Notes upon Russia/Volume 1/Introduction
INTRODUCTION.
When the following “Notes upon Russia” are presented to the reader as the earliest description of that country, the statement, though substantially and for all essential purposes correct, must not be allowed to pass without a word of modification. As we shall presently take occasion to show, the Baron Sigismund von Herberstein was preceded by numerous travellers to Russia, the record of whose peregrinations could scarcely have been handed down to us without some slight allusion to the character of the country they visited; yet from none of them have we received anything that could with reason be referred to as an authentic description of the country and its people, derived, as all such descriptions should be, from lengthened personal observation and industrious inquiry. The present work, however, which embodies the experience and observations of a sagacious and pains-taking man, during two periods of residence, in all about sixteen months, in Moscow, as ambassador from the Emperor of Germany to the Tzar, has won for its author so high a reputation for correctness and minuteness of detail, that he has been thought by many (and one of the number is the learned historian, August Ludwig Schlözer himself) worthy of the designation of the “Discoverer of Russia”. The “Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii” has been a standing book of reference for all subsequent historians of the great empire of the north; and it is not without good reason that the distinguished biographer of Herberstein, Friedrich Adelung (to whose works, as quoted below,[1] the editor is mainly indebted for the materials of this introduction) expresses his surprise that a work of such importance should so long have remained untranslated, either into the Polish, the French, the Dutch, or the English languages. Especially is this expression of astonishment applicable, as he justly observes, to England and Holland,—countries which have for nearly three centuries maintained commercial relations with the Russian empire. The scope of the work comprises brief but interesting, and in many cases highly amusing, sketches of the history, antiquities, geography, and productions of the country, with the religion, form of government, peculiarities in matters of warfare, trade, domestic habits, and amusements of the people.
The advantages possessed by Herberstein for collecting all the materials requisite for the supply of this extensive range of information, were various and important. In the first place, may be mentioned the clear-sightedness and experience which his residence in foreign courts had superadded to his own naturally keen understanding; add to this, the intercourse which his position as ambassador at Moscow enabled him to cultivate with the best informed and most intelligent people of the metropolis. Independent of these advantages, which enabled him to sift and scrutinize the accounts which might be supplied to him from the descriptions of others, he possessed a fund of information in the men who were assigned to him as interpreters. These persons, named Gregor Istoma, Vlas, and Dmitrii, had themselves made considerable journeys in their native country, and the results of their several observations in these journeys were communicated to Herberstein by the first-mentioned of the three in writing. Our author likewise had the benefit of being acquainted with several foreigners who had long resided in Russia, among whom should especially be mentioned the minister and confidant of the Grand Duke, often spoken of in his work under the name of George the Little. Another source of information may also be mentioned as proving serviceable to Herberstein in the composition of a work which has conferred immortality upon his name; namely, a considerable number of manuscript annals, to which he makes especial reference, under the title of “Literæ cujusdam Warlami Prioris Huttiniensis Monasterii”, anno 7034 [A.D. 1525].
Before we proceed to give an account of the bibliography of the work before us, it may be desirable to vindicate its value by laying before the reader a list of the various travellers to Russia who preceded Herberstein, and more especially of those authors, whether travellers or otherwise, who anticipated him, in making allusion, however slightly, to the history, geography, natural history, or customs of the country.
Although a bibliographical account of the narratives of these early travellers will occupy a considerable space in this introduction, and though in some cases their travels only partially refer to Russia, it is hoped that the details we are about to give will not be considered inappropriate, and that by members of the Hakluyt Society at least they will be regarded as both interesting and important.
They are principally derived from the researches of Adelung, as given in his “Kritisch Literärische Uebersicht der Reisenden in Russland bis 1700” (St. Petersburg, 1846, 4to.), but have received considerable additions and alterations from the editor of the present volume. The first traveller in the list is—
(1.)
Ohthere. 890.
Ohthere, a northman, of whom we know little more than that he was born in Helgoland, was a man of substance, and undertook several voyages, one of which was from Norway towards the extreme northern coasts, in the course of which he became acquainted with the Finns and Bjarmier, or Permians, in the north-east of European Russia. In one of these voyages he must have reached the shores of England, which was at that time governed by Alfred the Great. This famous prince collected[2] all the attainable geographical accounts of the then known world, which, together with the narration of Ohthere’s voyages and that of Wulfstan (who, it is possible, became acquainted with Ohthere in the course of his voyages, or resided with him in England), he included in his valuable Anglo-Saxon translation of the Hormista of Paulus Orosius. The beautifully written and well-preserved original of this work is to be found in the Cottonian collection of manuscripts in the British Museum. It was published under the title—
The Anglo-Saxon version from the historian Orosius, by Alfred the Great. Together with an English translation from the Anglo-Saxon. By Daines Barrington; London, 1773; 8vo.
Dr. Joh. Reinh. Forster, who gave a German translation of the narratives of Ohthere and Wulfstan, in his Geschichte der Entdeckungen, under the title, Erdbeschreibung vom nördlichen Europa nach König Alfred, etc., with many valuable comments and explanations,[3] says that Alfred’s account of the two voyages of Ohthere and of that of Wulfstan, which is both exact and authentic, is exceedingly valuable, as it contains the best information in regard to the geography of the northern regions of the ninth century.
Ohthere’s voyages have also been printed in the following works.
In the first volume of Hakluyt’s Principal Navigations, etc., of the English nation, 1599-60, there is a translation from the Anglo-Saxon of the “Voyages of Octher, made to the east parts beyond Norway, reported by himself unto Alfred the famous king of England, about the year 890.” Following this is “The voyage of Octher out of his countrey of Halgoland into the Sound of Denmarke, unto a part called Hetha, which seemeth to be Wismar or Rostoke”; and in the page following we have an account of “Wolstan’s navigation within the East sea (within the Sounde of Denmarke), from Hetha to Trussa, which is about Dantzic.” This English translation is said to have been made for the work by Dr. Caius; but it has never been highly estimated as an accurate translation, and is now considered valueless.[4]
Aelfredi magni Anglorum Regis vita tribus libris comprehensa a Jo. Spelman anglice conscripta, dein Latine reddita et annotationibus illustrata ab Aelfredi in collegio magnæ aulæ universitatis Oxoniensis alumnis. Oxonii, 1673, fol., p. 205, et seq.
Scriptores rerum Danicarum. Ed. Langebek, Hafniæ, 1773, fol., vol. ii, p. 106, et sec.}} In the original Anglo-Saxon, with a Latin translation, and an excellent commentary.
The best edition, however, that has yet appeared, is that published by the celebrated Anglo-Saxon scholar Rasmus Rask, accompanied by a Danish translation and critical remarks.—See “Samlede tildels forhen utrykte Afhandlinger af R. K. Rask”. Del. 1. Köbenhavn. 1834; 8vo.
(2.)
Ibn-Fodhlan. 921.
Ibn-Fodhlan, or to give him his name fully and correctly, Ahmad Ben-Fodhlan Ibn al Abbas Ben-Assam Ben-Hamad, was, in the year 921 of our era, sent by the Abasside khaliph Almuktsadir Billah as companion to an ambassador to the king of Wolga-Bulgharia, or according to Yakut,[5] to the Sclaves. In this journey he met with the Wolga Russians, who had come hither in ships to trade; and his narrative contains a remarkable and circumstantial representation of the manners and customs of these Russians.
Ibn-Fodhlan’s account indeed, as could not fail to be the case, was known to other ancient Arabian authors; and, as we now discover on nearer comparison, was used by them, but is only completely preserved in Yakut, through whose medium he was first made known to Europeans in the following publications—
Die ältesten arabischen Nachrichten über die Wolga-Bulgharen aus Ibn-Foszlan’s Reise-Berichte. In the Mémoires de l’Acad. Imp. des Sciences de St. Pét. VI. ser. t. i. St. Petersb. 1832, p. 527, etc.
Ibn-Foszlan’s und andere Araber Berichte über die Russen älterer Zeit. Text und Uebersetzung mit kritisch-philologischen Anmerkungen; nebst drei Beilagen über sogenannte Russen-Stämme und Kiew, die Warenger und das Warenger-Meer, und das Land Wisu, ebenfalls nach Arabischen Schriftstellern, von C. M. Frähn, etc., Herausgegeben von der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. St. Petersburg, 1823, 4to.
(3.)
Benjamin of Tudela. 1160.
Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela (a town in Navarre) made himself famous by visiting all the synagogues of his religion in the east, in order to become acquainted with the customs, ceremonies, and rabbis of each. He set out from Spain in 1160, and travelling by land to Constantinople, proceeded through the countries to the north of the Euxine and Caspian Seas, as far as Chinese Tartary. Thence he turned southwards, crossed several provinces of the further India, and embarking on the Indian Ocean, visited several of its islands. After an absence of thirteen years, he returned by way of Egypt to Europe, bringing with him much information concerning a vast tract of the globe, then almost entirely unknown to the people of the west. He left a curious narrative of his travels, the authority of which, however, has been questioned, though many of its errors are attributed to the incorrect versions that have been given of it. Be this as it may, we accept with confidence the statement made by one of such extensive learning in philology and bibliography as Mr. A. Asher, the eminent bookseller of Berlin, who has edited the latest and infinitely the best edition of this traveller’s Itinerary (vide infra), “that it was in order to remedy a defect of which he complains, namely, an almost total want of research upon the geography of the middle ages, and to furnish materials for such a study, that he selected the Itinerary of the Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela, not only,” he says in his preface, “because it contains more facts and fewer fables than any other cotemporary publication which has come down to us, but also because it describes a very large portion of the earth known in the twelfth century.”
In the bibliography of the work given in the first volume of Mr. Asher’s edition, and which we here transcribe, is an explanation of the origin of many of the corruptions which have tended to detract in some measure from the reputation of this most interesting narrative.
1. The first edition was printed at Constantinople, Soncini, 1543, 8vo.; sixty-four pages, in the Rabbinic character.
This edition is so extremely rare, that notwithstanding the most diligent search, Mr. Asher has not been able to meet with any complete copy. It has been in the Bibliothèque Royal, at Paris, but upon the closest inquiry could nowhere be found. The Oppenheim division of the Bodleian library contains an incomplete copy of this rare book, being deficient of the first fourteen pages, or one quarter of the whole work. Like most other Hebrew books which issued from the early Constantinople presses, this is but a very poor specimen of correctness and typography. All mistakes of this “princeps” have unfortunately crept into the editions noticed below, Nos. 3, 4, and 10, and have led the translators into error. The rarity constitutes its only value.
2. Hebrew. Travels of R. Benjamin of blessed memory; printed at Ferrara in the house of Abraham Ben Usque, in the year 316 [1556]; small 8vo.; sixty-four pages, in the Rabbinic character.
This second edition is perhaps rarer still than the first, and having evidently been printed from another manuscript, is indispensably necessary for a critique of the work. The text is much purer than that of the former, and in many instances its readings give a sense, where the former is too corrupt to be understood.
Unfortunately, this edition was unknown to the early translators, B. Arias Montanus and l’Empereur, who would have made fewer mistakes and formed a more correct judgment of our author, had they been able to compare it with that of Constantinople. It forms the groundwork of Mr. Asher’s edition and translation. No public library in France or Germany,—most of which that gentleman personally visited or inquired at by correspondence,—possesses a copy; and the only one now known to exist is in the Oppenheim division of the Bodleian library at Oxford.
3. Hebrew. Travels, etc.; printed in the country of Brisgau, in the year 343 [1583], by the Siphroni; small 8vo., thirty-two pages, in the square character.
This is a reprint of the first (Constantinople) edition; it repeats faithfully all the mistakes of that edition. This is one of the rarest of the rare books printed in Brisgau.
4. Hebrew. Itinerarium D. Benjaminis F. M. Lugduni Batavorum apud Elzivirios, 1635; 24mo., 203 pages, square character.
This edition was probably reprinted from that printed in Brisgau, and formed (as well as that quoted below, No. 13) part of the “Respublicæ Elzevirianæ”, a collection well known to the amateurs of those bijoux of the celebrated Dutch printers. Constantin l’Empereur, the learned editor, changed but very few words in the text, and reserved his emendations for the notes, with which the edition quoted under No. 10 is enriched.
5. Hebrew. The Travels of Rabbi Benjamin the Physician, of blessed memory, who travelled in three parts of the world—in Europe, in Asia, and in Africa. Printed at Amsterdam in the year 458 [1698], in the house of Caspar Sten; 24mo., 65 pages.
There are some pretended ameliorations in this edition, but they are founded upon mere suggestion, and at best upon the translations of Arias Montanus and l’Empereur.
6. Hebrew. Travels, etc.; s. 1. 1734.
This edition, which Mr. Asher had not seen, is quoted by Dr. Zunz, in “Zeitschrift für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums.” Berlin, 1823, p. 130.
7. Hebrew. Travels of R. Benjamin. Printed under the direction of John Andrew Michael Nagel, for the use of his scholars at this celebrated university. Altdorf, 1762, printed by John Adam Tessel; small 8vo., 56 pages, square character.
A correct reprint of No. 4 of this list, containing every mistake of its original. This edition is so rare, that Meusel doubted its existence.—See his “Lexicon deutscher Schriftsteller”; vol. x, 1810.
8. Hebrew. Travels, etc.; printed at Salzbach, 542 [1782]; small 8vo., 82 pages, square character.
A very poor reprint of l’Empereur’s edition, upon wretched German blotting-paper, full of mistakes, and without the least literary value.
9. Hebrew. Travels of R. Benjamin; printed at Zolkiew, in Austrian Gallicia.
An edition quoted by the celebrated scholar, the Rev. Rabbi Salomon L. Rapoport, in his geographical preface to Shalom Cohen’s “Kore Haddoroth”. Warsaw, 1838.
10. Hebrew and Latin. Itinerarium D. Benjamin, cum versione et notis Constantini l’Empereur ab Oppyck S. T. D. et S. L. P. in acad. Lugd. Batav. Lugd. Batavorum. Ex officiua Elzeviriana, 1633; small 8vo., of 34 (unnumbered) and 234 (numbered) pages.
This edition, as far as the text and translation are concerned, is composed of Nos. 4 and 12 of this list; the dissertation and the notes contain a vast deal of antiquated learning.
11. Latin. Itinerarium Benjamini Tudelensis: in quo Res Memorabiles, quas ante quadringentos annos totum fere terrarum orbem notatis itineribus dimensus vel ipse vidit vel a fide dignis suæ ætatis hominibus accepit, breviter atque dilucidè describuntur; ex Hebraica Latinum factum Bened. Aria Montano Interprete. Antwerpiæ, ex officina Chr. Plantini, Architypographi regii, MDLXXV, 8vo.
The celebrated Arias Montanus was the first to introduce this work to the learned Christians, who, although they might understand the Scripture Hebrew, were strangers to the Rabbinic style, in which these travels were written. In many instances, he has rather guessed at, than faithfully translated, the text; but notwithstanding this, his labours deserve respect, and his suggestions in many instances are nearer the truth than those of later translators.
12. Latin. Itinerarium Benjaminis. Lat. redditum: Lugd. Batav., 1633; 24mo.
This neat little volume, which forms part of the “Respublicæ”, is one of, if not the rarest of that series. The text is that of No. 10 of this list.
13. Latin. Itinerarium Benjaminis Tudelensis ex Versione Benedicti Ariæ Montani. Helmstadi in typographeo Calixtino, excudit Henningus Mullerus, MDCXXXVI; sm. 8vo.
14. Latin. Benjaminis Tudelensis Itinerarium ex Versione Benedicti Ariæ Montani. Lipsiæ apud Joann. Michael. Ludov. Teubner. MDCCLXIV; 8vo.
This is a corrected reprint of all the contents of the volume just noticed under No. 13.
