n;
length of range (Sanudo on), 166n;
effect of Mangonel on Saracens, 166n;
procured by Kúblái for siege of Siang-yang, 167n;
Chinese and Persian histories on, 167n–169n;
known to Mongols and Chinese, 168n;
the _Karabugha_, or _Calabra_, 168n;
the _P’ao_, 169n
Milk, portable, or curd, i. 262, 265n
Milk, rite of sprinkling Mare’s, i. 300, 309n, 411
Million, use of the numeral, _67_, ii. 215, 217n
Millione, Millioni, nickname for Polo and his book, _6_, _54_, _119_,
ii. 217n
Millioni, Corte del, _4_
Milne, ii. 222n
Minao district, i. 110n, 114n
Mines and Minerals, _see_ Iron, Silver, etc.
Minever, _see_ Menuvair
Ming, the Chinese dynasty which ousted the Mongols, A.D. 1368,
i. 29n, ii. 15n, 238n;
their changes in Peking, i. 342n;
their paper-money, 427n;
their effeminate customs, ii. 20;
expeditions to India, 392n;
annals, 413n, 439n, 445n
Mingan, Khan’s Master of Hounds, i. 400
Ming-ti, Emperor i. 347n
Minján, dialect of, i. 160n
Minotto, Professor A. S., _6_, ii. 511n
Min River (in Fokien), ii. 228n, 230n, 233n, 234n
—— River (in Sze-ch’wan), ii. 40n, 70n, 130n
Mint, the Khan’s, i. 423
Mintsing-hien, ii. 230n
Mious River, ii. 488n
Miracle Stories, fish in Lent, i. 52–57n;
Mountain moved, 68–73;
St. Barsamo’s girdles, 77;
Holy Fire, 80;
Stone at Samarkand, 185;
at St. Thomas’ Shrine, ii. 354, 356n, 358n
Mírat, ii. 426n
_Mire_, French for leech, i. 81n
Mirkhond, ii. 180n
Mirobolans, ii. 388n
_Misḳál_, a weight, i. 353n, ii. 41n, 217n, 592n.
(_See_ also Saggio.)
_Misri_, sugar-candy, ii. 230n
Missionary Friars, powers conferred on, i. 22, 23n;
in China in 14th century, _140_, ii. 154n, 237n, 240n
—— Martyrs, i. 312n, ii. 396n
Moa of New Zealand, ii. 417n, 418n
Modhafferians, the, i. 86n
Modun Khotan (“Wood-ville”), i. 408n
Moghistan, i. 110n
Mohammed, son of Yusuf Kelefi, founder of Shíráz, i. 85n
Mohammerah, ii. 444n
Mohiuddin, i. 24n
Mokli, the Jelair, ii. 462n
Molayu, ii. 283n
Molebar, _see_ Malabar
Molephatan, ii. 426n
Molière, _Pastorale Comique_, i. 341n
Moluccas, ii. 265n
Mombasa, ii. 424n
Momein, ii. 57n, 80n, 81n
Monasteries of Idolaters (Buddhists), i. 167, 219, 286n, 303, 319n,
ii. 171, 174n, 175, 176n, 213n
Money, paper, i. 423–425, 426n–430n
—— values, i. 426n, ii. 590n–592n
Mongol conquests, _9_, _10_; capture Soldaia, i. 4n;
Bolghar, 7n, 8n;
treachery and cruelty, 61n, 151n, 265n, ii. 181n;
their inroads, i. 105n;
Balkh city, 151n;
invade Balakhshán, 161n;
invasion of Poland and Silesia, ii. 493n
Mongon Khan, _see_ Mangu
Mongotay (Mangkutai), a Mongol officer, ii. 136, 138n
Monkeys, ii. 285, 382, 431;
passed off as pygmies, 285, 383n–385n
Monks, idolatrous, i. 303.
(_See_ Monasteries.)
Monnier, Marcel, his visit to Karakorum, i. 230n;
on the Ch’êng-tu Suspension Bridge, ii. 41n
Monoceros and Maiden, legend of, ii. 285, 291n
Monophysitism, i. 61n
Monsoons, _23_, ii. 264–265
Montecorvino, John, Archbishop of Cambaluc, i. 117n, 287n, 289n,
346n, ii. 180n
Monte d’Ely, ii. 386n, 387n
Montgomerie, Major T. G. (R.E.) (Indian Survey), on fire at great
altitudes, i. 178n;
position of Kashgar and Yarkund, 182n
Monument at Si-ngan fu, Christian, ii. 27n, 28n
Moon, Mountains of the, ii. 415n, 420n, 421n
Moore, _Light of the Harem_, i. 115n
Moplahs, _see_ Mapillas
Morgan, E. Delmar, i. 176n, 198n, 207n
Mortagne, siege of, ii. 165n
_Morus alba_, silk-worm tree, ii. 25n
Moscow, Tartar Massacre at, ii. 493n
Mosolin, or Muslin (Mosolini), _Mo-sze_,
Arab Mauçili, i. 60, 62n, ii. 363n, 408n
Mossos, a tribe, ii. 60n, 63n
Mosta’sim Billah, last Abbaside Khalif of Baghdad, story of his
avarice and death, i. 63–64, 67n
_Mostocotto_, i. 87n
Mosul (Mausul), i. 46, 60, 61n, 62n
Motapallé, _see_ Mutfili
Motawakkil, Khalif, i. 131n
Moule, Bishop G. E., ii. 194n–198n, 209n–213n, 215n
Mount, Green, in Palace grounds at Peking, i. 365, 370n, 372n
—— St. Thomas, ii. 356n, 358n
—— D’Ely, _see_ Monte d’Ely
Mountain, Old Man of the, _see_ Old Man of the
—— Miracle of the, i. 68–73
—— Road in Shensi, extraordinary, ii. 32n
Mourning customs, at Hormuz, i. 109;
in Tangut, 204;
at Kinsay, ii. 191
Mozambique Channel, ii. 415n
Muang, term applied in Shan countries (Laos and W. Yunnan) to
fortified towns, as:—
Muang-Chi, ii. 67n
Muang, or Maung Maorong, ii. 79n, 113n
Muang Shung, ii. 120n
Muang Yong, ii. 57n, 117n, 128n
Muláhidah (Mulehet, Alamút, Chinese Mulahi), epithet of Ismaelites,
i. 139, 141n, 142n, 146n
Mulberry Trees, i. 423, ii. 13, 24
Mul-Java, ii. 349n
Müller, F. W. K., ii. 89n
Müller, Professor Max, i. 65n;
on _Couvade_, ii. 93n;
on stories of Buddha and St. Josafat, 323n, 325n, 326n, 328n
Multan, ii. 426n
Múnál pheasant (_Lophophorus impeyanus_), described by Ælian, i. 280n
Mung (_Nicaea_), i. 104n
Mungasht, hill fort, stronghold of the Atabegs, i. 85n
Mungul, name applied to Tartars, i. 285.
(_See_ Mongol.)
Mungul-Temur and Mongo-Temur, see Mangu-Temur
Murad Beg, of Kunduz, i. 156n, 161n, 163n
Murghab River, i. 172n, 175n
Murray, Dr. J. A. H., on _Couvade_, ii. 93n
—— Hugh, ii. 133n, 141n, 175n, 208n, 212n, 486n
Murus Ussu (Brius, Upper Kiang), ii. 67n
Mus, Merdin (Mush, Mardin), i. 60, 62n
Musk, animal (Moschus), i. 275, 279n, 364, ii. 34, 35n, 45, 54
—— earliest mention of and use in medicine, i. 279n
Muslin, _see_ Mosolin
Mutfili (Motapallé for Telingana), ii. 359, 362n, 403n, 424;
its diamonds, 360–361, 362n;
identified, 362n
Muza, ii. 408n
Mynibar, ii. 426n
Mysore, ii. 427n
Mystic number, _see_ Numbers

Nac, Nasich, Naques (Nakh), a kind of brocade, i. 63, 65n, 285, 295n
_Nachetti_, silk stuff interwoven with gold, i. 65n
_Nakhut_, gold brocade, i. 65n
Nakkára (Naccara, Nacaires), the great kettledrum signalling action,
i. 338, 339n–341n, ii. 461
Nákshatra, ii. 368n
Nalanda, i. 306n
Nan-Chao, formerly Ai-Lao, Shan dynasty in Yun-nan, ii. 73n, 79n
Nancouri, ii. 308n
Nanghin (Ngan-king), ii. 154, 157, 171n
Nangiass, Mongol name of Manzi, ii. 144n
Nankau, archway in Pass of, with polyglot inscription, i. 28n
Nanking, not named by Polo, ii. 158n
Nanwuli, ii. 301n
Naobanján, i. 85n
Naoshirwan, i. 53n
Naphtha in the Caucasian country, i. 46, 49
—— Fire used in war by the Karaunahs, i. 101n
Napier, Sir C., i. 147n
Napoleon III., his researches and experiments on mediæval engines of
war, ii. 164n, 165n
Narikela-Dvipa, ii. 307n
Narin-Kaleh, fortress, i. 53n
Narkandam, volcanic island, ii. 312n
Narsinga, King of, ii. 347n
Narwhal tusk, mediæval Unicorn’s Horn, ii. 291n
Nasich, _see_ Nac
Nasruddin (Nescradin), officer in the Mongol Service, ii. 101, 104n,
111n, 114n
Nassir-uddin, Mahmud, Sultan of Delhi, _12_
Natigay, Tartar idol, i. 257, 258n, 456, ii. 479
Nava-Khanda, or Nine Divisions of Ancient India, i. 104n
Navapa (Lop?), i. 197n
Naversa (ancient Anazarbus), in Cilicia, under Taurus, i. 58n
Nayan, Kúblái’s kinsman, his revolt, i. 333, 334n;
Kúblái marches against, 335;
routed in battle, 337;
put to death by Kúblái, 343
Nearchus at Hormuz, i. 114n
Nebila and Mangla islands, ii. 405n
Nebuchadnezzar, i. 52n
Necklaces, precious, ii. 338, 346n
Necuveran, _see_ Nicobar
Negapatam, Chinese Pagoda at, ii. 336n
Negroes described, ii. 422
Negropont, i. 18, 19n, 36
Nellore, ii. 333n
Nemej, Niemicz (“Dumb”), applied to Germans by Slavs, ii. 493n
Nerghi, Plain of, ii. 499
_Neri_ (pigs), ii. 210n
Nescradin, _see_ Nasruddin
_Nesnás_ (a goblin), i. 202n
Nestorian Christians, at Mosul, i. 46, 60, 61n;
Tauris, 75, 77n;
Kashgar, 182;
Samarkand, 182, 186n;
Yarkand, 187;
Tangut, 203, 207n;
Kamul, 211n;
Chingintalas, 212;
Sukchur, 217;
Kampichu, Kan-chau, 219;
their diffusion in Asia, 237n;
among the Mongols, 241, 243n;
Erguiul and Sinju, 274;
Egrigaia, 281;
Tenduc, 284, 285, 287n;
China, 291n;
Yachi, or Yun-nan fu, ii. 66, 74n;
Cacanfu, 132;
Yang-chau, 154n;
one in Polo’s suite, 159;
churches at Chinghianfu, 177;
church at Kinsay, 192;
at St. Thomas, 358n;
Patriarch of, 377n, 407;
Metropolitan, 377n, 409n
Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, i. 61n
Nevergún Pass, i. 112n
New Year Festival at Kúblái’s Court, i. 390
Neza Tash Pass, i. 172n
Ngan-king (Nanghin), ii. 154, 157, 171n
Ngan-ning-ho River, ii. 69n
Ngantung, Mongol general, ii. 462n
Ngo-ning, or Ho-nhi, ii. 120n, 121n
Nia (ancient Ni-jang), in Khotan, i. 195n
Nias Island, ii. 298n
Nibong Palm, ii. 305n
Nicaea of Alexander, i. 105n
Nicholson, Edward B., ii. 604n
Nicobar (Necuveran) Islands, ii. 306, 307n, 315n;
etymology and people, 308n
Nicolas of Pistoia, ii. 356n
Nicolas, Christian name of Ahmad Sultan, ii. 468n
—— Friar, of Vicenza, i. 22
Nicolas IV., Pope, ii. 474n
Nieuhoff, ii. 139n, 141n
Nigudar (Nogodar), Mongol princes, i. 98, 102n
Nigudarian bands, i. 98, 102n, 121n, 164n
Nilawár (Nellore), ii. 333n
Nile, sources of, ii. 415n, 438, 439n
Nileshwaram, ii. 388n
_Nímchah Musulmán_, “Half-and-Halfs,” i. 155n
Nine, auspicious number among Tartars, i. 390, 392n
Nine Provinces (India), i. 104n;
(China), ii. 190, 199n
Ning-hsia, or hia (Egrigaia), i. 282n, ii. 23n
Ningpo, ii. 224n
Ning-yuan fu, ii. 69n, 70n
Niriz, steel mines of, i. 86n, 92n
Nirvana, figures of Buddha in, i. 221n
Nishapúr, i. 150n
Niuché (Yuché), Chinese name for the Churchés or race of Kin Empire,
_12_, i. 28n, 231n
Noah’s Ark in Armenia, i. 46, 49n
Nobles of Venice, _14_;
Polo’s claim to be one, _ib._
Nochdarizari, mountains north of Kabul, i. 102n
Nogai Khan, ii. 496;
his intrigues and wars, 496–497;
his history, 497n;
wars with Toctai, 498
Nogodar (Nigudar), King of the Caraonas, story of, i. 98
Nomad tribes of Persia, i. 87n
Nomogan (Numughan), Kúblái’s son, i. 361n, ii. 460, 462n
None, _Nona_, _Nuna_, title given to younger brothers or subordinate
princes, i. 171, 173n
North, regions of the Far, ii. 479
North Star, _see_ Pole-Star
Note Book, Polo’s, ii. 193n
Novgorod, ii. 489n
Nubia, St. Thomas in, ii. 355;
alleged use of elephants in, 434n
Nukdaris, tribe west of Kabul, i. 102n
Nuksán Pass, i. 165n
Numbers, mystic or auspicious, ii. 108n, 347n;
Nine, i. 390, 392n;
one hundred and eight, ii. 347n
_Nuna_, _see_ None
Nusi-Ibrahim, ii. 414n
Nutmegs, ii. 272, 309n
Nyuché, or Churché, race of Kin Emperors, _see_ Niuché.

