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
0275 Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 / Page 275 (Color Image)

New!Citation Information

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

OCR Text


150. CIANGLU   259

with what has now become the portion of the Grand Canal until it meets with the lower Hu-t'o-ho. MOULE in 1915 (TP, 1915, 400) thought that the Ling-chou of the itinerary of 1276 was the modern Ling-hsien; this is not quite correct. The modern Ling-hsien is the ancient Tê-thou; and the modern Tê-chou is the ancient Ling-chou, afterwards Ling-hsien; the exchange of names dates only from the Ming dynasty (see for instance Ti-ming to tz'ic-tien, 791, 867). So the Ling-chou of the Imperial envoys of 1276 is in principle the modern Tê-chou (now Tê-hsien), on the banks of the former Wei-ho and now of the Grand Canal (it may nevertheless be that the Wei-ho flowed then a little more to the east than it does now, and that the Ling-chou of the Mongol period was somewhere between the present Tê-hsien and the present Ling-hsien). The Ling-chou of the Mongol dynasty must be Polo's « Ciangli ».

I had reached this conclusion before I found what I believe to be the true explanation of

Polo's toponym. Under the Sung and Chin and at the beginning of the Mongol dynasty, Ling-chou (= modern Tê-chou, Tê-hsien) had always been called the hsien of i pi Chiang-ling (Tsiang-ling) ; it became Ling-chou only in 1253, reverted to a hsien in 1265, but was promoted again to a chou in 1266. The envoys of 1276 used the new administrative name, but the name of the hsien, in use for centuries, did not die out immediately from popular usage, and it is the one Polo heard. « Ciangli » is Chiang-ling; the « Ciangli » of the mss. must stand for *Ciangli

*Cianglin, the fall of the final -n being due perhaps to the attraction of « Cianglu ».

« *Cianglin » and « Cianglu » are examples, in Polo, of notations in -ng, and not simply in -n, of Chinese finals in -ng; others are « Cingsan » and « Scieng ». We have many similar cases in Rasidu-'d-Din when the Persian historian has to deal with terms which had not taken a « spoken » form in Mongolian — and Persian — speaking circles (see « Pianfu »), or when he wants to be quite accurate (see « Quinsai »). CHARIGNON, who declares it necessary to divide the names into « Cian-gli » and « Cian-glu » (Ch, III, 5), nevertheless maintains the usual division a little further on (Ch, III, 8). And we have only to accept here Polo's forms at their face value, with -ng for Ch. -ng.

One difficulty remains. In this note, I have not taken into account the city of « Cianglu » mentioned by Polo as lying between « Cacanfu » and « Ciangli »; for a discussion of the point, see « Cianglu ».


cagnul VB

chivanglu, cinuanglu, zinuan-

glu VA

ciaglu TA 1, TA 3

cianglu F, Ft, FA, LT, Z, L,

L 1, VL, R, S çianglu Z cinaglu Fr cionglu, ciunglu LT ciuglu TA 1

cyanglu FB, P cyangula G cynamguy FB 2 zanglo V

From the days of MARSDEN and MURRAY, the place has

been identified with Ts'ang-chou,

on the Grand Canal. PAUTHIER, however, pointed to the name of   Î Ch'ang-lu, not far from