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.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 545 of 655
Words from 284647 to 285187
of 342071
