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 relation ship 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 Kublai. 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.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 170 of 655
Words from 88739 to 89270
of 342071