15. English. The Peregrinations of Benjamin, the sonne of Jonas a Jew; written in Hebrew; translated into Latin by B. Arias Montanus. Discouering both the state of the Jews and of the world, about foure hundred and sixtie yeeres since.
For this first English translation, see Purchas’s “Pilgrimes”. London, 1625; fol., vol. ii, liv. 9, chap. 5, p. 1437; it is divided into five paragraphs.
16. English. The Travels of R. Benjamin, the son of Jonas of Tudela, through Europe, Asia, and Africa, from Spain to China, from 1160 to 1173. From the Latin versions of B. A. Montanus and Constantine l’Empereur, compared with other translations into different languages.
This extract of the “Itinerary” will be found in Harris’s “Collection of Voyages and Travels”. London, 1744; fol., vol. i, p. 546 to 555; and the introduction, which is prefixed, as well as the notes, are not devoid of interest.
17. English. Travels of Rabbi Benjamin, son of Jonah of Tudela, through Europe, Asia, and Africa, from the ancient kingdom of Navarre, to the frontiers of China. Faithfully translated from the original Hebrew, and enriched with a Dissertation and Notes, Critical, Historical, and Geographical. In which the true character of the author and intention of the work are impartially (!) considered.
By the Rev. R. Gerrans, lecturer of Saint Catherine Coleman, and second master of Queen Elizabeth’s Free Grammar School, Saint Olave, Southwark. This author, says the editor, Mr. Gerrans, flourished about the year 1160 of the Christian era, is highly prized by the Jews and other admirers of Rabbinical learning, and has frequently been quoted by the greatest orientalists that this or any other nation ever produced; but was never before (to the editor’s knowledge) wholly translated into English, either by Jew or Gentile. London, MDCCLXXXIV, 8vo.
The absurdities of this editor have been ludicrously exposed by Mr. Asher, in his edition of 1840.
18. English. The Travels of R. Benjamin of Tudela, from the Latin of B. Arias Montanus and Constantine l’Empereur, compared with other translations into different languages.
This abridgment will be found in Pinkerton’s “General Collection of the best and most interesting Voyages and Travels of the world.” London, 1808-14; 4to., vol. vii.
19. French. Voyage du célèbre Benjamin, autour du Monde, commencé l’an 1173 (sic) contenant une exacte et succincte description de ce qu’il a vû de plus remarquable dans presque toutes les parties de la Terre; aussi bien que de ce qu’il en a appris de plusieurs de ses Contemporains dignes de foi. Avec un détail, jusques ici inconnu, de la conduite, des Sinagogues, de la Demeure et du nombre des Juifs et de leurs Rabins, dans tous les endroits où il a été, etc., dont on aprend en même tems l’état où se trouvaient alors diférentes Nations avant l’agrandissement des Turcs. Ecrit premièrement en Hebreu par l’auteur de ce Voyage, traduit ensuite en Latin par Benoit Arian Montan; et nouvellement du Latin en François. Le tout enrichi de Notes, pour l’explication de plusieurs passages.—In Bergeron’s “Collection de Voyages, faits principalement en Asie, dans le 12, 13, 14, et 15 siécles, à la Haye,” 1735; 2 vols., 4to.
Neither the notes nor the map which accompanies this poor piece of work, are of any value.
20. Voyages de Rabbi Benjamin, fils de Jona de Tudele, en Europe, en Asie, et en Africa, depuis l’Espagne jusqu’à la Chine. Traduits de l’Hebreu et enrichis de notes et de Dissertations Historiques et Critiques sur ces Voyages. Par J. P. Barratier, Etudiant en Théologie. A Amsterdam, aux dépens de la Compagnie, 1734; 2 vols., small 8vo.
21. Voyages de Benjamin de Tudelle autour du monde, commencé l’an 1173. De Jean du Plan-Carpin en Tartarie, du Frère Ascelin et de ses compagnons vers la Tartarie. Du Guillaume de Rubruques en Tartarie et en Chine en 1253, suivi des Additions de Vincent de Beauvais et de l’Histoire de Guillaume de Naugès, pour l’Eclaircissement des précédentes Voyages. Paris, imprimé aux Frais du Gouvernement pour procurer du Travail aux ouvriers Typographes. Août, 1830, in 8vo.
A reprint of No. 18, and (as Mr. Asher says) curious only on account of the occasion, which procured Master Benjamin the honour of being called forth again from oblivion.
22. Dutch. De Reysen van R. Benjamin Jonas Tudelens. In de drie Deelen der Werelt. Tut Nederdyts overgeschrieben door Jan Bara. Amsterdam, Jonas Rex, 1666; 24mo., 117 pp.
This translation having been made from l’Empereur’s Latin version, offers nothing new or valuable to the critical reader.
23. Jewish-German. These are the voyages of R. Benjamin Tudeleus, the Physician (!), which he has travelled through three corners of the world. Amsterdam, 451 [1691]; 8vo.
This translation by Chaim Ben Jacob, was made from l’Empereur’s text; and although the editor was a Jew, he was too illiterate to correct any of the errors of l’Empereur.
24. Jewish-German. These are the voyages, etc. Francfort on the Mayne, 471 [1711]; 8vo.
A mere reprint of the former edition, and consequently as worthless in a critical point of view.
Adelung quotes another edition, with the following title—
Les voyages de Benjamin de Tudèle, traduits en Français accompagnés du texte, corrigé et complèté d’après un manuscrit du XIVe siècle, et suivis de notes historiques, géographiques, et littéraires, par E. Carmoly. Paris, 1839; 8vo.
But the editor has been informed that Mr. Asher, who had also met with the title, but not with the work, doubted its existence, and wrote to M. Carmoly requesting information respecting it. His application received no answer, and it may therefore be fairly supposed that such an edition never had existence.
We have finally to mention the completest edition of all, entitled—
The Itinerary of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela, translated and edited by A. Asher. London and Berlin, 1841; 8vo. Hebrew and English.
(4.)
Anonymous Englishman. 1243.
We have an account of the travels in Tartary, of an English traveller, whose name is unknown, which will be found printed in the following collections.
In the first book of Hakluyt’s collection, under the title—
The Voyage of a certain Englishman into Tartary, and from thence into Poland and Hungary, anno 1243.
And from thence transferred into the—
Collection of Voyages by Robert Kerr: Travels of an Englishman into Tartary, and thence into Poland, Hungary, and Germany, in 1245.—See tom. i, p. 114.
(5.)
Joannes de Plano Carpini. 1245.
Joannes de Plano Carpini, an Italian minorite, together with five other brothers of the order, the minorite Benedict of Poland, and the friars-preachers Ascelin, Simon de St. Quentin, Alexander, and Albert, were chosen to undertake a journey into the country of the Mongolians. As the devastations committed by these conquerors of Europe became more and more alarming, Pope Innocent IV, at the council of Lyons, in 1245, resolved to send the above-named monks as ambassadors to these formidable enemies of Christianity, in order to pacify them, or, if possible, to divert them from Europe, and to instigate them rather to a war against the Turks and Saracens. At the same time they were to endeavour to persuade the Mongolians to embrace the Christian faith, and in any case to gather every possible information respecting a people so little known.
Plano Carpini, together with Benedict, travelled through Bohemia and Poland to Kiev, and thence by the mouth of the Dnieper to the camp of Korrensa, a general of the Mongolians, whence crossing the Don and Wolga, they came to the encampment of Batu Khan, who sent them to Kajuk Khan, called also Cuyne, the emperor of the Mongolians.
Carpini was absent sixteen months, and after having done his best to carry out the instructions he had received, he returned to Europe.
“He had the merit of being the first to publish in Europe a rational description of the Mongol nation; though ignorant, bigoted, and credulous, he was not altogether destitute of talent and observation; and his prudent deportment procured him opportunities which the monastic austerity of Ascelin and his companions could never have expected.”[6]
Of this journey we have a detailed and also an abbreviated account, both in Latin, and of these there are several, in part contemporaneous, copies. The Imperial Library of Vienna possesses of the larger narrative three copies, two of which are on parchment, of the thirteenth century. The one in quarto, and marked, Hist. prof., No. DCLI, bears the title—
Relacio fratris Joannis de Plano Carpini, ordinis fratrum minorum, de Tartaris; and begins with the words: Anno Domini Mo.CCo. XL. Vo. Frater Johannes de ordine minorum fratrum dictus de Plano Carpini a domino papa missus ad Tartaros cum alio fratre ejusdem ordinis.
The folio MS. is marked Hist. prof., No. XCIV, and has the title—
Carpini Plano libellus de moribus bellicis Tartarorum, 1245. It commences with the prologue: Omnibus Xpi fidelibus frater Johannes de Plano Carpini, etc.
The third Vienna copy is in folio, and on paper, marked No. 651, and bears the title—
Carpini Plano legatio in Tartariam.
Another copy is to be found in the Vatican library, with the title—
Libellus historicus Joannis de Plano Carpini, qui missus est legatus ad Tartaros anno Domini 1246 ab Innocentio IV Pontifice Maximo.
The following copies are farther known. In Cambridge two, one in the University library, No. 61, 3; the other, in that of Corpus Christi College, No. 181.
In Tournai, in the library of St. Martin.
In Leyden, in the University library. This MS. belonged formerly to the celebrated Paul Petau.
In the British Museum is a copy which formerly belonged to Lord Lumley, and which was used by Hakluyt for his “Principal Navigations”.
In the Bibliothèque Royale, Paris, No. 686, in the collection presented by Jacques Dupuy, and another MS., No. 2477, written on parchment in the fourteenth century, which formerly belonged to the minister Colbert.
The work is divided into two distinct parts, of which the first contains the narrative of the journey itself, the rest treating of the manners, customs, etc., of the Tartars.
The printed travels may be found in the following works:—
Italian. Vincent de Beauvais has inserted an ample abridgment, which occupies thirty-one chapters of his “Speculum Historiale”; first printed, Nuremberg, 1473; a French translation of which was published 1495. The same abridgement of the voyages of Brother John and Brother Simon had been translated into Italian, and published separately at Venice, 1537, 8vo., under the title—
Opera dilettevole da intendere, nel qual si contienne doi itinerarij in Tartaria, per alcuni frati del ordine minore, e di S. Domenico (cioe frate Giovanni e frate Simone) mandati da Papa Innocentio IIII nella detta Provincia de Scithia per Ambasciatori, non piu vulgarizata.—Stampata in Vinegia, per G.—Aut. de Nicolini da Sabio, M.D.XXXVII, small 8vo.
This was reprinted in Ramusio’s “Collection of Navigationi et Viaggi,” 1574; vol. ii.
English. Hakluyt gave a fraction of the original narrative after a MS. of Lord Lumley; republished likewise the abrégé of Vincent de Beauvais, and added an English translation.
French. A translation from Hakluyt, with additions, was given in Bergeron’s “Voyages en Tartarie”, 16mo., under the title “Relation des Voyages en Tartarie de Fre Guillaume de Rubruquis, Fr. Jean du Plan Carpin”; and in a subsequent edition of Bergeron by Vander Aa (Leyden, 1729; 4to., vol. i), under the following title—
Voyages très-curieux faits et écrits par les R.R. P.P. Jean du Plan Carpin, Cordelier, et N. Ascelin, Jacobin: Envoyez en qualité de légats apostoliques et d’ambassadeurs de la part du Pape Innocent IV vers les Tartares et autres peuples orientaux: avec ordre exprès de décrire de bonne foi ce qui regarde les Tartares, comme la situation tant de leur pays que de leurs affaires; leur vêtement, boire et manger, leur gouvernement politique et civil, culte de religion, discipline militaire, enterremens, et autres points les plus remarquables; dont l’observation était le sujet de leur ambassade. Le tout raporté fidèlement par ces religieux. Avec des notes, tables, observations, une carte très-exacte de ces voyages et de très-belles figures pour l’explication des choses.
In 1725, this narrative was published by Bernard, at Amsterdam, in vol. vii of “Recueil des Voyages au Nord.”
Relation du voyage de Jean du Plan Carpin en Tartarie. In the Recueil des Voyages au Nord, t. vii. Printed in the Voyages de Benjamin de Tudéle. Paris, 1830, 4to.
Finally, a critical and most elaborate edition appeared under the title—
Relation des Mongols ou Tartares, par le Frère Jean du Plan de Carpin, de l’ordre des Frères Mineurs, legat du Saint Siége Apostolique, Nonce en Tartarie pendant les années 1245, 1246, 1247, et Archévêque d’Antivari. Première édition complète, publiée d’après les manuscrits de Leyde, de Paris, et de Londres, et précédée d’une notice sur les anciens Voyages en Tartarie en général, et sur celui du Plan de Carpin en particulier, par M. d’Avezac. Paris, 1838; 4to. This important work forms the fourth volume of the Recueil de Voyages et de Mémoires publiés par la Société de Géographie de Paris, p. 899-779.
Russian. Moscow, 1795; 8vo.:—also, by Jasykow. St. Petersburg, 1825; 8vo.
Dutch. Seer aanmerkelyke Reysebeschryvingen van Johan du Plan Carpin en Br. Ascelin, beyde als legaten van den H. Apostolischen stoel, en voor gesanten van den Paus Innocentius de IV afgesonden na Tartaryen en andere oosterche volkeren. Nu aldereest getrouwelijk na het egte handschrift vertaald door Salomon Bor predikant tot Zeyst. Leyden, 1706, 8vo.
This forms the first part of the first volume of a collection of Dutch translations of remarkable travels, which the well known bookseller Van der Aa published in 1706, under the title of: “Naaukerige versameling der gedenkwaardigste zee en land Reysen na Ost en West Indien.”
Respecting the travels of Plano Carpini, see Sprengel’s “Gesch. d. geogr. Entdeck.”, p. 278-288, where the same are accompanied by many learned explanations, as also Murray’s “Discoveries in Asia”, vol. i, pp. 84-109.
(6.)
Ascelin. 1245.
Nicolas Ascelin, a Dominican, was despatched by Pope Innocent IV to the Mongolians, at the same time that Plano Carpini was sent by way of Poland and Russia to the court of the Khan. He was accompanied by the monks Alexander, Albert, and Simon de St. Quentin. His entire journey lasted only for a short time; and as he speaks chiefly in his narrative of his reception in the camp of Bajothnoi (Bajunovian?), he gives but few disclosures respecting the countries he travelled through. His route seems to have been by the south of the Caspian Sea, through Syria, Persia, and Khorasan. Ascelin’s narrative, moreover, has not reached us entire; we know of it only from the accounts received by Vincent de Beauvais from Ascelin’s companion, Simon de St. Quentin.
The account of Ascelin’s journey will be found in the following works, as already more fully described.
Speculum historiale Vincentii Bellovacensis. Venetiis, 1499, fol. L. 31, C. 40, et seq.
Opera dilettevole ad intendere la qual si contiene dei Itinerarii in Tartaria. Venezia, 1537, 4to.
Voyage du P. Ascelin. In Bergeron, Voyages, éd. de P. van der Aa; vol. i. Together with the Travels of P. Carpino.
In Murray’s Discoveries and Travels in Asia, vol. i, p. 75-84.
Voyage du Frère Ascelin. Printed in Voyage de Benjamin de Tudèle, etc. Par. 1830, 4to.
Russian: In Jasykow, as alluded to in the notice of Plano Carpini.
(7.)
Simon de Saint Quentin. 1245.
Simon de St. Quentin, a Dominican monk, accompanied the embassy sent to Tartary by Pope Innocent IV, and prepared an account of this journey in Latin. The complete original of the journey has not been found; the dominican Vincent de Beauvais, Simon’s contemporary, gives, however, in his “Speculum Historiale”, in book XXVII, a great part, viz., nineteen chapters, of the “Itinerarium Fratris Simonis”; and from this source Reinerus Reineccius has received it into his “Historia Orientalis”.
