PREFACE.

The little work here presented was printed in the original Latin at Paris in 1839, under the editorship of M. Coquebert-Montbret, in theRecueil de Voyages et de Mémoires, publié par la Société de Géographie, vol. iv.

I cannot find that it has ever been published or translated in England, or even noticed in any English book, except in theCeylonof Sir James Emerson Tennent, where there is an allusion to it.

The book itself does not add anything to our knowledge; but the observations of a traveller who resided in India so far back as the beginning of the fourteenth century must be very dull indeed if sufficient interest cannot be derived from their date to make them acceptable. Nor do I think our author is dull, whilst I regret that he is so brief, and has omitted so much that he might really have laid up as an addition to our knowledge. The very fact that there were Roman Catholic missionaries and a bishop in India at that period, just between the days of Marco Polo and those of Ibn Batuta, may indeed be excavated from old ecclesiastical chronicles; but it iscertainly unfamiliar to the knowledge of those who do not dig in such mines.

The translation which follows has been made, and the brief particulars which I shall give respecting the author have been derived, from theRecueilabove indicated.[22]

The manuscript from which the French editor transcribed belonged to the Baron Walckenaer. It is on parchment, of the fourteenth century, and contains other matter, the work of Jordanus occupying twenty-nine quarto pages.

The author is termed a native of Séverac. That he was a Frenchman will appear from several passages in his book. But there are at least five places of the name of Séverac in France. Three of these are in the district of Rouergue, in the department of the Aveyron (near the eastern boundary of the old province of Guyenne, and some ninety miles N.E. of Toulouse), and it was probably from one of these that he came. There was a noble family of this province called De Séverac, of which was Amaulry de Séverac, Marshal of France in the time of Charles VII. But, as will afterwards appear, our traveller was calledCatalani.[23]

The dates of his birth, his death, or his first going to the East, are undetermined. But it is ascertained that he was in the East in 1321-1323, that he returned to Europe, and started again for India, in or soon after 1330. There appears to be nothing to determine whether this book ofMirabiliawas written on his first, or on a subsequent, return to Europe.

The authorities for the dates just given are the following:—

Two letters from Jordanus are found in a MS. in the national library at Paris (in 1839,—Bibliothèque du Roi—MS. No. 5,006, p. 182), entitledLiber de ætatibus, etc. The first of these is dated from Caga,[24]12th October, 1321. It is addressed to members of his own order (the Dominican) and of that of St. Francis, residing at Tauris, Tongan, and Marogo,[25]and points out three stations adapted for the establishment of missions, viz., Supera, Paroco, and Columbum. On the receipt of these letters, NicolausRomanus, who was Vice-Custos of the Dominicans in Persia, is stated to have started for India.[26]

In his second letter, dated in January, 1324, Jordanus relates how he had started from Tabriz to go to Cathay, but embarked first for Columbum with four Franciscan missionaries, and how they were driven by a storm to Tana,[27]in India, where they were received by the Nestorians. There he left his companions, and started for Baroch, where he hoped to preach with success, as he was better acquainted with the Persian tongue than the others were. Being detained however at Supera, he there heard that his four brethren at Tana had been arrested, and returned to aid them, but found them already put to death. He was enabled to remove the bodies of these martyrs by the help of a young Genoese whom he found at Tana, and, having transportedthem to Supera, he buried them in a church there as honourably as he could.[28]

The only remaining date in the biography of Jordanus is derived from a bull of Pope John XXII., the date of which is equivalent to 5th April 1330, addressed to the Christians of Columbum, and intended to be delivered to them by Jordanus, who was nominated bishop of that place. The bull commences as follows:—[29]

“Nobili viro domino Nascarinorum et universis sub eo Christianis Nascarinis de Columbo, Venerabilem fratrem nostrum Jordanum Catalani, episcopum Columbensem, Prædicatorum Ordinis professorem, quem nuper ad episcopalis dignitatis apicem auctoritate apostolicâ duximus promovendum⸺” etc.

The Pope goes on to recommend the missionaries to their good-will, and ends by inviting the Nascarini (Nazrání, Christians, in India) to abjure their schism, and enter the unity of the Catholic Church.

