Genoa, in fact, having been followed up by no systematic attack upon
Venetian commerce.[27] Among the terms was the mutual release of prisoners
on a day to be fixed by Visconti after the completion of all formalities.
This day is not recorded, but as the Treaty was ratified by the Doge of
Venice on the 1st July, and the latest extant document connected with the
formalities appears to be dated 18th July, we may believe that before the
end of August Marco Polo was restored to the family mansion in S. Giovanni
Grisostomo.
[Sidenote: Grounds on which the story of Marco Polo's capture at Curzola
rests.]
37. Something further requires to be said before quitting this event in
our Traveller's life. For we confess that a critical reader may have some
justification in asking what evidence there is that Marco Polo ever fought
at Curzola, and ever was carried a prisoner to Genoa from that unfortunate
action?
A learned Frenchman, whom we shall have to quote freely in the immediately
ensuing pages, does not venture to be more precise in reference to the
meeting of Polo and Rusticiano than to say of the latter: "In 1298, being
in durance in the Prison of Genoa, he there became acquainted with Marco
Polo, whom the Genoese had deprived of his liberty from motives equally
unknown."[28]
To those who have no relish for biographies that round the meagre skeleton
of authentic facts with a plump padding of what might have been, this
sentence of Paulin Paris is quite refreshing in its stern limitation to
positive knowledge. And certainly no contemporary authority has yet been
found for the capture of our Traveller at Curzola. Still I think that the
fact is beyond reasonable doubt.
Ramusio's biographical notices certainly contain many errors of detail;
and some, such as the many years' interval which he sets between the
Battle of Curzola and Marco's return, are errors which a very little
trouble would have enabled him to eschew. But still it does seem
reasonable to believe that the main fact of Marco's command of a galley at
Curzola, and capture there, was derived from a genuine tradition, if not
from documents.
Let us then turn to the words which close Rusticiano's preamble (see
post, p. 2): - "Lequel (Messire Marc) puis demorant en le charthre de
Jene, fist retraire toutes cestes chouses a Messire Rustacians de Pise que
en celle meissme charthre estoit, au tens qu'il avoit 1298 anz que Jezu
eut vesqui." These words are at least thoroughly consistent with Marco's
capture at Curzola, as regards both the position in which they present
him, and the year in which he is thus presented.
There is however another piece of evidence, though it is curiously
indirect.
The Dominican Friar Jacopo of Acqui was a contemporary of Polo's, and was
the author of a somewhat obscure Chronicle called Imago Mundi.[29] Now
this Chronicle does contain mention of Marco's capture in action by the
Genoese, but attributes it to a different action from Curzola, and one
fought at a time when Polo could not have been present. The passage runs
as follows in a manuscript of the Ambrosian Library, according to an
extract given by Baldelli Boni: -
"In the year of Christ MCCLXXXXVI, in the time of Pope Boniface VI., of
whom we have spoken above, a battle was fought in Arminia, at the place
called Layaz, between xv. galleys of Genoese merchants and xxv. of
Venetian merchants; and after a great fight the galleys of the Venetians
were beaten, and (the crews) all slain or taken; and among them was
taken Messer Marco the Venetian, who was in company with those
merchants, and who was called Milono, which is as much as to say 'a
thousand thousand pounds,' for so goes the phrase in Venice. So this
Messer Marco Milono the Venetian, with the other Venetian prisoners, is
carried off to the prison of Genoa, and there kept for a long time. This
Messer Marco was a long time with his father and uncle in Tartary, and
he there saw many things, and made much wealth, and also learned many
things, for he was a man of ability. And so, being in prison at Genoa,
he made a Book concerning the great wonders of the World, i.e.,
concerning such of them as he had seen. And what he told in the Book was
not as much as he had really seen, because of the tongues of detractors,
who, being ready to impose their own lies on others, are over hasty to
set down as lies what they in their perversity disbelieve, or do not
understand. And because there are many great and strange things in that
Book, which are reckoned past all credence, he was asked by his friends
on his death-bed to correct the Book by removing everything that went
beyond the facts. To which his reply was that he had not told one-half
of what he had really seen!"[30]
This statement regarding the capture of Marco at the Battle of Ayas is
one which cannot be true, for we know that he did not reach Venice till
1295, travelling from Persia by way of Trebizond and the Bosphorus, whilst
the Battle of Ayas of which we have purposely given some detail, was
fought in May, 1294. The date MCCLXXXXVI assigned to it in the preceding
extract has given rise to some unprofitable discussion. Could that date be
accepted, no doubt it would enable us also to accept this, the sole
statement from the Traveller's own age of the circumstances which brought
him into a Genoese prison; it would enable us to place that imprisonment
within a few months of his return from the East, and to extend its
duration to three years, points which would thus accord better with the
general tenor of Ramusio's tradition than the capture of Curzola.