Oak of Hebron, _see_ Terebinth
Oaracta (Kishm, or Brakht), i. 115n
Obedience of Ismaelites, extraordinary, i. 144n
Obi River, ii. 481n, 484n
Observatory at Peking, i. 378n, 449n
Ocean Sea, i. 107, 270, ii. 3, 22, 36, 56, 146, 153, 189, 237n, 251,
487;
other seas, parts of, 265
Ocoloro Island, ii. 406n
Odoric, Friar, _117_, i. 49n, 59n, 76n, 81n, 89n, 110n, 117n, 202n,
288n, 314n, 370n, 375n, 384n, 385n, 426n, 437n, 441n, ii. 237n,
599n, 602n, 604n;
on Kinsay, 212n;
on Fuchau, 232n;
Zayton, 237n;
Java, 263n, 275n;
Champa, 271n;
Sumatra, 294n, 297n;
on sago tree, 304n;
on products of Ceylon, 315n;
St. Thomas’s, 358n;
Pepper Forest, 377n;
brazil-wood, 380n;
Thána, 396n
Oger, the Dane, i. 131n
Ogotai Khan, _see_ Okkodai
Oil from the Holy Sepulchre, i. 14, 19, 26;
fountain of (Naphtha) at Baku, 46, 49n;
whale, 108, 117n
—— head (Capidoglio, or Sperm whale), ii. 411, 414n
—— walnut and Sesamé, i. 158, 162n
Oirad, or Uirad (Horiad), a great Tartar tribe, i. 300, 308n
Okkodai Khan, third son of Chinghiz, _10_, i. 65n, 206n, 227n, 228n,
236n, 247n, 437n
Olak, Illuk, Aulak, _see_ Lac
Old Man of the Mountain (Aloadin), _124_, _127_, i. 139–146;
his envoys to St. Lewis, 47n;
account of, 139;
how he trained his Assassins, 142;
the Syrian, 144;
his subordinate chiefs, 143, 145n;
his end, 145;
modern representative, 147n
Oljaitu Khan, his correspondence with European princes, i. 14n, 36n,
362n;
his tomb, ii. 478n
Oman, ii. 348n, 452n
Omens, much regarded in Maabar, ii. 344, 351n;
by the Brahmans, 364, 368n, 369n
Onan Kerule, near Baikal, i. 236n
Ondanique (fine kind of steel), Andaine,
Andanicum, Hundwáníy, i. 90, 93n, 125n;
in Kerman, 90;
Chingintalas, 212, 215n
Oppert, Dr. Gustavus, Book on Prester John, _Der Presbyter Johannes
in Sage and Geschichte_, i. 231n–233n, 235n, 236n, 245n, 288n
Orang Gugu, ii. 301n
Orang Malayu River, ii. 281n
_Or Batuz_, i. 388n
Orbelian, John, identified by Bruun with Prester John, i. 233n–235n
Ordos, the Mongols of, i. 249n
Organa (Jerún), Persian Gerún, i. 115n
Oriental phrases in Polo’s dictation, _84_
Orissa, ii. 426n
Orkhon River, i. 227n
Orléans, defence of, ii. 165n
—— Isle d’, 277n
_Orloks_, or Marshals of the Mongol Host, i. 263, ii. 462n
Oroech, ii. 487, 489n
_Oron_, Mongol for a region or realm, i. 104n
_Orphani_, strange customs of the, ii. 298n
_Osci_, the word, ii. 350n
Ostriches, ii. 431, 437n
Ostyaks, ii. 484n
Otto, Bishop of Freisingen, i. 233n, 234n
Oulatay (Uladai), Tartar envoy from Persia, i. 32, 33n
_Ovis Poli_, _see_ Sheep
_Oweke_, _see_ Ucaca
Owen, Professor, ii. 417n
Owen, Rev. Gray, on the Lolos, ii. 69n
_Owo_, Mongol for Musk, i. 279n
Oxen, humped, in Kerman, i. 97, 99n;
wild, shaggy (Yaks), 274, 277n
—— wild (_Beyamini_), in East Tibet, ii. 50;
Burma, 111, 114n;
in Bengal, 115, 116n;
Anin, 119;
worshipped, 341, 365, 370n;
figures of, worn, 365, 370n
Oxenham, _Atlas_, i. 433n, ii. 12n, 14n, 67n, 157n
Oxydracae, the, i. 93n
_Oxyrhynchus_, ii. 434n
Oxus Valley and River, i. 152n, 161n, 172n, 173n, ii. 594n
_Ozene_, ii. 397n