The Pope had shortly before nominated John de Core to be Archbishop of Sultania in Persia. This metropolitan had, at least, three bishops under him, viz., of Tabriz, of Semiscat, and of Columbum.[30]The two latter were entrusted by the Pope with thePalliumfor the archbishop. Sultania, between Tabriz and Tehran, was the seat of the Persian kings previous to the Tartar conquest in the thirteenth century, and was still a great centre of commerce between the Indies and Europe. The number of Christians was so great, that they had in this city, it is said, four hundred churches. (?)[31]

We may suppose that Jordanus, after fulfilling his commission at Sultania, proceeded to his see in Malabar by the Persian Gulf, the route which he had followed on his first visit to India; but whether he ever reached it, or ever returned from it, seems to be undetermined.[32]M. Coquebert-Montbret assumes that he did both; but as far as I can gather, this is based on the other assumption, that hisMirabiliawas writtenafterreturning a second time. My impression is that it was writtenbeforehe went out as bishop, for it contains no allusion to his having heldthat dignity. Nor does it appear to be known whether he had any successor in his episcopate.

Another work appears to have been traced with some plausibility to our author. It is a chronicle composed in the fourteenth century, and quoted by Muratori from a MS. which in 1740 existed in the Vatican library, with the No. 1960. It is adorned with fine miniatures, and is entitled

“Satyrica gestarum rerum, regum et regnorum, atque summorum pontificum, historia, à creatione mundi usque ad Henricum VII. Romanum augustum.”

The chronicle ends with the year 1320, and purports to be written by oneJordanus. The passage which is considered to identify him with our author is one relating to the martyrdom of four Minor Friars at Tana, and is so interesting in itself as to be worth quoting at length. It is very perplexing, that though several of the circumstances appear to identify his narrative with that which forms the subject of our author’s letter quoted in a previous page, the dates are irreconcilable. This difficulty the French editor does not notice, nor can I solve it.[33]

“Mdcccxix.Pope John read in the consistory, with great approval, a letter which he had received, to the effect following: To wit, that certain brethren of the orders of Minors and Preachers, who had been sent on a mission to Ormus to preach the faith to the infidels, when they found that they could do no good there, thought it well to go over to Columbum in India. And when they arrived at the island called Dyo,[34]the brethren of the order of Minors separated from the rest of the party, both Preachers and secular Christians, and set out by land to a place called Thana, that they might there take ship for Columbum. Now there was at that place a certain Saracen of Alexandria, Ysufus[35]by name, and he summoned them to the presence of Melich, the governor of the land, to make inquest how and why they were come. Being thus summoned, he demands: what manner of men are ye called? They made answer, that they were Franks, devoted to holy poverty, and anxious to visit St. Thomas. Then, being questioned concerning their faith, they replied that they were true Christians, and uttered many things with holy fervour regarding the faith of Christ. But when Melich let them go, the aforesaid Yusuf a second and a third time persuaded him to arrest and detain them. At length Melich and the Cadi and the people of the place were assembled, Pagans and idolaters as well as Saracens, and questioned the brethren: How can Christ, whom ye call the Virgin’s son, be the son of God, seeing that God hath not a mate? Then set they forth many instances of divine generation, as from the sun’s rays, from trees, from germs in the soil; so that the infidels could not resist the Spirit who spake in them. But theSaracens kindled a great fire, and said: Ye say that your law is better than the law of Mahomet; an it be so, go ye into the fire, and by miracle prove your words. The brethren replied that, for the honour of Christ, that they would freely do; and brother Thomas coming forward would first go in, but the Saracens suffered him not, for that he seemed older than the others; then came forward the youngest of the brethren, James of Padua, a young wrestler for Christ, and incontinently went into the fire, and abode in it until it was well nigh spent, rejoicing and uttering praise, and without any burning of his hair even, or of the cloth of his gown. Now they who stood by shouted with a great cry, Verily these be good and holy men!“But the Cadi, willing to deny so glorious a miracle, said: It is not as ye think, but his raiment came from the land of Aben ...[36]a great friend of God, who when cast into the flames in Chaldea, took no hurt; therefore, hath this man abode scatheless in the fire.“Then stripped they the innocent youth, and all naked as he was born was he cast by four men into the fire. But he bore the flames without hurt, and went forth from the fire unscathed and rejoicing. Then Melich set them free to go whither they would. But the Cadi, and the aforesaid Yusuf, full of malice, knowing that they had been entertained in the house of a certain Christian, said to Melich: What dost thou? why slayest thou not these Christ-worshipers? He replied: That I find no cause of death in them. But they say: If ye let them go, all will believe in Christ, and the law of Mahomet will be utterly destroyed. Melich again says: What will ye that I should do, seeing that I findno cause of death? But they said: His blood be upon us. For it is said that if one cannot go pilgrim to Mecca, let him slay a Christian and he shall obtain a full remission of sins, as if he had visited Mecca. Wherefore, the night following, the three men aforesaid, Melich, the Cadi, and Yusuf, sent officers who despatched the three brethren, Thomas, James, and Demetrius, to the joys of heaven, bearing the palm of martyrdom. And after awhile, having made brother Peter, who was in another place, present himself before them, when he firmly held to the faith of Christ, for two days they vexed him with sore afflictions, and on the third day, cutting off his head, accomplished his martyrdom. But their comrades, the Preachers and the rest, when they heard this, wrote to the West, lamenting wofully that they had been parted from the company of the holy martyrs, and saying that they were devoutly engaged in recovering the relics of the martyrs.”

