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
0141 Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 / Page 141 (Color Image)

New!Citation Information

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

OCR Text


95. CAIDU   125

lung's commissioners and suppose a dialectical form *qaidu of Mong. gaidaq, «alone », «single », from which Manchu kaidu, of identical meaning, would be borrowed (cf. also BLOCHET, Moufazzal, 608).

According to Polo, Qaidu was a grandson of Cayatai, and twice (cf. Vol. i, 144, 447) Polo makes Cayatai a brother of Qubilai; at the same time, he calls Qaidu a « neveu » of Qubilai, and the word may be taken to mean either «nephew» or « grandson ». Polo is here mistaken. HAMMER (Hal, i, 142) speaks of a Qaidu, sixth son of Ögödäi, and of a Qaidu, seventh son of Cayatai, but both are due to misunderstandings or misreadings. The Qaidu, son of Cayatai, mentioned by HOWORTH for the campaign of 1240-1241 in Hungary (t, 137, 142), is due to another error : WOLFF (Gesch. der Mongolen, 154, 159) had absurdly changed the Qadan, son of Ögödäi, given by his sources, into a would-be Qaidu, son of Cayatai; this has led GROUSSET,

Hist. de l'Extrême-Orient, 435, to include the true Qaidu among the princes who took part in the campaign of 1240-1241, while Qaidu was still at that period a young boy, as will be seen farther on. There is in fact only one prince Qaidu in the 13th cent., and he is a grandson not of Cayatai, but of Ögödäi; to Qubilai, he was the son of a first cousin, what we call in French a «neveu à la mode de Bretagne ».

The date of the birth of Qaidu is not given by any text, but can be determined approximately. All the texts agree that he was the son of Qagi or Qagin, a son of Ögödäi (YS, 107, 6 a; BI, II, 7, 434); Ragidu-'d-Din adds that Qagi was the name then used by the Mongols for Tangut (= Hsi-Hsia), and that Qagi owed his name to the fact that he was born when Chinghiz had

just led a victorious campaign against the Hsi-Hsia. It is true that Qagi or, with a paragogical -n, Qagin, Ch. â 1= up ] ` Ha-shih, represents a Mongol alteration of r7 TR. Ho-hsi (mediaeval pronunciation Hö-si), then the common Chinese name for the Hsi-Hsia country, the modern Kan-su (see «Tangut »). The passage in Mongolian of s- to ! before i was not yet general, and the name of Qagi, with the adjectival or ethnical suffix -tai, -dai, is still transcribed ~7

Ho-hsi-tai (*Qasidai) in the Hei-Ta shih-lio of 1232 (cf. TP, 1928-1929, 167; ed. WANG Kuo-

wei, I b) and â   ÿ Ha-si-tai (*Qasidai) in the Cho-kêng lu of 1366 (i, 3 a). So there is no
doubt about the meaning of Qagi, and the way in which the name was given is also in agreement with Mongol habits.

But from 1205 to 1227, Chinghiz marched five times against Tangut; HUNG Chün, 15, i a,

refrained from any formal opinion about the time which is meant here. T'u Chi (37, z) says that Qagi was born in 1205 (he gives in fact i-hai, 1215, but the whole reasoning in the preceding paragraph shows that this is a slip for i-ch'ou, 1205); this I cannot accept. Ögödäi was born in 1186; he had seven sons, the eldest of whom, Güyük (see «Cui »), was born in 1206; Chinese sources and Ragidu-'d-Din agree in making Qagi the fifth son, and Ragid says that the first five sons were born of the same mother (YS, 2, 4a; 107, 5 b-6 b; BI, u, 4-7; T'u Chi's attempt to show that Qagi was the eldest son and born of another mother is a failure). The result is that Qagi could not have been born before the third campaign of Chinghiz against the Hsi-Hsia, stated to be in 1209 by the YS, t, 6 b, but more correctly in 1210 by Ragid (Ber, in, 16) and the Shêng-wu

ch'in chêng lu (ed. WANG Kuo-wei, 49 a). We cannot make it any later, knowing what we do of Qagi's son Qaidu. So Qagi must have been born in 1210.