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 -
| 0291 |
Notes on Marco Polo : vol.1 |
Citation Information
OCR Text
between the kingdom of Cathay and the kingdom of Inde » and in which « fine diamonds » are
found (Hist. des Croisades, Arm., II, 123, 263).
But our best informant is once more Rašīdu-'d-Dīn. According to him, the country south
of Ḥitai (= of North China) is called by the Hindus « Mahāčīn », hence « Māčīn », in Persian, but
« Manzi » by the Chinese and « Nangias » by the Mongols (see « Mangi »). To judge from
Bānākātī's account, Rašīd seems also to have said that « Čīn » was the Hindu name for Ḥitai
(cf. Quatremère, Hist. des Mongols, LXXXVI-LXXXVII, XCI-XCIII). For « Māčīn » = « Manzi », cf.
also Bl, II, 370-371. At other times, Rašīd uses « Čīn and Māčīn » as a mere synonym of
« Nangias », i. e. South China (cf. Ber, I, 146).
But Rašīd also speaks of the « capital of Māčīn » as of a city which is neither Ḥingsai (see
« Quinsai »), nor Zaitūn (see « Çaiton »), and Yule has already surmised that the place referred
to must be Canton (cf. Y¹, III, 115;. cf. also Le Strange, Nuhzat al-Qulāb, transl., 250, and
the somewhat conflicting account on p. 254). According to Yule (Y¹, II, 180), both Al-Bīrūnī
and Rašīdu-'d-Dīn « distinctly apply the name Mahacin to a city, no doubt Canton ». I do not
think that this information should be traced as far back as to Al-Bīrūnī; it occurs in a chapter
in which Rašīd freely culled from Al-Bīrūnī, but an additional section of which cannot be earlier
than the Mongol period. It is in this latter part that we find the following very interesting
passage (Elliot, History of India, I¹, 45-46; I², 71-72) : « Beyond [Champa; see ' Ciamba '] is
Ḥainam (see ' Cheynam '), subject also to the Qāān. Beyond that is Māhāčīn, then the harbour
of Zaitūn, on the shore of the China Sea . . . ». Instead of « Māhāčīn », an Arabic ms. gives
الصين الاعلى, also meaning « Čīn the Great ». Yule was certainly right when he said that Rašīd's
« Māhāčīn » in this passage was Canton.
Canton is first mentionned in Arabic texts of the 9th cent. as خانفو Ḥānfū, which renders
廣 府 Kuang-fu, a popular short form of Kuang-chou [州]-fu. I stated this in 1904 in BEFEO,
IV, 215. To the examples of « Kuang-fu » I had then adduced, I can now add 粤, III, 93 b,
quoted above; T'ang liu tien, 20, 8 ro; and, at a much later date, Sainson, Hist. particulière du
Nan-Tchao, 45. But the identification was forgotten in the Mongol period, and Canton came to
be known under new names. I concur with Elliot (History of India, I², 71) who identified with
Canton Idrīsī's صينية الصين Šīniyatu-'š-Šīn, « China of China » (Jaubert, I, 194), although Idrīsī
also repeats elsewhere (ibid., I, 84) the old information on Ḥānfū without suspecting that both
names refer to the same place. Al-Baiṭār, speaking of the Persian « *Šīn Māšīn » (properly
« Čīn ū Māčīn ») says that it is somehow equivalent to an Arabic form « Šīn aš-Šīn », « China of
China » (Fe, 269). Although this is not etymologically correct and although Al-Baiṭār wrongly
refers « Čīn and Māčīn » to « Turkestan », his text shows that a correspondence was felt between
the two forms. We must then take into consideration that Māhāčīn (= Mahāčīn, Māčīn) is used
by Rašīd as a name of Canton, and that « Šīniyatu-'š-Šīn » is practically the same form as « Šīn aš-
Šīn ». The identification is already all the more probable when Idrīsī speaks of « Šīniyatu-'š-
Šīn » as being a city of unequalled greatness, which was situated at the extremity of the empire,
and which was visited by a great number of traders from various parts of India.
This is made certain by a passage in which Ibn Baṭṭūṭah, two centuries after Idrīsī, speaks
of « Šīn aš-Šīn » as being the same place as صين كلان Šīn-kālān (Defrémery, IV, 92). Ibn Baṭṭūṭah
18.
1
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
11
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
21
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
31
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
41
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
51
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
61
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
71
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
81
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
91
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
101
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
111
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
121
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
131
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
141
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
151
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
161
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
171
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
181
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
191
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
201
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
211
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
221
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
231
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
241
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
251
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
261
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
271
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
281
.
.
.
.
|
.
.
289
290
291
292
293
.
.
|
.
.
.
.
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.