This portion of the “Itinerarium” is also found in MS. No. 686, in the Royal Library of Paris, which bears the title—
Itineraria in Tartariam Fr. Joannes de Plano Carpino, ord. Minorum, et Fr. Simonis de S. Quintino ord. prædicatorum, etc.
These extracts are also found in Hakluyt’s “Collection”, vol. i, p. 25-29: “Libellus Historicus”, etc., but where Simon’s travels are mixed up with Plano Carpini’s narrative.
They are also found in Italian, in the now very rare work entitled—
Opera dilettevole da intendere, etc. Venez., 1537, 8vo., and again in Ramusio Raccolta di Viaggi, vol. ii of the edition of 1574, under the title, Due Viaggi in Tartaria.
(8.)
Rubruquis. 1253.
Wilhelm von Ruysbroeck, Rusbrock, or Rubruk, commonly known by the Frenchified name of De Rubruquis, was a friar of the minorite order. He was sent to the Mongolians by the French king Louis IX, 1253, then in his crusade against the Saracens, when the rumour had spread in Europe that the Mongolian chief, Mangu Khan, had embraced the Christian religion. In the year just mentioned, he set out on his journey, with a fellow traveller, Bartholomæus of Cremona, went to Constantinople, over the Black Sea, through the Crimea,[7] and finally arrived after many difficulties in the district of the city of the Caraci, in the Gobi desert, where Mangu Khan was then residing. His accounts of the countries he passed through are more circumstantial than those of his predecessors, which were unknown to him. He introduces, however, a number of cities under names which cannot yet be identified. We have to thank him, among other things, for the first accounts collected from personal experience respecting China, which he derived from a Chinese ambassador in the Mongolian camp. Rubruquis tarried five months in the neighbourhood of Mangu Khan, and passed then by Sarai, Astrachan, and Derbent, through Georgia, Armenia, and Turcomania, across the Mediterranean to Cyprus, Antioch, and Tripoli, from which latter place he transmitted the narrative of his travels to the King of France. From this latter circumstance he is sometimes called William of Tripoli.
Sprengel says of these travels:—“Rubruquis, by his journal, certainly widely extended the knowledge of the period with respect to northern Asia and the countries around the Caspian and Black Seas; and it is the more valuable inasmuch as he has conveniently inserted all manner of useful observations, which travellers at that time seldom thought worth recording”; and accompanies this opinion with many examples, at pp. 295-299 of his work.
Rubruquis wrote his travels in Latin, and several copies of the original still exist.
There is a copy in manuscript in the Royal Library of Paris, in the codex No. 686, which bears the title: “Itineraria in Tartariam”.—See d’Avezac’s Plan Carpin, p. 50.
It has only been once printed in the language of the original, and that in Hakluyt’s Collection, vol. i, pp. 71-79, but from a manuscript of Lord Lumley’s, imperfect at the end.
Purchas found a perfect copy of the travels in Benet College Library at Cambridge, with the inscription: “Historia Monogallorum sive Tartarorum”.—See d’Avezac, p. 52. He translated it into English, and inserted it into his “Pilgrimes”, vol. iii, p. 1. Roger Bacon has likewise inserted extracts from Rubruquis, in his “Opus Majus”.
Bergeron translated it from this English version into French, under the title—
Voyage remarquable de Guillaume de Rubruquis, envoyé en Ambassade par le Roi Louis IX en differens parties de l’Orient, principalement en Tartarie et à la Chine, l’an de notre Seigneur 1253. Contenant des recits très singuliers et surprenans. Ecrit par l’Ambassadeur même. Le tout orné d’une Carte de voyage de tailles douces, et accompagné de Tables. Traduit de l’Anglais par le Sr. de Bergeron.
In Bergeron’s Voyages, etc., vol. i, collated, says Bergeron, with two Latin MSS.
It was again reprinted under the title: “Relation du Voyage en Orient de Guillaume de Rubruk”, in vol. iv of the publications of the Geographical Society of Paris, “Recueil de Voyages et de Mémoires”, pp. 205-296.
Here, and to both the foregoing journeys, belongs the following—
Quelques observations du Moine Bacon touchant les parties septentrionales du Monde, avec les relations touchant les Tartares; tirées de l’histoire de R. Wendover et de Mathieu de Paris, avec quelques lettres sur le même sujet; où l’on fait voir l’inhumanité, les mœurs sauvages, la rage et la cruauté des Tartares; leurs invasions, par lesquelles ils menacent de détruire la Chrétienté; avec une lettre de l’Empereur pour demander du secours au Roi d’Angleterre contre les Tartares dont on fait voir les rapines, les cruautez, et les meurtres; mais ils y sont courageusement repoussez. In P. Bergeron’s Voyages, etc., vol. ii.
Both Forster, “Gesch. d. Entdeck”, p. 127-146, and Sprengel, “Gesch. d. Entdeck”, p. 288-299, have supplied explanatory and very learned remarks upon the travels of Rubruquis.
(9.)
Marco Polo. 1271.
Marco Polo, on whom Malte Brun has bestowed the inappropriate[8] appellation of the “créateur de la géographie moderne, l’Humboldt du treizième siècle,” was descended from a noble family of Venice. His father Niccolò Polo, and his uncle Matteo Polo, had many years before made a trading journey to Tartary; and when afterwards in 1271, the two set out on a similar journey to the east, they took young Marco, then seventeen or eighteen years old, with them. The journey was again into Tartary, to the court of Kublai Khan, where Marco found opportunity to develope speedily his rare capacity, learnt several oriental languages, was frequently employed by the prince just named to undertake distant journeys and important business, and collected at the same time the materials of his work on the east, which, as Sprengel says, “was long the general manual of Asiatic geography throughout entire Europe, especially after the voyages of the Portuguese had confirmed many of his supposed rodomontades.”
He is said to have acquired great wealth from this journey, through trading and the generosity of Kublai Khan, on which account his countrymen gave him the surname of il Millione; and even down to the time of Ramusio, the house in which Marco Polo had lived at Venice was called la corte del Millioni.[9] He finally returned to Europe in 1295, but was soon after named commander of a division of the Venetian fleet against the Genoese, and as such, fell into the hands of the hostile admiral Lampa Doria. He was now carried prisoner of war to Genoa, where, although treated with great kindness and sympathy by the principal inhabitants, he nevertheless spent four years in prison. Here his famous work was composed, which will further be noticed in detail.
On account of the unstable life which Marco Polo led during his long sojourn in the east, it is not likely that he should have kept a detailed journal. He appears farther to have brought with him[10] only the short notices, which he collected for Kublai Khan on his route, and with the help of these dictated his narrative to his friend and fellow-sufferer, Rustichello, a native of Pisa, in his prison at Genoa.
With respect to the language in which the work was originally composed, Mr. Marsden, in his important and learned work presently to be quoted more at length, adduces evidence to show that it was not written in Latin, as Ramusio erroneously understood, but in a dialect of Italian; and in this conclusion he is warranted by the decided opinion of the celebrated Apostolo Zeno, who expresses himself as follows:—“Io sone persuaso che il Polo la scrivesse primieramente, non come vuole il Ramusio, in lingua latina, ma nella volgar sua natia, e che poco dopo da altri fosse translatata in Latino.”
With all the apparent improbabilities and inconsistencies of Marco Polo’s narrative, there is still enough in it to convince the most sceptical of its general accuracy; while, as Mr. Marsden justly observes, the numerous descriptions and incidents afford unobtrusive proofs of genuineness. Many of these details, which for centuries had excited either ridicule or suspicion, have been shown to be correct by the discoveries of modern times, while others less generally comprehensible have been elucidated and explained by the learning and research of Mr. Marsden.
Before we proceed to give the bibliography of the work, we would quote that part which treats of various countries which belong to modern Russia, which occurs at the end of the third book. According to the text of Ramusio, it reads thus:—“Della provincia di Russia. La provincia di Russia è grandisima, et divisa in molte parti, et guarda verso la parte di Tramontana, dove si dice essere la regione delle tenebre. Li popoli di quella sono Christiani, et osservano l’usanza de’ Greci nell’ officio della chiesa. Sono belissimi huomini, bianchi e grandi, et similmente le loro femine bianche et grandi, con li capelli biondi et lunghi, et rendono tributo al Ré di Tartari detti di Ponente, con il qual confinano nella parte di loro regione che guarda il Levante. In questa provincia si trovano abondanza grande di pelli di Armelini, Ascolini, Zebellini, Vari, Volpi, et cera molta; vi sono anchora molte minere, dove si cava argento in gran quantità. La Rossia è region molto fredda, et mi fù affermato cha la si estende fino sopra il Mare Oceano, nel qual (come abbiamo detto di sopra) si prendono li Girifalchi, Falconi pellegrini in gran copia, che vengono portati diverse regioni et provincie.”
Ramusio says in reference to Marco Polo’s account of the climate of Russia: “Vltimamente nel fine del terzo libro, ove parla della Rossia, et del Regno delle Tenebre, come quello che in varij mappamondi antichi, è posto per fine del nostro habitabile sotto la Tramontana, non s’inganna punto del sito del detto regno, nelli mesi però ch’egli scrive dell’ inverno.”
All the texts of Marco Polo are defective, uncritical, and incorrect. The testimony of Purchas on this point is as follows:—“Multos auctores corruptos vidi, sed nullum corruptiorem quam Latina Pauli Veneti editio est. Ramusius edidit Italicam versionem, quæ aurea est si cum Latina comparetur.”
The first Latin translation appears to have been made about the year 1320, by a monk of the Order of Preachers, named Francesco Pipino (called also Pepuri), of Bologna, to the performance of which task he was invited by the superiors of his order.
The following MSS. of Marco Polo are known:—
In Venice. Latin. Ramusio says of it: “Una copia di qual libro scritta la prima volta latinamente, di meravigliosa antichità e forse copiata dall’ originale di esso Messer Marco, molte volte ho veduta e incontrata con questa che al presente mandiamo in luce.”
This MS., which Apostolo Zeno also saw in the library of the senator Giacomo Soranzo, is lost; or, at least, we no longer know where to find it.[11]
In Paris. Latin. In the Bibliothèque Royale, No. 8392. A beautiful MS. in folio, on parchment, with many miniatures. By the monk Fra Pipino of Bologna, translated again into Latin from an Italian translation made from a Latin copy. Copies of this MS. are also found in the public libraries of Rome, Padua, Modena, Ferrara, Berlin, and Wolfenbüttel. That in the British Museum is supposed by Sir Henry Ellis to have been written about 1400.
In Mentz. Latin.
See Recensus codd. Moguntiæ in R. Capituli Metropolitani Bibliotheca latitantium, pars prima. In Val. Ferd. de Guden Sylloge variorum diplomatariorum Monumentorumque veterum ineditorum adhuc, et res germanicas imprimis Moguntinas illustrantium. Francof., 1728; 8vo.; pages 377-385.
In Giessen, in the University library, Latin, under the title—
Marcus Polus de Venetiis: de conditionibus et consuetudinibus orientalium regionum: bound up with Cod. 218, a MS. of Eusebius. See Catalogus Codd. Mspt. Bibliothecæ Academ. Gissensis. Auct. J. Valent. Adrian. Francof. ad Mœn. 1840, 8vo.
In Florence. Italian. This MS. is generally called by the epithet of Marco Polo, il Millione, and under this name is entered in the Dictionary of the Academia della Crusca.
In Brit. Mus. (Sloane MSS.), bearing date 1457.
In Berne. French. Of the fourteenth century, on parchment, in folio. In the library of Bongars.—See Sinner, “Catalogus Codd. MSS. Bibliothecæ Bernensis annotationibus criticis illustratus; addita sunt excerpta quam plurima et præfatio, curante J. R. Sinner” (Bernæ, 1770; 3 vols., 8vo., t. ii, p. 419), where the history of this translation is given. In the year 1307, Thibault, Seigneur de Capoy, passing through Venice on his way to Constantinople, had here the honour to receive a copy of his travels from Marco Polo himself, “desirans,” as Thibault says, “que ce qu’il avoit veu fus sceu par l’univers monde, et pour l’onneur et reverence de tres excellent et puissant princ Monseigneur Charles fils du Roy de France et Comte de Valois, bailla et donna au dessus dit Seigneur de Cepoy la premiere copie de son dit livre.” A French MS. of 1300, is in the Royal Library of Paris. Other older French translations, which are probably copies only of this, are cited in “Montfaucon Biblioth. MSS. nova,” p. 895.
A manuscript extract from the travels, under the title: “De magnis mirabilibus mundi et de Tartaris”, cap. XXI, is found in a codex of the fourteenth century, in the Ambrosian library of Milan, bearing the title: “Imago Mundi pars II, seu chronica Fratris Jacobi ab Aquis (Giacomo d’Aqui), in Lombardia ord. Præd. usque ad annum 1296.”
Respecting the manuscripts of Marco Polo’s travels, see “Ricerche critico-biografiche sui testi di Marco Polo”, in Zurla’s work hereafter quoted, vol. i, p. 13, and in Purchas’s “Pilgrimes”.
The most remarkable editions of Marco Polo in both languages of the original, are the following—
Incipit prologus in libro domini Marci Pauli de Veneciis de consuetudinibus et condicionibus orientalium regionum. Rome or Venice, between 1484 and 1490 (but according to Brunet, 1490-1500); 4to.
M. Paulus Venetus de regionibus Orientalibus. Zwoll, 1483, 4to.
Marco Polo da Veniesia delle meravigliose cose del Mondo da lui vedute, da Giambattista Sessa. In Venetia, 1496; 8vo.
Again reprinted, Brescia, 1508; 8vo. This is a kind of extract in the Venetian and Tuscan dialects, and is now scarcely anywhere to be found.
Marco Polo Venetiano, in cui si tratta le maravigliose cose del Mondo per lui vedute, del costume di varii paesi, etc. Venetia, s. a. Small 8vo.
These Italian editions were repeated: Venetia, 1508, fol.; 1533, 8vo. Treviso, 1590, 8vo. Venetia, 1597, 8vo; 1611, 8vo.; 1626, small 8vo.; Trevigi, 1672, small 8vo.
Paulli Veneti, de regionibus orientalibus Libri III, in the Orbis novus regionum et insularum veteribus incognitarum, etc. of Simon Grynæus. Basil, 1532, fol.
Marco Polo, gentilhuomo Venetiano, delle cose de’ Tartari et delle Indie Orientali, con la vita et costumi di que’ popoli, descrittione di que’ paesi, et molte altre cose notabili et meravigliose: in tre libri descritte, non prima che hora cosi interi et copiosi publicati. In the Raccolta di Ramusio, vol. ii, p. 1-60 (1559).
This is the best and most correct Italian text of Marco Polo.
Appears to have been printed after the Latin translation of Frà Pipino.
Marci Pauli Veneti de regionibus orientalibus Libri III, ex editione Reineri Reineccii. Helmstadii, 1585, 4to. Also 1602, 4to. Amstelodami, 1664, 4to.
“Voyages de Marco Polo.” Paris, 1624; 4to. Latin and French. This forms the first volume of “Recueil de Voyages et de Mémoires publiés par la Société de Géographie de Paris,” of which, up to the present time, seven volumes in 4to. have appeared.
Viaggi di Marco Polo illustrati e commentati, preceduti dalla Storia delle Relazioni vicendevoli dell’ Europa e dell’ Asia, da Baldelli. Firenze, 1827, 4 vols. in 4to, and atlas in folio.
Il Milione di Marco Polo, testo di lingua del secolo XIII, ora per la prima volta publicato ed illustrato dal Conte Giov. Batista Baldelli Boni. Firenze, 1827; 4to, 2 vols.