Pacamuria (Baccanor), ii. 386n
Pacauta! (an invocation), ii. 338, 346n
Pacem, _see_ Pasei
Paddle-wheel barges, ii. 211n
Paderin, Mr., visits Karákorum, i. 228n
Pádishah Khátún of Kerman, i. 91n
Padma Sambhava, i. 164n
Pagán (in Burma), ii. 100n, 107n, 109n, 113n, 114n;
ruins at, _13_;
empire of, ii. 279n
—— Old (Tagaung), ii. 107n, 113n
Pagaroyang, inscriptions from, ii. 286n
Paggi Islands, ii. 298n
Pagodas, Burmese, ii. 110, 114n;
alleged Chinese in India, 336n–337n, 391n
Pahang, ii. 279n
Paï, or Peyih tribe, ii. 60n, 120n
Paipurth (Baiburt), i. 46, 49n
Pai-yen-ching, ii. 58n
_Paizah_, or Golden Tablet of Honour, i. 352n, 353n
—— and _Yarligh_, i. 322n, 352n
Pakwiha, China ware, ii. 243n
_Pala_, a bird, ii. 351n
Palace of Khan at Chagannor, i. 296;
at Chandu (Shangtu), 298;
of cane, 299;
at Langtin, 306;
Cambaluc, 362;
on Green Mount, 370;
at Kenjanfu (Si-ngan fu), ii. 24, 29n;
of the Empire of Manzi at Kinsay, 191, 192, 206, 212n;
in Chipangu, paved and roofed with gold, 253, 256n, 275n
Palembang, ii. 281n, 283n
_Paliolle_, _Or de_, for gold dust, ii. 52n
Palladius, the Archimandrite, i. 187n, 198n, 215n, 225n, 227n, 248n,
251n, 256n, 270n, 276n, 279n, 282n, 287n, 288n, 291n, 304n,
306n, 308n, 310n, 319n, 327n, 334n, 336n, 344n–347n, 358n, 389n,
397n, 402n, 407n, 408n, 430n, 456n, 461n, ii. 178n
Palm (Measure), ii. 592n
Palm Wine, _see_ Wine of Palm
Pamier (Pamir), Plain of, i. 171;
its wild sheep, 171, 176n;
great height, 174n;
pasture, etc., 174n, 175n;
described by Hiuen Tsang, Wood, Goës, Abdul Mejid, Colonel Gordon
and others, 174n–176n;
Dr. M. A. Stein on, ii. 593n–594n;
Lord Curzon on number of, 594n
Pan-Asiatic usages, i. 324n, 326n, ii. 359n
Pandarani, or Fandaraina, ii. 386n, 391n
Pandit Manphul, i. 162n, 163n, 173n, 154n–156n, 160n, 161n, 422n, 438n
Pandrethan in Kashmir, Buddhist temple at, i. 167
Pandyan kings, ii. 333n–335n, 373n–374n
Panja River, or Upper Oxus, i. 170, 172n–174n
Panjáb, i. 104n
Panjkora, i. 104n
Panjshir, i. 162n, 165n, ii. 488n
Pantaleon, coins of, i. 163n
Panthé, or Mahomedan Kingdom in
Yun-nan, ii. 80n
Panya (or Pengya), in Burma, ii. 113n
Pao-ki h’ien, ii. 32n, 34n
Paonano Pao, i. 173n, ii. 593n
Papé, Papesifu, ii. 117n, 128n
Paper-money (Chao), Kúblái’s made from bark, i. 423–425, 426n–430n;
modern, 428n.
(_See_ also Currency.)
Papien River, ii. 128n
Paquier, Professor, i. 172n, 183n
Paradise, Apples of, i. 97, 99n
—— in legend of the Cross, 136n
—— of Persia, 114n
—— of the Old Man of the Mountain, i. 140, 142;
destroyed, 145
—— Rivers of, 9n
Parákráma Bahu I., ii. 334n
Paramisura, founder of Malacca, ii. 282n
_Parapomisadae_, ii. 402n
_Parasol_, i. 354n
Paravas, ii. 372n
Parez, Pariz, turquoise mines of, i. 92n
—— falcons of, 96n
Pariahs (_Paraiyar_), ii. 228n;
etymology of, ii. 349n
Parker, E. H., i. 263n, 291n, 312n, 345n, 360n, 381n, 433n, ii. 60n,
74n, 88n, 104n, 148n, 151n, 169n, 207n;
on Pasei, 296n
Parlák, or Perlak, _see_ Ferlec
—— Tanjong, ii. 287n
Parliament, Tartar, ii. 495
Parpa iron mines, i. 93n
Parrot, Professor, first to ascend Mount Ararat, i. 49n
Parrots, ii. 376, 431
Partridges, i. 88;
black, 99n;
Jirufti, 111n;
great (Chakors), 296, 297n;
in mew, 298n.
(_See_ also Francolin.)
Parwana, a traitor eaten by the Tartars, i. 312n
Paryán silver mines, i. 162n
Pascal of Vittoria, Friar, i. 9n
Pasei, Pacem (Basma), a kingdom of Sumatra, ii. 284–285, 288n–289n,
292, 296n, 305n
—— Bay of, 296n
—— History of, 288n–289n
Pasha-Afroz, i. 165n
Pasha and Pashagar tribes, i. 165n
Pashai, i. 164;
what region intended, 164, 165n
—— Dir, i. 98, 104n
Passo (or Pace), Venetian, ii. 280, 281n, 592n
Patarins, heretics, _108_, i. 303, 321n, ii. 342n
_Patera_, debased Greek, from Badakhshan, i. 159, 160n
Patlam, ii. 337n
_Patra_, or Alms-dish of Buddha, ii. 320, 328n;
miraculous properties, 330n;
Holy Grail of Buddhism, 330n
Patriarchs of Eastern Christians, i. 60, 61n, ii. 407, 409n.
(_See_ also Catholicos and Nestorian.)
Patteik-Kará, ii. 99n, 100n
Patterns, beast and bird, on silk, etc., i. 66n, 90, 95, 96n, 398n,
ii. 424n
Patu, _see_ Batu
Paukin (Pao-ying), ii. 152
Pauthier, G., remarks on text of Polo, _92_ _seqq._, _et passim_
Paved roads in China, ii. 189, 198n
—— streets of Kinsay, ii. 189
Payan, _see_ Bayan
Payangadi, ii. 387n
Pa-yi writing, specimen of, ii. 65n
Peaches, yellow and white (apricots), ii. 202, 210
Peacocks at St. Thomas’s, ii. 355;
special kind in Coilum, ii. 376
Pearls, i. 60, 107, 350, 387, 390, 394, 424, ii. 338, 373n;
in Caindu, 53, 56n, 231, 235;
rose-coloured in Chipangu, 254, 257n;
fishery of, 331, 332, 337n, 344, 372n;
pearls and precious stones of kingdom of Maabar, 338, 364, 368n
Pears, enormous, ii. 202, 210n
Pedir, ii. 289n
Pedro, Prince of Portugal, _110_, _135_
Pegu and Bengal confounded, ii. 99n, 115n, 128n
Pei-chau (Piju), ii. 141
Pein (Pim), province, i. 191, 192n;
site of, ii. 595n
Peking, white pagoda at, ii. 347n.
(_See_ Cambaluc.)
Pelly, Col. Sir Lewis, British Resident at Bushire, i. 85n, 86n,
110n, 114n, 117n
Pema-ching, ii. 35n
Pemberton, Captain R., ii. 79n
Pentam (Bintang), ii. 280n, 284
Pepper, daily consumption of, at Kinsay, ii. 204;
change in Chinese use of, 210n;
great importation at Zayton, duty on, 235, 242n;
white and black, 264, 272;
in Coilum, 375;
Eli and Cananore, 385, 388n;
Melibar, 389;
Guzerat, 393, 394n;
trade in, to Alexandria, 235, 389, 438
Pepper Country, ii. 377n
Peregrine falcons, i. 269, ii. 487
Perla (Ferlec), ii. 287n
Persia, extent of name to Bokhara, i. 10n;
spoken of, 75, 78;
three Magi of 78;
its eight kingdoms, 83
Persia and India, boundary of, ii. 402n
Persian applied to language of foreigners at Mongol Court, i. 380n,
ii. 5n
Persian Gulf (Sea of India?), i. 63, 64n
Pesháwar, ii. 330n
Peter, Tartar slave of Marco Polo’s, _72_
Pharaoh’s rats (Gerboa), i. 252, 254n, ii. 480, 517n
Phayre, Major-General Sir Arthur, ii. 100n, 105n, 113n, 114n
Pheasants, large and long tailed, i. 275, ii. 22, 153;
Reeves’s, i. 280n
Pheng (the Rukh), ii. 421n
Philip the Fair, i. 14n, 87n
Philip III. and IV. of France, i. 87n
Philippine Islands, ii. 265n, 266n
Phillips, G., ii. 220n–222n, 224n, 228n, 230n, 232n, 233n, 238n,
239n, 240n–241n, 278n, 279n, 296n, 297n, 308n, 314n, 315n, 596n
Phipps, Captain, ii. 373n
Phra Râma, Siamese kings so-called, ii. 278n
Phungan, Phungan-lu (Fungul?), ii. 127n, 129n
Physician, a virtuous, i. 461n
Physicians, ii. 203, 376
Pianfu (P’ing-yang fu), ii. 13, 16n, 25n
_Piccoli_, ii. 66, 74n
Pichalok, ii. 279n
Pievtsov, General, i. 188n;
expedition, 200n
Pigeon posts, i. 438n
Pig-shells, ii. 85
Piju (Pei-chau), ii. 141
Pilgrimage, to Adam’s Sepulchre in Ceylon, ii. 319;
to Shrine of St. Thomas, 353
“Pillar Road,” ii. 32n
Pima (Pim), i. 191, 192n
Pinati, king of Kaulam, ii. 380n
Pine woods in Mongolian desert, i. 224
—— in South China, ii. 251n
P’ing-chang, Fanchán, or second class Minister, i. 432n
P’ing-yang fu (Pianfu), ii. 13, 16n, 25n
Pinna-Cael (Punnei-Káyal), ii. 372n
Pipino, Friar Francesco, _66_, _81_, _95_, _103_, i. 19n, 22n, 23n,
144n, 156n, 395n, ii. 120n, 517n
Pirabandi or Bir Pandi (Vira Pandi), ii. 333n–335n
Pirada, ii. 305n
Pirates of Malabar, ii. 389–390n;
Guzerat 392;
Tana, 395;
Somnath, 400n;
Socotra, 407, 410n
Piratical customs at Eli, ii. 385, 390n
Pistachioes, i. 97, 114n, 125n, 153, 155n
Plane, Oriental or Chínár, i. 127, 128n, 131n, 135n, 138n
Plano Carpini, _15_, _passim_
Pog, or Fiag River, i. 54n
Poison, antidote to, ii. 79
Poisoning guests, custom of, ii. 84n
Poisonous pasturage, i. 217, 218n
Poison wind, i. 108, 120n
Poland, Mongol invasion of, ii. 493n
Pole, or Jackdaw on Polo’s scutcheon, _7_
Pole-star, invisible in Java the Less, ii. 284, 292;
visible again in India, 382, 389, 392, 397
Police, of Cambaluc, i. 414;
Kinsay, 187, 188
Politeness of Chinese, i. 457, 462n
Polo, Andrea, grandfather of Marco, _8_, _14_, _26_
—— Antonio, illegitimate son of Elder Marco, _26_
—— Bellela, second daughter, _69_, _71_;
died before 1333, _76_, ii. 506n
—— Donata, wife of Traveller, _69_, _71_;
sale of property to her husband, _30_, ii. 507, 512;
death between 1333–1336, _76_;
before Council, _77_;
may have been Loredano, _69_, _77_, ii. 510n, 512n, 518n, 520n
—— or Bragadino, Fantina, eldest daughter of Traveller, _69_, _71_,
_76_, ii. 506n, 513n
—— Felice, a cousin, _25_, _64_
—— Fiordelisa, wife of last, _25_, _65_
Polo, Fiordelisa, daughter of Maffeo the Younger, _17_, _64_
—— Maffeo, brother of Nicolo, _14_, _15_, _64_;
in Kan-chau, i. 220;
time of death between 1309 and 1318, _66_
—— Maffeo, brother of Traveller, _15_, _16_;
probabilities as to birth, _17_, _18_, _25_;
will of, _26_, ii. 510n;
abstract from, _64–66_
—— Marco, the elder son of Andrea,
Uncle of the Traveller, _14_;
his will, _17_, _25_, _26_, i. 4, ii. 510n
—— Marco, the Traveller, veracity, perplexities in his biography, _1_;
Ramusio’s notices, extracts from, _2_ _seqq._;
recognition of his names of places, paralleled with Columbus, _3_,
_105_;
nicknamed _Millioni_, _6_, _67_;
story of his capture at Curzola, _6_;
writes his book in prison at Genoa, _6_;
release and marriage, _7_;
arms, _7_;
claim to nobility, _14_;
supposed autograph, _ib._;
his birth, circumstances of, _15_;
is taken to East, _18_;
employed by Kúblái, mentioned in Chinese Records, _21_, _see_
i. 420;
mission to Yun-nan, _21_;
governor of Yang-chau, _22_;
employed at Kan-chau, Kara Korum, Champa and Indian Seas, _22_;
returns home, _23–24_;
mentioned in his Uncle Marco’s will, _25_;
commands a galley at Curzola, _46_;
taken prisoner and carried to Genoa, _48_;
his imprisonment there, _52_;
dictates his book to Rusticiano, _52_;
release and return to Venice, _52_;
evidence as to story of capture, _53–55_;
dying vindication of his book, _54_;
executor to his brother Maffeo, _64_;
record of exemption from municipal penalty, _66_;
gives copy of book to T. de Cepoy, _68_;
marriage and daughters, _69_;
lawsuit with Paulo Girardo, proceeding regarding house property,
_70_;
illness and last will, _70–74_;
probable date of death, _74_;
place of burial, _74_;
professed portraits of, _75–76_;
alleged wealth, _77_;
estimate of him and of his book, _104_ _seqq._;
true claims to glory, _106_;
faint indications of personality, _107_;
rare indications of humour, _108_;
absence of scientific notions, _109_;
geographical data in book, _109_;
his acquisition of languages, ignorance of Chinese, deficiencies in
Chinese notices, _110_;
historical notices, _111_;
allusions to Alexander, _113_;
incredulity about his stories, _115_;
contemporary recognition, _116_ _seqq._;
by T. de Cepoy, Friar Pipino, _118_;
J. d’Acqui, Giov. Villani, and P. d’Abano, _119_;
notice by John of Ypres, _121_;
borrowings in poem of Bauduin de Sebourc, _121_ _seqq._;
Chaucer and, _128_;
influence on geography, obstacles to its effect, _129_;
character of mediæval cosmography, _130_;
Roger Bacon as geographer, _131_;
Arab maps, _132_;
Marino Sanudo’s map, _133_;
Medicean, _134_;
Carta Catalana largely based on Polo’s, _134_;
increased appreciation of Polo’s book, _135_;
confusions of nomenclature, _136_;
introduction of block-printing into Europe and Polo, _138–141_;
dictates his narrative, i. 2;
found at Venice, 18;
his age, 19n, 22, 26;
noticed and employed by Kúblái, 27;
grows in favour, many missions, 30, 31;
returns from one to India, 32;
escapes from the Karaunas, 99, 106n;
hears of breed of Bucephalus, 158;
recovers from illness in hill climate, 159;
hears from Zulficar about Salamander, 213;
at Kan-chau, 220;
brings home hair of yak, 274;
and head and feet of musk deer, 275;
witnesses events connected with Ahmad’s death, 420, 422n;
noticed in Chinese annals, 422n;
whether he had to do with Persian scheme of paper currency in 1294,
428n;
sent by Khan into Western provinces, ii. 3;
governor of Yang-chau, 154;
probable extent of his authority, 157n;
aids in constructing engines for siege of Siang-yang, 159 _seqq._;
difficulties as to this statement, 167n _seqq._;
on number of vessels on Great Kiang, 170;
ignorant of Chinese, 183;
on greatness of Kinsay, 185;
his notes, 193n;
sent to inspect amount of revenue from Kinsay, 216;
his great experience, 236;
never in islands of Sea of Chin, 265;
in kingdom of Chamba, 268, 271n;
historical anecdotes, 270n;
detained five months in Sumatra, stockade party against wild
people, 292;
brings Brazil seed to Venice, 299;
partakes of tree-flour (sago), 300;
takes some to Venice, 305n;
in six kingdoms of Sumatra, 300;
witnesses arrest for debt in Maabar, 343;
his erroneous view of Arabian coast, _110_, ii. 452n;
Indian geography, 403n;
his unequalled travels, 501;
Venetian documents about him, 510n–521n
—— Marco, called Marcolino, son of Nicolo the Younger, _65_, _77_,
_78_, ii. 510n
—— Marco, last male survivor, _8_, _78_, _79_, ii. 510n
—— Marco, others of this name, _66_, _79_, _80_, ii. 508n, 509n
—— Maroca, sister of Nicolo the Younger, _15_, _25_, i. 4n
—— or Delfino, Moreta, youngest daughter, _69_, _71_, _76_, ii. 506n,
513n
Polo, Nicolo and Maffeo, sons of Andrea, their first journey, _15_
_seqq._;
cross Black Sea to Soldaia, i. 2;
visit Volga country, etc., 4;
go to Bokhara, 9;
join envoys to Khan’s Court, 10;
Kúblái’s reception of, 11;
sent back as envoys to Pope, 13;
receive a Golden Tablet, 15;
reach Ayas, 16;
Acre, 17;
Venice, 18;
find young Marco there, _ib._
—— Nicolo, Maffeo and Marco, proceed to Acre, i. 19;
set out for East, recalled from Ayas, 20;
set out again with Pope’s letters, etc., 22;
reach Kúblái’s Court, 25;
are welcomed, 26;
_see_ on their journey outward, _19_;
their alleged service in capture of Siang-yang, _22_, ii. 158, 159;
Khan refuses them permission to return home, i. 32;
allowed to go with ambassadors, 33;
receive Golden Tablets, 34;
on return _see_ also _23_, _24_;
story of their arrival at Venice, _4_;
scheme to assert their identity, _5_
—— Nicolo, his alleged second marriage and sons, _7_, _15_;
probable truth as to time of, _17_;
his illegitimate sons, _25_;
approximate time of his death, _64_;
his tomb, _7_, _74_
—— Nicolo the Younger, cousin of
traveller, _15_, _25_, _65_, i. 4n
—— Stefano and Giovannino, illegitimate brothers of Traveller, _25_,
_30_, _65_
—— (?), or Trevisano(?), Fiordelisa, perhaps second wife of Nicolo
Polo the Elder, and mother of Maffeo the Younger, _17_, _25_, _27_
—— or Trevisano, Maria, last survivor of the family, _8_, _78_, _79_;
doubts as to her kindred, 79, ii. 510n
—— Family, its duration and end, according to Ramusio, _7–8_;
origin, _13_;
last notices of, _76_ _seqq._ (For relationship of different Polos,
_see_ table, ii. 506n.)
—— Family, branch of S. Geremia, _14_, _66_, ii. 507n–509n
_Po-lut_ (Pa-lut), _incense_, ii. 304n
Polygamy, i. 220, 252, 276, ii. 371;
supposed effect on population, i. 437n–438n, ii. 268, 339
_Pomilo_ (Pamir), i. 174n
_Pompholyx_, i. 126n
Ponent, or West, term applied by Polo to Kipchak, the Mongol Khanate
of the Volga, _see_ Kipchak
Pong (Mediæval Shan State), ii. 79n, 113n
Poods, Russian, i. 162n
Popinjays, i. 107
Population, vast, of Cathay, i. 437n–438n
Porcelain manufacture, ii. 235, 242n;
fragments found at Kayál, 373n;
Chinese, 595n
—— shells, _see_ Cowries
Porcupines, i. 154, 156n
Pork, mention of, omitted, ii. 210n
_Postín_, sheep-skin coat, i. 153, 155n
Posts, post-houses and runners, i. 433 _et seqq._, 438n;
in Siberia, ii. 480
Po-sz’ (Persia), ii. 437n
Potala at L’hasa, i. 319n
Pottinger, i. 94n, 96n
Poultry, kind of, in Coilum, ii. 376;
in Abyssinia (guinea-fowl?), 431, 437n
Pound, sterling, _71_, ii. 591n
_Pourpre_, or _Purpura_, i. 66n, 389n
P’o-yang Lake, ii. 243n
Pozdneiev, Professor, i. 228n
Precious stones or gems, _5_, i. 75, 76n, 107, 350, 390, 394, 424,
ii. 202, 231, 235, 236, 254, 264, 313, 315n, 338, 361, 362n;
how discovered by pirates, 392
Prester John (Unc Can, Aung or Ung Khan), i. 27n, 239;
Tartar tribute to, 226;
account of, 231n–237n;
marriage relations with Chinghiz, 239;
insults Chinghiz’ envoys, 239;
“these be no soldiers,” 240;
marches to meet Chinghiz, 241;
real site of battle with Chinghiz, 242;
his real fate, _ib._;
slain in battle, 244;
his lineage in Tenduc, 284, 288n;
and the Golden King, ii. 17–22
Prices of horses, _see_ Horses
Printing, imaginary connection of Polo’s name with introduction of
_139_ _seqq._
Private names supposed, i. 361n
Prjevalsky, Colonel N. M., i. 198n, 206n, 216n, 249n, 276n, 277n,
ii. 23n, 29n, 61n
Probation of Jogis, ii. 366;
parallel, 370n
Prophecy regarding Bayan, ii. 145, 149n
_Proques_, the word, ii. 370n
Prostitutes, at Cambaluc, i. 414;
Kinsay, ii. 202–203
Provinces, thirty-four of Kúblái’s Empire, i. 430
Pseudo-Callisthenes, _113_, i. 56n, 57n
Ptolemies’ trained African elephants, ii. 434n
Ptolemy, _2_, _129_, _131_, i. 24n, 88n, 91n;
Sarmatic Gates, i. 53n
P’u-chau fu, ii. 25n, 26n
Pu-ch’eng, ii. 224n
Puer and Esmok, ii. 57n, 117n
Pukan Mien-Wang, ii. 113n
Pulad Chingsang, ii. 218n
Pulisanghin, River and Bridge, _111_, _136_, ii. 3–4, 5n
Pulo Bras, ii. 307n
Pulo Condore (Sondur and Condur), ii. 276, 277n
Pulo Gommes (Gauenispola), ii. 307n
Pulo Nankai, or Nási, ii. 307n
Pulo Wé, Wai, or Wey, ii. 307
Punnei-Káyal, ii. 372n
Puránas, the, i. 58n
_Purpura_, _see_ _Pourpre_
Putchok, ii. 397n
Putu-ho, “Grape R.,” ii. 16n
Pygmies, factitious(?), ii. 285

Qal’ah Asgher, hot springs at, i. 122n
Qara Arslán Beg, king of Kermán, i. 92n
Quails in India, ii. 345
Queen of Mutfili, ii. 360
Quicksilver and sulphur potion, ii. 365, 369n
—— as regarded by alchemists, 369n
Quills of the Ruc, _see_ Ruc
Quilon, Kaulam, etc., _see_ Coilum
Qumādin (Camadi), i. 113n