“But the Cadi, willing to deny so glorious a miracle, said: It is not as ye think, but his raiment came from the land of Aben ...[36]a great friend of God, who when cast into the flames in Chaldea, took no hurt; therefore, hath this man abode scatheless in the fire.

“Then stripped they the innocent youth, and all naked as he was born was he cast by four men into the fire. But he bore the flames without hurt, and went forth from the fire unscathed and rejoicing. Then Melich set them free to go whither they would. But the Cadi, and the aforesaid Yusuf, full of malice, knowing that they had been entertained in the house of a certain Christian, said to Melich: What dost thou? why slayest thou not these Christ-worshipers? He replied: That I find no cause of death in them. But they say: If ye let them go, all will believe in Christ, and the law of Mahomet will be utterly destroyed. Melich again says: What will ye that I should do, seeing that I findno cause of death? But they said: His blood be upon us. For it is said that if one cannot go pilgrim to Mecca, let him slay a Christian and he shall obtain a full remission of sins, as if he had visited Mecca. Wherefore, the night following, the three men aforesaid, Melich, the Cadi, and Yusuf, sent officers who despatched the three brethren, Thomas, James, and Demetrius, to the joys of heaven, bearing the palm of martyrdom. And after awhile, having made brother Peter, who was in another place, present himself before them, when he firmly held to the faith of Christ, for two days they vexed him with sore afflictions, and on the third day, cutting off his head, accomplished his martyrdom. But their comrades, the Preachers and the rest, when they heard this, wrote to the West, lamenting wofully that they had been parted from the company of the holy martyrs, and saying that they were devoutly engaged in recovering the relics of the martyrs.”

I had desired to add to this preface some notices of the Christians of Malabar, embracing the latest information; but my work is cut short by circumstances, and I must content myself with saying something, hurriedly put together, as to the identity ofColumbum, the seat of the bishop’s see.

It is clear that Columbum is not Colombo in Ceylon, though the French editor is wrong in supposing that the latter city did not exist in the time of Jordanus, for it is mentioned by the modern name in Ibn Batuta’s travels, only a few years later. Jordanus evidently does not speak of Ceylon as one who had been there, and whilst treating of greater India, he says distinctly, “In istâ Indiâ, me existente in Columbo, fuerunt inventi,”etc.

The identity of Columbum with Kulam or Quilon, on the coast of Malabar (now in Travancore), might therefore have been assumed, but for the doubts which have been raised by some of the editors of Marco Polo as to the position of theKulamorCoilonof Marco and other medieval travellers.

Mr. Hugh Murray, adopting the view of Count Baldello Boni in his edition of Marco Polo, considers that the place so-called by those travellers was on the east coast of the Peninsula. I have not time to seek for Baldello’s edition, and do not know his arguments; but I conceive that there is enough evidence to show that he is wrong.