I viaggi in Asia, in Africa, nel mare dell’ Indie, descritti nel secolo XIII da Marco Polo, testo di lingua detto il Milione, illustrato con annotazioni. Venezia, 1824, small 8vo., 2 vols.
It is said that Klaproth had collected rich materials for a new edition. It is much to be regretted that it was never published.
It was natural that a work of such extraordinary contents as Marco Polo’s travels should soon be translated into several languages. These translations are here arranged according to their dates.
German. The oldest German translation was printed at Nürnberg by Fricz Creussner. Its title is as follows—
First edition, of extreme rarity, in the Grenville Library. The following note is in Mr. Grenville’s handwriting: “The volume agrees with Dr. Dibdin’s description of Lord Spencer’s copy (see Bibl. Spenc., vol. vi, p. 176), having fifty-seven leaves of text; but the wood-cut, representing a full length figure of Marco Polo on the reverse of the first leaf, is supplied in this copy by an admirable fac-simile. The present is a very fine rubricated copy. When Mr. Marsden published his translation of this work, the only known copy of this first German edition was in the Imperial Library at Vienna, and I had a literal transcript made from it: since that time a second copy was found, and sold by Payne and Foss to Lord Spencer: and now I have purchased from Leipsic the present beautiful copy. I know of no fourth copy. The copy at Vienna wants the portrait.”
See also respecting this edition, Panzer’s “Annalen der älterem deutschen Litteratur,” i, 99-100.
A reprint of this German translation appeared at Augsburg, 1481, by Anthonius Sorg, in the “Historia von Hertzog Leuppold und sein Sohn Wilhelm, von Osterreich,” in fol.
Another version by Mich. Herr, appeared in the German translation of the “Novus orbis regionum” of Simon Grynæus, etc. Strassburg, 1534; fol. A version equally distinct from the other was made from the Italian of Ramusio, and entitled as follows—
Marcus Polus; wahrhafte Beschreybung seiner wunderlichen Reise in die Tartarey, zu dem grossen Can von Chatai verrichtet. Aus dem Italiänischen verteutscht durch Hieron. Megiserum. Leipzig, 1609, 8vo; 1611, 8vo.
Marco Polo’s Reise in den Orient während der Jahre 1272 bis 1295, in’s Deutsche übersetzt nach den besten Ausgaben des Originals und mit einem Commentare begleitet von Felix Peregrin. Ronneburg und Leipzig, 1802, 8vo.
Portuguese. Marco Paulo de Veneza das condiçōes e custumes das gentes e das terras e provincias orientaes. Ho livro de Nycolao Veneto [Niccolò di Conti]. O traūado da carta de hull genoves das ditas terras. Imprimido per Valentym Fernandez Alemaāo. Lyxboa, 1502; fol.
This is a translation from Pipino’s Latin version.
Spanish. Libro del famoso Marco Paulo Venetiano de las cosas marvillosas que vido en las partes orientales, conviene saber, en las Indias, Armenia, Arabia, Persia, e Tartaria, e del poder del Gran Can, y otras reys; con otro tratado de Micer Poggio Florentino e trata de las mesmas tierras y islas. Traducido por Rodriquez (Arcediano), canonico de Sevilla. Sevilla, 1520, fol.; and Logrono, 1529, fol.
Historia da las gradezas y cosas maravillosas de las provincias orientales, sacada de Marco Polo Veneto, y traduzida de Latin en Romance, y an̄adida en muchas partes, por D. Martin Abarca de Bolea y Castro. En Zaragoça por Angelo Tauano, 1601, 8vo.
English. The most noble and famous travels of Marcus Paulus, one of the nobilitie of the State of Venice, in the east partes of the world, as Armenia, Persia, Arabia, Tartary, with many other kingdoms and provinces. No lesse pleasant than profitable, as appeareth by the table or contents of this booke. Most necessary for all sortes of persons, and especially for travellers. Translated into English (by John Frampton). London, 1579; 4to.
A translation by Samuel Purchas, in his “Pilgrimes,” from the text of Ramusio.
Another, in the “Bibliotheca Navigantium” of Harris, likewise from the text of Ramusio.
We have next to quote the excellent and well known edition of Mr. Marsden, likewise translated from Ramusio, entitled—
The travels of Marco Polo, a Venetian, in the thirteenth century. Being a description, by that early traveller, of remarkable places and things in the eastern parts of the world. Translated from the Italian, with notes, by William Marsden, F.R.S., etc. With a map. London, 1818, 4to.
And finally, an edition entitled—
The Travels of Marco Polo, greatly amended and enlarged from valuable early manuscripts, recently published by the French Society of Geography, and in Italy by Count Baldelli Boni. With copious notes, illustrating the routes and observations of the author, and comparing them with those of more recent travellers. By Hugh Murray, F.R.S.E. Two maps and a vignette. New York, 1845; small 8vo.
Dutch. Translated from the Latin edition of R. Reineccius, under the title—
Marcus Paulus Venetus: Reisen en Beschryving der Oostersche Lantschappen, etc. Beneffens de Historie der Oostersche Lantschappen door Haithon van Armenien te zamen gestelt. Door J. H. Glazemaker. Amsterdam, 1664, 4to.
French. We have already spoken of the very ancient French translation of Thybault de Cepoy.
A translation of the Latin text in the “Novus Orbis,” was published anonymously at Paris. 1556, 4to.; with the title—
La Description géographique des provinces et des villes les plus famcuses de l’Inde Orientale, avec les mœurs, loix, et coutumes des habitans d’icelles, mesmement de ce qui est soubz la domination du grand Cham, empereur des Tartares. Par Marc Paule, gentilhomne Vénitien, et nouvellement reduict en vulgaire François. Paris, 1556, 4to.
In Bergeron’s Collection, à la Haye, 1735; 4to.
Detailed accounts of Marco Polo will be found in the following works—
Sur la chorographie de Marc Paul, Vénitien. Preface d’André Müller Greiffenhag. Bergeron’s Voyages, vol. ii.
Témoignages et jugemens de plusieurs savans touchant la relation de Marc Paul, Vénitien, entre lesquels ils s’en trouvent quelques uns qui contredisent à ces Relations, mais dont la pluspart sont favorables et très dignes de Foi. Bergeron, vol. ii, p. 26.
Terrarossa Riflessioni Geografiche circa le Terre incognite. Padova, 1687, 4to. Treats chiefly of Marco Polo.
Ab. Renaudot des anciennes Relations des Indes et de la Chine, de deux Voyageurs Mahométans qui y allèrent dans le IX siècle, trad. de l’arabe avec des remarques. Paris, 1718, 8vo.
The following works may also be quoted:—
Murray’s Discoveries and Travels in Asia, vol. i, pp. 151-182.
Tiraboschi Storia della Letteratura Italiana. Defends Marco Polo especially from the charges of error brought against him.
Saggi di Studj Veneti, di Toaldo. Venez., 1782, 8vo. Contains, among other things, an Elogio de’ Poli.
Dissertazione intorno ad alcuni Viaggiatori eruditi Veneziani poco noti; dal Abbate Morelli. Venezia, 1803; 4to.
Vita di Marco Polo. In the Collezzione di Vite e Ritratti d’illustri Italiani, da Bottoni. Padova, 1816; 8vo.
Notice sur la rélation originale de Marc Pol, par Paulin-Paris. Paris, 1823, 8vo.
Vies de plusieurs personnages célèbres des temps anciens et modernes. Par M. Walckenaer, Laon, 1830, 2 vols., 8vo. Tom. ii, p. 1-34.
Very valuable accounts of Polo are found also in “Joh. Reinh. Forster’s Gesch. d. Entdeck. im Norden,” p. 151-182.
A very important work respecting Marco Polo and his travels is—
Di Marco Polo e degli altri Viaggiatori Veneziani più illustri: Dissertazione del P. Ab. D. Placido Zurla; con appendice sopra le antiche mappe lavorate in Venezia, e con quattro carte geografiche. In Venezia, 1818; large 4to., 2 vols.
This work, the whole of the first volume of which is occupied with Marco Polo, contains a very detailed investigation respecting the text of his travels, as well as a thorough analysis of the countries he travelled through. This survey is divided into the following sections:—1. Geography, p. 87-206; 2. Natural History and Physical Geography, p. 207-241; 3. History, p. 242-266; 4. Religion, p. 267-303; 5. Manners and Customs, p. 304-324; 6. Arts and Sciences, p. 325-349; 7. Commerce and Navigation, p. 350-368.
Forster says, in his “Gesch. d. Entdeck.” p. 152: “It were to be wished, that a man of extended reading would compare all these translations with the Wolffenbüttel manuscript, and prepare and publish a new edition of this useful, and, for the geography of the Middle Ages, highly important book.” This wish appears to have been in great measure fulfilled by Marsden’s work.
(10.)
Giovanni di Monte Corvino. 1288.
Giovanni di Monte Corvino, a Franciscan monk of Calabria, was despatched as ambassador by Pope Nicholas IV, in 1288, to Arghun, to the Mongolian Khan of Persia, He spent some time at Tauris, and left that city in 1291 for India, where he made several conversions. He then proceeded further east to Khan-Balyk, or Cambalu, the capital of the Tatars, the modern Peking, where he died, holding the honourable position of archbishop of the missions in that city. Regarding his travels in Tartary, we have only two of his letters, dated respectively 1305 and 1306, which are found printed in the following works—
Wadding, Annales Minorum. Romæ, 1732, fol., vol. vi, p. 69 sq.
Mosheimii Historia Tartarorum Ecclesiastica. App. xliv et xlv, p. 114-120.
Marsden, the Travels of Marco Polo, a Venetian, in the thirteenth century. London, 1818, 4to., p. 243-245.
See also, respecting this monk, “Nouveaux mélanges Asiatiques,” par M. Abel Remusat; vol. ii, p. 193-198.
(11.)
Haitho. 1290.
Haitho, Hatto, or Hayton, was a prince of the royal family of Armenia. Having long followed the profession of arms under his uncle Haitho II, king of Armenia, he retired in 1305, in fulfilment of a vow which he had formerly made, to Piscopia in Cyprus, where he entered a convent of Premonstrants. He subsequently came to Poitiers in France, and there, by the desire of Pope Clement V, dictated to Niccolò Salconi, in the French language, the history of the East, from the time of the appearance of the Mongolians; which the latter translated in 1307, into Latin, under the title, “Liber Historiarum partium Orientis.”
Haitho’s work consists—1, of accounts of the Tatars, from Jenghis Khan to Mango Khan; 2, of narrations from Haitho I, king of Armenia, respecting his life and travels; 3, of the monk Haitho’s narrative of the events of his own time.
Haitho was not a traveller; but deserves mention here, inasmuch as in his work he frequently touches on northern Asia, and several countries pertaining to modern Russia.
Haitho’s work is found both in Latin and French, in manuscript, in the Imperial Library of Vienna, viz.—
Haithon, la flor des Histoires de l’Orient, par Nicolas Faucon, in 4to., Hist. prof., No. 39.
Haitoni flos Historiarum Orientis. Fol., Hist. prof., No. 73.
Likewise, in the celebrated manuscript of Marco Polo, at Bern; and in the Bibliothèque Royale of Paris, No. 7500 and 8392.
The printed editions of this work are the following—
Here begynneth a lytell Cronycle, translated and imprinted at the cost and charge of Rycharde Pynson, by the commaundement of the ryght high and mighty prince Edwarde duke of Buckingham, yerle of Gloucester, Staffarde, and of Northampton. Imprinted by the sayd Richarde Pynson, printer unto the kinges noble grace. (No date.) Fol. B.L.
In the Grenville collection. The volume consists of forty-eight leaves. On the verso of fol. 35, “Here endeth the boke of thistoris of thorient partes cōpyled by a religious man frere Hayton, frere of Premonstre order, somtyme lorde of Court and cosyn german to the kyng of Armeny, upon the passage of the holy lande. By the commaundement of the holy fader the apostle of Rome, Clement the V, in the citie of Potiers: which boke I, Nicholas Falcon, writ first in French, as the frere Hayton sayd with his mouth, without any note or example; and out of French I have translated it in Latyn for our holy fader the pope. In the yeere of our lorde god 1307.”
Mr. Grenville, in his manuscript note, says: “The present is the only translation into English, and from the circumstances of its being printed by Pynson, and having been (when in Mr. Heber’s collection) bound with two other works (Mirrour of good Maners and Sallust), both translated by Barclay, was probably also translated by him. It is a book of extraordinary rarity, no perfect copy that can be traced having previously occurred for public sale.”
The earliest French edition was printed at Paris, in 1529, with the title—
L’Hystore merveilleuse, plaisante et recreative du grand Empereur de Tartarie, seigneur des Tartares, nommé le Grand Can, etc. Paris, pour Jehan Sainct Denys, 1529; fol.
On the first leaf of the text of the volume it is stated, that the work was originally written in Latin in the year 1310, by the very noble Monsieur Aycon, Seigneur de Courcy, in the abbey of the Epiphany, whither he had retired: and that in 1351, it was translated into French by Brother Jehan Longdit. This edition is very rare; but a copy is in the Grenville Library.
This edition, without date, is also in the Grenville Library.
Histoire orientale, où des Tartares, de Haiton, parent du roi d’Armenie; qui comprend premièrement une succincte et agréable description de plusieurs royaumes ou païs orientaux, selon l’état dans lequel ils se trouvoient environ l’an 1300; secondement une relation de beaucoup de choses remarquables, qui sont arrivées aux peuples de ces païs et nations. Le tout décrit par la main de Nicolas Salcon, et traduit suivant l’édition latine d’André Müller Greiffenhag. In Bergeron’s Voyages, vol. ii.
Latin. Haithoni Armeni, Liber historiarum partium orientis, sive passagium terræ sanctæ, scriptus anno Redemptoris nostri MCCC. Haganoæ, 1529; 4to.
This first edition, in Latin, was edited by Men. Molther.
Haithoni Armeni, Liber de Tartaris. In the Orbis novus regionum et insularum veteribus incognitarum, etc., of Simon Grynæus. Basileae, 1537; fol.
Historia orientalis Haythoni Armeni et huic subjectum Marci Pauli Veneti Itinerarium: item fragmentum e Speculo historiali Vincentii Belvacensis ejusdem argumenti. Auctore Reinesio Reineccio. Helmæstadii, 1585, 4to.
Haithoni Armeni Historia orientalis, quae et de Tartaris inscribitur. In Andr. Mülleri M. Pauli Veneti de regionibus orientalibus, libri III. Coloniae Brandeb. 1671, 4to.
Italian. Ayton Armeno, dell’ origini et successione di Gran Cani Imperadori Tartari, et come aggrandirono l’Imperio loro, et della vita, religione, costumi et conditione de’ Tartari. In Raccolta di Ramusio, vol. ii, p. 60-66, is divided into two sections, viz., Discorso sopra il libro del signor Hayton Armeno, p. 60-62; and Parte seconda della Historia del signor Hayton Armeno, che fù figliuol del signor Curchi, parente de’ Rè di Armenia, p. 62a-64a.
Compendio della Storia de’ Tartari scritta dell’ Armeno Aitone, fatto da Gio-Boccaccio in Latino, trovato e tradotto in volgare, e pubblicato da Sebast. Ciampi. In Monumenti di un manuscritto autografo e lettere inedite di Mes. Giovanni Boccaccio, il tutto trovato ed illustrato da Sebastiano Ciampi. Milano, 1830, 8vo.
It was also translated into Dutch by J. H. Glazemaker, and printed with his translation of Marco Polo. Amsterdam, 1664; 4to.
(12.)
Riccoldo da Montecroce. 1296.