Rabelais, i. 100n
Rabbanta, a Nestorian monk, i. 243n
Radloff, Dr. W., i. 28n;
map, 229n, 230n
Ráin, i. 113n
Rainald, of Dassel, Archbishop, i. 82n
Rain-makers, _see_ Conjurers
Rainy season, ii. 343, 351n
Rajkot leather-work, ii. 395
Rakka, Rákshasas, ii. 298n, 308n, 312n
Rama Kamheng, king, ii. 278n
Rameshwaram, ii. 335n
Ramnad, ii. 335n
Rampart of Gog and Magog, i. 57n, 292n
Ramusio, Giov. Battista, _passim_;
his biographical notices of Polo, _2_ _et seqq._, _52_;
his edition of Polo, _96–101_, ii. 208n, 212n, 374n
Ráná Paramitá’s Woman Country, ii. 405n
Ranking, John, i. 339n
Raonano-Rao, i. 173n, ii. 593n
Rapson, E. J., ii. 595n
Ras Haili, ii. 386n
—— Kumhări, ii. 383n
Rashíduddín, _alias_ Fazl-ulla Rashid, Persian statesman and
historian of the Mongols, _121_;
frequently quoted in the Notes.
Ravenala tree (_Urania speciosa_), ii. 421n, 597n
Raw meat eaten, ii. 66, 76n, 85
Rawlinson, Sir H., i. 58n, 82n, 85n, 87n, 114n, 115n, 152n, 166n,
192n, 195n
Reclus, _Asie russe_, i. 54n;
on Caspian Sea fisheries, 59n
Red gold and red Tangas, ii. 349n
_Re Dor_, ii. 19n
Red Sea, trade from India to Egypt by, ii. 438;
described in some texts as a river, 439n;
possible origin of mistake _93_
Red sect of Lamas, i. 315n, 319n
Refraction, abnormal, ii. 419n
_Reg Ruwán_, of Kabul, i. 202n
—— of Seistán, i. 202n
Reindeer ridden, i. 269, 271n
Religion, indifference of Chinghizide Princes to, i. 14n, 349n,
ii. 477n;
occasional power of among Chinese, i. 460n _seqq._
Remission of taxation by Kúblái, i. 439
Rennell, Major James, ii. 402n
Reobarles (Rúdbár, etc.), i. 97, 109, 111n, 114n
Revenue of Kinsay, ii. 189, 190, 215 _et seqq._
Rhinoceros (Unicorn), in Sumatra, ii. 285, 290n;
habits, 290n;
four Asiatic species, 289n
—— _Tichorinus_, ii. 419n
Rhins, Dutreuil de, i. 190n, 192n, 276n
Rhubarb, _Rheum palmatum_, i. 217, 218n, 279n, ii. 181, 183n
Riant, Comte, ii. 593n
Ricci, Matteo, i. 347n, 451n, 454n
Rice, ii. 33, 56, 85, 115, 117, 123, 174, 202, 292, 300, 313, 342,
354, 360, 401, 404, 423, 431
Rice-wine, i. 441n;
at Yachi, ii. 66
—— trade on Grand Canal, ii. 174
Richard II., i. 42n
Richthofen, Baron F. von, i. 106n, 198n, 218n, 295n, ii. 14n–16n, 19n,
23n, 26n, 27n, 29n, 32n, 34n, 35n, 38n, 40n, 42n, 45n, 48n, 57n,
60n, 67n, 80n;
on Fungul, 129n;
on Tanpiju, 220n
Right and Left, ministers of the, i. 432n
Rio Marabia, ii. 387n
_Rishis_ (Eremites) of Kashmir, i. 166, 169n
“River of China,” ii. 222n, 243n
Roads radiating from Cambaluc, i. 433
Robbers in Persia, i. 84, 87n, 98, 99, 101n
Robbers’ River, i. 114n
Robes distributed by Kúblái, i. 387, 388n, 394
Roborovsky, Lieutenant, i. 188n
Rochefort, “faire la couvade,” ii. 94n
Rockets, i. 342n
Rockhill (_Rubruck_ and _Diary of a Journey_), i. 5n, 8n, 9n, 277n,
279n, 282n, 283n, 294n, 295n, 306n, 308n–310n, 312n, 319n, 321n,
324n, 325n, 353n, 354n, 384n, 385n, 389n, 393n, 429n, 437n,
ii. 491n;
on the titles Khan, Khatun, etc., _10_;
on horn horse-shoes, i. 177n;
earliest mention of name Mongol in Oriental works, 294n;
Mongol storm-dispellers, 310n;
charge of cannibalism against Tibetans, 312n;
on Bönbo Lamas, 325n;
Tablets (_hu_), 354n;
mechanical contrivances at E. Court, 385n;
Mongol etiquette, 393n;
Chinese leather-money, 429n;
Mongol post-stations, 437n;
pocket-spitoons, 462n;
from Peking to Si-ngan fu, ii. 5n;
descent of Yellow River, 23n;
road between T’ung-kwan and Si-ngan fu, 27n;
two famous Uigur Nestorians, 28n;
on the word Salar, 29n;
on the Hui-hui sects, 30n;
on the Alans, 180n;
on branch of Volga Bulgars, 489n
Rofia palm _(sagus ruffia_), ii. 597n
_Roiaus dereusse_(?), ii. 395n
Rome, the Sudarium at, i. 213
_Rondes_, ingenious but futile explanation of, i. 410n
_Rook_, in Chess, ii. 419n
Rori-Bakkar, Sepoy name for Upper Sind, i. 86n
Rosaries, Hindu, ii. 338, 347n
Rostof and Susdal, Andrew, Grand Duke of, i. 7n
Roth, H. Ling, on _couvade_, ii. 596n
Rouble, ii. 488n
Roxana, daughter of Darius, wife of Alexander, i. 151, 152n, 157
Roze de l’Açur, i. 370n
Rubies, Balas, _5_, i. 157, 161n;
of Ceylon, ii. 313, 315n;
of Adam’s Peak, 316n
Rubruquis, or Rubruc, Friar William de, _15_, _104_, _132_, i. 57n,
65n, 227n, 230n, 239n, 242n, 253n, 264n, 278n, 308n, 309n, 354n,
384n, 385n, 389n, 426n, 437n
Ruby mines in Badakhshan, i. 161n
Ruc (Rukh), or Gryphon, bird called, described, ii. 412–413;
its feathers and quills, 413, 420n, 596n–598n;
wide diffusion and various forms of fable, 415n;
eggs of the Aepyornis, 416n;
Fra Mauro’s story, 417n;
genus of that bird, condor, 417n, 420n;
discovery of bones of _Harpagornis_ in New Zealand, 418n;
Sindbad, Rabbi Benjamin, romance of Duke Ernest, 418n;
Ibn Batuta’s sight of Ruc, 419n;
rook in chess, 419n;
various notices of, 420n–421n
Rúdbár-i-Laṣṣ, Robbers’ River, i. 114n
—— (Reobarles), district and River, i. 97, 109, 111n, 114n
Rudder, single, noted by Polo as peculiar, i. 108;
double, used in Mediterranean, 117n
Rúdkhánah-i-Duzdi (Robbers’ River), i. 114n
Rúdkhánah-i-Shor (Salt River), i. 111n
Rudra Deva, King of Telingana, ii. 362n
Rudrama Devi, Queen of Telingana, ii. 362n
Rukh, Shah, i. 86n, 191n, 211n, 218n, 392n, 396n
Ruknuddin, Mahmud, Prince of Hormuz, i. 120n
—— Masa’úd, i. 120n
—— Khurshah, son of Alaodin, Prince of the Ismaelites, i. 146n
Rúm, i. 44n
Runiz, i. 86n
Ruomedam-Ahomet, King of Hormuz, i. 110, 121n
Rupen, Bagratid, founder of Armenian State in Cilicia, i. 42n
Rupert, Prince, ii. 486n
Rüppell’s Table of Abyssinian kings, ii. 435n
Russia (Rosia), annexes Georgia, i. 53n, ii. 486;
great cold, Arab accounts of, 487;
silver mines, 488n;
subject to Tartars, 489n;
conquered by Batu, 489n
—— leather, i. 6n, 394, 395n;
clothes of, 295n
Russians, trusty lieges of king, ii. 348n
Rusták, i. 173n
Rusticiano of Pisa, introduces himself in prologue, i. 1, 141n, 263n;
writes down Polo’s book, _52_, _55_ _seqq._, _84_, _112_;
extracts and character of his compilation, _61_ _seqq._, _143_;
his real name, _61_;
his other writings, _89_
Ruysch’s map, _135_

