The Travels of Marco Polo Volume I Part 35

I gather from the facts that the MS. C represents an older form of the work than A and B. I should judge that the latter had been derived from that older form, but intentionally modified from it. And as it is the MS.

C, with its copy at Bern, that alone presents the certificate of derivation from the Book given to the Sieur de Cepoy, there can be no doubt that it is the true representative of that recension.

[Sidenote: Third; Friar Pipino's Latin.]

58. III. The next Type of Text is that found in Friar Pipino's Latin version. It is the type of which MSS. are by far the most numerous. In it condensation and curtailment are carried a good deal further than in Type II. The work is also divided into three Books. But this division does not seem to have originated with Pipino, as we find it in the ruder and perhaps older Latin version of which we have already spoken under Type I.

And we have demonstrated that this ruder Latin is a translation from an Italian copy. It is probable therefore that an Italian version similarly divided was the common source of what we call the Geographic Latin and of Pipino's more condensed version.[9]

Pipino's version appears to have been executed in the later years of Polo's life.[10] But I can see no ground for the idea entertained by Baldelli-Boni and Professor Bianconi that it was executed with Polo's cognizance and retouched by him.

[Sidenote: The Latin of Grynaeus a translation at fifth hand.]

59. The absence of effective publication in the Middle Ages led to a curious complication of translation and retranslation. Thus the Latin version published by Grynaeus in the _Novus...o...b..s_ (Basle, 1532) is different from Pipino's, and yet clearly traceable to it as a base. In fact it is a retranslation into Latin from some version (Marsden thinks the printed Portuguese one) of Pipino. It introduces many minor modifications, omitting specific statements of numbers and values, generalizing the names and descriptions of specific animals, exhibiting frequent sciolism and self-sufficiency in modifying statements which the Editor disbelieved.[11] It is therefore utterly worthless as a Text, and it is curious that Andreas Muller, who in the 17th century devoted himself to the careful editing of Polo, should have made so unfortunate a choice as to reproduce this fifth-hand Translation. I may add that the French editions published in the middle of the 16th century are _translations_ from Grynaeus. Hence they complete this curious and vicious circle of translation: French--Italian--Pipino's Latin--Portuguese?--Grynaeus's Latin--French![12]

[Sidenote: Fourth; Ramusio's Italian.]

60. IV. We now come to a Type of Text which deviates largely from any of those hitherto spoken of, and the history and true character of which are involved in a cloud of difficulty. We mean that Italian version prepared for the press by G. B. Ramusio, with most interesting, though, as we have seen, not always accurate preliminary dissertations, and published at Venice two years after his death, in the second volume of the _Navigationi e Viaggi_.[13]

The peculiarities of this version are very remarkable. Ramusio seems to imply that he used as one basis at least the Latin of Pipino; and many circ.u.mstances, such as the division into Books, the absence of the terminal historical chapters and of those about the Magi, and the form of many proper names, confirm this. But also many additional circ.u.mstances and anecdotes are introduced, many of the names a.s.sume a new shape, and the whole style is more copious and literary in character than in any other form of the work.

Whilst some of the changes or interpolations seem to carry us further from the truth, others contain facts of Asiatic nature or history, as well as of Polo's own experiences, which it is extremely difficult to ascribe to any hand but the Traveller's own. This was the view taken by Baldelli, Klaproth, and Neumann;[14] but Hugh Murray, Lazari, and Bartoli regard the changes as interpolations by another hand; and Lazari is rash enough to ascribe the whole to a _rifacimento_ of Ramusio's own age, a.s.serting it to contain interpolations not merely from Polo's own contemporary Hayton, but also from travellers of later centuries, such as Conti, Barbosa, and Pigafetta. The grounds for these last a.s.sertions have not been cited, nor can I trace them. But I admit _to a certain extent_ indications of modern tampering with the text, especially in cases where proper names seem to have been identified and more modern forms subst.i.tuted. In days, however, where an Editor's duties were ill understood, this was natural.

[Sidenote: Injudicious tamperings in Ramusio.]

