National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books

> > > >
Color New!IIIF Color HighRes Gray HighRes PDF   Japanese English
0081 Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 / Page 81 (Color Image)

New!Citation Information

doi: 10.20676/00000246
Citation Format: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR Text


48. BAGHERLAC   65

(lit. 'precious jade', pao-yü); that his road passed through Sha-chou (see ' Saciou') and that he encountered there the revolt of J( 2, Huo-hu (Hoqu); that [Wang] Hsiao-chung had escaped and had come for orders; and that [he ought] to be ordered to till the ground in Kua[-chou] and Sha-

ti      chou. The Emperor agreed» (YS, 9, 2 a). Hoqu (see also «Barac») was Güyük's third son, and
took Qaidu's side when Qaidu rebelled against Qubilai; the present text proves that Hoqu's rebellion cannot be dated later than 1275. But the most interesting feature of the text is that it shows that, in 1275, Qubilai would and could send people to work for him in Badal*n, which was thus outside

a      the territory of the ilkhans of Persia. It must be this text of 1276 which is alluded to in Y, III,
34, with PARKER'S erroneous remark that it is the first mention of Badah"san in Chinese sources (the Pa-ta-shan of 1276 must not be confused with the Pa-ta[xj]-shan mentioned in 1275, YS, 8, 10 a; the latter was north of the great bend of the Yellow River; cf. T'u Chi, 7, 31 a).

The text of 1276 is important for another reason. When Rabban Çauma and the future Mar

`      Yahbalaha III undertook their pilgrimage to the Holy Land, they arrived at Khotan (see «Cotan),
where the King «Oqo», having rebelled against Qubilai, had sought refuge (cf. CHABOT, Hist. de Mar Jabalaha III, 22-23). This king «Oqo », who has not hitherto been identified (cf. Mo, 100),

is certainly the prince Hoqu, Güyük's son; Ragid writes his name   Hoqu (Bl, II, 5), with the
weak h- not marked in Uighur-Mongol spelling. If Hoqu's rebellion occurred, as I think, in 1275, that would give us the clue, so long desired, for fixing the chronology of the two monks' journey.



bagherlac L   bargeolach LT   bargolach P

barchelac VB   bargherlac F   barguelac FB

barcholach V   bargolac VA   barguerlac FA

bargelach R

This is the sand-grouse (Syrrhaptes Pallasii, a kind of Pterocles); the common Chinese name, sha-chi (« sand-fowl »; not « sha-ch'i» as in Y, I, 273), is applied also to other birds. The name given by Polo is Turkish; we find already bayirlaq in Kaayari (BROCKELMANN, 18).

ZENKER'S boyurtlaq must be wrong, but   Y;.. bayïrtlaq is known in Osm. and cay. (RADLov, Iv,

1452, 1455). For Turki (in Chin. Turkestan), SHAW (Vocab., 210) gives   bayitaq (with the

usual dropping of -r in the western Turki pronunciation); I have myself heard the form bayïrtaq used in Turfan and Qomul; LE COQ (Sprichwörter... von Turfan, 84) has noted another form bdyrïltdq in Turfan; cf. also E. D. Ross, A polyglot list of birds, 129; RADLOV omits the Turki forms by oversight.

With the sole exception of L, all the mss. have an -r at the end of the first syllable (<c bargherlac », «bargelach », etc.), but there should not be two is in the word. Even before