Saadi, i. 85n
Saba (Sava, Savah), city of the Magi, i. 78, 80, 81n
Sabaste, _see_ Sivas
Sable, its costliness, i. 405, 409n–410n, ii. 479, 481, 484, 486n, 487
Sabreddin, ii. 437n
Sabzawur, i. 150n
Sachiu (Sha-chau), i. 203, 206n
Sacrifices of people of Tangut, i. 204
—— human, i. 208n, ii. 303n
_Sadd-i-Iskandar_, rampart of Alexander, i. 53n, 54n, 57n
Saffron, fruit-serving purposes of, ii. 225, 226n
Sagacity of sledge-dogs, ii. 483n
Sagamon Borcan, _see_ Sakya Muni Buddha
Sagatu, general of Kúblái’s, ii. 267, 270n
Saggio (⅙ oz.), i. 350, 353n, ii. 54, 57n, 76, 215, 216, 217n, 339,
347n, 592n
Sago, ii. 300, 304n, 305n
Saianfu, _see_ Siang-yang-fu
Saif Arad, king of Abyssinia, ii. 437n
Saifuddin Nazrat, ruler of Hormuz, i. 120n
Saimur (Chaul), ii. 367n
Sain Khan (or Batu), ii. 490, 491
St. Anno of Cologne, i. 130n
St. Barlaam and St. Josafat, story of a Buddhist christianised,
ii. 323n _seqq._
St. Barsauma (Barsamo, Brassamus), and monastery of, i. 77
St. Blasius (Blaise), Church at Sivas, i. 43, 45n
St. Brandon, ii. 312n
St. Buddha! ii. 325n _seqq._
St. Epiphanius, ii. 362n
St. George, Church of, in Sivas, i. 45n;
at Quilon, ii. 377n
St. Helena, i. 58n
St. James’ Shrine, Gallicia, ii. 319
St. John the Baptist, Church of, in Samarkand, i. 185
—— Major Oliver, i. 57n, 92n, 96n, 105n, 112n, 114n, 120n
St. Leonard’s Convent in Georgia, and the fish miracle, i. 52, 58n
St. Lewis, i. 27n, 47n, 67n, 87n;
his campaign on the Nile, ii. 165n, 593n
St. Martin, Vivien de, Map, i. 164n, 192n
St. Mary’s Island, Madagascar, ii. 414n
St. Matthew, Monastery near Mosul, i. 61n
St. Matthew’s Gospel, story of the Magi, i. 82n
St. Nina, i. 58n
St. Sabba’s at Acre, _42_
St. Thomas, the Apostle, ii. 321n, 323n, 325n;
his shrine in India, 341, 353, 355n;
his murderers, and their hereditary curse, 350n;
reverenced by Saracens and heathen, 353;
miracles in India, 354, 356n;
story of his death, 355, 357n;
tradition of his preaching in India, 356n;
translation of remains to Edessa, 357n;
King Gondopharus of legend a real king, 357n;
Roman Martyrology, 357n;
the localities, 358n;
alleged discovery of reliques, 358n _seqq._;
the Cross, 358n;
church ascribed to, 378n;
in Abyssinia, 427
St. Thomas’s Isle, ii. 403n
—— Mounts, ii. 358n
Saker falcons, i. 158, 162n, 223, ii. 50
Sakta doctrines, i. 323n
Sakya Muni (Sagamon Borcan) Buddha, i. 164n, 324n, 348n, ii. 265n,
308n;
death of, i. 170n;
recumbent figures of, 219, 221n;
story of, ii. 316 _seqq._;
his footmark on Adam’s Peak, 321n;
Alms dish, Holy Grail, 328n–330n;
tooth relique, 319–320, 330n
Salamander, the, i. 213, 216n
Salar (Ho-chau), ii. 29n
Salem, dragoman, explores Rampart of Gog, i. 57n
Salghur, Atabegs of Fars, i. 85n, 121n
Sálih, Malik, son of Badruddín Lúlú, i. 61n
Salsette Island, ii. 325n, 396n
Salt, H., his version of Abyssinian chronology, ii. 435n
—— rock, in Badakhshan, i. 153, 154n;
used for currency, ii. 45, 54, 57n;
extracted from deep wells, 58n, 66, 76n;
in Carajan province, 66, 76n;
manufactured in Eastern China, 133;
manufacture, revenue and traffic in, 152, 153, 155n, 215, 216, 217n;
trade on the Kiang, 171;
junks employed therein, 174n
—— stream, i. 124n
Salwen River, or Lu-Kiang, i. 323n
Samagar, ii. 471, 474n
Samána, ii. 427n
Samara, kingdom of, _see_ Sumatra
Samarkand (Samarcan), i. 57n, 62n, ii. 458, 462;
story of a miracle at, i. 183, 186n;
colony near Peking from, 291n
Sampson, Theos., on grapes in China, ii. 16n
_Sámsúnji Báshi_, i. 401n
Samudra, _see_ Sumatra
Samuel, his alleged tomb at Sávah, i. 81n
San Giovanni Grisostomo, parish in Venice where the Ca’ Polo was,
_4_, _26_, _53_, _70_, _71_, _76_;
theatre, _28_
San Lorenzo, Venice, burial place of Marco and his father, _7_, _71_,
_74_
Sandu, _see_ Chandu
Sanf, _see_ Champa
Sangín, Sangkan River, ii. 5n, 6n
Sanglich, dialect of, i. 160n
Sang-Miau, tribe of Kwei-chau, ii. 82n
Sangon, the Title (Tsiang-kiun), ii. 136, 138n
Sanitary effects of Mountain air, i. 158
Sanjar, sovereigns of Persia, i. 233n
Sankin Hoto, Dalai, i. 215n
Sanuto of Torcelli, Marino, _118_, i. 17n, 23n, 24n, 42n, 59n, 67n,
77n, 144n;
his World Map, _133_;
on long range, ii. 166n
Sappan wood, _see_ Brazil
Sapta-Shaila, ii. 386n
Sapurgan (Sabúrḳán, Shabúrḳán, Shibrgán), i. 149, 150n
_Saputa_, _Sçue_, peculiar use of, i. 437n
Saracanco (Saraichik), on the Yaik, i. 6n
Saracens, _see_ Mahomedans
Sarai (Sara), capital of Kipchak, i. 4;
city and its remains, 5n;
perhaps occupied successive sites, 6n
—— Sea of (Caspian), i. 59n, ii. 494
_Sáras_, crane (_grus Antigone_), i. 297n
Saratov, i. 9n
Sarbizan Pass, i. 113n
Sardines, ii. 444n
Sárdú Pass, i. 113n
Sarghalan River, i. 156n
Sărha, Port of Sumatra, ii. 294n
Sarhadd River, i. 175n
Sar-i-kol, Lakes, i. 163n, 172n
Sarsati, ii. 427n
Sartak, the Great Khan’s ambassador to Hulákú, i. 10n, 14n
Sassanian dynasty, i. 61n
Sati, _see_ Suttee
Satin, probable origin of word, ii. 241n
_Saum_, _Sommo_, silver ingots used in Kipchak, ii. 488n;
apparently the original rouble, 488n
_Sauromatae_, ii. 466n
Sávah (Saba), i. 78, 80, 81n
Savast (Siwas), i. 43, 44n
Scanderoon, Gulf of, i. 16n
Scasem, i. 156n
Scherani, bandits, i. 101n
Schiltberger, Hans, i. 131n
Schindler, General Houtum-, i. 89n, 96n, 99n, 100n, 105n, 106n,
112n–115n, 122n, 126n, 308n, 310n, 314n
Schlegel, Dr. G., i. 342n, 437n, 441n, ii. 281n, 596n
Schmidt, Professor I. J., i. 201n, 294n
Schönborn, Carl, ii. 601n
Schuyler, Eugene, i. 54n
Scidmore, Miss E., on the Tide, ii. 209n
Scotra, _see_ Socotra
Sea of Chin, ii. 264, 265, 266n, 270n
—— England, ii. 265
—— Ghel, or Ghelan, i. 52
—— India, i. 35, 63, 108, 166, ii. 265, 424
—— Rochelle, ii. 265
—— Sarain, i. 59, ii. 494
Seal, Imperial, i. 366, 424
Sebaste, _see_ Sivas
Sebourc, Bauduin de, _see_ _Bauduin de Sebourc_
Sees of Latin Church, i. 186n, ii. 237n, 377n
—— Nestorian Church, i. 91n, 183n, 186n, 207n, 211n
Sefavíehs, the, i. 90n
Seilan, _see_ Ceylon
Self-decapitation, ii. 349n
Selitrennoyé Gorodok (Saltpetre Town), i. 5n, 6n
Seljukian dynasty, i. 44n
—— Turks, i. 91n
_Selles, chevaux à deux_, the phrase, ii. 440n
Semal tree, ii. 394n
Semedo, ii. 211n
Semenat, _see_ Somnath
Sempad, Prince, High Constable of Armenia, i. 186n, 352n
Sendal, a silk texture, ii. 10n, 37, 132, 182, 390, 464
_Sendaus_, generally Taffetas, ii. 10n
Sendemain, king of Seilan, ii. 313
Seneca, _Epistles_, i. 14n
Senecherim, king of Armenia, i. 45n
Seni, Verzino, ii. 380n
_Senshing_, i. 332n
Sensin, ascetics, devotees living on bran, i. 303, 321n–327n
Sentemur, ii. 98
Sepulchre of Adam, _see_ Adam’s Sepulchre
—— of our Lord, i. 19;
oil from, 14, 19, 26
Serano, Juan de, ii. 295n
Serazi (Shíráz), kingdom of Persia, i. 83, 85n
Serendib, ii. 314n
_Seres_, _Sinae_, _12_;
their tree wool, ii. 137n;
ancient character of the, 211n
Serpents, great, _i.e._ alligators, ii. 76 _seqq._, 81n, 360
Sertorius, ii. 348n
Sesamé, i. 158, 162n, ii. 431
_Sesnes_, mediæval form of _cygnes_, _cigni_, i. 297n
_Seta Ghella_, _seta Leggi_ (Ghellé), silk, i. 59n
Seth’s mission to Paradise, i. 136n
Sevan Lake, i. 58n
Seven Arts, the, i. 13, 14n
Severtsof, shoots the _Ovis Poli_, i. 175n, 177n;
on the name Bolor, 179n
Seyyed Barghash, Sultan of Zanzibar, ii. 420n
Shabánkára, or Shawánkára (Soncara), i. 83, 85n–86n
Shabar, son of Kaidu, ii. 459n
Sha-chau (Sachin), “Sand-district,” i. 203, 206n
Shadow, augury from length of, ii. 364
Sháh Abbás, i. 310n;
his Court, 385n
—— Jahan, i. 168n
Shahr-i-Babek, turquoise mine at, i. 92n
Shahr-i-Nao (Siam), ii. 279n
Shahr Mandi, or Pandi, ii. 333n
Shah Werdy, last of the Kurshid dynasty, i. 85n
Shaibani Khan, ii. 481n
_Shaikh-ul-Jibal_, i. 142n, 144n, 145n
Shaikhs (Esheks), in Madagascar, ii. 411, 413n
Shakespeare, on relation of gold to silver, ii. 95n
Sháliát, ii. 440n
Shamanism, i. 257n, 315n, 324n, 325n, ii. 97n.
(_See_ also Devil-Dancing.)
Shampath, ancestor of Georgian kings, i. 52n
Shamsuddin Shamatrani, ii. 303n
Shamuthera, _see_ Sumatra
Shan (Laotian, or _Thai_), ii. 74n, 90n, 96n, 113n, 278n
—— race and country, ii. 117n, 128n
—— dynasty in Yun-nan, ii. 73n, 79n
—— ponies, ii. 82n
—— state of Pong, _see_ Pong
Shanars of Tinnevelly, ii. 97n;
their devil-worship, 359n
Shang-hai, ii. 238n
Shangking-Fungking, i. 345n
Shangtu, Shangdu (Chandu), i. 25n;
Kúblái’s City and Summer Palace, 298, 304n;
Dr. Bushell’s description of, 304n;
Kúblái’s annual visit to, 308n, 410
Shangtu Keibung, i. 306n, 308n
Shan-hai-kwan, i. 407n
Shankárah, Shabankára (Soncara), i. 83, 85n, 86n
Shan-si, ii. 12n, 14n, 15n, 23n, 25n, 32n, 135n, 143n, 167n
Shan-tung, ii. 137n, 141n, 143n;
silk in, 136, 137n;
pears from, 210n
Shao-hing-fu, ii. 220n–222n
Shao-ling, pariah caste of, ii. 228n
Sharakhs, i. 149n
Shara-ul-buks (Forest of box on the Black Sea), i. 57n
Sharks and shark charmers, ii. 332–337n
Shauls, or Shúls, the, i. 85n, 87n
Shawánkára (Soncara), i. 83, 85n, 86n
Shaw, R. B., i. 169n, 178n, 195n, 276n, 315n, ii. 16n
Shawls of Kerman, i. 96n
Sheep, fat-tailed in Kerman, i. 97, 100n
—— four-horned at Shehr, ii. 443, 494n
—— large Indian, ii. 361
—— none in Manzi, ii. 219
—— of Pamir (_Ovis Poli_), i. 171, 176n
—— wild, of Badakhshan (Kachkar, _Ovis Vignei_), i. 158, 162n
—— with trucks behind, 100n
—— Zanghibar, ii. 422, 424n
Sheep’s head given to horses, ii. 351n
Shehr, or Shihr, _see_ Esher
Shehrizor (Kerkuk), i. 62n
Shenrabs, i. 324n
Shen-si, ii. 23n, 25n, 26n, 31n, 32n, 167n, 237n
Shentseu tribe, ii. 120n
Sheuping, ii. 120n
Shewá, cool plateau of, i. 163n
Shibrgán (Sapurgan), i. 149, 150n
Shieng, Sheng, or Sing, the Supreme Board of Administration, i. 431,
432n, ii. 154, 157n
_Shien-sien_, _Shin-sien_, i. 322n
Shighnan (Syghinan), ruby mines, i. 157, 161n, 172n
_Shijarat Malayu_, or Malay Chronicle, ii. 287n, 288n, 294n, 296n,
300n, 302n
Shikárgáh, applied to animal pattern textures, Benares brocades,
i. 66n
Shing-king, or Mukden, i. 345n
Ships, of the Great Khan, ii. 142;
of India at Fuju, 231;
of Manzi described, 249–251;
mediæval, accounts of, 252n–253n;
in Japan, 264;
in Java Seas, 274n;
at Eli, 386
Shíráz (Cerazi), i. 83, 85n
Shireghi, ii. 462n
Shirha, ii. 436n
Shirwan, ii. 495n
Shi-tsung, Emperor, i. 310n
Shoa, ii. 434n, 436n
Shob’aengs of Nicobar, ii. 308n
Shodja ed-din Kurshid, Kurd, i. 85n
Shor-Rud (Salt River), i. 124n
Shot of Military Engines, ii. 159, 163n, 164n–168n
Shpilevsky, i. 8n
Shúlistán (Suolstan), i. 83, 85n
Shúls or Shauls, people of Persia, i. 83n, 85n
Shut up nations, legend of the, _114_, _136_, i. 57n
Shwéli River, ii. 107n
Siam, ii. 277n–280n;
king of, 278n
Siang-yang-fu (Saianfu), Kúblái’s siege of, Polo’s aid in taking,
_22_, _112_, ii. 158, 159;
difficulties in Polo’s account, 167n;
not removed by Pauthier, notice by Wassáf, Chinese account,
Rashiduddin’s, 168n;
treasure buried, 169n
Siberia, ii. 479–481n
Sibree, on rofia palm, ii. 597n
Sick men put to death and eaten by their friends, ii. 293, 298n
_Siclatoun_, kind of texture, i. 283n
Siddhárta, ii. 322n
Sidi Ali, i. 152n, 165n, 277n, ii. 5n, 402n, 444n, 453n
Sien, Sien-Lo, Sien-Lo-Kok (Siam, Lo-cac), ii. 277n–280n
Sifan, ii. 60n, 61n, 70n
Sigatay, _see_ Chagatai
Sighelm, envoy from King Alfred to India, ii. 357n
Si Hia, language of Tangut, i. 29n
Si-hu, Lake of Kinsay or Hang-chau, ii. 186, 196n, 205n–207n, 211n,
214n
Sijistán, i. 102n
Siju (Suthsian), ii. 141
Sikintinju (Kien-chow), i. 343, 345n
Silesia, Mongol invasion of, ii. 493n
Silk, called Ghellé (of Gilan), i. 52;
manufacture at Yezd, 88n;
at Taianfu, ii. 13;
in Shan-si and Shen-si, 22, 23n;
in Kenjanfu, 24;
Cuncun, 31;
Sindafu, 42n;
Kwei-chau, 126, 128n;
Tasinfu, 136, 137n;
Piju, 141;
Pao-ying-Hien, 152;
Nanghin, 157;
Chinhiang-fu, 176;
Chinginju, 178;
Suju, 181n;
Vughin, 182;
Kinsay, 187, 198n, 216;
Ghiuju, 219
—— cotton tree, ii. 394n
—— duty on, ii. 216
—— and gold stuffs, i. 41, 60, 63, 75, 107, 257, 285, 383, 387, 415,
ii. 10, 24, 132, 152, 157, 176, 181, 206, 238n, 390, 411
—— stuffs and goods, Turcomania, i. 43;
Georgia, 50;
Baghdad, 63;
Yezd, 88;
Kerman, 90;
Tenduc province, 285;
Cambaluc, 415;
Juju, ii. 10;
Sindafu, 37;
Cacanfu, 132;
Chinangli, 135;
Suju, 181;
Vughin, 182;
Kinsay, 187;
in animal patterns, 63, 90;
with Cheetas, i. 398n;
of Kelinfu, ii. 225;
with giraffes, 424n
Silk, tent ropes, i. 405;
bed furniture, 434
—— trade at Cambaluc, i. 415;
at Kinsay, ii. 187
—— worms, ii. 13, 24
Silver chairs, i. 351, 355n
—— imported into Malabar, ii. 390;
Cambay, 398
—— Island, ii. 174n
—— mines at Baiburt, i. 46;
Gumish-Khánah, 49n;
in Badakhshan, 157;
in N. Shansi, 285, 295n;
Yun-nan, ii. 95n;
Russian, 487, 488n
—— plate in Chinese taverns, ii. 187, 196n
Simon, Metropolitan of Fars, ii. 377n
—— Magus, i. 314n
Simúm, effects of, i. 109, 120n
Simurgh, ii. 415n, 419n
Sinbad, his story of the diamonds, ii. 362n;
of the Rukh, 418n
Sind (Sindhu-Sauvira), _12_, i. 104n, 105n
Sindábúr (Goa), ii. 390n, 440n
Sindachu (Siuen-hwa fu), i. 285, 295n
Sindafu (Chengtu-fu), ii. 36, 38n, 127, 128n
Sindhu-Sauvira (Sindh-Ságor), i. 104n
Si-ngan fu (Kenjanfu), ii. 24n, 25n, 29n, 34n;
Christian inscription at, 27n, 29n
Singapore, Singhapura, i. 37n, ii. 279n, 281n, 305n
Singkel, ii. 300n
Singphos, ii. 82n, 90n
Sings, ii. 238n
Singtur, Mongol Prince, ii. 111n
Singuyli (Cranganor), ii. 426n
Sinhopala (Accambale), king of Chamba, ii. 267
Sinju (Si-ning fu), i. 274, 276n
—— (Ichin-hien), ii. 170
Sinju-matu, ii. 137, 138
Sínkalán, Sín-ul-Sín, Mahá-chin, or Canton, i. 294n, ii. 175n, 243n,
252n
Sinope, i. 45n
Síráf (Kish, or Kais?), i. 65n
Sir-i-Chashma, i. 58n
Sirikol, Lake and River, i. 174n, 176n, 182n
Sírján or Shirján, i. 92n, 122n
Sis, i. 42n
Sístán, i. 61n
Sitting in air, i. 315n, 316n
Siu-chau, ii. 129n–131n
Siuen-hwa-fu, _see_ Sindachu
Siva, ii. 321n, 334n
Sivas, Siwas, Sebaste, Sevasd (Savast), i. 43, 44n, 45n
Siwastán, ii. 427n
Siwi, gigantic cotton in, ii. 394n
Sixtus V., Pope, ii. 326n
_Siya-gosh_, or lynx, i. 399n
Siyurgutmish, i. 91n
Sladen, Major, ii. 82n, 90n, 95n, 107n, 198n
Slaves in Bengal, ii. 115
Sledges, dog-, ii. 480, 481n–483n
Sleeping-mats, leather, ii. 394, 395n
Sluices of Grand Canal, ii. 175n
Smith, G., Bishop of Hongkong, i. 347n
Smith (R.E.), Major R. M., i. 89n, 96n,
99n, 106n, 111n–114n
Sneezing, omen from, ii. 364n
Socotra (Scotra), island of, ii. 404, 406, 408n;
history of, 408n–410n;
Christian Archbishop, 406;
aloes of, 409n
Soer (Suhar), ii. 340, 348n
Sofala, trade to China from, ii. 400n
Sogoman Borcan, _see_ Sakya Muni
Sol, Arbre, _see_ Arbre
Soldaia, Soldachia, Sodaya (the Oriental Sudák), _15_, _26_, i. 2,
3n, 4
Soldan, a Melic, ii. 470, 472
Soldurii, trusty lieges of Celtic kings, ii. 348n
Soli, Solli (_Chola_, or Tanjore), kingdom of, ii. 335n, 364, 368n,
403n
Solomon, house of, in Abyssinia, ii. 434n
Soltania, Archbishop of, ii. 213n.
(_See_ Sultaniah.)
Somnath (Semenat), ii. 398, 400n;
gates of, 399, 400n–401n
Sonagar-pattanam, ii. 372n
Soncara (Shawankára), i. 83, 85n
Sonder Bandi Davar, _see_ Sundara Pandi
Sondur and Condur (Pulo Condore Group), ii. 276, 277n
Sorcerers, sorceries of Pashai (Udyana), i, 164;
Kashmir, 166, 168n, 301, ii. 593n;
Lamas and Tibetans, _ib._, 314n–318n
—— Dagroian, ii. 293, 298n;
Socotra, 407, 410n.
(_See_ also Conjurers.)
Sornau (Shahr-i-Nau), Siam, ii. 279n
Sotiates, tribe of Aquitania, ii. 348n
Soucat, ii. 277
Southey, _St Romuald_, ii. 84n
Spaan, Ispahan, i. 85n
Sposk, district, i. 7n
_Spezerie_, i. 43n
Spice, Spicery, i. 41, 60, 107, 205, 302, 382, 441, ii. 49, 56, 66,
115, 116, 123, 202, 216, 234, 264, 272, 284, 389, 390n, 423, 438,
450
Spice wood, i. 405, 409n
Spices in China, duty on, ii. 216
Spikenard, ii. 115, 272, 284, 287n, 390
Spinello Aretini, fresco by, i. 118n
Spirit drawings and spiritual flowers, i. 460n
Spirits haunting deserts, i. 197, 209n, 274
Spiritualism in China, i. 325n
Spitoons, pocket, i. 458, 462n
Spodium (Spodos), i. 125, 126n
Sport and game, i. 41, 88, 91, 149, 151, 153, 158, 160, 171, 223,
252, 260, 275, 285, 296, 299, 397, 400–406, 411;
in Shan-si, ii. 22;
Cachanfu, 24;
Cuncun, 31;
Acbalec Manzi, 34;
Tibet, 50;
Caindu, 56;
Zardandan, 85;
Mien, 111;
Linju, 140;
Cagu, 153;
Nanghin, 157;
Saianfu, 158;
Ching-hiang-fu, 176;
Chinginju, 178;
Changan, 182;
Kinsay, 201, 207, 219;
Fuju, 225, 226, 234;
Lambri, 299;
Maabar, 345;
Comari, 382;
Eli, 386
Springolds, ii. 161n
Springs, hot, i. 110, 122n
Sprinkling of drink, a Tartar rite, i. 300, 308n
Squares at Kinsay, ii. 201, 209n
Sri-Thammarat, ii. 278n
Sri-Vaikuntham, ii. 374n
Sse River, ii. 139n
Stack, E., visits Kuh Banán, i. 126n
Star Chart, ii. 314n
Star of Bethlehem, traditions about, i. 82n
Steamers on Yangtse-kiang, ii. 173n
Steel mines at Kermán, i. 90, 92n;
in Chingintalas, 212;
Indian, 93n, 94n;
Asiatic view of, 94n
Stefani, Signor, i. 7, ii. 507n
Stein, Dr. M. A., on Sorcery in Kashmir, ii. 593n;
on Paonano Pao, 593n;
on Pamirs, 593n–594n;
on site of Pein, 595n
Stiens of Cambodia, ii. 82n, 97n
Stirrups, short and long, ii. 78, 82n
Stitched vessels, i. 108, 117n
Stockade erected by Polo’s party in Sumatra, ii. 292
Stone, miracle of the, at Samarkand, i. 185, 187n
—— the green, i. 187n
—— towers in Chinese cities, ii. 189
—— umbrella column, ii. 212n
Stones giving invulnerability, ii. 259, 263n
Suákin, ii. 439n
Submersion of part of Ceylon, ii. 313, 314n
Subterraneous irrigation, i. 89n, 123, 124n
Suburbs of Cambaluc, i. 412
Subutai, Mongol general, i. 8n, ii. 168n
Su-chau (Suju), ii. 179, 181, 199n;
plan of, 183n, 184n
Suchnan River, i. 172n
Sudarium, the Holy, i. 213
Súddhodhana, ii. 322n
Sugar, Bengal, ii. 115;
manufactured, 215, 231;
art of refining, 226, 230n;
of Egypt and China, 231
Suh-chau (Sukchur), i. 217, 218n, 282n
Suicides before an idol, ii. 340, 349n
Sukchur, province Sukkothai, i. 217
Sukkothai, ii. 278n, 279n
_Suḳlát_, broadcloth, i. 283n
Sukum Kala’, i. 57n
Suleiman, Sultan, i. 17n, 44n, ii. 74n, 80n
Sulphur and quicksilver, potion of longevity, ii. 365, 369n
Sultaniah, Monument at, ii. 478n.
(See Soltania.)
Sultan Shah, of Badakhshan, i. 163n
Sumatra (Java the Less), _23_, _120_, i. 34, ii. 288n, 300n–301n;
described, its kingdoms, 284, 286n, 287n;
circuit, 284, 286n
Sumatra, Samudra, city and kingdom of (Samara for Samatra), ii. 292,
306n;
legend of origin, 294n;
Ibn Batuta there, 294n;
its position, 295n;
latest mention of, 296n;
wine-pots, 297n
Sumbawa, ii. 287n
Summers, Professor, ii. 277n
Sumutala, Sumuntala, _see_ Sumatra
Sun and moon, trees of the, i. 130n
Sundara Pandi Devar (Sondar Bandi Davar), king in Ma’bar, ii. 331;
his death, 333n;
Dr. Caldwell’s views about, 333n, 334n
Sundar Fúlát (Pulo Condore Group), ii. 277n
Sung, a native dynasty reigning in S. China till Kúblái’s conquest,
_12_, i. 38n, ii. 135, 151n, 194n;
their paper-money, effeminacy, 20n, 150n, 207, 208, 211n;
cremation, 135n;
Kúblái’s war against, 148n, 149n;
end of them, 167n, 168n
Sunnis and Shias, i. 160n
Suolstan (Shulistan), a kingdom in Persia, i. 83, 85n
Superstitions in Tangut, the devoted sheep or ram (_Tengri Tockho_),
i. 204, 207n;
the dead man’s door, 205, 209n;
as to chance shots, 439;
in Carajan, ii. 79, 82n, 84n;
devil-dancing, 86;
property of the dead, 111;
Sumatran, 293, 298n;
Malabar, 339 _seqq._;
as to omens, 343–344, 364–365
Sur-Raja, ii. 374n
Survival, instances of, ii. 93n
Sushun, Regent of China, execution of (1861), i. 428n
Su-tásh, the Jadek, i. 193n
Suttees in S. India, ii. 341, 349n;
of men, 340
_Svastika_, sacred symbol of the Bonpos, i. 324n
Swans, wild, at Chagan-Nor, i. 296
Swat, i. 178n
—— River, i. 164n
Swi-fu, ii. 131n
Sword blades of India, i. 93n, 96n
Syghinan, _see_ Shighnan
Sykes, Major P. Molesworth, i. 102n, 106n, 113n, 114n, 119n, 124n,
126n, 127n, 128n
Sylen (Ceylon), ii. 426n
Symbolical messages, Scythian and Tartar, ii. 497n–498n
Syrian Christians, ii. 377n _seqq._, 433n
_Syrrhaptes Pallasii_, _see_ Barguerlac
Szechényi, Count, i. 207n
Sze-ch’wan (Ch’eng-tu), ii. 32n, 34n, 35n, 37n, 40n, 42n, 45n, 46n,
48n, 58n, 60n, 69n, 128n, 131n, 134n;
aborigines, 60n

