59. The absence of effective publication in the Middle Ages led to a
curious complication of translation and retranslation. Thus the Latin
version published by Grynaeus in the Novus Orbis (Basle, 1532) is
different from Pipino's, and yet clearly traceable to it as a base. In
fact it is a retranslation into Latin from some version (Marsden thinks
the printed Portuguese one) of Pipino. It introduces many minor
modifications, omitting specific statements of numbers and values,
generalizing the names and descriptions of specific animals, exhibiting
frequent sciolism and self-sufficiency in modifying statements which the
Editor disbelieved.[11] It is therefore utterly worthless as a Text, and
it is curious that Andreas Mueller, who in the 17th century devoted himself
to the careful editing of Polo, should have made so unfortunate a choice
as to reproduce this fifth-hand Translation. I may add that the French
editions published in the middle of the 16th century are translations
from Grynaeus. Hence they complete this curious and vicious circle of
translation: French - Italian - Pipino's Latin - Portuguese? - Grynaeus's
Latin - French![12]
[Sidenote: Fourth; Ramusio's Italian.]
60. IV. We now come to a Type of Text which deviates largely from any of
those hitherto spoken of, and the history and true character of which are
involved in a cloud of difficulty. We mean that Italian version prepared
for the press by G. B. Ramusio, with most interesting, though, as we have
seen, not always accurate preliminary dissertations, and published at
Venice two years after his death, in the second volume of the Navigationi
e Viaggi.[13]
The peculiarities of this version are very remarkable. Ramusio seems to
imply that he used as one basis at least the Latin of Pipino; and many
circumstances, such as the division into Books, the absence of the
terminal historical chapters and of those about the Magi, and the form of
many proper names, confirm this. But also many additional circumstances
and anecdotes are introduced, many of the names assume a new shape, and
the whole style is more copious and literary in character than in any
other form of the work.
Whilst some of the changes or interpolations seem to carry us further from
the truth, others contain facts of Asiatic nature or history, as well as
of Polo's own experiences, which it is extremely difficult to ascribe to
any hand but the Traveller's own. This was the view taken by Baldelli,
Klaproth, and Neumann;[14] but Hugh Murray, Lazari, and Bartoli regard the
changes as interpolations by another hand; and Lazari is rash enough to
ascribe the whole to a rifacimento of Ramusio's own age, asserting it to
contain interpolations not merely from Polo's own contemporary Hayton, but
also from travellers of later centuries, such as Conti, Barbosa, and
Pigafetta. The grounds for these last assertions have not been cited, nor
can I trace them. But I admit to a certain extent indications of modern
tampering with the text, especially in cases where proper names seem to
have been identified and more modern forms substituted. In days, however,
where an Editor's duties were ill understood, this was natural.
[Sidenote: Injudicious tamperings in Ramusio.]
61. Thus we find substituted for the Bastra (or Bascra) of the older
texts the more modern and incorrect Balsora, dear to memories of the
Arabian Nights; among the provinces of Persia we have Spaan (Ispahan)
where older texts read Istanit; for Cormos we have Ormus; for
Herminia and Laias, Armenia and Giazza; Coulam for the older
Coilum; Socotera for Scotra. With these changes may be classed the
chapter-headings, which are undisguisedly modern, and probably Ramusio's
own. In some other cases this editorial spirit has been over-meddlesome
and has gone astray. Thus Malabar is substituted wrongly for Maabar in
one place, and by a grosser error for Dalivar in another. The age of
young Marco, at the time of his father's first return to Venice, has been
arbitrarily altered from 15 to 19, in order to correspond with a date
which is itself erroneous. Thus also Polo is made to describe Ormus as on
an Island, contrary to the old texts and to the fact; for the city of
Hormuz was not transferred to the island, afterwards so famous, till some
years after Polo's return from the East. It is probably also the editor
who in the notice of the oil-springs of Caucasus (i. p. 46) has
substituted camel-loads for ship-loads, in ignorance that the site of
those alluded to was probably Baku on the Caspian.
Other erroneous statements, such as the introduction of window-glass as
one of the embellishments of the palace at Cambaluc, are probably due only
to accidental misunderstanding.
[Sidenote: Genuine statements peculiar to Ramusio.]
62. Of circumstances certainly genuine, which are peculiar to this edition
of Polo's work, and which it is difficult to assign to any one but
himself, we may note the specification of the woods east of Yezd as
composed of date trees (vol. i pp. 88-89); the unmistakable allusion to
the subterranean irrigation channels of Persia (p. 123); the accurate
explanation of the term Mulehet applied to the sect of Assassins (pp.
139-142); the mention of the Lake (Sirikul?) on the plateau of Pamer, of
the wolves that prey on the wild sheep, and of the piles of wild rams'
horns used as landmarks in the snow (pp. 171-177). To the description of
the Tibetan Yak, which is in all the texts, Ramusio's version alone adds a
fact probably not recorded again till the present century, viz., that it
is the practice to cross the Yak with the common cow (p. 274). Ramusio
alone notices the prevalence of goitre at Yarkand, confirmed by recent
travellers (i. p. 187); the vermilion seal of the Great Kaan imprinted on
the paper-currency, which may be seen in our plate of a Chinese note (p.
426); the variation in Chinese dialects (ii.
![The Travels Of Marco Polo - Volume 1 Of 2 By Marco Polo And Rustichello Of Pisa
-
Pipino's version appears to have been executed in the later years of
Polo's life.[10] But I can see no - Page 81](../images/travel.jpg)
