ROCKHILL, W.W. The Land of the Lamas. London, 1891, 8vo.
- - Diary of a Journey through Mongolia and Tibet in 1891 and
1892. Washington, 1894, 8vo.
- - The Journey of William of Rubruck. London, Hakluyt
Society, 1900, 8vo.
ROMAN., ROMANIN, Storia Documentata di Venezia. Venezia, 1853,
seqq.
RUB., RUBRUQUIS. Cited from edition in Recueil de Voyages et de
Memoires, tom. iv. Paris, 1839. See ROCKHILL.
S.S., SAN. SETZ., SS. SSETZ. See Schmidt.
SANTAREM, Essai sur l'Hist. de la Cosmographie, &c. Paris, 1849.
SANUDO. See Mar. San.
SCHILTBERGER, Reisen des Johan. Ed. by Neumann. Muenchen, 1859.
SCHLEGEL, G. Geographical Notes, I.-XVI., in T'oung Pao,
Leiden, 1898-1901.
SCHMIDT. Geschichte der Ost-Mongolen, &c., verfasst von Ssanang-Ssetzen
Chungtaidschi. St. Petersburg, 1829.
SONNERAT. Voyage aux Indes Orientales. Paris, 1782.
SPRENGER. Post und Reise Routen des Orients. Leipzig, 1864.
ST. MARTIN, M.J. Memoires Historiques et Geographiques sur l'Armenie,
&c. Paris, 1818-19.
SYKES, MAJOR PERCY MOLESWORTH. Ten Thousand Miles in Persia, or Eight
Years in Iran. London, 1902, 8vo.
Chap, xxiii. Marco Polo's Travels in Persia.
- - Recent Journeys in Persia. (Geog. Journal, X, 1897,
pp. 568-597.)
TEIXEIRA, Relaciones de Pedro, del Origen Descendencia y
Succession de los Reyes de Persia, y de Harmuz, y de un Viage hecho por
el mismo aotor, &c. En Amberes, 1670.
TIMKOWSKI. Travels, &c., edited by Klaproth. London, 1827.
UZZANO. See Della Decima.
VARTHEMA'S Travels. By Jones and Badger. Hak. Soc., 1863.
VIGNE, G.T. Travels in Kashmir, &c. London, 1842.
VIN. BELL., VINC. BELLOV. Vincent of Beauvais' Speculum Historiale,
Speculum Naturale, &c.
VISDELOU. Supplement to D'Herbelot. 1780.
WILLIAMS'S Middle Kingdom. 3rd. Ed. New York and London, 1857.
WILLIAMSON, Rev. A. Journeys in N. China, &c. London, 1870.
WEBER'S Metrical Romances of the XIIIth, XIVth, and XVth Centuries
Edinburgh, 1810.
WITSEN. Noord en Oost Tartaryen. 2nd Ed. Amsterdam, 1785.
APPENDIX K. - Values of certain Moneys, Weights, and Measures, occurring in
this Book.
FRENCH MONEY.
The LIVRE TOURNOIS of the period may be taken, on the mean of five
valuations cited in a footnote at p. 87 of vol. i., as equal in modern
silver value to ... 18.04 francs.
Say English money ... 14s. 3.8d.
The LIVRE PARISIS was worth one-fourth more than the Tournois,[1]
and therefore equivalent in silver value to ... 22.55 francs.
Say English money ... 17s. 10.8d.
(Gold being then to silver in relative value about 12:1 instead of about
15:1 as now, one-fourth has to be added to the values based on silver in
equations with the gold coin of the period, and one-fifth to be deducted
in values based on gold value. By oversight, in vol. i. p. 87, I took 16:1
as the present gold value, and so exaggerated the value of the livre
Tournois as compared with gold.)
M. Natalis de Wailly, in his recent fine edition of Joinville, determines
the valuation of these livres, in the reign of St. Lewis, by taking
a mean between a value calculated on the present value of silver, and a
value calculated on the present value of gold,[2] and his result is:
LIVRE TOURNOIS = 20.26 francs.
LIVRE PARISIS = 25.33 "
Though there is something arbitrary in this mode of valuation, it is,
perhaps, on the whole the best; and its result is extremedy handy for the
memory (as somebody has pointed out) for we thus have
One LIVRE TOURNOIS = One Napoleon.
" " PARISIS = One Sovereign.
VENETIAN MONEY.
The MARK of Silver all over Europe may be taken fairly at 2l. 4s. of
our money in modern value; the Venetian mark being a fraction more, and the
marks of England, Germany and France fractions less.[3]
The Venice GOLD DUCAT or ZECCHIN, first coined in accordance with a Law of
31st October 1283, was, in our gold value, worth ... 11.82 francs.[4]
or English ... 9s. 4.284d.
The Zecchin when first coined was fixed as equivalent to 18 grossi, and
on this calculation the GROSSO should be a little less than 5d.
sterling.[5] But from what follows it looks as if there must have been
another grosso, perhaps only of account, which was only 3/4 of the
former, therefore equivalent to 3-3/4d. only. This would be a clue to
difficulties which I do not find dealt with by anybody in a precise or
thorough manner; but I can find no evidence for it.
Accounts were kept at Venice not in ducats and grossi, but in Lire,
of which there were several denominations, viz.:
1. LIRA DEI GROSSI, called in Latin Documents Libra denariorum
Venetorum grosorum.[6] Like every Lira or Pound, this
consisted of 20 soldi, and each soldo of 12 denari
or deniers.[7] In this case the Lira was equivalent to 10 golden
ducats; and its Denier, as the name implies, was the Grosso. The
Grosso therefore here was 1/240 of 10 ducats or 1/24 of a ducat, instead
of 1/18.
2. LIRA AI GROSSI (L. den. Ven. ad grossos). This by decree of
2nd June, 1285, went two to the ducat. In fact it is the soldo of
the preceding Lira, and as such the Grosso was, as we have
just seen, its denier; which is perhaps the reason of the name.
3. LIRA DEI PICCOLI (L. den. Ven. parvulorum). The ducat is
alleged to have been at first equal to three of these Lire
(Romanin, I. 321); but the calculations of Marino Sanudo
(1300-1320) in the Secreta Fidelium Crucis show that he reckons the
Ducat equivalent to 3.2 lire of piccoli.[8]
In estimating these Lire in modern English money, on the basis of
their relation to the ducat, we must reduce the apparent value by 1/5. We
then have:
1. LIRA DEI GROSSI equivalent to nearly 3l. 15s. 0d.
(therefore exceeding by nearly 10s. the value of the Pound sterling of
the period, or Lira di Sterlini, as it was called in the appropriate
Italian phrase).[9]
