'Be these juggling fiends no more believed,

That palter with us in a double sense;

That keep the word of promise to our ear,

And break it to our hope!'

Polo, it is seen, says the General was called 'Baian Cincsan qui vaut à dire Baian Cent iex' (Cent yeux). Chingsang, however, is a Chinese title of a high Minister of State, occurring often in the Mongol history. It is, as Marsden pointed out, Pe-yen, the Chinese form of Baian, which can be rendered Centoculus, whilst Polo seems clearly to attribute that meaning to Chingsang. And this looks like conclusive proof of ignorance of Chinese.

Among many other valuable notes, we may call attention to the comparison of Polo's account of the defeat of the Burmese, with that given in the Chinese Annals' (p. 410); to that on the rebellion of Nayan, with a curious notice of the alleged use of fire-arms on that occasion (p. 238-9); on the ceremonial of the Mongol Court (p. 290); on the city of Khanbalig under the Mongols (p. 314); on their paper money (319 seqq.); on the Mongol Cabinet (331); on the revenue (510-18); on Chinese intercourse under Kublai with the States of Southern India (614, seqq.), which is very new and curious, but too diffuse for extract. From the note on the revenue we gather remarkable facts about the publication of the almanacks, which was a Government monopoly. In the year 1328, copies of different editions. were issued to the total number of 5,745,380. A great number of these seem to have been issued gratuitously, no doubt to the vast Chinese bureaucracy. The nominal prices seem to have varied from 7d. to ten times that amount, and the actual produce to the treasury is stated at the equivalent of about 86,000Z. But as the values are in paper money, the estimation of which fluctuated exceedingly, and was sometimes very low, it is almost impossible to derive positive statistics from this or the other financial tables supplied by M. Pauthier.

M. Pauthier has also read diligently in other directions for the illustration of his author, and has made some good identifications of names hitherto misunderstood. Thus he shows that the Tigris River, named on the journey of the elder Poli from Russia to Bokhara, is not the Jaxartes, as Marsden and others assumed, but the Wolga itself. Tunocain, again, is a province described by Marco as lying in the east or north-east of Persia. Marsden, reading in Ramusio Timochain, interpreted this as Damghan, an interpretation which Baldello hailed as the key of the whole itinerary. But Pauthier's explanation is far happier, and its merit carries conviction on its face. Tún and Qain are

two

two chief cities of the Kuhistan, or hilly tract of Eastern Persia, and the province itself, after a frequent Asiatic practice, has been designated by coupling them (Persicé), Tún-o-Qain. The elucidation is not the less happy that M. Pauthier does not seem to have had proof of the actual use of the designation. But it is used by Sultan Baber.* The Pascia or Pasciai of Polo, which has set commentators astray, Pauthier is unquestionably right, at least as regards the name, in identifying with a part of the southern skirts of the Hindu Kush, where there are still extensive remains of a tribe so called (Pashai). But M. Pauthier never knows when to stop, and when he proceeds also to identify Pasciai with the Kafirs of Pich (i.e. Peetch) mentioned by Baber, he merely confuses and cancels his own happier indications.

With such mild censure of one of M. Pauthier's weaknesses we should gladly have contented ourselves, had he not challenged a stricter measure of justice by his perpetual and unworthy depreciation of his predecessors, accompanied by a sickly self-applause in regard to his own achievements.

In his introduction, the large and interesting subject of the 'Bibliography of Marco Polo' is compressed into eleven lines, the largest half of which is occupied by the following words :

'We will dispense with the enumeration of these editions, of which Marsden in his English one of 1818, and V. Lazari in his Italian one of 1847, have given the names. Their own editions with that of Baldello Boni (1827) are the most important on account of the notes by which they are accompanied. But the greater part of these notes are either irrelevant, or are useless dissertations on erroneous suppositions.'-p. xcv.

'In all the long commentaries hitherto made on the Book of Marco Polo, there are but very few pages that will henceforward be anything but striking testimonies to the deficiency of critical power in their authors' (p. 227). All that the various commentators have written on this chapter, as on most others, is not merely worthless, but is capable only of giving false ideas on the subjects which they profess to elucidate' (p. 328). That which Marco Polo says here. confirms in the most unexpected manner the determination which we formerly made of the true position of the Arbre Sec, which none of the commentators of Marco Polo have been able to recognise, any more than they have the greater part of the places which he has described' (p. 373).