61. Thus we find subst.i.tuted for the _Bastra_ (or _Bascra_) of the older texts the more modern and incorrect _Balsora_, dear to memories of the Arabian Nights; among the provinces of Persia we have _Spaan_ (Ispahan) where older texts read _Istanit_; for _Cormos_ we have _Ormus_; for _Herminia_ and _Laias, Armenia_ and _Giazza; Coulam_ for the older _Coilum; Socotera_ for _Scotra_. With these changes may be cla.s.sed the chapter-headings, which are undisguisedly modern, and probably Ramusio's own. In some other cases this editorial spirit has been over-meddlesome and has gone astray. Thus _Malabar_ is subst.i.tuted wrongly for _Maabar_ in one place, and by a grosser error for _Dalivar_ in another. The age of young Marco, at the time of his father's first return to Venice, has been arbitrarily altered from 15 to 19, in order to correspond with a date which is itself erroneous. Thus also Polo is made to describe Ormus as on an Island, contrary to the old texts and to the fact; for the city of Hormuz was not transferred to the island, afterwards so famous, till some years after Polo's return from the East. It is probably also the editor who in the notice of the oil-springs of Caucasus (i. p. 46) has subst.i.tuted _camel-loads_ for _ship-loads_, in ignorance that the site of those alluded to was probably Baku on the Caspian.

Other erroneous statements, such as the introduction of window-gla.s.s as one of the embellishments of the palace at Cambaluc, are probably due only to accidental misunderstanding.

[Sidenote: Genuine statements peculiar to Ramusio.]

62. Of circ.u.mstances certainly genuine, which are peculiar to this edition of Polo's work, and which it is difficult to a.s.sign to any one but himself, we may note the specification of the woods east of Yezd as composed of _date trees_ (vol. i pp. 88-89); the unmistakable allusion to the subterranean irrigation channels of Persia (p. 123); the accurate explanation of the term _Mulehet_ applied to the sect of a.s.sa.s.sins (pp.

139-142); the mention of the Lake (Sirikul?) on the plateau of Pamer, of the wolves that prey on the wild sheep, and of the piles of wild rams'

horns used as landmarks in the snow (pp. 171-177). To the description of the Tibetan Yak, which is in all the texts, Ramusio's version alone adds a fact probably not recorded again till the present century, viz., that it is the practice to cross the Yak with the common cow (p. 274). Ramusio alone notices the prevalence of _goitre_ at Yarkand, confirmed by recent travellers (i. p. 187); the vermilion seal of the Great Kaan imprinted on the paper-currency, which may be seen in our plate of a Chinese note (p.

426); the variation in Chinese dialects (ii. p. 236); the division of the hulls of junks into water-tight compartments (ii. p. 249); the introduction into China from Egypt of the art of refining sugar (ii. p.

226). Ramusio's account of the position of the city of Sindafu (Ch'eng-tu fu) encompa.s.sed and intersected by many branches of a great river (ii. p.

40), is much more just than that in the old text, which speaks of but one river through the middle of the city. The intelligent notices of the Kaan's charities as originated by his adoption of "idolatry" or Buddhism; of the astrological superst.i.tions of the Chinese, and of the manners and character of the latter nation, are found in Ramusio alone. To whom but Marco himself, or one of his party, can we refer the brief but vivid picture of the delicious atmosphere and scenery of the Badakhshan plateaux (ip. 158), and of the benefit that Messer Marco's health derived from a visit to them? In this version alone again we have an account of the oppressions exercised by Kublai's Mahomedan Minister Ahmad, telling how the Cathayans rose against him and murdered him, with the addition that Messer Marco was on the spot when all this happened. Now not only is the whole story in substantial accordance with the Chinese Annals, even to the name of the chief conspirator,[15] but those annals also tell of the courageous frankness of "Polo, a.s.sessor of the Privy Council," in opening the Kaan's eyes to the truth.

Many more such examples might be adduced, but these will suffice. It is true that many of the pa.s.sages peculiar to the Ramusian version, and indeed the whole version, show a freer utterance and more of a literary faculty than we should attribute to Polo, judging from the earlier texts.