The argument on which Murray rests is chiefly the position in which Polo introduces his description of Coilon, after Maabar, and before Comari; Maabar being with him an extensive region of Coromandel, and Comari doubtless the country about Cape Comorin. But, omitting detailed discussion of the value of this argument, which would involve a consideration of all the other difficulties in reducing to geographical order Polo’s notices of the kingdoms on the coast of India, his description of Coilon as a great port for pepper and brazil-wood, is sufficient to identify it as on the coast of Malabar. The existence of places called Coulan on the east coast in the maps of D’Anville, Rennel, and Milburn, is of little moment, for an inspection of the “Atlas of India” will show scores of places so-called on both sides of Cape Comorin, the word signifying, in the Tamul tongue, ‘an irrigation tank, formed by damming up naturalhollows.’ Indeed, though I have found no trace of any well-known port on the east coast so-called, there were at least four ports of the name on the west coast frequented by foreign vessels, viz., Cote Colam, north of Cananore; Colam, called Pandarani, north of Calicut; Cai-Colam, or Kaincolam,[37]between Cochin and the chief place of the name; Coulam, or Quilon, the Columbum of our author.

We know that Kulam, on the coast of Malabar, was founded in the ninth century, and that its foundation formed an era from which dates were reckoned in Malabar.[38]In that same century we find[39]that the sailing directions for ships making the China voyage from the Persian Gulf, were to go straight fromMaskát toKulam Malé, a place evidently, both from name and fact, on the coast of Malabar. Here there was a custom-house, where ships from China paid their dues.

The narrative of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela is very hazy. He callsChulanonly seven days from El-Cathif (which is a port on the west coast of the Persian Gulf), “and on the confines of the country of the Sun-worshippers.” However, his description of the pepper-gardens adjoining the city, the black Jews, etc., identify it with one of the Kulams on the Malabar coast, and doubtless with Quilon, which was the chief of them.

Then comes Polo’s notice of Coilon already alluded to, followed by our author’s mention of it, and residence there.

It is probable that the Polumbrum or Polembum of his contemporaries Odoricus and Mandevill, are corrupt readings of the name of Kulam or Columbum. The former describes this place as at the head of the pepper forest towards the south, and as abounding in all sorts of merchandize; Mandevill adding, “thither go merchants often from Venice to buy pepper and ginger.”

Ibn Batuta, only half a century after Polo, is quite clear in his description ofKaulam, as the seat of an infidel king, the last city on the Malabar coast, and frequented by many Mahomedan merchants. He also says that Kaulam, Calicut, and Hílí were the only ports entered by the ships of China.

So also Conti, early in the fifteenth century, on hisreturn from the Eastern Archipelago, departing from Champa (Cambodia), doubtless in one of those same ships of China, after a month’s voyage arrives atColoen, a noble city, three days from Cochin, and “situated in the province called Melibaria.”

Coming down to later times, Barbosa, in the first years of the sixteenth century, speaks of Coulon still as the great pepper port, the seat of one of the three (chief) kings of Malabar, and where lived many Moors, Gentiles, and Christians, who were great merchants, and had many ships trading to Coromandel, Ceylon, Bengal, Pegu, Malacca, Sumatra, etc.

Here, however, at last, we find something to justify Marco Polo in regard to the position in which he introduces the kingdom of Coilon. For, after speaking of Coulam on the Malabar coast, Barbosa goes forward to Cape Comorin, where he says the country of Malabar indeed terminates, but the “aforesaid kingdom of Coulam” still goes on and comes to an end at the city of Cail, where the King of Coulam made his continual residence. So also the “Summary of kingdoms,” etc., in Ramusio, describes the kingdom of Colam as extending on both sides of Cape Comorin.

It is intelligible, therefore, that Marco, coming upon territory belonging to thekingdomof Coilon, before reaching Cape Comorin, should proceed to speak of the city of that name, though it lay upon the western coast. But there is in this no ground for asserting, as Mr. Murray does, that “theplaceof that name described by Marco and other early Europeanslay to the east of that great promontory.” We have seen that a regular catena of authorities, from the ninth to the sixteenth century, concurs in representing Coulam, Kulam, Coloen, Coilon (Quilon), on the coast of Malabar, as the great entrepôt of trade with east and west, and there can be no reasonable doubt that this is the Columbum which was the seat of our author’s mission.

The occasional quotations given in the notes will indicate the quality of the author’s Latin. The French editor is unwilling to believe that episcopal Latinity could be so bad, and suggests that his vernacular was Latinized by some humbler scribe, and probably extracted from a larger work. In support of this, he adduces the abrupt commencement, and the “but” with which he plunges in—“Inter Siciliamautemet Calabriam.” But he gives a fac-simile of the beginning of the MS., and the words seem to me (all inexpert I confess) almost certainly to be “Inter SiciliamatqueCalabriam,” so that this argument is null.

