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

68   MARCO POLO.   VOL. I. BK. II.

IX., p. 360.

MONGOL IMPERIAL FAMILY.

i

" Marco Polo is correct in a way when he says Kúblái was

the sixth Emperor, for his father Tu li is counted as a Divus

(Jwei Tsung), though he never reigned ; just as his son Chin kin

(Yü Tsung) is also so counted, and under similar conditions.

Chin kin was appointed to the chung shu and shu-mih depart-

ments in 1263. He was entrusted with extensive powers in

1279, when he is described as ` heir apparent.' In 1284 Yün Nan,

Chagan-jang, etc., were placed under his direction. His death

is recorded in 1285. Another son, Numugan, was made

Prince of the Peking region (Péh-p'ing) in 1266, and the next

year a third son, Hukaji, was sent to take charge of Ta-li, Chagan-

jang, Zardandan, etc. In 1272 Kúblái's son,.Mangalai, was made

Prince of An-si, with part of Shen Si as his appanage. One

more son, named Ai-ya-ch'ih, is mentioned in 1284, and in that

year yet another, Tu kan, was made Prince of Chén-nan, and sent

on an expedition against Ciampa. In 1285 Essen Temur, who

had received a chung-shu post in 1283, is spoken of as Prince of

Yün Nan, and is stated to be engaged in Kara-jang ; in 1286 he

is still there, and is styled ` son of the Emperor.' I do not

observe in the Annals that Hukaji ever bore the title of Prince

of Yün Nan, or, indeed, any princely title. In 1287 Ai-ya-ch'ih

is mentioned as being at Shén Chou (Mukden) in connection

with Kúblái's ` personally conducted ' expedition against Nayen.

In 1289 one more son, Géukju, was patented Prince of Ning

Yüan. In r 293 Kúblái's third son, Chinkin, received a posthumous

title, and Chinkin's son Temur was declared heir-apparent to

Kúblái.

" The above are the only sons of Kúblái whose names I have

noticed in the Annals. In the special table of Princes Numugan

is styled Péh-an (instead of Pêh-p'ing) Prince. Aghrukji's name

appears in the table (chap. 108, p. 107), but though he is styled

Prince of Si-p'ing, he is not there stated to be a son of Kúblái ;

nor in the note I have supplied touching Tibet is he styled a

hwang-tsz or ' imperial son.' In the table Hukaji is described

as being in 1268 Prince of Yün Nan, a title ` inherited in 1280

by Essen Temur.' I cannot discover anything about the other

alleged sons in Yule's note (Vol. I., p. 361). The Chinese count

Kúblái's years as eighty, he having died just at the beginning of

1294 (our February); this would make him seventy-nine at the very

outside, according to our mode of reckoning, or even seventy-eight