In 1296, Riccoldo da Montecroce, or Ricaldus de Monte Crucis, a Dominican of Florence, Sanctius de Bolea, Guillelmus Bernardi, Bernardus Guille, and several other monks, were sent by Pope Boniface VIII to the Saracens, Bulgarians, Kumans, Alans, Chazars, Goths, Russians, Nestorians, Georgians, Tatars, and other oriental and northern people; and Riccoldo left an “Itinerarium peregrinationis” of his travels,—the original text of which is not, however, extant. Jean Lelong, a Benedictine monk of Ypres, translated the work into French in 1351, and through this translation we are acquainted with Riccoldo’s travels.
Four copies of Lelong’s translation are known, which correspond with each other pretty well. One, which contains, with the travels of Haitho, those of Oderic, Boldensel, and the archbishop of Sultanieh, in folio, adorned with miniatures, is to be found in the Royal Library of Paris, marked No. 7500 C. A copy of this was made by the Chancellor Baron Rumänzow, which is to be found in the library of the Rumänzow Museum, under No. 40. This translation bears the following title—
Cy commence le livre de peregrinacion de l’itineraire et du voyage que fist ung bon preu d’omme des freres precheurs qui ōt nom frère Riculd, qui par le commendement du Saint Pere ala oultre mer pour prechier aux mescreans la foy de Dieu, et sont en ce traictié par ordonnance contenuz les royaumes pays et provinces, les manieres diverses des gens, les loys, les sectes, les creances, etc. Et fut ce livre translatez du Latin en François en l’an de grâce mil CCCII fait et compilé par frere Jehan Lelong d’Ypre, moine de l’eveschée de taroenne. Folio.
It was printed with Haitho’s work, entitled—
L’hystore merveilleuse plaisante et recreative du grand empereur de Tartarie, seigneur des Tartares, nommé le grand Can, etc. Paris, 1529; sm. fol.
The second copy of Lelong’s translation is to be found in the City Library of Berne, in the same manuscript containing Marco Polo.
The third, in the Cotton Collection of manuscripts, British Museum, with the press-mark, Otho D. II.
The fourth, in the Archiepiscopal Library of Mentz. An extract of the “Peregrinacion” will be found in Murray’s “Discoveries and Travels in Asia,” vol. i, p. 197, etc.
Ricold de Montecroix, voyageur et missionnaire en Asie. In Nouveaux Mélanges Asiatiques par M. Abel-Rémusat, vol. ii, p. 199-202.
(13.)
Oderico di Pordenone. 1317.
Oderico Mattheussi, a Franciscan monk, born about 1285, at Pordenone, in Friuli, on which account he is generally called Oderico of Friuli, Odericus de Forto Julii, also Odericus de Portenau. He undertook in 1317 a journey through Tartary by Trebisond to India, and returned by Thibet to Europe. In 1330, he dictated, in Padua, to Guglielmo di Solagno, a monk, his travels in Italian, and then went to Udine, where he died in 1331.
Copies of the travels of Oderico exist in manuscript in the Arundel Collection, British Museum (press-mark, 13 f. 38 b.), under the title, “Itinerarium fratris Odorici de ordine Minorum de Mirabilibus Indie”; and in the Royal Collection (press-mark, 14 c. 13, fol. 216), under the title, “Itinerarium fratris Odrici Ordinis fratrum Minorum de Mirabilibus orientalium Tartarorum.” These manuscripts are pronounced by good authority to be in the early half of the fourteenth century, and most probably a short time after the death of the author. The following also are known; viz., one under the title, “De Mirabilibus Mundi”, after the Latin translation of the monk Heinrich von Glatz, in Udine, in the Royal Library of Paris, Nos. 2584 and 3195; in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, No. 407; and in the Cathedral Library of Mentz, No. 52. The French translation of Jean le Long of Ypres, is found in manuscript in the Royal Library of Paris, No. 7500 C, and No. 8392, on parchment, and with many miniatures, in the City Library of Berne, and in the Cottonian Collection, British Museum.
Oderico’s journey is printed—
In the Acta Sanctorum, and Wadding’s Annales.
Latin and English. By Hakluyt, t. ii, p. 39-67.
Italian. By Ramusio, in the Appendix by Tommaso Giunti, vol. ii, fol. 237-248; and in: Elogio storico alle geste del Beato Oderico dell’ ordine de’ Minori conventuali, con la storia da lui dettata de’ suoi viaggi Asiatici, illustrata da un religioso dell’ ordine stesso, e presentata agli amatori delle antichità (Dal Fr. Giuseppe Venni). Venezia, 1761, 4to.
French. Printed with Haitho’s work, entitled—
L’hystore merveilleuse, plaisante et recreative du grand empereur de Tartarie, etc. Paris, 1529, fol.
Sprengel gives in his “Gesch. der geog. Entdeck.” p. 348-9, a comparison of the names of various places found in Oderico’s travels.
See further the article drawn up by De la Renaudière: Oderic, in the “Biographie Universelle”, t. xxxi, p. 499.
(14.)
Ibn Batuta. 1324.
Ibn Batuta, an Arabian author, left an account of a journey, in which the Russians are incidentally mentioned.
See respecting him, Frähn’s Ibn Foszlan, p. 229.
His work first appeared in an English translation entitled—
The Travels of Ibn Batuta: translated from the abridged Arabic manuscript copies, preserved in the public library of Cambridge. With notes, illustrative of the history, geography, botany, antiquities, etc., occurring throughout the work. By the Rev. Samuel Lee; 4to. London (printed for the Oriental Translation Committee), 1829.
A Portuguese translation of the entire work was published under the title—
Viagens extenses e dilatadas do celebre Arabe Abu-Abdallah, mais conhecido pelo nome de Ben-Batuta. Traduzidas por Jose de Santo Antonio Moura. Tom. i, 4to. Lisboa (published by the Acad. Real das Sciencias), 1840.
A particular account of Ibn Batuta and his travels will be found in the “Roosskiee Viestneek”, 1841; No. 2, p. 462.
(15.)
Jean de Cor. 1330.
Jean de Cor, a Franciscan monk, was sent in 1330, by Pope John XXII, as missionary into Tartary, and for his zeal in the work of conversion was by him nominated Archbishop of Sultanieh. He left a narrative of his travels, which bears the following title—
This narrative is found in the Royal Library of Paris, in a fine manuscript (No. 8392), adorned with many miniatures.
See D’Avezac, Relations des Mongoles ou Tartares, page 2d.
(16.)
Jourdain Catalan. 1330.
Jourdain Catalan, commonly called Jordanus Catalani, a French Dominican monk of Séverac, made several journeys into Asia in the beginning of the fourteenth century; and in 1330 was sent by Pope John XXII to Sultanieh in Tartary, as the bearer of the pallium to Jean de Cor, the archbishop of that see. He left several documents, more particularly his “Memorabilia”, a copy of which was in the possession of Walckenaer, from which it was printed in the “Recueil de Voyages et de Mémoires” of the Geographical Society of Paris, vol. iv, page 1-65.
The narrative bears the title—
See d’Avezac, already quoted, pp. 25-26.
(17.)
Sir John Mandeville. 1322-56.
Sir John Mandeville belonged to an ancient and distinguished English family. He was born at Saint Alban’s, and received a careful education. His favourite studies were mathematics, surgery, and theology. His busy spirit urged him at the same time to inquire into the nature and condition of foreign countries; and with this intention he went, in 1322, through France on a journey to the Holy Land, served several years under the Sultan of Egypt and the Grand Chan of Cathay. After thirty-three years’ wanderings in Asia, he returned to Europe, and died, in 1371, in Liège, where his monument is still to be seen. In the year 1356, as he says himself, in the thirty-fourth year after his departure, he drew up a narrative of his travels, in the French language apparently, but translated it himself soon after into Latin. This narrative, according to his own acknowledgment, included many of the chronicles, adventures, and romances of chivalry, so much admired in that age; but in almost every allusion to such romances he refers to them as merely matters of hearsay. This acknowledgment, we conceive, ought to be allowed to clear this early traveller from the charge of wilful falsification, which the manifest exaggerations occurring in his story have caused to be thrown upon him. With respect to the marvels which he asserts to have fallen under his own observation, they, like those of Herodotus and Marco Polo, have been mainly, if not entirely, verified by the researches of more recent travellers. This twofold ground of exculpation we hold to be an acquittal for Mandeville, on the score of veracity. In England there are several copies of an English version of his narrative, the original of which is dedicated to Edward III, and said to have been written by Mandeville himself.
His work belongs to this place, on account of his details respecting the Tatars and the countries ruled by them.
Of the English manuscripts, there are nineteen copies in the British Museum, according to Mr. Halliwell. “So numerous,” he says, “indeed, are they, owing to its great popularity, that it would be an endless labour to collate them all, though scarcely any two copies agree to any extent.”
Besides the English manuscripts, there is a very ancient one in the French language in the Municipal Library of Berne; one in the Grenville Library, upon vellum, of the fourteenth century; and another very fine one in the Royal Library of Paris, also on vellum, with many miniatures.
The various editions of his travels are the following—
English. Here begynneth a lytell treatyse or booke named Johan Maūdeuyll, knyght, borne in Englonde, in the towne of Saynt Albone, and speketh of the wayes of the holy londe towarde Jherusalem and of marueyles of ynde and of other dyuerse coūtrees. Emprynted at Westmynster by Wynken de Worde, anno dn̄i, MCCCC.LXXXXIX; 8vo.
This edition contains one hundred and nine chapters, exclusive of the introduction, and has several wood-cuts.
In the Grenville Library is an undated edition, “emprented by Rychard Pynson”, entitled—
The boke of John Maunduyle, knyght, of wayes to Jerusalem, and of marueyls of ynde and of other countrees; 4to.
Mr. Grenville, in his manuscript note, says:—“Dibdin seems to agree with Sir F. Freeling, in considering this book as of the fifteenth century, and therefore prior to that of W. de Worde of 1499, which was esteemed the first edition. No other copy being as yet ascertained, I readily purchased it, though it wants four leaves. The text varies very much from Este’s edition; but I have never found that of W. de Worde, to collate it with that edition.”
Other English editions are—
1503, 8vo; 1568, 4to; 1670, 4to; 1696, 4to; 1722, 4to; and lastly, the most perfect edition, under the title: The voiage and travaile of J. de Mandeville, which treateth of the way of Hierusalem, and of marvayles of Inde, with other islands and countryes. London, 1725, 8vo.
This last edition was reprinted “with an introduction, notes, and glossary, by J. O. Halliwell, Esq.” 8vo.; London, 1839.
Latin. Itinerarius domini Johannis de Mandeville militis. (Without place, date, or name of printer.) 4to.
This is the first of the Latin editions, being probably printed about 1480.
It was also printed in the first edition of Marco Polo.
In Purchas’s “Pilgrimes”, a Latin extract.
French. Ce livre est appelé Mandeville, et fut fait et composé par Jehan de Mandeville, chevalier natif d’Angleterre de la ville de St. Albain, et parle de la terre de promission, c’est a dire de Jerusalem, etc. Lyon, 1480, small fol.; and again, 1487, 4to.
Maitre Jehan de Mandeville, lequel parle des grandes aventures des pays étranges où il s’est trouvé, ensemble la terre de promission, et du saint voyage de Hierusalem. Paris (no date), 4to; also, 1517 and 1542.
By Bergeron, from the Latin translation of the extract in Purchas, under the following title—
So attractive a book would not fail of being translated into other languages. We are aware of the following translations—
Italian. Tractato delle piu maravigliose cosse e piu notabili, che si trovano in le parte del mondo vedute . . . del cavalier J. da Mandavilla. Milano, 1480, 4to; Bologna, 1488, 4to; Venezia, 1491, 4to; Firenze, 1492, 4to; Venezia, 1496, 4to; Milano, 1497, 4to; Bologna, 1497, 4to; Venetia, 1504, 4to; Venezia, 1515, 4to, and 1534, 8vo; 1537, 8vo; 1564, 8vo; 1567, 8vo.
German. Das buch des Ritters von Montevilla. Augspurg, 1481, fol., with wood-cuts; and 1482. fol., with woodcuts. This translation is by Michelfelser.
Johannes von Montevilla, Ritter, Strassburg, 1484, folio, with wood-cuts; translated by Otto von Demeringen. Also 1488, 4to; 1499, fol., with wood-cuts; 1501, with wood-cuts; 1507, fol.
Des Ritters Johannes von Montevilla Reyss und Wanderschaft durch das gelobte Landt, Indien und Persien. Francof. 1580, 8vo; 1600; 1608.
The same in “Reisebuch des Heiligen Landes,” etc. Franckf. 1629; fol. Th. I, p. 759.
Des Ritters Johannes von Montevilla Curieuse Reissbeschreibung, 1690, 8vo; 1692; 1696.
Spanish. Valencia, 1540; fol.
Dutch. Antwerpen, 1494; fol.
(18.)
Francesco Balducci Pegolotti. 1335.
Francesco Balducci Pegolotti, of Florence, made a journey into the east in the service of the Florentine Trading Company, and collected, especially in Tana (Asow), very useful accounts concerning the route of the caravans which went to China through the interior of Asia. He wrote in 1335 a work on the subject, a kind of commercial geography, remarkable for its time, bearing the title—“Libro di divisamenti di paesi et di misure di mercatanzie e d’altre cose bisognevoli di sapere a’ mercatanti di diverse parti del mondo.” This was afterwards printed from a manuscript in the Riccardi Library, at Florence, under the above title, with the false imprint “Lisboa e Lucca”, but at Florence in 1766.
It is also contained in the third volume of the work—
Della decima e delle altre gravezze imposte dal comune di Firenze, della moneta et della mercatura dei Fiorentini fino al secolo XVI. Opera di Gian Francesco Pagnini del Ventura. In Firenza, 1766, 4to, 4 vols.
Of this extract, for which the work deserves a notice here, the first chapter bears the title—“Avisamento del viaggio del Gattajo per lo cammino della Tana ad andare et tornare con mercatanzie”—which is translated in Forster’s “Gesch. d. Entd.” p. 187-189, with explanations.
Franz Balducci Pergoletti’s Reise-Route von Asof nach Peking.
With the corresponding text of the original. In Sprengel’s “Gesch. d. geog. Entd.” p. 257, etc. With many observations and explanations.
(19.)
Luchino Arigo. 1374.
The still unpublished narrative of an expedition of the Genoese Luchino Arigo, to the Don and Caspian in 1374, is to be found in a manuscript of the beginning of the fifteenth century, bearing the title, “Itinerarium Antonii Usus Maris,” preserved in the public library of Genoa.
(20.)
Peter Suchenwirt. 1377.
Peter Suchenwirt, probably of Austrian parentage, flourished between the years 1356 and 1395, and left a collection of poems, which consist partly of historical relations, partly of allegorical and didactic poems. In the first we find several poems collected, for the most part, on the spot; short indeed, but for the period to which they belong very valuable relations respecting Russian countries and regions, and for the historical occurrences which they touch upon. On this account, Suchenwirt is here deserving of a place. Two manuscripts are known of the entire collection of his poems, one of which, the Palatine, was long preserved in the Vatican, and is now deposited at Heidelberg; the other is in the Imperial Library of Vienna. They were first published by the learned Primisser, at Vienna, in 1827, under the following title—
Peter Suchenwirt’s Werke, aus dem vierzehnten Jahrhunderte. Ein Beitrag zur Zeit-und Sittengeschichte, mit einer Einleitung, historischen Bemerkungen und Wörterbuche. Wien, 1827; 8vo.
In the historical poems, Suchenwirt touches on the history, exploits, etc., of the heroes of his time, but chiefly those of his own countrymen both at home and abroad. Some of these knights-errant, and among others more particularly Friedrich von Chreutzpeck and Hans von Traunn, proceed on their various and distant campaigns into Russian countries, and both were present at the battle of Isborsk, 1348, and at the storming of this city by the German Orders. Isborsk is here called Eysenburk and Eysenwurch, and receives the appellation of die gehewer, or the famous.