One must notice the frequent extraordinary coincidences of statement, and almost of expression, between this and other travellers of the same age, especially M. Polo. At first one would think that Jordanus had Polo’s book. But he certainly had not Ibn Batuta’s, and the coincidences with him are sometimes almost as striking. Had those ancient worthies, then, aMurrayfrom whom they pilfered experiences, as modern travellers do? I think they had; buttheirMurray lay in the traditional yarns ofthe Arab sailors with whom they voyaged, some of which seem to have been handed down steadily from the time of Ptolemy—peradventure of Herodotus[40]—almost to our own day.

And so I commend the simple and zealous Jordanus to kindly entertainment.

London, June 27th, 1863.

Nota Bene.The English edition of Marco Polo, so often referred to in my notes, is Mr. Hugh Murray’s fourth edition; Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd, (no date; more shame to Oliver and Boyd).In my absence on the continent my friend Mr. Badger has undertaken the correction of the press. Therevisesheets have been sent to me, but in the absence of my manuscript and references I fear some errors may still inevitably escape correction.The numbers to chapters and paragraphs have been attached by me,H. Y.

Nota Bene.The English edition of Marco Polo, so often referred to in my notes, is Mr. Hugh Murray’s fourth edition; Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd, (no date; more shame to Oliver and Boyd).

In my absence on the continent my friend Mr. Badger has undertaken the correction of the press. Therevisesheets have been sent to me, but in the absence of my manuscript and references I fear some errors may still inevitably escape correction.