We may observe that there is as little ground for the first part of this sentence as there is taste or truth in the last. What M. Pauthier has written on the Arbre Sec is for the most part

'a useless dissertation on erroneous suppositions.' We have exposed one of his errors on the subject. Take another sample. Klaproth describes, from Chinese sources, The Isolated Tree. This tree exists on the north-west frontier of the Khassaks of the Left, on the upper part of the river Olie When the Khassaks pass, they kneel and worship it,' &c. M. Pauthier thinks this is probably the Arbre Sec of Polo, and adds that the river Olie, on whose banks it stands, is the Ori descending from the Hindu Kush, and passing near Khunduz, in Badakhshan' (p. 96). As the Khassaks of the Left are those otherwise called the Middle Horde, west of the Irtish, this Isolated Tree, according to Pauthier's geography extends from the noonday shadows of the Indian Caucasus to the frontier of Tobolsk! No wonder he calls it Ficus Vasta!-or rather, Ingens annosa robore quercus, UNA NEMUS!' Well might the Khassaks venerate such boundless continuity of shade! Klaproth is the especial object of bitter disparagement, for no reason that we discern except that he was a Chinese scholar, and wrought in this field. The odium theologicum appears to be a trifle to the odium sinologicum.. Klaproth is 'the too much puffed Prussian Orientalist, who affected in all that concerned the East universal knowledge and uncontrolled superiority,' whose custom it was 'to disparage the labours of others in order to exalt his own, the sources of which are far from being always indicated,' &c., &c.

Medice sana teipsum. We see that M. Pauthier can disparage the labours of others to exalt his own.' Let us see if the sources of his results are always indicated.'

M. Pauthier (p. 49) parades as original the derivation of cramoisi from the Arabic Qirmiz. But almost any dictionary, for the last three centuries, gives the etymology. And he need not have confounded the Qirmiz (Coccus Ilicis), known from the earliest times, with the Mexican cochineal.

He follows Marsden in identifying the Cobinam of Polo with Khabis in the Persian Desert. There is no good ground for the identification. The resemblance in name is slight, the distances are inconsistent. In Marsden's time, indeed, Khabis was misplaced; but Mr. Abbott's visit and paper in the Geographical Society's Journal had corrected this long ago. Thus M. Pauthier borrows a bad shilling, but still he might acknowledge it! * The explanation of Tuc as applied by Polo to a great Mongol

Marsden, p. 77. Cobinam is probably Kuh-Benan, which appears in Consul Abbott's itinerary as a district north of Kerman. (See Journ. Royal Geog. Soc.,' xxv. p. 25, also 'Sprenger, Post-Routen des Orients,' p. 77.)

Vol. 125.-No. 249.

many

6

corps d'armée, from the Tugh or yak's tail borne by the highest officers, and that of Faghfur, the old Persian name of the kings of China, as a translation of the epithet 'Son of Heaven,' are both to be found in Neumann.* He appears to borrow from Lazari the explanation of the odd name Gheluchelan, which Polo applies to the Caspian, as being Göl Ghilan, the Lake of Ghilan.' We suspect this to be another bad coin. Polo, we doubt not, said the sea was called that of Ghil or of Ghilân, the name being used in fact, like Oriental names of provinces, sometimes in a singular form, sometimes in a plural one. Rusticiano probably took Ghil ou Ghilan for one word, and produced the name as it stands. Pauthier's derivation of the Brius River of Marco Polo (really the Bri-tshu of Kiepert's Asia, the Tibetan branch of the Great Kiang) from the Burmese Mret, a river, is in the highest degree improbable; but it is not even original; it was suggested by Jacquet. His identification of the Cielstan or Suolstan of Polo with the Shaulistan of Medieval Persia is excellent; but it was pointed out by Quatremère. § His explanation of Avarian, the title of respect which Marco says the Saracens in India gave to St. Thomas (Ar. Hawári, an apostle of our Lord) is very happy, but it was given nearly three centuries ago by Joseph Scaliger, || and repeated by Andreas Müller. A loan from Murray deserves special notice. M. Pauthier is about to identify the Pein of Polo with the district of Eastern Turkestan called Baï. To give éclat to his own success he begins by saying, 'This city of Pein has till now greatly perplexed commentators; it has, as one of the latest (Mr. Hugh Murray) says, defied all conjecture.' Here M. Pauthier's quotation stops. Had it proceeded, we should have learned that Hugh Murray, twenty years before, had himself given that solution of the knot which Pauthier is about to put forward as his own.