That which we have more especially to refer to occurs in the fourth poem of Suchenwirt’s work, which bears the inscription, “Von Herzog Albrecht’s Ritterschaft”. In 1377, the young duke Albrecht III, son of Albrecht II, of Austria, undertook, in company with many nobles, an expedition to Prussia, in which Suchenwirt attended him as officer of the court (hofdiener), that thence he might be able, from personal observation, to describe the countries through which they passed. The soldiers of Duke Albrecht advanced from Insterburg, in Prussia, at the same time with the German Orders, towards the Samaiten (Samogitia), and penetrated from thence into the Russian territories, which, in later times, under Polish rule, was called Black Russia. Suchenwirt relates, v. 360, etc.
“Des dritten tages chom daz her
Vroleich in ein ander lant
Daz waz Russenia genannt,
Da sach man wuhsten prennen,
Slahen, schiezzen und rennen,
Haid ein, pusch ein, unverzagt,” etc.
Afterwards, at verse 427, etc., we are told—
“Daz her wuchst drew gantze lant
Die ich mit namen tue bechannt;
Sameyt, Russein, Aragel.
Wint, regen und der hagel
Begraif uns da mit grozzen vrost,
Da fault uns harnasch und die chost,” etc.
The crusaders then returned (v. 441), and hastened towards Memel (“und eylten zu der Mymmel,”), making their way through a trackless country, and experiencing many discomforts on account of the bad weather. They passed through, v. 473, etc.—
“Ein Wildung heist der grauden,
Gen westen noch gen sauden
So poz gevert ich nye gerayt,
Daz sprich ich wol auf meyn ayt,” etc.
They then reached Königsberg, of which it is said, v. 483—
“Tzu Chunigezperch so waz uns gach
Do het wir rue und gut gemach.”
The three districts here introduced, Russein, Aragel, and Grauden, Primisser explains by White Russia, Carelia, and Graudenz. These districts, however, are so far distant from Insterburg, the point from which the army of the Orders started, and so remote from each other, that this supposition is exceedingly improbable. The following explanation would appear to be more natural, whereby the accuracy and truthfulness of Suchenwirt, in his names of districts, places, and rivers, are more clearly established. The army of the Orders proceeded from Insterburg into Samogitia, penetrated on the third day into Russenia, i.e., Black Russia, the district of Novogrodek in the modern government of Grodno, on the Upper Niemen, laid waste a portion of this province and of Aragel, pushed on to Memel, and then retreated through the waste of Graudenz into the country of the Orders; when Suchenwirt, in consequence of fatigue, stayed behind at Königsberg. Aragel, according to Schlözer, in his “Geschichte von Litthauen”, is the Germanised name of the Lithuanian province Aragola, or Aragallen, and the waste of Grauden is the district on the Niemen, north-west of Grodno, which city is well known to lie on the Niemen, and at that time was well built. The country lying thence north-west towards the Prussian boundary is still little known in our times, and might easily have been designated a waste by Suchenwirt. Such an expedition, from Insterburg through Samogitia to the district of Novogrodock, and from thence to the Niemen through Grodno, back to the Prussian boundary, could be well accomplished in a short time.
Finally, the observation has still to be made, that Suchenwirt appears to have known the diversity of the Russian countries mentioned by him. The most remote north-eastern Russia to which the Livonian expedition went, he calls White Russia (Weizzen Reuzzen). Isborsk lies in White Russia (s. xviii, v. 205 and 506). The Russian districts, which in a strict sense form the frontier of Lithuania, he calls Russenia, or Russein (s. vi, v. 362 and 429); they comprise the territories subsequently called Black Russia. Red Russia, on the other hand, or those Russian districts which first came under Polish rule, which lay nearest to our poet’s description, and hence the best known to him, he simply calls Russia (Reuzzen).[12]
(21.)
Johann von Schildberger. 1394.
Johann von Schildberger, born in Munich, accompanied the army of King Sigismund of Hungary, in 1394, against the Turks; but in the following year was taken prisoner at the battle of Nicopolis by the Turks, and by order of Bajazet I (or, as he names him, Weyasit), was sent into Asia. On the overthrow of Bajazet by Timur, he fell into the hands of the latter, whom he attended in all his expeditions until his death in 1405. Thus Schildberger passed from one master to another, and traversed in his wanderings Georgia, Persia, and the whole of Tartary, of which he relates many wonderful things.
He returned by Constantinople, Lemberg, and Cracow, to Munich, his native city, in 1427, after an absence of thirty-two years.
Schildbergcer was a man entirely destitute of education, and consequently was ill able to describe the wonders of the countries he passed through. By whom the German narrative of his travels was composed, we know not; probably he had a friend, to whom he dictated it from memory on his return. His work, notwithstanding many disfigurements and false accounts, is still important, more particularly for the later epoch of the Chanat of the Golden Horde, and well deserves a critical revision and explanation.
Schildberger’s journal of travels appears in the following editions—
Hie vachet an d’Schildberger der vil wunders erfaren hatt in der heydenschafft vnd in d’ Türkey. Without place or date. (Perhaps Ulm, 1477.) Fol. With wood-cuts.
Frankf. a. M., 1549, 4to. In somewhat different orthography.
Ein wunderbarlich history wie Schildberger aus München von den Türken in die heydenschafft geführet und wieder heimgekommen ist. Nürnberg (no date), 4to.
Eine wunderbarliche und kürtzweylige Histori wie Schildberger einer aus der Stadt München in Bayern von der Türken gefangen inn die haydenschafft gefüret und wider heym gekommen. Item, was sich für Krieg, vund wunderbarlicher thaten dieweyl er in die haydenschafft gewesen zugetragen gantz kürtzweylig zu lesen. Frankfort, durch Wigand Hanen Erben (about 1554), 8vo.
Magdeburg, 1606, 8vo.
Johan Schildberger’s Reise in den Orient und wunderbare Begebenheiten. Von ihm selbst beschrieben. Aus einer alten Handschrift übersetzt und herausgegeben von A. J. Penzel. München, 1814, 8vo. Modernised and without explanations.
Extracts from Schildberger’s travels. By Witsen; p. 132.
Forster gives a review of these travels, th. 1, p. 245-253, and Sprengel, p. 367-370.
(22.)
Josafa Barbaro. 1436.
Josafà, or properly Giosafat Barbaro, descended from a noble Venetian family, went, in 1436, as ambassador for his republic, and probably also as a merchant, to Tana, the modern Azov, which then belonged to the Genoese, and was the most celebrated market for Chinese and Indian merchandize. He tarried sixteen years in the Crimea, through which he travelled, partly by land, partly by water, and thereby gained the interior, with the view of collecting as accurate accounts as possible of the Tatars. In the last two chapters, he speaks particularly of Russia and the Tatar countries, which lie between the south and east. In 1471, he undertook a journey into Persia, in the service of his native city, to Ussum Kassan,—or, as he calls him, Assambeï,—in order to support him with military stores and advice, in the war against the Turks, so as to weaken them in their attempts against Venice. He finally returned to his native country in 1479, and first wrote eight years afterwards, in 1487, as he says himself, both his journeys, that he might be enabled to mention that Russians had subdued Kasan and Novogorod. Barbaro died in Venice, 1494, at an advanced age.
The first of Barbaro’s travels alone concerns us here. A very full and annotated extract of it will be found in Forster’s “Gesch. d. geogr. Entdeck. und Schiff. im Norden,” p. 203-217; as well as in Beckmann’s “Liter. der älter Reisebeschreib.”, th. I, p. 165-192. Here also we should especially mention the extract found under the title “Giosofat Barbaro”, in Zurla’s work, “Di Marco Polo e degli altri viaggiatori Veneziani piu illustri,” vol. ii, p. 205-229.
Barbaro, on the whole, shows himself to have been a well-informed and careful observer; this must have drawn much attention to his work on its first appearance, and it is still valuable for its important contributions towards the history of the commerce and geography of the middle ages.
For a long time it was doubtful whether Barbaro’s travels appeared by themselves, or were only to be found in Manuzio, or Ramusio’s travels. The latter is given by the accurate Beckmann, as his opinion, after careful investigation; but there can be no doubt now, however, that they appeared earlier in a separate form, as Mazzuchelli mentions in his “Scrittori d’Italia” (t. II, vol. i, p. 270), an edition (Venezia, 1543, small 8vo) which Zurla himself possessed; and another still (Venezia, 1545, small 8vo.) is quoted.
Viaggio di Josaphat Barbaro, Ambasciadore di Venetia, alla Tana et in Persia. In the Raccolta di Viaggi pubblicata da Antonio Manuzio, in Venezia, 1543, 8vo; 1545, small 8vo. Apud Aldum.
Also, the Crimea travels, with the following title—
Di Messer Josafa Barbaro, Gentilhuomo Venetiano, il Viaggio della Tana. In the Raccolta di Ramusio, vol. ii, p. 91a-98; as also in a Lettera dello stesso Giosafat Barbaro scritta al R. Monsignor Piero Barocci Vescovo di Padova, nella qual si descrive l’erba del Baltracan, che usano i Tartari per lor vivere; which is wanting in Manuzio’s work.
A detailed description of the Viaggio alla Tana, taken from Beckmann, but given with full acknowledgment, is found in Zurla’s Marco Polo, vol. ii, p. 207-212; and a Latin extract from the journey to Persia, in J. de Laet’s “Persia seu regni Persici status”, ed. sec. Lugd. Bat., 1647, 24mo, p. 207-221. Barbaro has been translated into the Latin and Russian only.
The Latin version, which has the character of not being very faithfully rendered, is by Jacob Geuder von Herolzberg, and is included in Pietro Bizari’s “Rerum Persicarum historia.” Francof. 1601; fol.
This is also reprinted verbatim in “Georgii Hornii Ulyssea.” Francof. et Lips., 1671; 12mo.
The travels, “alla Tana”, were translated into Russian from the text of Ramusio by Vasiley Semenov’, under the title—
Puteshestvie v’ Tanu Josafata Barbaro, Venetsianskago dvoryanina. Perevod’ c’ Italianskago V.S., printed with the Italian original in his Biblioteka Inostrannuikh’ Pisatelei o Rossy. Part I, tom. i. St. Petersburgh, 1836; 8vo., p. vi-xvi, and 1-156.
(23.)
Nicolaus Cusanus. About 1450.
Niclas Krebs, of Cusa, a small village on the Moselle, in Trèves, was born of very poor parents in 1401. He became an ecclesiastic at an early age, and, according to the custom of his time, took the name of Cusanus from his birth-place; he raised himself through his learning and abilities to the highest dignity in the church, and died at Rome in 1464, as cardinal and governor of that city. Herberstein reckons him among the writers who have treated of Russia, and hence he must not be passed over here; there is no work of the kind, however, bearing his name, known; and even in the large collection of his works published at Basil, 1565, in 3 vols., fol., nothing is to be found respecting Russia.
Adelung suggests, however, that as Cusanus had been employed by Pope Eugene IV, to effect a union between the Greek and Roman churches, he made, on that account, a journey to Constantinople, and may on that occasion possibly have written something respecting Russia; and to such manuscript accounts of the constitution of the Greek church, or other such work, which may have been since lost, Herberstein may have made allusion. At the same time, it is possible, as Adelung himself suggests, that he only referred to the “Tabula Cusani”, a map of Germany, now unknown, but of which Sebastian Münster wrote an explanatory description. From this work of Münster’s, which is to be found in the “Rerum Germanicarum Scriptores” of Schardius, tom. i, it is evident that Russia was included in the map, as the work contains a short notice of that country.
Upon this subject the Editor of this translation has been favoured by Prince Lobanoff (editor of the famous “Recueil des Lettres de Marie Stuart”), with evidence confirmatory of the belief, that it is De Cusa’s map alone to which Herberstein alludes. This evidence exists in the preface to a work anterior to Herberstein, viz., the German translation of Miechov’s “Tractatus de duabus Sarmatiis”; a copy of which, though of extreme rarity, and unknown to Adelung, Ebert, and the other bibliographers, is in the Prince’s possession. It bears the following title—
Tractat von baiden Sarmatien und andern austossenden Landen, in Asia und Europa, von sitten und gepräuchen der völcker so darinnen wonen. Ain anders vō den landen Scithia und den in̄wonern des selben lands, genannt Cairchassi. Vast wunderparlich zu hörën; goth. 34 feuillets in 4to. Augsburg, 1518.
The second part is a translation of G. Interiano’s work.
The translation is made by Johann Mair von Eckh, as is shewn by the preface, an extract from which Prince Lobanoff has obligingly transcribed for the Editor, and is given in the note below.[13]
A collation of the passage in italics, with what Herberstein says in his preface addressed to the Emperor Ferdinand, shews it to be highly probable that a map of Cusanus was all that was alluded to by Herberstein. This opinion, Prince Lobanoff reasonably suggests, is still further strengthened by the fact, that Herberstein, in mentioning Cusanus, Paulus Jovius, T. Fabri, and A. Bied or Wied, says, “cum tabulas, tum commentarios reliquerint.” Now we are acquainted with the works of Paulus Jovius and of Fabri, so that the question of maps can only apply to Cusanus or to A. Weid.
(24.)
Giorgio Interiano. After 1450.
Giorgio Interiano, of Genoa, styled by Politian “magnus naturalium rerum investigator”, went into
Circassia in the fifteenth century, and on his return described the country and its inhabitants in a very simple treatise. He says in his letter to Aldus (in Ramusio, ii, 196), that many years before (da più anni in quì), he had seen the land of the Tscherkesses; he must consequently have visited the western Caucasus in the beginning of the second half of the fifteenth century.
His little work on the Tscherkesses, whom he calls Zychi,[14] appeared under the title—
La vita: & sito di Zichi, chiamiti ciarcassi: historia notabile. Venetiis, apud Aldum Manutium, 1502; 8vo.
A translation of this into German forms the second part of the rare work above quoted, under the article “Nicolaus Cusanus”, as in the possession of Prince Lobanoff.
This Aldine edition is of extreme rarity.
It is reprinted in the collection of Ramusio, vol. ii, fol. 196.
The Marchese Girolamo Serra, in his “Storia dell’ antica Liguria e di Genova” (Torino, 1834, 4to., vol. iv, page 234), calls Interiano, “un uom saggio, piacevole, amatore delle lettere, peritissimo in geografia, e ricercatore instancabile di lontani paesi, chi fù il primo a far conoscere i costumi de’ Zichi e Circassi.”
(25.)
Æneas Sylvius. 1454.
Æneas Sylvius Bartholomæus Piccolomini, who at a later period (1458) received the papal tiara under the name of Pius II, attained in 1450 the rank of cardinal, and as such was employed on various diplomatic embassies by the emperor Frederick III. In the same capacity he was once sent into Prussia, on the affairs of the Holy See, and had then an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the Poles and Lithuanians. This embassy supplied him with the means of gaining materials for his work, “De Polonia, Lithuania et Prussia sive Borussia”, which is printed in the first volume of the collection, entitled, “Joan. Pistorii Polonicæ historiæ corpus, hoc est Polonicarum rerum Latini, recentiores et veteres scriptores, quotquot extant.” Basil. 1582, fol. A considerable portion of the second section of this work is translated in the journal, “Sendungen der Kurländischen Gesellschaft für Literatur und Kunst” (vol. ii, p. 4), in the memoir, “Ueber einige religiöse Gebräuche der alten Letten, von Watson,” in which Æneas Sylvius relates many remarkable circumstances respecting the superstitions of the ancient Lithuanians, their veneration of serpents, their fire-worship, and the oracle connected with it, their adoration of the sun, and of a great hammer by which they once delivered from captivity the signs of the zodiac, as also respecting their sacred groves, etc.
