National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books
|
|
Color Thumbnail -
Page Number -
Biliographic Information (Metadata) -
Caption -
Color Image -
Gray HighRes. Image -
Facing Pages -
Graphics -
| 0157 |
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 |
Citation Information
OCR Text
wrong in thinking it to be Mongol; it has not even been borrowed by the Mongols, and no
text in the Mongol language gives it; in Turkish, baltq is already known in the runic
inscriptions, and is listed for «town» in Kāšγarī (BROCKELMANN, 29); it has survived to
the present day. Rašīdu-'d-Dīn's mss. hesitate between خان بالق Ḫan-balīq and خان بالیه Ḫan-balīy
(Bl, II, 456); Waṣṣāf (Ha², 45) writes خان بالیه Ḫan-balīy. We find «Cambaliech» in Montecorvino
(Wy, 347) as well as in the much-debated letter attributed to Peregrinus de Castello (Wy, 367).
Odoric's form is «Cambalec» (Wy, 471, 475, 478), which also appears in the Emperor's and the
Alans' letters of 1336 (cf. Y¹, III, 181, 183), and in Marignolli (Wy, 526, 529); hence
«Chambalech» on the Catalan Map (Y¹, I, 301). Andrea da Perugia writes in Latin
«Cambaliensis civitas» (Wy, 374). Pegolotti's very bad transcriptions provide us with a
«Gamalec» (Y³, III, 149). The name has long survived among Turkish- and Persian-speaking
peoples. In 1419-1421, Šāh-Rūḫ's envoys always speak of خان بالق Ḫan-baliq, but the Zafar-
namāh has «Ḫan-balīy» (cf. Not. et Extr. XIV, I, 395, 401, 500). The ms. Sino-Uighur
Vocabulary of the Ming dynasty in the School of Oriental Studies («Kō Kwō I yü») writes 汗
把里 Ḫan-pa-li = Ḫan-baliq, with its Chinese equivalent, Pei-ching, Peking. Cf. also the
«Kambaluk» and «Chaan balug» in WITSEN (1785), I, 277, 495. For other Mussulman writers
who, from the middle of the 13th cent. down to the end of the 17th, have named Ḫan-baliq or
Ḫan-balīy, see Fe, 711. In the first years of the 17th cent., Matteo Ricci was able to satisfy
himself that the Mussulmans from the West still called Peking by the very name Polo had used
(cf. TACCHI-VENTURI, Opere stor. del P. M. Ricci, I, 296-297, 377; II, 352). The name has now
been forgotten for more than a century; the itinerary copied in 1812 by Mīr 'Izzet Ullah has
already بجین Bājin, the only form known to-day in Chinese Turkestan (JRAS, No. XIV, 308,
where the name is miswritten and misread بجین «Peḅin»; LE STRANGE [Nuzhat al-Qulūb,
transl., 235, 250] is mistaken when he thinks that the name of Peking could already have
existed in the first half of the 14th cent.). In the transcriptions of Ḫan-baliq, the variations
between °baluc and °balec are due to the peculiar nature of Turk. ī (see «Achbaluch»).
It would most probably be wrong to suppose that the name of Ḫan-baliq, as applied to
Peking, originated when Qubilai moved the capital there in 1260. The Syriac work on Mār
Yahbalaha III speaks of Bar Çauma's father who lived «in the town called Ḫan-baliq, that is to
say the Royal town of the land of the East»; and the time when that father could have lived in
Ḫan-baliq is 1240-1250 at the latest. Of course, it might be suspected that the author, writing
at the beginning of the 14th cent., used the name current in his own age; but there are no
traces in the work of a modernized nomenclature (see CHABOT, Hist. Mar Jabalaha III, 9,
and Mo, 94). The name of Ḫan-baliq appears also in the Tables of Naṣīru-'d-Dīn Aṭ-Ṭūsī
(cf. Fe, 358), who is said by FERRAND to have died in 1261; but FERRAND is wrong; the death
of Naṣīru-'d-Dīn occurred in June 1274 (cf. BROWNE, Lit. Hist. of Persia, II, 485). In fact,
I think that the name of Ḫan-baliq was given in Central Asia to Peking while it was still the
capital of the Chin, that is prior to 1215, and had perhaps then been in use already for a whole
century. It is met with even earlier, but as an epithet for another capital (= Ch. ti-ch'êng,
«Imperial City»): in the Uighur translation of Hsüan-tsang's biography, Ḫan-baliqi is the
designation of the then capital Ch'ang-an (Hsianfu); cf. A. VON GABAIN, Die uig. Uebersetzung
1
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
11
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
21
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
31
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
41
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
51
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
61
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
71
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
81
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
91
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
101
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
111
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
121
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
131
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
141
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
151
.
.
.
155
156
157
158
159
.
161
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
171
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
181
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
191
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
201
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
211
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
221
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
231
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
241
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
251
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
261
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
271
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
281
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
291
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
301
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
311
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
321
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
331
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
341
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
351
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
361
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
371
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
381
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
391
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
401
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
411
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
421
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
431
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
441
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
451
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
461
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
471
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
481
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
491
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
501
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
511
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
521
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
531
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
541
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
551
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
561
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
571
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
581
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
591
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
601
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
611
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
621
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
631
632
Copyright (C) 2003-2019
National Institute of Informatics
and
The Toyo Bunko. All Rights Reserved.
