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 Kublai'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
mediaeval Herodotus.
[Sidenote: Circumstances of the Departure of the Polos from the Kaan's
Court.]
21. Arghun Khan of Persia, Kublai's great-nephew, had in 1286 lost his
favourite wife the Khatun Bulughan; 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 Kokachin, 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] Arghun Khan too had been dead even before
they quitted China;[21] his brother Kaikhatu reigned in his stead; and his
son Ghazan succeeded to the lady's hand. We are told by one who knew both
the princes well that Arghun was one of the handsomest men of his time,
whilst Ghazan was, among all his host, one of the most insignificant in
appearance. But in other respects the lady's change was for the better.
Ghazan 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.