CHAPTER VI.
OF THE GREAT CITY OF BAUDAS, AND HOW IT WAS TAKEN.
Baudas is a great city, which used to be the seat of the Calif of all
the Saracens in the world, just as Rome is the seat of the Pope of all
the Christians.{1} A very great river flows through the city, and by
this you can descend to the Sea of India. There is a great traffic of
merchants with their goods this way; they descend some eighteen days
from Baudas, and then come to a certain city called KISI, where they
enter the Sea of India.{2} There is also on the river, as you go from
Baudas to Kisi, a great city called BASTRA, surrounded by woods, in
which grow the best dates in the world.{3}
In Baudas they weave many different kinds of silk stuffs and gold
brocades, such as _nasich_, and _nac_, and _cramoisy_, and many another
beautiful tissue richly wrought with figures of beasts and birds. It is
the noblest and greatest city in all those regions.{4}
Now it came to pass on a day in the year of Christ 1255, that the Lord
of the Tartars of the Levant, whose name was Alaü, brother to the Great
Kaan now reigning, gathered a mighty host and came up against Baudas
and took it by storm.{5} It was a great enterprise! for in Baudas
there were more than 100,000 horse, besides foot soldiers. And when
Alaü had taken the place he found therein a tower of the Califs, which
was full of gold and silver and other treasure; in fact the greatest
accumulation of treasure in one spot that ever was known.{6} When he
beheld that great heap of treasure he was astonished, and, summoning
the Calif to his presence, he said to him: “Calif, tell me now why
thou hast gathered such a huge treasure? What didst thou mean to do
therewith? Knewest thou not that I was thine enemy, and that I was
coming against thee with so great an host to cast thee forth of thine
heritage? Wherefore didst thou not take of thy gear and employ it in
paying knights and soldiers to defend thee and thy city?”
The Calif wist not what to answer, and said never a word. So the Prince
continued, “Now then, Calif, since I see what a love thou hast borne
thy treasure, I will e’en give it thee to eat!” So he shut the Calif
up in the Treasure Tower, and bade that neither meat nor drink should
be given him, saying, “Now, Calif, eat of thy treasure as much as thou
wilt, since thou art so fond of it; for never shalt thou have aught
else to eat!”
So the Calif lingered in the tower four days, and then died like a
dog. Truly his treasure would have been of more service to him had
he bestowed it upon men who would have defended his kingdom and his
people, rather than let himself be taken and deposed and put to death
as he was.{7} Howbeit, since that time, there has been never another
Calif, either at Baudas or anywhere else.{8}
Now I will tell you of a great miracle that befell at Baudas, wrought
by God on behalf of the Christians.
NOTE 1.—This form of the Mediæval Frank name of BAGHDAD, _Baudas_
[the Chinese traveller, Ch’ang Te, _Si Shi Ki_, XIII. cent., says,
“the kingdom of _Bao-da_,” H. C.], is curiously like that used by
the Chinese historians, _Paota_ (_Pauthier; Gaubil_), and both
are probably due to the Mongol habit of slurring gutturals. (See
_Prologue_, ch. ii. note 3.) [Baghdad was taken on the 5th of
February, 1258, and the Khalif surrendered to Hulaku on the 10th of
February.—H. C.]
NOTE 2.—Polo is here either speaking without personal knowledge, or
is so brief as to convey an erroneous impression that the Tigris
flows to Kisi, whereas three-fourths of the length of the Persian
Gulf intervene between the river mouth and Kisi. The latter is the
island and city of KISH or KAIS, about 200 miles from the mouth of
the Gulf, and for a long time one of the chief ports of trade with
India and the East. The island, the _Cataea_ of Arrian, now called
Ghes or Kenn, is singular among the islands of the Gulf as being
wooded and well supplied with fresh water. The ruins of a city
[called Harira, according to Lord Curzon,] exist on the north side.
According to Wassáf, the island derived its name from one Kais,
the son of a poor widow of Síráf (then a great port of Indian trade
on the northern shore of the Gulf), who on a voyage to India, about
the 10th century, made a fortune precisely as Dick Whittington did.
The proceeds of the cat were invested in an establishment on this
island. Modern attempts to nationalise Whittington may surely be
given up! It is one of the tales which, like Tell’s shot, the dog
Gellert, and many others, are common to many regions. (_Hammer’s
Ilch._ I. 239; _Ouseley’s Travels_, I. 170; _Notes and Queries_,
2nd s. XI. 372.)