The numbers to chapters and paragraphs have been attached by me,

H. Y.

FOOTNOTES[22]I have to regret that unavoidable circumstances have interrupted my pleasant task, and have compelled me to leave this preface, and some part of the commentary, in a cruder state than I should have allowed, had time permitted of the search for further particulars or illustrations of the author’s life, mission, and descriptions.[23]The French editor regards this as his surname. Is it not more probably only the genitive of his father’s name?[24]“Which I suspect to beConengueorKhounouk, a port of Persia, on the Persian Gulf,” (French Editor). Speaking without having seen the letter, I should rather suspect it to be the island and roadstead ofKarrack, called by the ArabsKhârej, but also locally, as appears by the Government charts,Khárg. (My friend Mr. Badger thinks it may beEl-Kât, an ancient port still much frequented, fifty miles south-west of the mouth of the Euphrates.) I find from M. D’Avezac inRec. de Voyages, (iv. 421), that this letter is published inQuétif & Echard, Scriptoris Ordinis Dom., i. p. 549, and that the second letter is given byWadding,Annales Minorum, vi. 359.[25]Tauris, Tabriz;Tongan, which the French editor calls “Djagorgan” (?), is probably Daumghan in Persia, south of Astrabad, mentioned by Marco Polo (ii. 17), with an allusion to the Christians there; andMarogois Maragha in the plain east of Lake Urumia, formerly the capital of the Tartar Hulaku.[26]Which shows that the places indicated by Jordanus were in India. Paroco is of course Baroch, and Columbum, Coulam or Quilon. Respecting the identity of this last we shall, however, have to speak more fully. Supera, the French editor states, after D’Anville, to be “the port now called Sefer, theSefara el Hindof the Arabs.” It is doubtless the Supara of Ptolomy, which he places on the north of the first great river south of the Namadus or Nerbudda. Masudi also says that Sefara was four days’ journey from Cambay. These indications fix Supera on the Tapti, over against Surat, and probably as the ancient representative of that port. (See Reinaud’sMém. sur la Géog. de l’Inde, and Vincent’sPeriplus of the Erythræan Sea, p. 385.)[27]A town on the island of Salsette, about twelve miles from Bombay, and formerly a port of considerable importance.[28]According to the Acta Sanctorum of the Bollandists, this martyrdom took place, 1st April 1322. There is a letter from Francis of Pisa (I presume in the MS. above quoted), a comrade and friend of Jordanus, which gives similar details. They are also found in theBibliotheca Hispanica VetusofNicol. Antonio, p. 268. (French Editor’s Comment.) See also below, pp.ix-xii.[29]Quoted by the French editor fromOdericus Raynaldus,Annal. Eccles., No. 55.[30]The French editor supposesSemiscatto be, perhaps, a misreading for Samirkat =Samarkand. Mr. Badger suggests judiciouslySomeisât, the ancient Samosata. There was another see under Sultania,viz., Verna, supposed by D’Avezac to be Orna or Ornas, which he identifies with Tana, the seat of a Venetian factory at the mouth of the Don, on the site of ancient Tanais. (Rec. de Voy., iv. 510.)[31]The editor does not give his authority for this. Sultania was destroyed by Tamerlane, and never recovered its former importance. It was still a city of some size in the time of Chardin, but is now apparently quite deserted. It is not mentioned by M. Polo.[32]I conclude, from a passage near the end of the work (ch. xiv.), that the actual residence of Jordanus at Columbum, previous to his writing, lasted only a year, or thereabouts.[33]I have now no doubt that the date in the next line is wrong. For, according to M. D’Avezac (in the same volume of theRec. de Voyages, which contains Jordanus, p. 417), the celebrated traveller Odoricus of Friuli, who was at Tana in 1322, sent home a letter describing this martyrdom as having occurred in the preceding year. It is in the Bib. Royale (now Impériale) at Paris. The narrative, in still greater detail than here, is indeed to be found in the Itinerary of Odoricus, as published in Hakluyt, at least in the Latin; the English translation does not give the details. From this error in date, as well as the better style of Latin, I should doubt if this chronicle was written by our Jordanus.[34]Diu, on the coast of Guzerat, where the old Portuguese warriors afterwards made such a gallant defence against the “Moors” in 1547.[35]Yusuf.[36]Sic.I suppose it should be Abraham, according to the well-known Mussulman tradition; perhaps called, as Mr. Badger kindly suggests,Aben(or Ibn)Azer, the son of Azer, the Mussulman name for Terah.[37]In Keith Johnstone’s new and beautiful atlas Quilon is identified with Kayan or Kain-Kulam. This, I have no doubt, is quite a mistake. The places, though near, are quite distinct, and in the beginning of the sixteenth century were under distinct sovereigns. I may here notice what I venture, with respect, to think is an error in Mr. Major’s edition of Conti (India in the Fifteenth Century). Conti, on his first arrival in Malabar, lands at “Pudefitania,” and, after describing his visit to Bengal, and his ascent of the Ganges, returns to Pudefitania. Mr. Major interprets this in the last placeBurdwan. But, apart from other arguments, it is evidently in both passages the same place,i.e.,Pudipatanam, one of the old forgotten ports on the coast of Malabar, but mentioned by Barbosa and the Geographer in Ramusio. Other names mentioned by Conti are in need of examination.Maarazia, the great city on the Ganges which he visits, is certainly notMuttra, as the editor has it, but Benares. The Braminical name,Baranási, is near enough to Conti’s.[38]Wilson’s preface to Mackenzie’s Collections, p. xcviii.[39]See the relations of Mahomedan voyagers published by Renaudot, and again by Reinaud.[40]See end of note to ch. v. para. 16.

[22]I have to regret that unavoidable circumstances have interrupted my pleasant task, and have compelled me to leave this preface, and some part of the commentary, in a cruder state than I should have allowed, had time permitted of the search for further particulars or illustrations of the author’s life, mission, and descriptions.

[23]The French editor regards this as his surname. Is it not more probably only the genitive of his father’s name?

[24]“Which I suspect to beConengueorKhounouk, a port of Persia, on the Persian Gulf,” (French Editor). Speaking without having seen the letter, I should rather suspect it to be the island and roadstead ofKarrack, called by the ArabsKhârej, but also locally, as appears by the Government charts,Khárg. (My friend Mr. Badger thinks it may beEl-Kât, an ancient port still much frequented, fifty miles south-west of the mouth of the Euphrates.) I find from M. D’Avezac inRec. de Voyages, (iv. 421), that this letter is published inQuétif & Echard, Scriptoris Ordinis Dom., i. p. 549, and that the second letter is given byWadding,Annales Minorum, vi. 359.

[25]Tauris, Tabriz;Tongan, which the French editor calls “Djagorgan” (?), is probably Daumghan in Persia, south of Astrabad, mentioned by Marco Polo (ii. 17), with an allusion to the Christians there; andMarogois Maragha in the plain east of Lake Urumia, formerly the capital of the Tartar Hulaku.