Tabashir, ii. 263n, 396n
Tabbas, i. 124n
Table of the Great Khan, i. 381
Tables, how disposed at Mongol feasts, i. 384n
Tablet, Emperor’s, adored with incense, i. 391, 393n
Tablets of Authority, Golden (_Páizah_), presented by Khan to Polos,
i. 15, 16, 34, 35;
lion’s head and gerfalcon, 35, 351;
bestowed on distinguished captains, inscription, 350, 351n–354n;
cat’s head, 356n;
granted to governors of different rank, 431
—— worshipped by Cathayans, i. 456, 458n
Tabriz (Tauris), i. 17n, 74, 76n
Tachindo, _see_ Ta-t’sien-lu
Tacitus, _Claustra Caspiorum_, Pass of Derbend, i. 53n
Tactics, Tartar, i. 262, 265n, ii. 460
Tacuin, i. 447, 448n
Tadinfu, ii. 136
Taeping Insurrection and Devastations, ii. 154n, 158n, 173n, 176n,
177n, 179n, 184n, 196n, 222n
Taeping, or Taiping, Sovereigns’ effeminate customs, ii. 20n
Taffetas, ii. 10n
Taft, near Yezd, turquoise at, i. 92n
Tafurs, i. 313n
Tagachar, ii. 471, 474n
Tagaung, ii. 107n, 111n, 113n
Tagharma Pass, i. 172n, ii. 594n
Tághdúngbásh River, i. 175n
Taianfu (T’ai-yuan-fu), king of N. China, ii. 12, 14n, 15n
Taiani, ii. 432n
Taican, _see_ Talikan
Taichau (Tigu), ii. 154n
T’aiching-Kwan, ii. 26n
Taidu, Daitu, Tatu, Kúblái’s new city of Cambaluc, i. 305n, 306n,
374, 375n
Taikung, _see_ Tagaung
Tailed men, in Sumatra, ii. 299, 301n;
elsewhere, 301n–302n;
English, 302n
Tailors, none in Maabar, ii. 338
Taimúni tribe, i. 100n
Taiting-fu (Tadinfu), or Yenchau, ii. 137n
Taitong-fu, _see_ Tathung
Tai-tsu, Emperor, i. 428n
T’ai Tsung, Emperor, ii. 15n, 28n
Taiyang Khan (Great King), king of the Naimans, ii. 20n
Tajiks of Badakhshan, great topers, i. 153, 155n
Takfúr, ii. 148n
Takhtapul, i. 152n
Táki-uddin, Abdu-r Rahmán, ii. 333n
Takla-Makan, i. 190n
Talains, ii. 74n
Talas River, ii. 459n
Tali, gold mines, ii. 81n
Talifu (Carajan), ii. 67n, 76n, 79n, 80n, 105n, 107n, 111n
Talikan, Thaikan (Taican), i. 153, 154n, 163n
Tallies, record by, ii. 86, 96n
Tamarind, pirates’ use of, ii. 392, 394n
Tamerlan, i. 8n
Tana (Azov), _9_, _43_, _72_, i. 4n, 6n, 19n
—— near Bombay, kingdom of, ii. 395, 396n, 403n, 426n, 440n
Tana-Maiambu, ii. 396n
Tana-Malayu, ii. 281n, 283n
Tánasi cloth, ii. 396n
Tanduc, _see_ Tenduc
T’ang dynasty, ii. 28n, 194n, 278n
Tangnu Oola, branch of Altai, i. 215n
Tangut province, Chinese Si Hia, or Ho Si, i. 29n, 203, 214n, 217,
219, 220n, 223, 224n, 245n, 274, 276n, 281;
five invasions of, 281n
Tangutan, term applied to Tibetan speaking people round the Koko-nor,
i. 206n
Tanjore, ii. 334n, 335n;
Suttee at, 349n;
Pagoda at, 352n;
fertility of, 368n
Tánkíz Khan, applied to Chinghiz, i. 247n
Tanpiju (Shaohing?), ii. 218
Tantras, Tantrika, Tantrists, i. 315n, 323n, 326n
Tao-lin, a Buddhist monk, i. 165n
Tao-sze (Taossé), sect, i. 321n–325n;
female idols of the, 303, 327n
Ta-pa-Shan range, ii. 34n, 35n
Taprobana, mistakes about, ii. 295n
Tarakai, ii. 475n
Tarantula, ii. 346, 364
_Tarcasci_, i. 366n
Tarem, or Tárum, i. 86n, 122n
Tares of the parable, i. 122n
Taríkh-i-Rashídí, i. 194n
Tarmabala, Kúblái’s grandson, i. 361n
_Tarok_, Burmese name for Chinese, ii. 113n
Tarok Man and Tarok Myo, ii. 113n
Tartar language, i. 12;
on Tartar, its correct form, 12n;
misuse by Ramusio, 458n
Tartars, i. 1, 4, 5, 10, 13, 50, 90, 97, 99, 110n, 121n, 151;
different characters used by, 28n;
identified with Gog and Magog, 57n;
ladies, 76n;
their first city, 226;
original country, tributary to Prester John, _ib._;
revolt and migration, 227;
earliest mention of the word, 230n;
make Chinghiz their king, 238;
his successors, 245;
their customs and religion, 249n, 251, 256;
houses, 252, 253n;
waggons, 252, 254n;
chastity of their women, 252, 256n;
polygamy, etc., 252, 256n;
their gods and idols, 256;
their drink (Kumiz), 257, 259n;
cloths, 257, 295n;
arms, horses, and war customs, 260–263;
military organization, 261, 263n;
sustenance on rapid marches, 261;
blood-sucking, 261, 264n;
portable curd, 262, 265n;
tactics in war, 262, 265n;
degeneracy, 263, 266n;
administration of justice, 266;
laws against theft, 266, 268n;
posthumous marriage, 267, 268n;
the cudgel, 266, 267n;
Rubruquis’ account of, 236n;
Joinville’s, 237n;
custom before a fight, 337;
want of charity to the poor, 445;
conquerors of China, history of, ii. 20;
excellence in archery, 102;
objection to meddling with things pertaining to the dead, 111;
admiration of the Polo mangonels, 160;
employment of military engines, 168n;
their cruelties, 180n;
arrows, 460;
marriage customs, i. 33n, 252–253, ii. 467
—— in the Far North, ii. 479
—— of the Levant, _see_ Levant
—— of the Ponent, _see_ Ponent
Tartary cloths, i. 257, 295n
Tarungares, tribe, ii. 298n
Tásh Kurgán, i. 172n, ii. 594n
Tataríya coins, i. 12n
Tathung, or Taitongfu, i. 245n, 286n, 289n
Ta-t’sien-lu, or Tachindo, Tartsédo, ii. 45n, 48n, 49n, 52n, 60n,
67n, 70n
Ta Tsing River, ii. 137n, 143n
Tattooing, ii. 84, 90n, 117, 119n, 131n, 235, 242n, 297n;
artists in, 235, 242n
Tatu (Taichu), i. 374
—— River, ii. 61n
Tauris, _see_ Tabriz
Taurizi, Torissi, i. 74, 75n
Tawálisi, ii. 465n
Taxes, _see_ Customs, Duties
Tchakiri Mondou (Modun), i. 404, 408n
_Tchekmen_, thick coarse cotton stuff, i. 190n
Tea-houses at Kingszé, ii. 196n
Tea trees in E. Tibet, ii. 59n
Tebet, _see_ Tibet
Tedaldo, _see_ Theobald
Teeth, custom of casing in gold, ii. 84, 88n–91n
—— of Adam or of Buddha, ii. 319, 329n–330n
—— conservation of, by Brahmans, ii. 365
Tegana, ii. 471
Teghele, Atabeg of Lúr, i. 85n
Teimur (Temur), Kúblái’s grandson and successor, i. 360, ii. 149, 459n
Tekla, Hamainot, ii. 356
Tekrit, i. 61n
Telingana, _see_ Tilinga
Telo Samawe, ii. 295n
Tembul (Betel), chewing, ii. 371, 374n
Temkan, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n
Temple, connection of Cilician Armenia with Order of, i. 24n
—— Master of the, i. 23, 24n
Temple’s account of the Condor, ii. 417n
Temujin, _see_ Chinghiz
Tenduc, or Tanduc, plain of, i. 240, 241;
province of, 284, 286n
Tengri, Supreme deity of Tartars, i. 257n–258n
Tennasserim, ii. 279n;
(Tanasari), 314n
Tents, the Khan’s, i. 404, 409n
Terebinth, i. 125n;
of Mamre, 132n, 135n
_Terlán_, goshawk, i. 57n
Teroa Mountains, ii. 420n
Terra Australis, ii. 274n
Te-Tsung, Emperor, ii. 28n
Thai, Great and Little, ii. 287n;
race, 278n
Thaigin, ii. 25n, 26n
Thai-yuanfu (Taianfu), ii. 12, 14n–17n
_Thard-wahsh_, _see_ Patterns, Beast and Bird
Theft, Tartar punishment of, i. 266, 268n
Theistic worship, i. 456, 458n
Thelasar, ii. 431n
Theobald, or Tedaldo of Piacenza, i. 17, 20, 21n, ii. 593n;
chosen Pope as Gregory X., i. 20;
sends friars with the Polos and presents, 22, 23n
Theodorus, king of Abyssinia, ii. 436n
Theodosius the Great, i. 49n
Theophilus, Emperor of Constantinople, i. 385n
—— missionary, ii. 409n
Thévenot, _Travels_, i. 81n
Thian Shan, i. 175n, 177n, 191n
Thianté-Kiun, i. 286n
Thin l’Evêque, siege of, ii. 163n, 165n
_Thinae_ of Ptolemy, ii. 27n
Tholoman, _see_ Coloman
Thomas, Edward, i. 87n, ii. 115n, 164n
—— of Mancasola, Bishop of Samarcand, i. 186n
Thread, Brahmanical, ii. 363
Three kingdoms (San-Kwé), ii. 38n
Threshold, a great offence to step on the, i. 383, 385n
Thurán Shah’s History of Hormuz, i. 120n
Tibet (Tebet) province, ii. 42, 49;
boundary of, 49, 52n;
its acquisition by Mongols, 46n;
organisation under Kúblái, 46n;
dogs of, 45, 49, 52n
Tibetan language and character, i. 29n;
origin of the Yue-chi, 174n
Tibetans, i. 165n;
superstitions of, 208n, 209n;
and Kashmiris (Tebet and Keshimur), sorceries of, 301, 315n;
accused of cannibalism, 301, 312n
Tides in Hang-chau estuary, ii. 150n, 208n
Tierce, half tierce, etc., hours of, ii. 364, 368n
Tiflis, i. 49n, 57n, 58n
Tigado, Castle of, i. 148n
Tigers (called lions by Polo), ii. 225, 231n, 411;
trained to the chase, i. 397, 399n;
in Cuncun, ii. 31;
in Caindu, 56;
Kwei-chau, 127n.
(_See_ also Lions.)
Tigris River (Volga), i. 5, 9n;
at Baghdad, 63, 64n
Tigúdar (Acomat Soldan), ii. 468n
Tiju, ii. 153, 154n
Tiles, enamelled, i. 364, 370n
Tilinga, Telingana, Tiling, Telenc, ii. 362n, 427n
Tiling, ii. 427n
Timur of Toumen, chief of the Nikoudrians, i. 102n
Timur the Great, i. 5n, 9n, 45n, 49n, 52n, 61n, 86n, 152n, 155n,
187n, ii. 166n
Timurids, the, i. 85n
Ting, 10 taels of silver = tael of gold, i. 427n, ii. 217n, 218n
Tinju, ii. 153, 154n
Tinnevelly, ii. 359n, 373n, 403n
Tithe on clothing material, i. 445
Tithing men, Chinese (_Pao-kia_), ii. 200n
Titus, Emperor, i. 66n
Tjajya, _see_ Choiach
Toba race, i. 205n
Toctai, king, _see_ Toktai
Tod, Colonel James, i. 104n, 114n, 169n, 183n
Toddy, _see_ Wine of Palm
Togan, ii. 471, 474n
Toghrul I., i. 49n
—— Shah of Kermán, i. 113n
Toghon Temur, last Mongol Emperor, i. 228n;
his wail, 305n
Togrul Wang Khan, _see_ Prester John
Toka Tumir, i. 8n
Tokat, i. 45n
Toktai Khan (Toctai, Lord of the Ponent), _72_, ii. 487, 491, 496;
wars with Noghai, 499;
his symbolic message, 497n, 498n
Tolan-nur (Dolonnúr), i. 26n
Toleto, John de, Cardinal Bishop of Portus, i. 21n
Tolobuga, ii. 496, 497n
Toman (Tuman, etc.), Mongol word for 10,000, i. 261, 263n, ii. 192,
200n, 217n, 218n, 462n
Tongking, Tungking, ii. 119n, 120n, 128n, 131n
Tooth-relique of Buddha, ii. 319–320;
history of, 329n–330n
Torchi, Dorjé, Kúblái’s first-born, i. 361n
Tornesel, i. 423, 426n
Torro River, i. 345n
Torshok, ii. 489n
Torture by constriction in raw hide, i. 262n
_Toscaul_, _tosḳáúl_ (_toscaol_), watchman, i. 403, 407n
Tournefort, on cold at Erzrum, i. 49n
Tower and Bell Alarm at Peking, i. 375, 378n;
at Kinsay, ii. 189
Toyan (Tathung?), i. 286n
Trade at Layas, i. 41;
by Baghdad, 63;
at Tauris, 75;
at Cambaluc, 415;
in Shan-si, ii. 22;
on the Great Kiang, 36, 170;
at Chinangli, 135;
at Sinju Matu, 138;
Kinsay, 187, 190, 202, 216;
Fu-chau 231;
Zayton 234;
Java, 272;
Malaiur, 280;
Cail, 370;
Coilum, 375;
Melibar, 389;
Tana, 395;
Cambaet, 398;
Kesmacoran, 401;
Socotra, 407
—— of India with Hormuz, i. 107;
with Egypt by Aden, ii. 438, 439n;
with Esher, 442;
with Dofar, 444;
with Calatu, 450
Trades in Manzi, alleged to be hereditary, ii. 186, 196n
_Tramontaine_, ii. 296n
Transmigration, i. 456, ii. 213n, 318–319
Traps for fur animals, ii. 481, 483n
Travancore, ii. 383n, 403n;
Rajas of, 380n
Treasure of Maabar kings, ii. 340, 348n–349n
Trebizond, _43_, i. 19n, 36, 46;
Emperors of, and their tails, ii. 302n
Trebuchets, ii. 159, 160n, 161n
Trees, of the Sun and Moon, i. 129n, 130n;
superstitions about, 131n–135n;
by the highways, 440;
camphor, ii. 234, 237n;
producing wine, 292, 297n, 300, 313;
producing flour (sago), 300, 304n–305n
_Tregetoures_, i. 386n
Trench, Archbishop, i. 201n, ii. 82n
Trevisano, Azzo, _8_, _17_, _25_, _65_
—— Marc’Antonio, Doge, _8_, _78_
Trincomalee, ii. 337n
Tringano, ii. 279n
Trinkat, ii. 308n
‘Trusty lieges,’ devoted comrades of king of Maabar, ii. 339, 347n
T’sang-chau, ii. 133n, 137n
_T’siang-kiun_ (‘General’), ii. 138n, 261n
Ts’ien-T’ang River, ii. 194n, 198n, 208n, 214n, 220n–222n;
bore in, 150n, 208n
T’si-nan-fu (Chinangli), ii. 137n, 138n
T’sing-chau, ii. 138n
T’sing-ling range, ii. 35n
T’si-ning-chau, ii. 137n, 139n
Tsin-tsun, ii. 229n
Tsiuan-chau, T’swanchau, _see_ Zayton
Tsongkhapa, Tibetan Reformer, i. 315n
Ts’uan-chou, _see_ Zayton
Tsukuzi in Japan, ii. 260n
Tsung-ngan-hien, ii. 224n
Tsushima, Island, ii. 260n
Tuan, Prince, chief of the Boxers, i. 282n
_Tuc_, _tuk_, _tugh_, commanders of 100,000, horse-tail or yak-tail
standard, i. 261, 263n
Tudai, Ahmad Khan’s wife, ii. 471n
Tudai-Mangku (Totamangu or Totamangul), ii. 491, 492n, 496, 497n, 499
Tu-fan, ancient name of Tibet, ii. 46n
Tughan, Tukan, Kúblái’s son, i. 361n, ii. 270n
Tughlak Shah, of Delhi (a Karaunah), i. 101n
Tuktugai Khan, i. 9n
Tu-ku-hun, i. 193n
Tuli, or Tulin, fourth son of Chinghiz, ii. 32n
Tuman, _see_ Toman
Tumba, Angelo di, _25_;
Marco di, _65_
Tún, city of E. Persia, i. 86n, 124n
Tung-’an in Fokien, ii. 243n
_Tungani_, or Converts, Mahomedans in N. China and Chinese Turkestan,
i. 291n
Tung-chau (Tinju), ii. 154n
Tung-hwang-hien, ancient Shachau, i. 206n
Tung-kwan, fortress of the Kin sovereigns, ii. 14n, 25n, 27n
_Tung-lo_ (Kumiz), i. 259n
Tunguses, i. 271n
Tunny fish, i. 108, 416n, ii. 442
Tun-o-kain (Tunocain), kingdom of Persia, i. 83, 86n, 127, 128n,
138n, 145n
Turbit (radex Turpethi), ii. 389, 391n
Turcomania (Anatolian Turkey), i. 43
Turgaut, day-watch, i. 381n
Turkey, Great (Turkestan), i. 191, ii. 286n, 452, 457, 458, 462, 477
Turkistan chiefs send mission to kings of India, ii. 370n
Turkmans and Turks, distinction between, i. 44n, 101n;
horses, 43, 44n
Turks, ancient mention of, i. 56;
friend of Polo’s, 213;
and Mongols, 294n
Turmeric, ii. 226n
Turner, Lieutenant Samuel, describes Yak of Tartary, i. 277n
Turquans, Turkish horses, i. 43
Turquoises in Kermán, i. 90, 92n;
in Caindu, ii. 53
Turtle doves, i. 97, 99n
Turumpak, Hormuz, i. 111n
Tutia (Tutty), preparation of, i. 125, 126n, ii. 398
Tuticorin, ii. 372n
Tu T’song, Sung Emperor of China, ii. 150n, 211n
Tver, ii. 489n
Twelve, a favourite round number, ii. 426n
—— Barons over Khan’s Administration, i. 430, ii. 154
Twigs or arrows, divination by, i. 241, 242n
Tyuman, ii. 481n
Tyunju, porcelain manufacture, ii. 235, 242n
Tylor, Dr. E. B., on _Couvade_, ii. 93n, 94n
Tzarev, i. 6n
Tzaritzyn, i. 6n, 57n