Mr. Badger, in a postscript to his translation of the History of
Omán (_Hak. Soc._ 1871), maintains that Kish or Kais was at this
time a city on the mainland, and identical from Síráf. He refers
to Ibn Batuta (II. 244), who certainly does speak of visiting “the
city of Kais, called also Síráf.” And Polo, neither here nor in Bk.
III. ch. xl., speaks of Kisi as an island. I am inclined, however,
to think that this was from not having visited it. Ibn Batuta says
nothing of Síráf as a seat of trade; but the historian Wassáf,
who had been in the service of Jamáluddín al-Thaibi, the Lord of
Kais, in speaking of the export of horses thence to India, calls
it “the _Island_ of Kais.” (Elliot, III. 34.) Compare allusions to
this horse trade in ch. xv. and in Bk. III. ch. xvii. Wassáf was
precisely a contemporary of Polo.
NOTE 3.—The name is _Bascra_ in the MSS., but this is almost
certainly the common error of _c_ for _t_. BASRA is still noted for
its vast date-groves. “The whole country from the confluence of
the Euphrates and Tigris to the sea, a distance of 30 leagues, is
covered with these trees.” (_Tav._ Bk. II. ch. iii.)
NOTE 4.—From Baudas, or Baldac, _i.e._ Baghdad, certain of these
rich silk and gold brocades were called _Baldachini_, or in English
_Baudekins_. From their use in the state canopies and umbrellas
of Italian dignitaries, the word _Baldacchino_ has come to mean a
canopy, even when architectural. [_Baldekino, baldacchino_, was
at first entirely made of silk, but afterwards silk was mixed
(_sericum mixtum_) with cotton or thread. When Hulaku conquered
Baghdad part of the tribute was to be paid with that kind of stuff.
Later on, says Heyd (II. p. 697), it was also manufactured in the
province of Ahwaz, at Damas and at Cyprus; it was carried as far
as France and England. Among the articles sent from Baghdad to
Okkodai Khan, mentioned in the _Yüan ch’ao pi shi_ (made in the
14th century), quoted by Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ II. p. 124),
we note: _Nakhut_ (a kind of gold brocade), _Nachidut_ (a silk
stuff interwoven with gold), _Dardas_ (a stuff embroidered in
gold). Bretschneider (p. 125) adds: “With respect to _nakhut_ and
_nachidut_, I may observe that these words represent the Mongol
plural form of _nakh_ and _nachetti_.... I may finally mention that
in the _Yüan shi_, ch. lxxviii. (on official dresses), a stuff,
_na-shi-shi_, is repeatedly named, and the term is explained there
by _kin kin_ (gold brocade).”—H. C.] The stuffs called _Nasich_
and _Nac_ are again mentioned by our traveller below (ch. lix.).
We only know that they were of silk and gold, as he implies here,
and as Ibn Batuta tells us, who mentions _Nakh_ several times and
_Nasíj_ once. The latter is also mentioned by Rubruquis (_Nasic_)
as a present made to him at the Kaan’s court. And Pegolotti speaks
of both _nacchi_ and _nacchetti_ of silk and gold, the latter
apparently answering to _Nasich_. _Nac, Nacques, Nachiz, Nacíz,
Nasís_, appear in accounts and inventories of the 14th century,
French and English. (See _Dictionnaire des Tissus_, II. 199, and
_Douet d’Arcq, Comptes de l’Argenterie des Rois de France_, etc.,
334.) We find no mention of _Nakh_ or _Nasíj_ among the stuffs
detailed in the _Aín Akbari_, so they must have been obsolete
in the 16th century. [Cf. Heyd, _Com. du Levant_, II. p. 698;
_Nacco_, nachetto, comes from the Arabic _nakh_ (_nekh_); _nassit_
(_nasith_) from the Arabic _nécidj_.—H. C.] _Quermesis_ or Cramoisy
derived its name from the Kermes insect (Ar. _Kirmiz_) found on
_Quercus coccifera_, now supplanted by cochineal. The stuff so
called is believed to have been originally a crimson velvet, but
apparently, like the mediæval _Purpura_, if not identical with it,
it came to indicate a tissue rather than a colour. Thus Fr.-Michel
quotes velvet of vermeil cramoisy, of violet, and of blue
cramoisy, and _pourpres_ of a variety of colours, though he says
he has never met with _pourpre blanche_. I may, however, point to
Plano Carpini (p. 755), who describes the courtiers at Karakorum as
clad in white _purpura_.
The London prices of _Chermisi_ and _Baldacchini_ in the early part
of the 15th century will be found in Uzzano’s work, but they are
hard to elucidate.