[26]Which shows that the places indicated by Jordanus were in India. Paroco is of course Baroch, and Columbum, Coulam or Quilon. Respecting the identity of this last we shall, however, have to speak more fully. Supera, the French editor states, after D’Anville, to be “the port now called Sefer, theSefara el Hindof the Arabs.” It is doubtless the Supara of Ptolomy, which he places on the north of the first great river south of the Namadus or Nerbudda. Masudi also says that Sefara was four days’ journey from Cambay. These indications fix Supera on the Tapti, over against Surat, and probably as the ancient representative of that port. (See Reinaud’sMém. sur la Géog. de l’Inde, and Vincent’sPeriplus of the Erythræan Sea, p. 385.)

[27]A town on the island of Salsette, about twelve miles from Bombay, and formerly a port of considerable importance.

[28]According to the Acta Sanctorum of the Bollandists, this martyrdom took place, 1st April 1322. There is a letter from Francis of Pisa (I presume in the MS. above quoted), a comrade and friend of Jordanus, which gives similar details. They are also found in theBibliotheca Hispanica VetusofNicol. Antonio, p. 268. (French Editor’s Comment.) See also below, pp.ix-xii.

[29]Quoted by the French editor fromOdericus Raynaldus,Annal. Eccles., No. 55.

[30]The French editor supposesSemiscatto be, perhaps, a misreading for Samirkat =Samarkand. Mr. Badger suggests judiciouslySomeisât, the ancient Samosata. There was another see under Sultania,viz., Verna, supposed by D’Avezac to be Orna or Ornas, which he identifies with Tana, the seat of a Venetian factory at the mouth of the Don, on the site of ancient Tanais. (Rec. de Voy., iv. 510.)

[31]The editor does not give his authority for this. Sultania was destroyed by Tamerlane, and never recovered its former importance. It was still a city of some size in the time of Chardin, but is now apparently quite deserted. It is not mentioned by M. Polo.

[32]I conclude, from a passage near the end of the work (ch. xiv.), that the actual residence of Jordanus at Columbum, previous to his writing, lasted only a year, or thereabouts.

[33]I have now no doubt that the date in the next line is wrong. For, according to M. D’Avezac (in the same volume of theRec. de Voyages, which contains Jordanus, p. 417), the celebrated traveller Odoricus of Friuli, who was at Tana in 1322, sent home a letter describing this martyrdom as having occurred in the preceding year. It is in the Bib. Royale (now Impériale) at Paris. The narrative, in still greater detail than here, is indeed to be found in the Itinerary of Odoricus, as published in Hakluyt, at least in the Latin; the English translation does not give the details. From this error in date, as well as the better style of Latin, I should doubt if this chronicle was written by our Jordanus.

[34]Diu, on the coast of Guzerat, where the old Portuguese warriors afterwards made such a gallant defence against the “Moors” in 1547.

[35]Yusuf.

[36]Sic.I suppose it should be Abraham, according to the well-known Mussulman tradition; perhaps called, as Mr. Badger kindly suggests,Aben(or Ibn)Azer, the son of Azer, the Mussulman name for Terah.

[37]In Keith Johnstone’s new and beautiful atlas Quilon is identified with Kayan or Kain-Kulam. This, I have no doubt, is quite a mistake. The places, though near, are quite distinct, and in the beginning of the sixteenth century were under distinct sovereigns. I may here notice what I venture, with respect, to think is an error in Mr. Major’s edition of Conti (India in the Fifteenth Century). Conti, on his first arrival in Malabar, lands at “Pudefitania,” and, after describing his visit to Bengal, and his ascent of the Ganges, returns to Pudefitania. Mr. Major interprets this in the last placeBurdwan. But, apart from other arguments, it is evidently in both passages the same place,i.e.,Pudipatanam, one of the old forgotten ports on the coast of Malabar, but mentioned by Barbosa and the Geographer in Ramusio. Other names mentioned by Conti are in need of examination.Maarazia, the great city on the Ganges which he visits, is certainly notMuttra, as the editor has it, but Benares. The Braminical name,Baranási, is near enough to Conti’s.

[38]Wilson’s preface to Mackenzie’s Collections, p. xcviii.

[39]See the relations of Mahomedan voyagers published by Renaudot, and again by Reinaud.

[40]See end of note to ch. v. para. 16.

Back to Index Next