M. Pauthier piques himself on his knowledge of 'notre vieux Français.' We have no such pretension, but we cannot help noticing palpable errors in his explanations. Bouguerans are explained (p. 38) as woollen stuffs; they were cotton. In Georgia, Marco says (p. 42), Il y a les meilleurs Austours du monde,' the best Goshawks in the world;' but the note explains 'Vultures.' We fear even the Paris Exposition has had no prize to offer for the best of vultures! Moult envis, i.e. Multum

*Bürck, pp. 618, 629.

† Lazari, p. 286.

In Journ. Asiat.,' Ser. II. tom. x. 442. § Notices et Extraits,' xiii. p. 332.

De Emend. Temporum,' Geneva, 1629, p. 680.

inviti,

6

inviti, in spite of their teeth,' is rendered avidement (p. 94). Nois (p. xxiv.) meaning 'snow,' is explained as Nights.' Pennes, Furs,' is rendered feathers (p. 192), and Sesnes, 'Swans,' is transmuted into Ses nes, his ships' (p. 222). Enferme terre, 'a sickly place,' is made to do duty for Terra Firma (p. 86). Couverture (p. 478) for the deck of a vessel (Ital. Coperta) is rendered an awning.' Car, we are told (p. 386), means but,' which assertion has no foundation but M. Pauthier's desire to support a paradox. Wambasia, a term used by Rubruquis in his Latin for cotton,' is rendered (in the thirteenth century!) 'Bamboo.' Frère Charnel (p. 138) we are told does not mean 'own brother,' as might be supposed by ignorant people, but only a near relation.' This gross misinterpretation illustrates another characteristic which makes M. Pauthier an untrustworthy guide. We have noticed some of Marco's historical slips. On this occasion he is telling a story of Chagatai, uncle to Kublai, but calls him his frère charnel, and it is to cover this error that Pauthier boldly asserts frère charnel not to mean brother at all. Polo is quite consistent in the error. In a later chapter of the book (p. 716) he tells us: In Great Turkey there is a king called Caidu. He is the Great Khan's Nephew, for he was son to Chagatai, qui fu frère charnel du Grant Kaan.' Polo is here in double error, for Kaidu was the grandson of Chagatai's brother Okkodai, and nephew to Kublai only à la mode de Bretagne. Why does not Pauthier tell us that filz in notre vieux Français means great-nephew?

In truth M. Pauthier's general principles are these: (1) that Marco Polo is never wrong; (2) that M. Pauthier's text of Marco Polo is never wrong; (3) that M. Pauthier can never be wrong. And if facts are against either, so much the worse for the facts.

Thus because Marco calls tigers lions, we have Pauthier once and again insinuating that lions did exist in China (pp. 298, 434); because Marco repeats an absurd fable about the elephant, long ago exploded by Sir Thomas Browne, M. Pauthier tries to support it (p. 686). Again, because his MSS., speaking of Layas in Cilicia (p. 34) as the great port for the inland trade of Asia, read, or are read by him as having, Eufratere instead of the genuine phrase enfra tere, an Italianism (infra terra) for Inland,' he invents a word Eufratere as meaning 'The Valley of the Euphrates!' Precisely the same phrase occurs in the Geographic Text,' in speaking of the port of Kalhat in Oman : 'From this city all the goods and spices that arrive are carried into the interior' (enfra tere). The chapter on Yezd commences in M. Pauthier's MS., Zasdi est une ville moult bonne et