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

In the meantime, G. FERRAND had made a scathing criticism of GRANDIDIER's views first in
*Les Musulmans à Madagascar* (Paris, 1893, II, 83-90), and again in *Trois étymologies arabico-
malgaches* (*Mém. Soc. Ling.*, XIII, 413-422); it is still repeated by him in 1928 in *EI* (s. v. Madagascar).
FERRAND concluded that Madagascar must be مدقش بار Madaqaš-bār, « the Land of the Madaqaš
(or Matakasi, Madegase) »; this was more or less accepted by CORDIER in *Y*, II, 414. In *Bull. Acad.
malgache*, 1932, 15-18, and 1933, XXVI, G. MONDAIN, without putting too much confidence in a form
« Madangaskara » found by Govr JULIEN in an «old» Arabico-Malagasy Ms., starts from Polo's «Mada-
gascar» and explains it as Malagasy « *Madagasikari*», «riche en nacre sacrée» or «béni par la pos-
session de la nacre sacrée».

And yet I have no doubt that GRANDIDIER was right, and that, in Marco Polo, neither the des-
cription nor the name applies to Madagascar. The question of distance from Socotra, in spite
of BENEDETTO, has no weight. Polo speaks here by hearsay, narrating what he was told when tra-
velling from India to Ormuz, and his mentions of distances are often fanciful even when he speaks
of places he has travelled to. More important is the fact that he places the would-be Madagascar
between Socotra and Zanzibar, which only fits Mogadišo. It is true that he says the would-be Mada-
gascar is an island, but then he says the same of Zanzibar, and all agree that his text does not apply
to the small island of Zanzibar, but to the mainland, when he gives it a compass of some 2 000 miles;
I side against FERRAND with GRANDIDIER and see here the result of the loose use of *Jazirah* in Arabic,
meaning «island» and «peninsula» (the same ambiguity prevails in Skr. with *dvīpa*, and in Chinese
with *chou*). Moreover Polo does not seem to have had any clear idea about Eastern Africa, and
has probably supposed that the kingdoms of the Eastern African coast were so many islands. Then
there is the fact that Arabic texts know of Madagascar in Polo's time, but give it quite different
names, and that neither «Madaqaš-bār», nor even «Madaqaš», has even been met with in one of
them; Madaqaš-bār is FERRAND's arbitrary creation, on the type of Zanzibar and Malabar. Above
all, there is the fact, acknowledged by all commentators, that Polo's description applies correctly
to Mogadišo, and cannot fit Madagascar. Finally, it is owing to the idea of Polo mentioning Mada-
gascar, coupled with the identification of the *ruh* with the fossil *Æpiornis* (see «*ruc*»), that Mada-
gascar has been given as the equivalent of the K'un-lun-ts'eng-ch'i of Chou Ch'ü-fei (1178) and
of Chao Ju-kua (1225).

But there is something more. Most former commentators have discussed the matter as if we
had two names in Polo's texts, when we have always only one. The text in F has only «Madei-
gascar», the preliminary list of chapters has only «Mogelasio» (for the value of this preliminary list,
see «Sumatra»). Even with this last single mention, FERRAND admitted that «Mogelasio» was
undoubtedly Mogadišo, while keeping «Madeigascar» alongside it as meaning Madagascar. But
the different stages of alteration are shown by «Magastar» of VB and R, «Macdesca star» of K,
«Machdoscastar» of K¹, and now that we have «Mogdaxo» in Z, we can be sure that «Madeigascar»,
a name which never existed, is simply, as GRANDIDIER said, altered from the form which Polo
adopted for Mogadišo.

This last name is spelt مقدشو in Arabic, and this is generally read Maqdāšau, but the Swahili
form is مقدش or مقدش Mogadišo (FERRAND, *Trois étymologies*, 414), and FERRAND himself has
said that the traditional vocalization of the Arabic form is wrong for Mogadišo (cf. *Fe*, 321; also, for