It is possible, however, that this may be almost, if not entirely, due to the fact that the version is the result of a double translation, and probably of an editorial fusion of several doc.u.ments; processes in which angularities of expression would be dissolved.[16]

[Sidenote: Hypothesis of the sources of the Ramusian Version.]

63. Though difficulties will certainly remain,[17] the most probable explanation of the origin of this text seems to me to be some such hypothesis as the following:--I suppose that Polo in his latter years added with his own hand supplementary notes and reminiscences, marginally or otherwise, to a copy of his book; that these, perhaps in his lifetime, more probably after his death, were digested and translated into Latin;[18] and that Ramusio, or some friend of his, in retranslating and fusing them with Pipino's version for the _Navigationi_, made those minor modifications in names and other matters which we have already noticed.

The mere facts of digestion from memoranda and double translation would account for a good deal of unintentional corruption.

That more than one version was employed in the composition of Ramusio's edition we have curious proof in at least one pa.s.sage of the latter. We have pointed out at p. 410 of this volume a curious example of misunderstanding of the old French Text, a pa.s.sage in which the term _Roi des Pelaines_, or "King of Furs," is applied to the Sable, and which in the Crusca has been converted into an imaginary Tartar phrase _Leroide pelame_, or as Pipino makes it _Rondes_ (another indication that Pipino's Version and the Crusca pa.s.sed through a common medium). But Ramusio exhibits _both_ the true reading and the perversion: "_E li Tartari la chiamano_ Regina delle pelli" (there is the true reading), "_E gli animali si chiamano_ Rondes" (and there the perverted one).

We may further remark that Ramusio's version betrays indications that one of its bases either was in the Venetian dialect, or had pa.s.sed through that dialect; for a good many of the names appear in Venetian forms, e.g., subst.i.tuting the _z_ for the sound of _ch, j_, or soft _g_, as in _Goza, Zorzania, Zagatay, Gonza_ (for Giogiu), _Quenzanfu, Coiganzu, Tapinzu, Zipangu, Ziamba_.

[Sidenote: Summary in regard to Text of Polo.]

64. To sum up. It is, I think, beyond reasonable dispute that we have, in what we call the Geographic Text, as nearly as may be an exact transcript of the Traveller's words as originally taken down in the prison of Genoa.

We have again in the MSS. of the second type an edition pruned and refined, probably under instructions from Marco Polo, but not with any critical exactness. And lastly, I believe, that we have, imbedded in the Ramusian edition, the supplementary recollections of the Traveller, noted down at a later period of his life, but perplexed by repeated translation, compilation, and editorial mishandling.

And the most important remaining problem in regard to the text of Polo's work is the discovery of the supplemental ma.n.u.script from which Ramusio derived those pa.s.sages which are found only in his edition. It is possible that it may still exist, but no trace of it in anything like completeness has yet been found; though when my task was all but done I discovered a small part of the Ramusian peculiarities in a MS. at Venice.[19]

65. Whilst upon this subject of ma.n.u.scripts of our Author, I will give some particulars regarding a very curious one, containing a version in the _Irish_ language.

[Sidenote: Notice of a curious Irish Version of Polo.]

This remarkable doc.u.ment is found in the _Book of Lismore_, belonging to the Duke of Devonshire. That magnificent book, finely written on vellum of the largest size, was discovered in 1814, enclosed in a wooden box, along with a superb crozier, on opening a closed doorway in the castle of Lismore. It contained Lives of the Saints, the (Romance) History of Charlemagne, the History of the Lombards, histories and tales of Irish wars, etc., etc., and among the other matter this version of Marco Polo.

A full account of the Book and its mutilations will be found in _O'Curry's Lectures on the MS. Materials of Ancient Irish History_, p. 196 seqq., Dublin, 1861. The _Book of Lismore_ was written about 1460 for Finghin MacCarthy and his wife Catharine Fitzgerald, daughter of Gerald, Eighth Earl of Desmond.

The date of the Translation of Polo is not known, but it may be supposed to have been executed about the above date, probably in the Monastery of Lismore (county of Waterford).