(26.)
Ambrogio Contarini. 1473.
Ambrogio Contarini, descended from one of the most ancient and distinguished patrician families of the Venetian republic, was, like Giosafat Barbaro already mentioned, sent by his government as ambassador to Persia, to incite Ussumcassan to make war against Mahomet II. With a very unostentatious retinue, consisting of only four persons, he set out on the 23rd of February 1473, and proceeded by land, on account of the war, through Germany, Poland, and the Crimea, to Ispahan, where the Persian monarch then resided, and where he met with his countryman Barbaro. He returned through Georgia, Mingrelia, Derbent, Astrachan, Resen, and Moscow, at which last place he arrived on the 26th of September 1476, through the assistance and in the company of a Russian ambassador named Marco Rosso, who was likewise returning from Persia, and thence made his way back through Poland and Germany, arriving at Venice on the 21st of January.
Contarini’s work contains a circumstantial journal of all that he saw from the 24th of February 1474, to the 10th of April 1477, but still more of the misfortunes that happened to himself and his attendants; owing, however, to the disturbed state of the times and unfavourable circumstances, it is not nearly so copious as that of Barbaro.
The eighth chapter of his work contains many interesting statements with regard to Russia. On the 26th of September 1476, Contarini came to Moscow, where he presented himself to the grand-prince, Ivan Vasileivich III (“il Duca Zuanne, Signor della gran Rossia bianca”), was well received, and astonished at the magnificence of the court. He describes the situation and architecture of Moscow, speaks of the cold there, of the trade in sables, ermines, fox-skins, badger-skins, lynx-skins, and those of other animals, which were brought thither from the farthest north, and makes some observations on the manners and mode of life of the Russians. Contarini quitted Moscow on the 24th of January 1477, and continuing his journey on sledges[15] through Novogorod, made his way homeward.
Copious accounts of Contarini and his travels will farther be found in—
Beckmann’s Liter. d. ält. Reisebeschr., I, 193-198.
Zurla di Marco Polo, etc., vol. ii, p. 230-235.
Editions of Contarini’s travels—
Questo e el viazo de misier Ambrosio contarin ambassador de la illustrissima signoria de Venesia al signor Vxuncassam Re de Persia. Impressum Venetia per Hannibalem Fosium parmensem anno 1487; 4to.
This first edition is very rare.
Itinerario del magnifico e clariss. Ambrosio Contarini, mandato (da Venetia) nel anno 1472 ad Usuncassan Re di Persia. Vineggia, 1523; 4to.
Viaggio del Ambrosio Contarini, Ambasciadore di Venetia ad Ussuncassan, Rè di Persia. In Raccolta de’ Viaggi pubblicata da Antonio Manuzzi. In Venezia, 1545, 8vo.
Il Magnifico Ambrosio Contarini gentilhuomo Venetiano, che mandato ambasciadore dall’ Illustrissima Signoria di Venetia ad Vssumcassan Rè di Persia, scrive il suo viaggio molto particolarmente, et descrive li siti della città, i costumi, et stati, non solo de’ popoli Persiani, ma anco di molte altre provincie, per le quali passò nel suo viaggio. In Raccolta di Ramusio, vol. ii, fol., 112a-125a.
Contarini’s travels are translated into Latin, French, Russian, and Polish.
Latin, by Jacob Geuder von Gerolzberg, in Bizari’s Rerum Persicarum historia. Francof., 1601; fol.
A Latin extract from these travels will be found in De Laet’s “Persia”, p. 220.
French. Voiage de Perse, par Ambroise Contareni, Ambassadeur de la République de Venise en ce Royaume là, en l’année MCCCCLXXIII. Décrit par lui même. In Bergeron’s “Recueil de divers Voyages curieux faits en Tartarie, en Perse et ailleurs,” etc. Amsterdam, 1724; 4to., vol. ii.
Polish, in an extract, viz., Contarini’s travels through Poland. In Skarbiec, Historii polskiej przez Karola Sienkiewieza; 4 vols. Paris, 1839; 8vo.
(27.)
Niclaus Poppel. 1486-1489.
Niclaus Poppel, whose birth-place is unknown, was sent by the Emperor Frederick III on two embassies to the court of Russia: the first in 1486, the second in 1489. Adelung received the information which he has been able to supply respecting this traveller from Mr. F. G. Müller, keeper of the Russian Imperial Archives, which contain partial accounts of both these embassies. It is easy, says Adelung, to perceive that Poppel, the first time as well as the second, had been furnished with a letter from his emperor to the grand-prince, but that at Moscow the validity of the first letter was doubted. The Boyars had expressed their suspicion, that Poppel might have written the letter himself, and that he had been despatched by the king of Poland to operate for the advantage of the latter with the grand-prince. Poppel thereupon proposed, that the grand-prince should send an ambassador with him to the emperor, to testify to his innocence. It would appear that some one had really been sent to Vienna, but confirmatory accounts to this effect are wanting. In any case, we may take it, that Poppel’s first embassy to the grand-prince was not particularly well received; and hence it may have happened, that neither the original, nor a copy, nor a translation of the first imperial letter, is to be found among the archives.
Poppel’s second embassy, says Müller, had with it a peculiarity which tended in some measure to protect him from the suspicions to which he had been exposed in the first. It had for its object, among other things, to propose that a strict alliance should be entered into between the two courts to support each other against their enemies. The imperial letter, dated from Ulm, the 26th of December 1488, is not indeed to be found; but we have the proposals of the ambassador, and what he received in answer, carefully protocoled, after he had been three times admitted to audience with the grand-prince. From these we learn that Poppel, at his own request, was allowed to hold his third audience with this prince in private, and without an interpreter. From this latter fact, we may conclude that he was of Sclavonic descent.
Poppel, at his first audience, sought above all to gain the favour of the grand-prince and his Boyars; informing them, that upon his return from his first journey, he had been asked by the emperor (whom he had met at Nurnberg) and by all the princes to give them information concerning the kingdom of Russia, of which but little was then known in Germany. He also informed them, that he had had an opportunity, and had availed himself of it, to make them acquainted with the general state of Russia, from his own observation, and had described the almost boundless extent of the countries and nations subject to its sovereign, on whose power, riches, and wisdom, he had been able to speak as an eye-witness.
His second object was to justify himself against the suspicions which the Boyars entertained, that he was not really an ambassador from the emperor, but that he assumed that name and title as an emissary from the king of Poland. “People,” he says, “have believed, that I have prepared the imperial letter myself, and have desired that I should write something, that it may be compared with that letter; while I, on the other hand, requested that an ambassador should be sent with me to the emperor. That was done,[16] and I trust that now you will place more confidence in my integrity.”
Hereupon he brought forward his proposals, and begged that they might be kept secret. The first point was, if the grand-prince were not indisposed, to unite in wedlock one of his princesses to the margrave Albert of Baden, the emperor’s sister’s son; the emperor in that case would forward the matter, and enter into an alliance of love and friendship with the grand-prince.[17] Such an unexpected desire demanded consideration: the grand-prince sent answer to the ambassador, through the diak Feodor Kirizin, that he would explain himself thereupon through a special ambassador.
Poppel, at his second audience, expressed a wish to be allowed to see the princess who was desired in marriage for the margrave of Baden: to which he received for answer,—“that it was not the custom in Russia to let the daughter be seen before the befitting time.”
Poppel now begged a third audience, at which he stated, that he had understood that an ambassador had been despatched to the pope from the grand-prince, with a request that the latter might have the title of King of Russia bestowed upon him; but as it was not in the power of the pope, but of the emperor alone, to name kings, princes, and knights, he (Poppel) would interest himself with the emperor to gain him such title, since that was his wish; but that in such case the matter must be kept very secret, and that the king of Poland must know nothing about it. To this proposal, the grand-prince gave the ambassador for answer, “that he was, through God’s grace, sovereign of his own countries from the beginning and by right of his ancestors, and held his station from God, and prayed to God that it might be so preserved to him and his children; and as in times past he had never desired the nomination of any other power, so neither did he then.”
Poppel quitted Moscow in March 1489, and took his way home through Sweden and Denmark, in which countries also he had commissions from the emperor.
The account of his travels is probably still to be found among the imperial archives of Vienna.
See also respecting Poppel: Hormayr’s “Archiv für Geographie,” etc. Wien, 1819; No. 47.
(28.)
Georg von Thurn. 1490-1492.
Georg von Thurn was sent by Maximilian, king of the Romans, as ambassador to Moscow, where he arrived on the 10th of July 1490, and was received with many proofs of honour. A few days after his arrival, he was admitted to an audience with the grand-prince, and, what until then had been very unusual, also with the grand-princess Sophia. He stated the wish of Maximilian to enter into closer alliance with the grand-prince, and at the same time to marry a daughter of the latter; and begged, in the event of this request being favourably received, to be allowed to see the princess, and to be informed what would be the amount of her dowry. With respect to religion, she should be entirely free; and it would be permitted her to have a Greek church and its priests. To this the ambassador received for answer, that it was not the custom in Russia to set out the princesses for show, and moreover, that it was unheard of among great monarchs, to fix the dowry prior to marriage; after marriage, the grand-prince would certainly endow his daughter proportionately to her rank. On the point of religion, the ambassador was desired to give a letter of assurance; but to the drawing up of this, he did not consider himself authorized.
Thurn was more fortunate than his predecessor in concluding an alliance between the grand-prince and Maximilian,—the first which had been effected between the Russian and Austrian courts. The letter which Ivan III sent to his new ally on that occasion, and which he had previously confirmed by kissing the cross, no longer exists in the original, but only in a cotemporaneous copy, preserved among the archives at Moscow.
The ambassador, as a proof of the satisfaction of the grand-prince, received from him presents, which for that time must be regarded as extremely handsome, viz.,a gold chain with a cross, an ermine mantle covered with satin worked in gold, and a pair of silver-gilt spurs.
Thurn left Moscow on the 19th of August 1490, in company with Trachaniota, already mentioned, and the diak Vasiley Kuleschin, who came with a duplicate of the document prepared by Ivan, to have it signed by Maximilian. They arrived on St. George’s day, 1491, at Nuremberg, where a diet was then being held, and where the treaty of alliance was signed on the part of Maximilian. Of this official document neither the original nor a copy could be found by Müller at Moscow, but only a cotemporaneous Russian translation of it.
In November of the same year, Thurn was sent for a second time to Moscow, where he arrived on the 20th, and was admitted to an audience on the 26th. He conveyed his master’s excuses for breaking off the union which he had previously wished for with a daughter of the grand-prince. He was instructed to state that a rumour had spread in Germany during his first absence, that he had been lost at sea. Maximilian had, thereupon, believed that his marriage proposals had not been mentioned; and hence, by the advice of his father and the princes of the kingdom, he had betrothed himself to the princess Anne of Brittany, through which circumstance the whole matter was at an end.
The ambassador then came to the subject of the alliance which had been concluded between the two monarchs, and which had been confirmed by Maximilian with an oath in the presence of the Russian deputies, and now begged that the grand-prince would do the same in his presence on his side. This ceremony was performed without demur, by the kissing of the cross.
Thurn, after having thus successfully carried out all the instructions of his court, returned to Germany on the 12th of April 1492.
The narrative of this embassy is to be found among the imperial archives of Vienna.
Respecting Georg von Thurn, the reader may consult Hormayr’s “Archiv für Geographie, Historie, Staats und Kriegskunst”. Wien, 1819; No. 47.
(29.)
Michael Snups. 1492.
In the year 1492 an Austrian embassy appeared at Moscow of altogether a novel character, namely, one professing to have for its object the advancement of knowledge and science. The archduke Sigismund, who took especial interest in collecting accounts of foreign countries and nations, despatched from Innspruck, where he then held his court, an able man to Moscow, and provided him with letters to the grand-prince from himself and from his nephew Maximilian, king of the Romans. This traveller was Michael Snups, whose name is only known to us through the Russian archives; he was charged to make himself acquainted with this and other countries of Europe but little known at that period, and for this purpose was required to learn the Russian language. The archduke had especially begged permission for him to travel into the interior of the kingdom, and even to venture as far as the Obi.
It was not found advisable in Moscow, however, through the general distrust of foreigners which still prevailed there, to favour such a journey, the reason being assigned that the Obi was too distant, and the difficulties of such a journey for a foreigner much too great, as even the officers who were sent to bring the tribute of those parts had always to contend with the greatest difficulties on the road. Snups now wished to return through Turkey or Poland; but this, too, was denied him, under the pretence of the great insecurity of the journey; and nothing more remained for him than to make his return by the way he had come, namely, through Livonia and Germany. The letters in reply, which the grand-prince intrusted to him for Maximilian, are dated the 5th of January 1493, and copies of them exist among the archives at Moscow.
The original of Michael Snups narrative of his travels is probably still to be found in Innspruck or Vienna.
(30.)
Justus Kantinger. 1504.
After the battle against the Livonians, near Pleskov’, on the 7th of September 1501, which proved so disastrous to the Russian army, the emperor Maximilian despatched an ambassador, named Justus Kantinger, to the grand-prince Ivan Vasileivich, to express, though somewhat tardily, his sympathy, and to offer his assistance. This, at least, was the official purport of his embassy; while at the same time he was to make himself particularly acquainted with the position of the grand-prince, and the state of affairs in Russia. The emperor’s letter is dated from Augsburg, the 6th of August 1502. In another confidential letter of the 12th of August, of which Kantinger, here called the Imperial Falconer, was also the bearer, the Emperor begged to have some white falcons (kretschati) sent to him by this messenger. The grand-prince answered the first despatch in a very long and courteous letter. In a second letter he informs the emperor that he had sent him five falcons, which, for caution and on account of their great value, he had forwarded by an officer of rank, named Michaila Klepik Jeropkin.
In the following year Kantinger was sent a second time into Russia. On this occasion, however, he went, for some unknown reason, to Narva only; and from this place sent, through the medium of the governor of Ivanogorod, a letter of the emperor Maximilian’s, dated at Costnitz, the 6th of March 1505, addressed to the grand-prince; and another from the emperor’s son, King Philip of Castile, from Brussels, dated the 13th of October 1504, to the grand-prince and his son Vasiley Ivanovich. The principal object of these letters was the liberation of certain distinguished Livonian prisoners of war, who, as German knights, were under the Imperial protection. These letters came to Moscow on the 16th of June, and the answer of the grand-prince reached Kantinger at Narva, on the 19th of the same month, on which day he returned for Germany. In the superscription of the letter of King Philip, the grand-prince as well as his son was addressed by the title of czar, an honour now for the first time paid to the princes of Russia by the Imperial court.
Kantinger’s account of his two journeys must still, without doubt, be preserved among the Imperial archives at Vienna.
(31.)
SIGISMUND BARON VON HERBERSTEIN. 1517-26.
Next to Justus Kantinger in chronological rotation, comes the author of the “Commentarii” which we now for the first time present to the reader in an English dress. His biography, as has been already stated, has been minutely elaborated by Adelung, in an octavo volume published in St. Petersburg in 1818. Apart from the results of much learned investigation by Adelung himself, he mentions the following works as supplying him with the principal materials of his information:—
1. An autobiography of our traveller, published in Vienna, 1560, folio, under the title, “Gratæ posteritati Sigismundus Liber Baro in Herberstain Neyperg et Guettenhag, etc., actiones suas a puero ad annum usque ætatis suæ septuagesimum quartum, brevi commentariolo notatas reliquit.” In the copy of this work in the Grenville Library, are inserted original drawings of Herberstein, in the various dresses worn by him in his several embassies, accompanied by cotemporaneous engravings from the same drawings. From one of these, the etching which forms the frontispiece of the present translation has been made. The work itself is of extreme rarity.