Ucaca (Ukak, Ukek, Uwek), i. 5, 8n, 9n;
Ukák of Ibn Batuta, a different place, ii. 488n
Uch-baligh, _134_
Uch-Multán, i. 86n
Udoe country, ii. 42, 598n
Udong, ii. 279n
Udyána, i. 164n
Ughuz, legend of, ii. 485n
Uighúr character, parent of present Mongol writing, i. 14n, 28n,
160n, 353n
Uighúrs, the, i. 76n, 214n, 227n, ii. 179n, 462n
Uiraca, i. 282n
Uirad, _see_ Oirad
Ujjain, legend of, ii. 349n;
(_Ozene_), 397n, 426n
Ukak, ii. 488n.
(_See_ Ucaca.)
Ulatai (Oulatay), Tartar envoy from Persia, i. 32, 33n, ii. 471, 474n
Ulakhai, i. 282n
Ulan Muren (Red River), i. 250n
Ulugh Bagh, on Badakhshan border, i. 154n
—— Mohammed, i. 8n
Ulús, the, i. 10n
U-man and Pe-man (Black and White Barbarians), ii. 73n
Umbrellas, i. 351, 354n, 355n
Unc Can (Aung Khan), _see_ Prester John
Ung (Ungkút), Tartar tribe, i. 285, 294n
Ungrat (Kungurat), Tartar tribe, i. 357, 358n
Unicorn (Rhinoceros), in Burma, ii. 107;
Sumatra, 285, 289, 299;
legend of Virgin and, 285, 290n;
horns of, 291n
Unken, City, ii. 226, 229n, 230n, 233n
Unlucky hours, ii. 364
U-nya-Mwezi superstition, i. 130n
Urduja, Princess, ii. 465n
Uriangkadai, ii. 46n
Uriangkut (Tunguses), i. 271n
Urianhai, the, i. 271n
Urumtsi, i. 201n, 214n
Urzú, i. 122n
Uspenskoye (called also Bolgarskoye), i. 7n
Uttungadeva, king of Java, ii. 275n
Uwek, _see_ Ucaca
Uzbeg Khan of Sarai, i. 4n, 6n, 352n
Uzbegs of Kunduz, i. 156n, 163n
Uzun Tati, coins, Chinese porcelain from, ii. 595n