Babylon, of which Baghdad was the representative, was famous
for its variegated textures in very early days. We do not know
the nature of the goodly Babylonish garment which tempted Achan
in Jericho, but Josephus speaks of the affluence of rich stuffs
carried in the triumph of Titus, “gorgeous with life-like designs
from the Babylonian loom,” and he also describes the memorable Veil
of the Temple as a πέπλος Βαβυλώνιος of varied colours marvellously
wrought. Pliny says King Attalus invented the intertexture of cloth
with gold; but the weaving of damasks of a variety of colours was
perfected at Babylon, and thence they were called Babylonian.
The brocades wrought with figures of animals in gold, of which
Marco speaks, are still a _spécialité_ at Benares, where they
are known by the name of _Shikárgáh_ or hunting-grounds, which
is nearly a translation of the name _Thard-wahsh_ “beast-hunts,”
by which they were known to the mediæval Saracens. (See _Q.
Makrizi_, IV. 69–70.) Plautus speaks of such patterns in carpets,
the produce of Alexandria—“_Alexandrina_ belluata _conchyliata
tapetia_.” Athenaeus speaks of Persian carpets of like description
at an extravagant entertainment given by Antiochus Epiphanes; and
the same author cites a banquet given in Persia by Alexander, at
which there figured costly curtains embroidered with animals. In
the 4th century Asterius, Bishop of Amasia in Pontus, rebukes
the Christians who indulge in such attire: “You find upon them
lions, panthers, bears, huntsmen, woods, and rocks; whilst the
more devout display Christ and His disciples, with the stories of
His miracles,” etc. And Sidonius alludes to upholstery of like
character:
“Peregrina det supellex
* * * *
Ubi torvus, et per artem
Resupina flexus ora,
It equo reditque telo
Simulacra bestiarum
Fugiens fugansque Parthus.” (_Epist._ ix. 13.)
A modern Kashmír example of such work is shown under ch. xvii.
(_D’Avezac_, p. 524; _Pegolotti_, in _Cathay_, 295, 306; _I.
B._ II. 309, 388, 422; III. 81; _Della Decima_, IV. 125–126;
_Fr.-Michel, Recherches_, etc., II. 10–16, 204–206; _Joseph. Bell.
Jud._ VII. 5, 5, and V. 5, 4; _Pliny_, VIII. 74 (or 48); _Plautus,
Pseudolus_, I. 2; _Yonge’s Athenaeus_, V. 26 and XII. 54; _Mongez_
in _Mém. Acad._ IV. 275–276.)
NOTE 5.—[Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. p. 114) says: “Hulagu left
Karakorum, the residence of his brother, on the 2nd May, 1253,
and returned to his ordo, in order to organize his army. On the
19th October of the same year, all being ready, he started for
the west.” He arrived at Samarkand in September, 1255. For this
chapter and the following of Polo, see: _Hulagu’s Expedition to
Western Asia, after the Mohammedan Authors_, pp. 112–122, and
the _Translation of the Si Shi Ki_ (Ch’ang Te), pp. 122–156, in
Bretschneider’s _Mediæval Researches_, I.—H. C.]
NOTE 6.—[“Hulagu proceeded to the lake of _Ormia_ (Urmia), when
he ordered a castle to be built on the island of _Tala_, in the
middle of the lake, for the purpose of depositing here the immense
treasures captured at Baghdad. A great part of the booty, however,
had been sent to Mangu Khan.” (_Hulagu’s Exp._, Bretschneider,
_Med. Res._ I. p. 120.) Ch’ang Te says (_Si Shi Ki_, p. 139): “The
palace of the Ha-li-fa was built of fragrant and precious woods.
The walls of it were constructed of black and white jade. It is
impossible to imagine the quantity of gold and precious stones
found there.”—H. C.]
NOTE 7.—
“I said to the Kalif: ‘Thou art old,
Thou hast no need of so much gold.
Thou shouldst not have heaped and hidden it here,
Till the breath of Battle was hot and near,
But have sown through the land these useless hoards
To spring into shining blades of swords,
And keep thine honour sweet and clear.
* * * * *
Then into his dungeon I locked the drone,
And left him to feed there all alone
In the honey-cells of his golden hive:
Never a prayer, nor a cry, nor a groan
Was heard from those massive walls of stone,
Nor again was the Kalif seen alive.’
