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

Kingdom
concha R fuchin LT fugui F, Pˢ, TA¹, V, VB, Z
ffuguy P fugiu F, Fr, t, L, TA³, VL furgu VA
figu, fingni TA³ fugny FAr sugi G
fingny, fuguy FA, FB

This is of course 福 州 Fu-chou; PHILLIPS's objections have already been considered and
rejected by YULE (Y, II, 232-233, 238) and do not now merit a fresh discussion.
Odoric writes « Fuço » (Wy, 461). Three forms of the name occur on the Catalan Map, « Fogo »,
« Fuguj » and « Fugu » (CORDIER, L'Extrême-Orient dans l'Atlas Catalan, 31; HALLBERG, 208-
210). Fra Mauro gives « Fuguy ». ZURLA's « Fuzui », which has puzzled HALLBERG, may perhaps
be read « Suçui » or even « Suçiu », and in any case is not « Fugiu », but Su-chou (see « Sugiu »),
as is clearly shown by the legend devoted to the place. Rašīdu'd-Dīn describes فوجو Fūjū (= Fu-
chou) as he seventh šing (see « Scieng »), more fully hsing-chung-shu-shêng or « moving Grand
Secretariat », practically equivalent to the shêng or « province » of more recent times. In 1575,
the Augustine Martín de Rada went to « Aucheo », where the viceroy of « Ochian » had his residence
(MENDOÇA, ed. Hakluyt Society, II, 34, 78); the names meant are certainly Fu-chou and Fu-chien.
Fu-chou has borne many designations in the past. From c. 585 to 606, and from 623 to
711, it was called Ch'üan-chou; it was only in 711 that the latter name was given to the city which
has borne it ever since (see « Çaiton »). In 711, our Fu-chou became 閩 州 Min-chou, and did
not in fact receive its official name of Fu-chou until 725.
For the vicissitudes of the « moving Grand Secretariat » of Fu-chien, which was transferred
several times from Fu-chou to Ch'üan-chou, and suppressed and re-established more than once,
see « Çaiton », where the main texts are translated.
PHILLIPS maintained that Fu-chou did not have any foreign trade until centuries after the
Mongol period. There is surely some exaggeration in such a statement. Fu-chou must have been
known as a maritime centre of some importance at an early date, since we see that in 744 the Buddhist
priest Chien-chên (Jap. Kanshin) sent emissaries from Yang-chou to buy a boat in Fu-chou in view
of his intended visit to Japan (cf. Fe, 638; BEFEO, XXVIII, 455). On the other hand, less than
half a century after the fall of the Mongol dynasty, Yung-lo's fleets, when ordered to the Indian
Ocean, regularly made fairly long calls at Fu-chou after leaving Nanking and before starting for
good on their great cruises (cf. TP, 1933, 274, 307).
One of the most important additions to our text which we owe to Z is the long paragraph devoted
to the people, of uncertain religion, who lived in Southern China, mainly in the region of Fu-chou,
and who numbered « more than seven hundred thousand families ». On the advice of Maffeo
and Marco Polo, these people sent messengers to Qubilai, who ordered that they should be officially
reckoned as Christians.
As soons as I read this new text, I felt convinced that we had here to do not with real Christians,
but with Manichæans, and I expressed that view in Journal des Savants, 1929, 42. MOULE knew
of my opinion just in time to add an extra sentence to his own note in Mo, 143. RICCI and ROSS
(RR, XIII, 418) and BENEDETTO (B¹, 452) have since agreed with me, and Father BERNARD (La