ERN INDIA, AND THE COASTS AND
ISLANDS OF THE INDIAN SEA

Nafun--Japanese War--Chamba--Pulo Condore--Locac--Lawaki--Pentam--
Tana-Malayu--Malacca--Sumatra--Ferlec--Sago Tree--Angamanain--
Dog-headed Barbarians--Ceylon--Sagamoni Borcan--Barlaam and Josaphat--
Tanjore--Chinese Pagoda at Negapatam--Suttees in India--Maabar--St.
Thomas--Calamina--Cail--Sappan--Fandaraina--Gozurat--Two Islands
called Male and Female--Scotra--The Rukh--Giraffes--Zanghibar--Aden--
Esher--Dufar--Frankincense.

BOOK IV. WARS AMONG THE TARTAR PRINCES AND SOME ACCOUNT OF THE NORTHERN
COUNTRIES

Russia

APPENDICES

LIST OF MSS. OF MARCO POLO'S BOOK SO FAR AS THEY ARE KNOWN

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF MARCO POLO'S BOOK

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PRINTED EDITIONS

TITLES OF SUNDRY BOOKS AND PAPERS WHICH TREAT OF MARCO POLO AND HIS BOOK

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE

ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS

INDEX

MARCO POLO AND HIS BOOK.

INTRODUCTORY NOTICES.

Introduction, p. 6.

Speaking of Pashai, Sir Aurel Stein (_Geog. Journ._), referring to
the notes and memoranda brought home by the great Venetian traveller, has
the following remarks: "We have seen how accurately it reproduces
information about territories difficult of access at all times, and far
away from his own route. It appears to me quite impossible to believe that
such exact data, learned at the very beginning of the great traveller's
long wanderings, could have been reproduced by him from memory alone close
on thirty years later when dictating his wonderful story to Rusticiano
during his captivity at Genoa. Here, anyhow, we have definite proof of the
use of those 'notes and memoranda which he had brought with him,' and
which, as Ramusio's 'Preface' of 1553 tells us (see Yule, _Marco
Polo_, I., Introduction, p. 6), Messer Marco, while prisoner of war,
was believed to have had sent to him by his father from Venice. How
grateful must geographer and historical student alike feel for these
precious materials having reached the illustrious prisoner safely!"

Introduction, p. 10 n.

KHAKHAN.

"Mr. Rockhill's remarks about the title _Khakhan_ require
supplementing. Of course, the Turks did not use the term before 560 (552
was the exact year), because neither they nor their name 'Turk' had any
self-assertive existence before then, and until that year they were the
'iron-working slaves' of the Jou-jan. The Khakhan of those last-named
Tartars naturally would not allow the petty tribe of Tu