From the extracts that have been translated for me, it is obvious that the version was made, with an astounding freedom certainly, from Friar Francesco Pipino's Latin.

Both beginning and end are missing. But what remains opens thus; compare it with Friar Pipino's real prologue as we give it in the Appendix![20]

"[Irish uncial text: riguib ocus ta.s.sech na cathar sin. bai bratair rigui anaibit san fnses inn cathr intansin. ba eoluc dano ss' nahilberlaib fransiscus aainm.

bhur iarum du ambant na maste ucut ocus cuingst fair inleabor doclod fcula otengaid natartaired cg inteng laitanda]." &c.

--"Kings and chieftains of that city. There was then in the city a princely Friar in the habit of St. Francis, named Franciscus, who was versed in many languages. He was brought to the place where those n.o.bles were, and they requested of him to translate the book from the Tartar (!) into the Latin language. 'It is an abomination to me,' said he, 'to devote my mind or labour to works of Idolatry and Irreligion.' They entreated him again. 'It shall be done,' said he; 'for though it be an irreligious narrative that is related therein, yet the things are miracles of the True G.o.d; and every one who hears this much against the Holy Faith shall pray fervently for their conversion. And he who will not pray shall waste the vigour of his body to convert them.' I am not in dread of this Book of Marcus, for there is no lie in it. My eyes beheld him bringing the relics of the holy Church with him, and he left [his testimony], whilst tasting of death, that it was true. And Marcus was a devout man. What is there in it, then, but that Franciscus translated this Book of Marcus from the Tartar into Latin; and the years of the Lord at that time were fifteen years, two score, two hundred, and one thousand" (1255).

It then describes _Armein Bec_ (Little Armenia), _Armein Mor_ (Great Armenia), _Musul, Taurisius, Persida, Camandi_, and so forth. The last chapter is that on _Abaschia_:--

"ABASCHIA also is an extensive country, under the government of Seven Kings, four of whom worship the true G.o.d, and each of them wears a golden cross on the forehead; and they are valiant in battle, having been brought up fighting against the Gentiles of the other three kings, who are Unbelievers and Idolaters. And the kingdom of ADEN; a Soudan rules over them.

"The king of Abaschia once took a notion to make a pilgrimage to the Sepulchre of Jesus. 'Not at all,' said his n.o.bles and warriors to him, 'for we should be afraid lest the infidels through whose territories you would have to pa.s.s, should kill you. There is a Holy Bishop with you,'

said they; 'send him to the Sepulchre of Jesus, and much gold with him'"--

The rest is wanting.

[1] In the following citations, the Geographic Text (G. T.) is quoted by page from the printed edition (1824); the Latin published in the same volume (G. L.) also by page; the Crusca, as before, from Bartoli's edition of 1863. References in parentheses are to the present translation:--

A. _Pa.s.sages showing the G. L. to be a translation from the Italian, and derived from the same Italian text as the_ Crusca.

Page (1). G.T. 17 (I. 43). Il hi se laborent _le souran tapis_ dou monde.

Crusca, 17 .. E quivi si fanno _i sovrani tappeti_ del mondo.

G.L. 311 .. Et ibi fiunt _soriani et tapeti_ pulcriores de mundo.

(2). G.T. 23 (I. 69). Et adonc le calif mande par tuit les cristiez ... _que en sa tere estoient_.

Crusca, 27 .. _Ora mand_ lo aliffo per tutti gli Cristiani _ch' erano di la_.

G.L. 316 .. _Or misit_ califus pro Christianis _qui erant ultra fluvium_ (the last words being clearly a misunderstanding of the Italian _di la_).

(3). G.T. 198 (II. 313). Ont _sosimain_ (sesamum) de coi il font le olio.

Crusca, 253 .. Hanno _sosimai_ onde fanno l' olio.

G.L. 448 .. Habent _turpes ma.n.u.s_ (taking _sosimani_ for _sozze mani_ "Dirty hands"!).

(4). Crusca, 52 (I. 158). _Cacciare e uccellare_ v' e lo migliore del mondo.

G.L. 332 .. Et est ibi optimum _caciare et ucellare_.