This is the story, strange and true,
That the great Captain Alaü
Told to his brother, the Tartar Khan,
When he rode that day into Cambalu,
By the road that leadeth to Ispahan.” (_Longfellow_.)[1]
The story of the death of Mosta’sim Billah, the last of the
Abbaside Khalifs, is told in much the same way by Hayton, Ricold,
Pachymeres, and Joinville. The memory of the last glorious old man
must have failed him, when he says the facts were related by some
merchants who came to King Lewis, when before Saiette (or Sidon),
viz. in 1253, for the capture of Baghdad occurred five years
later. Mar. Sanuto says melted gold was poured down the Khalif’s
throat—a transfer, no doubt, from the old story of Crassus and the
Parthians. Contemporary Armenian historians assert that Hulaku slew
him with his own hand.
All that Rashiduddin says is: “The evening of Wednesday, the 14th
of Safar, 656 (20th February, 1258), the Khalif was put to death in
the village of Wakf, with his eldest son and five eunuchs who had
never quitted him.” Later writers say that he was wrapt in a carpet
and trodden to death by horses.
[Cf. _The Story of the Death of the last Abbaside Caliph, from
the Vatican MS. of Ibn-al-Furāt_, by G. le Strange (_Jour. R. As.
Soc._, April, 1900, pp. 293–300). This is the story of the death of
the Khalif told by Ibn-al-Furāt (born in Cairo, 1335 A.D.):
“Then Hūlagū gave command, and the Caliph was left a-hungering,
until his case was that of very great hunger, so that he called
asking that somewhat might be given him to eat. And the accursed
Hūlagū sent for a dish with gold therein, and a dish with silver
therein, and a dish with gems, and ordered these all to be set
before the Caliph al Musta’sim, saying to him, ‘Eat these.’ But
the Caliph made answer, ‘These be not fit for eating.’ Then said
Hūlagū: ‘Since thou didst so well know that these be not fit for
eating, why didst thou make a store thereof? With part thereof
thou mightest have sent gifts to propitiate us, and with part thou
shouldst have raised an army to serve thee and defend thyself
against us! And Hūlagū commanded them to take forth the Caliph and
his son to a place without the camp, and they were here bound and
put into two great sacks, being afterwards trampled under foot till
they both died—the mercy of Allah be upon them.”—H. C.]
The foundation of the story, so widely received among the
Christians, is to be found also in the narrative of Nikbi (and
Mirkhond), which is cited by D’Ohsson. When the Khalif surrendered,
Hulaku put before him a plateful of gold, and told him to eat
it. “But one does not eat gold,” said the prisoner. “Why, then,”
replied the Tartar, “did you hoard it, instead of expending it
in keeping up an army? Why did you not meet me at the Oxus?” The
Khalif could only say, “Such was God’s will!” “And that which has
befallen you was also God’s will,” said Hulaku.
Wassáf’s narrative is interesting:—“Two days after his capture
the Khalif was at his morning prayer, and began with the verse
(_Koran_, III. 25), ‘Say God is the Possessor of Dominion! It
shall be given to whom He will; it shall be taken from whom He
will: whom He will He raiseth to honour; whom He will He casteth
to the ground.’ Having finished the regular office he continued
still in prayer with tears and importunity. Bystanders reported to
the Ilkhan the deep humiliation of the Khalif’s prayers, and the
text which seemed to have so striking an application to those two
princes. Regarding what followed there are different stories. Some
say that the Ilkhan ordered food to be withheld from the Khalif,
and that when he asked for food the former bade a dish of gold be
placed before him, etc. Eventually, after taking counsel with his
chiefs, the Padishah ordered the execution of the Khalif. It was
represented that the blood-drinking sword ought not to be stained
with the gore of Mosta’sim. He was therefore rolled in a carpet,
just as carpets are usually rolled up, insomuch that his limbs were
crushed.”
The avarice of the Khalif was proverbial. When the Mongol army was
investing Miafaraḳain, the chief, Malik Kamál, told his people that
everything he had should be at the service of those in need: “Thank
God, I am not like Mosta’sim, a worshipper of silver and gold!”
(_Hayton_ in _Ram._ ch. xxvi.; _Per. Quat._ 121; _Pachym. Mic.
Palaeol._ II. 24; _Joinville_, p. 182; _Sanuto_, p. 238; _J. As._
sér. V. tom. xi. 490, and xvi. 291; _D’Ohsson_, III. 243; _Hammer’s
Wassáf_, 75–76; _Quat. Rashid._ 305.)
NOTE 8.—Nevertheless Froissart brings the Khalif to life again one
hundred and twenty years later, as “_Le Galifre de Baudas_.” (Bk.
III. ch. xxiv.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Not that Alaü (_pace_ Mr. Longfellow) ever did see Cambalu.