Vair, the fur and animal, i. 257, ii. 479, 483n, 484n, 486n, 487
—— as an epithet of eyes, _124_
Valaghir district, i. 54n
Vámbéry, Prof. Hermann, i. 10n, 28n, 54n, 57n, 170n, 214n, 237n,
401n, ii. 465
Vanchu (Wangchu), conspires with Chenchu against Ahmad, i. 417–419,
422n
Van Lake, i. 57n
Varaegian, Varangian, ii. 490n
Varaha Mihira, astronomer, i. 104n
Vardoj River, i. 156n, 172n
_Varini_, ii. 490n
Varsach, or Mashhad River, i. 155n, 156n
_Vasmulo_, i. 292n
_Vateria Indica_, ii. 396n
Veil of the Temple, πέπλος βαβυλώνιος, i. 66
Vellalars, ii. 372n
Venádan, title of king of Kaulam, ii. 380n
Venetians, factory at Soldaia, i. 4n;
expelled from Constantinople, 19n
Venice, _2_, _15_, _16_, i. 2, 18, 19, 36, 41;
return of Polos to, _4_, _24_, _54_, i. 36;
its exaltation after Latin conquest of Constantinople, _9_;
its nobles, _14_;
Polo’s mansion at, _23_ _seqq._;
galleys, _32_ _seqq._;
archives at, _70_ _seqq._;
articles brought from East by Marco to, i. 274, ii. 299, 305n
Ventilators at Hormuz, ii. 452, 453n
Verlinden, Belgian missionary, i. 249n
_Verniques_, i. 382, 384n
_Verzino Colombino_, ii. 380n.
(_See_ also Brazil.)
Vessels, war, i. 34, 37n;
stitched of Kermán (πλοιάρια ῥαπτά), i. 108, 117n, ii. 415n;
on the Kiang, 170, 171, 173n.
(_See_ also Ships.)
Vial, Paul, French missionary, ii. 63n
Vijayanagar, 362n
Vikramajit, legend of, ii. 349n
Vikrampúr, ii. 99n
Villard de Honnecourt, Album of, ii. 164n
Vincent of Beauvais, ii. 325n
Vincenzo, P., ii. 410n
Vineyards, in Taican, i. 153;
Kashgar, 181;
Khotan, 188;
in N. China, ii. 10, 11n, 13, 15n
Vinson, Prof., on _Couvade_, ii. 91n
Virgin of Cape Comorin, ii. 382n
Visconti, Tedaldo, or Tebaldo, _see_ Theobald of Piacenza
Vissering, on _Chinese Currency_, i. 428n, 429n
Vochan (Unchan, Yungchan), ii. 84, 86, 89n;
battle there, 98, 101, 104n–106n
Vogels, J., ii. 601n, 602n
Vokhan, _see_ Wakhán
Volga, called Tigris, i. 5, 7n, 9n, ii. 485n, 488n
Vos, Belgian Missionary, i. 249n
Vughin, ii. 182
Vuju in Kiangnan, ii. 182
—— in Che-kiang, ii. 219

Wadoe tribe, ii. 420n
Wakf, i. 67n
Wakhán (Vokhan), dialect, i. 162n, 171, 173n
—— Mountains, i. 162n, 175n
Wakhjīr Pass, i. 175n, ii. 594n
Wakhijrui Pass, _see_ Wakhjīr Pass
Wakhsh, branch of the Oxus, ii. 5n
Wakhtang II. king of Georgia, i. 53n
Walashjird, i. 106n
Wallachs, ii. 489n, 491n
Wall of Alexander (or Caucasian), i. 50, 53n
—— of Gog and Magog (_i.e._ China), _111_, i. 285, 292n
Walnut-oil, i. 158, 162n
Wami River, ii. 420n
_Wang_, Chinese silk, i. 237n, 361n, ii. 113n
Wang, king of Djungar, i. 250n
Wangchu, _see_ Vanchu
Wapila, i. 54n
Warangol Ku, ii. 362n
Warangs, ii. 490n
Warner, Dr., ii. 604n
War vessels, Chinese, i. 34, 37n
Wassáf, the historian, i. 68n;
his character of the Karaunahs, 101n;
notices of Hormuz, 120n, 121n;
eulogy of Kúblái, 332n;
story of Kúblái, 440n;
his style, ii. 150n;
account of taking of Siang-yang, 150n, 167n;
of Kinsay, 213n;
Maabar, 333n;
horse trade to India, 348n;
treatment of them there, 351n;
extract from his history, 495n
Water, bitter, i. 110, 122n, 194
—— custom of lying in, i. 108, 119n;
consecration by Lamas, 309n
—— Clock, i. 378n
Wathek, Khalif, i. 57n
Wa-tzŭ, Lolo slaves, ii. 63n
Weather-conjuring, i. 301, 309n–311n
Wei dynasty, i. 205n, ii. 437n
Weights and measures, ii. 590n–592n
Wei-ning, ii. 130n
Wei River in Shen-si, ii. 27n, 29n, 35n
—— in Shan-tung, ii. 139n
Wen River, ii. 139n
Wen-chow, ii. 239n
Westermarck, _Human Marriage_, ii. 48n, 93n
Whale oil, including spermaceti, i. 108,
117n, ii. 407, 408n
Whales, ii. 249; in Socotra, 407;
Madagascar, 411, 414n;
species of Indian Ocean, 408n;
sperm (Capdoille), 411, 414n
Wheaten bread not eaten, i. 438n;
at Yachi, ii. 66, 74n
White bears, ii. 479
—— bone, Chinese for Lolos, ii. 63n
—— camels, i. 281
—— City, meaning of term among Tartars, i. 297n, ii. 14n
—— City, of Manzi frontier, ii. 34n
—— Devils, ii. 355, 359n
—— Feast at Kúblái’s City, i. 390, 392n
—— Horde, ii. 481n
—— horses and mares, i. 300, 390;
offered to Khan, 308n
Whittington and his cat in Persia, i. 65n
Wild asses and oxen, _see_ Asses and Oxen
William of Tripoli, Friar, i. 22;
his writings, 23n, 24n
Williams, Dr. S. W., on the Chinese year, i. 388n;
on elephants at Peking, 392n
Williamson, Rev. A., i. 135n, 217n, ii. 8n, 11n, 12n, 15n, 16n, 137n
Wilson, General Sir C., i. 45n
Wind, poison (Simúm), i. 108, 120n;
monsoons, ii. 264–265
Wine, of the vine, Persians lax in abstaining from, i. 84, 87n, 96n
—— boiled, i. 84, 87n, 153n, 155n
—— of ancient Kapisa, i. 155n; Khotan, 188;
at Taianfu, ii. 13, 16n;
imported at Kinsay, 202
—— rice (_Samshu_ or _darásún_), i. 441;
and of wheat, ii. 56, 59n;
at Yachi, 66, 85;
spices, etc., in Caindu, 56;
Kien-ch’ang, 59n, 85;
Cangigu, 117;
Coloman 123;
Kinsay, 202, 204, 216
—— Palm (toddy), ii. 292, 297n, 376
—— from sugar, ii. 376, 442
—— date, i. 107, 115n, ii. 292, 297n, 442
—— (unspecified), at Khan’s table, i. 382;
not used in Ma’bar, ii. 342;
nor by Brahmans, 363
“Winter” used for “rainy season,” ii. 391n
Wo-fo-sze, “Monastery of the lying Buddha,” i. 221n
Wolves in Pamir, i. 171, 176n
Women, Island of, ii. 405n–406n
Women, of Kerman, their embroidery, i. 90;
mourners, 109;
of Khorasan, their beauty, 128;
of Badakhshan, 160;
Kashmir, 166;
Khotan, 191;
Kamul, fair and wanton, 210;
Tartar good and loyal, 252;
Erguiul, pretty creatures, 276;
of the town, 414, ii. 202;
of Tibet, evil customs, 44;
Caindu, 53;
Carajan, 66;
Zardandan, _couvade_, 85;
Anin, 116;
Kinsay, charming, 186;
respectful treatment of, 204;
Kelinfu, beautiful, 225;
Zanghibar, frightful, 423
Wonders performed by the Bacsi, i. 314 _et seqq._
Wood, Lieutenant John, Indian Navy, _20_, i. 156n;
his elucidations of Polo in Oxus regions, i. 174n
Wood-oil, ii. 251n, 252n
Wool, Salamander’s, i. 213, 216n
Worship of Mahomet (supposed), i. 188, 189n
—— of fire, 303;
Tartar, 256, 257;
Chinese, 456
—— of first object seen in the day, ii. 284, 288n
Worshipping the tablets, i. 391, 392n
Wu-chau (Vuju), ii. 222n
Wukiang-hien (Vughin), ii. 184n
Wüsus, or Wesses, people of Russia, ii. 486n
Wu-ti, Emperor, ii. 437n
Wylie, Alexander, _76_, i. 2n, 8n, 322n, 377n, 451n, 454n, ii. 19n,
28n, 38n, 169n, 184n, 194n, 209n, 212n

_Xanadu_, i. 305n
Xavier, at Socotra, ii. 409n
Xerxes, i. 135n

Ya-chau, ii. 45n, 48n, 70n
Yachi (Yun-nan-fu), city, ii. 66, 67n, 72n, 74n, 80n, 111n
_Yadah_, _Jadagari_, _Jadah-tásh_, science and stone of
weather-conjurer, i. 309n
Yaik River, i. 6n
Yájúj, and Májúj, _see_ Gog and Magog
Yak (dong), i. 274, 277n;
their tails carried to Venice, 274;
used in India for military decorations, ii. 355, 359n
Ya’kúb Beg of Kasghar, i. 189n
Yakuts, i. 309n, 446n, ii. 484n
Yalung River, ii. 67n, 69n, 72n
Yam, or Yamb (a post-stage or post-house), i. 433, 437n, ii. 213n
Yamgán, i. 162n
Yang-chau (Yanju), city, i. 29n, 432n, ii. 154n, 173n;
Marco’s government there, _22_, ii. 154, 157n
Yarbeg of Badakhshan, i. 156n
Yarkand (Yarcan), i. 187
_Yarligh_ and _P’aizah_, i. 322n, 352n
Yasdi (Yezd), i. 88
—— silk tissue, i. 88
_Yashm_, jade, i. 193n
Yasodhara, bride of Sakya Sinha, ii. 323n
Yavanas, ii. 372n
Yazdashír, i. 92n
Ydifu, i. 285, 295n
Year, Chinese, i. 388;
Mongol and Chinese cycle, 447, 454n
Yelimala, _see_ Monté d’Ely
Yeliu Chutsai, statesman and astronomer, ii. 17n
Yellow, or orthodox Lamas, i. 315n, 324n
Yemen, ii. 432n, 433n, 440n, 441n, 445n.
(_See_ also Aden.)
Yeng-chau (in Shan-tung), ii. 137n, 139n
—— (in Che-kiang), ii. 222n
Yen-king (Old Peking), i. 375n, 376n
Yen-Ping, ii. 230n
Yenshan, ii. 224n
Yesubuka, ii. 474n
Yesudar, ii. 459
Yesugai, father of Chinghiz, i. 237n
Yetsina (Etzina), i. 223
Yezd (Yasdi), i. 88;
silk fabrics of, ii. 11
Yiu-ki River, ii. 230n
Yoritomo, descendants of, ii. 262n
Yonting Ho River, ii. 6n
Yotkàn, village, i. 190n
Youth, Island of, ii. 381n
Yrac, province, i. 74
Ysemain of Hiulie, western engineer, ii. 167n
Yu, _see_ Jade
Yuan Ho, i. 29n
Yu-chow, gold and silver mines, i. 295n
Yue-chi, i. 174n
Yuen, Mongol Imperial dynasty, so styled, i. 29n, 377n
Yuen-hao, kingdom of Tangut, i. 282n
Yuen ming-yuen, palace, i. 307n
Yuen shi, History of Mongol Dynasty in China, i. 115n, 248n, 295n,
ii. 95n
Yugria, or Yughra, in the Far North, ii. 483n, 485n, 493n
Yuh-shan, ii. 222n, 224n
Yule, Sir Henry, ii. 602n;
on Ravenala, 597n;
on Maundeville, 604n
Yun-Hien, a Buddhist Abbot, i. 304n
Yung-chang fu (Shen-si), i. 276n
—— (Yun-nan, Vochan), ii. 84, 89n, 104n, 105n, 107n–109n
Yung Lo, Emperor, ii. 596n
Yun-nan (Carajan), province, ii. 40n, 45n, 56n, 57n, 59n–62n, 64,
67n, 72n, 80n, 81n, 82n, 90n, 95n, 104n, 107n, 115n, 120n, 124n,
127n–129n;
conquerors of, 46n, 80n;
Mahomedans, 74n
Yun-nan-fu city, _see_ Yachi
Yurungkásh (white Jade) River, i. 193n
Yusuf Kekfi, i. 85n
Yuthia, Ayuthia (Ayodhya), mediæval capital of Siam, _13_, ii. 278n,
279n
Yvo of Narbonne, i. 12n

Zabedj, ii. 283n
Zaila, ii. 413n, 435n, 436n
Zaitúníah, probable origin of satin, ii. 241n
Zampa, _see_ Champa
Zanghibar (Zangibar, Zanjibar, Zanzibar), ii. 405n, 412, 422, 424n;
currents off, 415n;
Ivory trade, 423, 424n;
its blacks, women, 423, 424n
Zanton (Shantung?), _3_
Zanzale, James, or Jacob Baradaeus, Bishop of Edessa, i. 61n
Zapharan, monastery near Baghdad, i. 61n
Zardandan, or “Gold Teeth,” a people of W. Yun-nan, ii. 84, 98;
identity doubtful, 88n;
characteristic customs, 90n
Zarncke, Fr., i. 139n
Zayton, Zaitún, Zeiton, Cayton (T’swan-chau, Chwan-chau, or Chinchew
of modern charts), the great mediæval port of China, ii. 175n,
231, 232n–233n, 234, 237n–243n;
Khan’s revenue from, 235;
porcelain, 235, 242n;
language, 236n, 243n–244n;
etymology, 237n;
mediæval notices, 237 _seqq._;
identity, 239n, 240n;
Chinchew, a name misapplied, 239n;
Christian churches at, 240n, 241n;
ships of, 264
Zayton, Andrew, Bishop of, ii. 237n
Zebák Valley, i. 165n
Zebu, humped oxen, i. 99n
Zedoary, ii. 388n
Zenghi, i. 61n
Zerms (Jerms), ii. 439n
Zerumbet, ii. 388n
Zettani, ii. 241n
Zhafar, _see_ Dhafar
Zic (Circassia), ii. 490, 492n
Zikas, ii. 228n, 309n, 311n
Zimmé, _see_ Kiang-mai
Zinc, i. 126n
Zinj, Zinjis, ii. 424n, 426n
Zobeidah, the lady, i. 156n
Zorza, _see_ Chorcha
Zu-’lḳarnain (Zulcarniain), “the Two Horned,” an epithet of
Alexander, i. 56n, 157, 160n
Zurficar (Zúrpica, Zulficar), a Turkish friend of Marco Polo’s, i. 213

Transcriber’s Notes:

- Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
- Text enclosed by equals is in blackletter (=blackletter=).
- Text enclosed by ‘|’ is emphasized normal font within an italicized
paragraph (|emphasized|).
- Blank pages have been removed.
- Redundant half-title pages have been removed.
- Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.
- Names spelling, hyphenation, and diacritics are highly variable,
some were standardized when there seemed to be a clear choice.
- There are 3 types of footnotes:
- Normal, marked as ‘[1]’ and moved after the notes.
- Footnotes of footnotes, marked as ‘[A]’ and moved after the
normal footnotes.
- “Notes”, marked as ‘{1}, located and numbered as they are in the
book.
- Page and relative size information has been removed from
illustrations.
- Index has been copied from volume II.

*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Travels of Marco Polo — Volume 1" ***

Home