The City Was Captured By The Imperial Officers In 1873, When A
Horrid Massacre Of The Mussulmans Took Place [19th January].
The Sultan
took poison, but his head was cut off and sent to Peking.
Momein fell soon
after [10th June], and the Panthe kingdom is ended.
We see that Polo says the King ruling for Kublai at this city was a son of
the Kaan, called COGACHIN, whilst he told us in the last chapter that the
King reigning at Yachi was also a son of the Kaan, called ESSENTIMUR. It
is probably a mere lapsus or error of dictation calling the latter a son
of the Kaan, for in ch. li. infra, this prince is correctly described as
the Kaan's grandson. Rashiduddin tells us that Kublai had given his son
HUKAJI (or perhaps Hogachi, i.e. Cogachin) the government of
Karajang,[1] and that after the death of this Prince the government was
continued to his son ISENTIMUR. Klaproth gives the date of the latter's
nomination from the Chinese Annals as 1280. It is not easy to reconcile
Marco's statements perfectly with a knowledge of these facts; but we may
suppose that, in speaking of Cogachin as ruling at Karajang (or Tali-fu)
and Esentimur at Yachi, he describes things as they stood when his visit
occurred, whilst in the second reference to "Sentemur's" being King in the
province and his father dead, he speaks from later knowledge. This
interpretation would confirm what has been already deduced from other
circumstances, that his visit to Yun-nan was prior to 1280. (Pemberton's
Report on the Eastern Frontier, 108 seqq.; Quat. Rashid. pp.
lxxxix-xc.; Journ. Asiat. ser. II. vol. i.)
NOTE 2. - [Captain Gill writes (II. p. 302): "There are said to be very
rich gold and silver mines within a few days' journey of the city" (of
Ta-li). Dr. Anderson says (Mandalay to Momien, p. 203): "Gold is brought
to Momein from Yonephin and Sherg-wan villages, fifteen days' march to the
north-east; but no information could be obtained as to the quantity found.
It is also brought in leaf, which is sent to Burma, where it is in
extensive demand." - H.C.]
NOTE 3. - It cannot be doubted that Marco's serpents here are crocodiles,
in spite of his strange mistakes about their having only two feet and one
claw on each, and his imperfect knowledge of their aquatic habits. He may
have seen only a mutilated specimen. But there is no mistaking the hideous
ferocity of the countenance, and the "eyes bigger than a fourpenny loaf,"
as Ramusio has it. Though the actual eye of the crocodile does not bear
this comparison, the prominent orbits do, especially in the case of the
Ghariyal of the Ganges, and form one of the most repulsive features of
the reptile's physiognomy. In fact, its presence on the surface of an
Indian river is often recognisable only by three dark knobs rising above
the surface, viz. the snout and the two orbits.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 86 of 701
Words from 44091 to 44593
of 370046