2. An autobiography, which was only printed so recently as 1805, at Buda, by Martin George Kovachich, in his “Sammlung kleiner noch ungedruckter Stücke, in welchen gleichzeitige Schriftsteller einzelne Abschnitte der ungarischen Geschichte aufgezeichnet haben.” It bears the following title, “Mein Sigmunden Freyherrn zu Herberstain, Neyperg und Guttenhag, Raittung, und Antzaigen meines Lebens und Wesens wie hernach volgt.”
3. Sigmund Freyherr zu Herberstain, Neyperg, und Guttenhag, oberster Erbcamrer vnd oberster Druchsass in Kärnttn. Den Gegenwurtign vnd nach komendn Freyherrn zu Herberstain. Seines thuns dienstn vnnd Raisens mit trewer vermanung sich zu tugenden vnd gueten weesn schicken Gedruckt zu Wienn in Oestereich durch Raphaeln Hoffhalter. Folio; without date or place of publication.
4. Sigmundt Freyherr zu Herberstain, Neyperg, vnd Guttenhag, Oberster Erbcamrer vnd Oberster Erbdrucksas in Kärnthn, des Röm: Kayser Ferdinanden Ratt, Camrer, vnd president der Niederösterreichischen Camer. Den viertn Khayser erlebt, den Dreyen in Kriegen, Achte jn Ratn, Polschaftn hie vertzaichnet, vnd vilen andern auch geferlichen Raysn, vier vnd viertzig jar gedient. M. D. lviij in Maio; one sheet and a half, folio, without place of publication, but probably Vienna.
5. Sigismundus Liber Baro in Herberstain Neyperg et Guetenhag, Ducatus Carinthiæ Supremus Hæreditarius et Camerarius et Dapifer: Serenissimi D. Domini Ferdinandi Rom. Hungariæ et Bohemiæ Regis, Archiducis Austriæ: Ærarii Consilii præsidens. Excellentissimo Domino Henrico Lorito Glareano Patricio Claronensi Poetæ Laureato Amico suo S. D.
“This work,” says Adelung, “consisting of five folio leaves, is a strenuous attempt to vindicate the Baron von Rozzendorf, who was accused of treason; and is likewise a defence of himself from the charge brought by Poland against him, of giving the title of king to the Grand Duke of Russia. Although this appears to be the exclusive intention of the work, it contains in addition very many lights and disclosures respecting Herberstein’s public life, which we have not failed to make use of.”
Sigismund Baron von Herberstein was born on the 23rd of August 1486, in the castle of Wippach, granted to his father by the Emperor Frederick III, in the circle of Adelsberg, on a river of the same name in Carniola. His father was Leonhart, or Lienhart von Herberstein, a valiant warrior much in favour with the emperor, whom he attended to Rome on the occasion of his coronation; and to Naples, at the celebration of his marriage. During a second progress of the emperor into Italy he received the honour of knighthood in Rome, and in his later years became governor of Adelsberg and bailiff of Wippach. Sigismund’s mother was Barbara, the daughter of Niclaus Luegger, burgrave of Linz and Lueg.
Such records of the noble family of Herberstein as are indisputable ascend to the thirteenth century. Petrus Paganus speaks of it as “familiam ultra memoriam hominum nobilem et equestris ordinis dignitate conspicuam”; and the details of the history of this distinguished family were found sufficient to fill a thick and closely printed octavo volume, published by J. A. Kumar, in three parts; Vienna, 1817. Herberstein traces the names of his ancestors up to the middle of the thirteenth century, and relates various circumstances connected with them after the year 1400. Of the early times of his family, he relates the following droll anecdote, which may be repeated here for the sake of the practical conclusion which he draws. “I have heard,” says he, “from my parents, who also had it from hearsay, that once there were seven knights who lived at Herberstein, who had only one pair of breeches amongst them. I have also been told, that nine ladies of the Herberstein family were married in the same mantle. For the certainty of this, I will not answer; but it is not improbable. It only shows how the times are changed, for now-a-days no gentleman would be satisfied without seven pairs of breeches, and no lady without nine mantles.”[18]
The ancient hereditary estate of this family was Herberstein, an Austrian territory with a castle, near Stubenberg, on the River Feistritz, in the circle of Grätz in Styria, which one Otto von Harperg purchased in the year 1290, and the name of which he adopted for himself and his descendants. This purchase, nevertheless, does not appear to have given rise to the family name of Herberstein. The most ancient lord of the race whom Sigismund could find bearing the name, was Hans von Herberstein, curate of Pölan about the year 1200. He mentions also a tradition, that at first they bore the name of Herulstein, from the Heruli, who waged war against Istria and Pannonia, under Odoacer, in 475.
Leonhart von Herberstein had nine children, viz., four sons, of whom Sigismund was the third, and five daughters. Herberstein himself bears witness to the mutual affection of all the brothers for each other, and states that throughout their whole life they lived in the greatest harmony; he particularly speaks with the utmost gratitude of George, the eldest, as a most excellent and distinguished man, who by his advice and example had produced the most salutary influence on the formation of his youthful character. In the early years of his life, Sigismund was very delicate, and soon became so sickly that his parents despaired of human help, and made a vow to send him to the celebrated monastery of Our Lady at Loretto. His second brother Hans, who must have been at least fifteen years older than himself, accompanied him in this journey. The brothers embarked at Lovrana, a little harbour of Liburnia, and sailed for Ancona, whence they proceeded on horseback to the end of their pilgrimage. This so-called pious expedition, we are told, had the most beneficial effects; so that Sigismund, when only eight years old, was well able, after his return, to attend the school in his native town of Wippach. His parents afterwards sent him to school at Lonsbach. Here he learned German and Windisch, or Sclavonic, which latter language subsequently proved of the greatest service to him, although his schoolfellows, on this account, called him a Windisch slave. Petrus Paganus, speaking upon this point, says that the people used to exhibit great animosity against their neighbours upon the subject of differences in language, and that Herberstein consequently was exposed to the frequent taunts of his school-fellows, because he, being a German, and sprung from a German race, spoke the Sclavonic language; and that he only overcame their unkind treatment by patient endurance.
In the year 1495, in the ninth year of his age, his father sent him to Gurk, in the circle of Klagenfurt, and placed him under the care of Wilhelm Weltzer, a relative by his mother’s side, who was provost of the cathedral of that place. He often speaks with the greatest gratitude and satisfaction of his two years’ residence with this relation; and describes him “as a true nobleman, who loved nobility, and brought up many noble children in learning and every other needful branch of education.” He names also ten young noblemen, who were the companions of his studies and his games, and who shortly after by a remarkable accident were his companions in arms in his first campaign.
In 1497, Sigismund was sent to the public school at Vienna, under the care of Master George Ratzenperger, of whose integrity, goodness, and friendship, he frequently speaks, in his autobiography,[19] in the highest terms.
Two years after, viz. in 1499, Herberstein had the misfortune to lose his mother; shortly after which he went to the University at Vienna, where he became a student under the rector Oswald Ludwig von Weickerstorff. That he made good use of his time at Vienna under the tuition of Christoph Kalber, Paul Rockner, and also his paternal friend George Ratzenperger, is shown by the judgment of his cotemporaries, his constant love of his masters, and, more than all, by the subsequent events of his brilliant and laborious life. In the year 1502, when he was sixteen years old, after a most honourable and protracted examination, he was created by the rector Kaltenmarkter, bachelor of arts, or, as he himself calls it, half-master (Halb-Meister), a degree which brought down upon him from his frivolous companions many sneers and sarcastic appellations, such as doctor, student, scribe, etc.; “yet with all this,” says the excellent Herberstein, “Latin and the arts have not been suffered to escape me, but I have loved them, persevered in, and profited by them,—thanks to God and my father, and especially my masters, who urged me on to these studies, and have remained faithful to me, and imparted them to me, whilst I remained at school.” And in another place he says: “In the year 1502, I became bachelor of arts, a degree of which many are ashamed, but upon which I congratulate myself. How faithful have my masters and instructors been to me. God give them all eternal peace for their reward. Amen.”
Herberstein appears soon afterwards to have left Vienna, and to have returned to his father’s roof; and it was not long before an opportunity occurred by which to turn his various attainments to advantage, and at the same time not only to employ but to expand his intellect by his having committed to him the charge of very important business. His father sent him to the court of the Emperor Maximilian, that he might advance the interests of certain family concerns there; and he was also charged with similar commissions to the cities of Neustadt and Grätz. Four years were thus passed in these more private trials of his ability before we see Herberstein make his appearance in a public capacity. This period was divided between journeys, residences in the capital on the score of business, his own labours, and reading of the ancient as well as some of the modern historians. With respect to these last occupations, he himself says: “My most conscientious preceptor, Master George Ratzenperger, admonished me by no means to neglect my learning, and promised me that if I would devote at least one hour in the day to reading, it would be of great service to me. I did so, and as from time to time I studied the histories of modern writers, I remarked especially that in certain points they either from too much zeal and tendency to flattery wandered very far from the truth, or sometimes by a frivolous description detracted from the merits of good men, or attributed to others more than was just.”
After this period he entered the army, and made his first campaign at the early age of twenty. It began by his accompanying his brother George to the war which Maximilian, without provocation or even the proclamation of hostilities, had commenced against Hungary, in consequence of his fear of losing his claim to the throne of that kingdom through the marriage of John Zapolski, count of Zips, with the daughter of Vladislaus, king of Hungary. This was in March 1506; but as peace was concluded that same year, Herberstein had very little opportunity of distinguishing himself. In 1508, the Venetians deprived the emperor of his possessions in Friuli, Carniola, and Istria, in which latter country Herberstein’s father possessed the territory of Mährenfels; and during a short armistice, he was sent in 1509 to Venice, on a diplomatic mission to recover this estate, but he was not successful in his endeavours. During his stay in Venice, he witnessed the great fire in which the celebrated arsenal was consumed. In the same year, the lower Austrian states sent a corps to the assistance of the emperor to Friuli, under Duke Erick of Brunswick. Herberstein was in this corps, and was present in different engagements. Not long after, his eldest brother sent him, with twelve horsemen and thirty-two foot soldiers, to Mitterburg, in order to garrison the place; and he undertook this charge, because, as he says in his book, nobody else would go there. In this expedition he attacked Alben, from which place the enemy, together with the faithless inhabitants, fled at his approach. “They took refuge in a church,” he says; “and when the Croats asked if they should break into it, as they should take many prisoners, I replied, that one ought not to touch the house of God. For this, God afterwards rewarded me.” In the same year he was present at the siege and capture of Rasburg, where he distinguished himself so much, that on the 4th of October, he was taken into the immediate service of the emperor, or, as he himself describes it, in Cohortem Prætorianam. In March 1510, the Venetians again besieged Mitterburg, which was without means of defence and threatened with the rebellion of its own inhabitants. Herberstein was then in Mährenfels, and was asked by the commandant of Mitterburg to obtain assistance from the Duke of Brunswick; but as he could not pass through the country, he went himself to Mitterburg, where he found matters in a very bad state. The walls were already much injured by the enemy, and the inhabitants as well as the garrison were unwilling to obey the orders of the commandant, and deserted. The commandant urged Herberstein to take the command, but he would not accept it, and only consented to act conjointly with him. He succeeded in re-establishing order, and in compelling the enemy to withdraw. By this he gained great distinction from the duke, who was coming to assist the fortress, and on the road gained information of the delivery that had been effected. In this campaign he distinguished himself as much by prudence and order as by courage; and the states of Styria offered him in consequence the post of Paymaster of the Forces.
In the following year, viz., 1511, he lost his father, for whom he entertained a very warm affection, as is sufficiently shown by his writings, although it is but seldom that his parents are alluded to in them. He hastened to Wippach, in order to attend his father’s funeral, from which place the body was afterwards brought to Grätz. Nothing specially worthy of remark appears to have occurred in the two following years of his life; it is probable that during that period he was occupied with family matters.
The year 1514 presents us with more that is worthy of notice. We now begin to find him invested with great honours, and raised to a position which shows the confidence reposed in him at so early an age as twenty-eight. It was a high distinction at such an age to be made standard-bearer,—an honour which he held as a glorious remembrance till his death, and was proud of leaving it, amongst many other glorious reminiscences, to his descendants. The fortress of Maran, in Friuli, was besieged by the Venetians, and the inhabitants suffered the most dreadful famine, upon which Maximilian ordered Herberstein and his brother George to raise troops in Styria in order to relieve the place, and to convey provisions into it. Herberstein repulsed the enemy on the 12th of July, and took the leader, Giovanni Vittoria, prisoner. The remembrance of this exploit must have been dear to Herberstein in his old age, as he has immortalized it in two wood-cuts. Immediately after the campaign, the emperor summoned him to Innspruck, where the court was then held, and knighted him, as a reward for his distinguished services, and gave him a yearly salary of three hundred florins. He also gave him rank immediately below his own officers, and not long after he took him into the Imperial Council.
Even so early as the year 1515 Herberstein was employed in important diplomatic missions to the Archbishop of Salzburg; and afterwards to Ulm, Eichstatt, and Bavaria. At the end of the year, he went to Innspruck, where the emperor then was, and received from him an expression of his satisfaction, together with an order to remain at court, as his services would shortly be again put into requisition.
With the year 1516 really begins the great diplomatic and active career of Herberstein, as he then undertook the first journey to Russia. Before starting on this, however, he was employed on a mission, the management of which was also very difficult, and required extraordinary prudence and perseverance. Christian II of Denmark had two years before married Isabella, second daughter of Philip of Spain, a princess adorned with all the good qualities of her race; but that her lot could not be a happy one, may be judged from the character and public actions of that voluptuous tyrant. She complained to Charles of Burgundy, and to her powerful grandfather, the emperor Maximilian, of the shameful neglect she suffered on account of the ill-famed Dyveke and her mother Siegbrit, for the former of whom the king was possessed with a most infatuated affection. The queen also even complained of being personally ill-treated. The two monarchs, thus appealed to by their relative, resolved to send ambassadors to Christian, in order to remonstrate with him, and to require that he should show better treatment to his wife; and this very difficult and, in any case, ungrateful office was assigned by the emperor to Herberstein. He left the court in January 1516, and after fulfilling various commissions assigned to him by the way, came to Nykoping, where the unfortunate Queen Isabella then resided. Here he found also two ambassadors from Charles of Spain, who were waiting for him. The king arrived shortly after, and without much delay granted Herberstein an audience, not however, as one would suppose, in the Royal Palace, but in a convent of the Cordeliers, at a short distance from Herberstein’s hotel. This may probably have been caused by a suspicion of the purpose of Herberstein’s mission, and a wish to avoid having witnesses to so disagreeable a conference. Indeed, the king on this occasion was told such things as he had never heard from any one before, for Herberstein’s own words are, “I have told the king that he had acted unfairly, unjustly, and dishonestly, against the emperor and his friends. The king listened to me standing, and when I uttered these sharp words, I read them from a paper, that I might not say too much or too little.” His majesty allowed him to conclude without interruption; and then the other ambassadors, who stood at each side of him, declared that what he had said conveyed the sentiments of their own masters also. The king must have been moved, or at least embarrassed, by the noble boldness of Herberstein, for he did not give his answer immediately, but said that he would reply on a future occasion. Soon after, Herberstein was admitted, together with the Spanish and Netherlands ambassadors, to an audience of the queen, on which occasion he received the honourable distinction of being permitted to read his address sitting, whereas the others were obliged to read their’s|theirs}} in a kneeling posture. At length the king sent for Herberstein, and gave him a verbal answer for the emperor, but of too evasive and vague a character to satisfy the shrewd and resolute diplomatist. He had, therefore, the courage to tell the king, that neither the emperor nor the prince of Spain expected such an answer; nor would they believe that His Majesty would set a higher value upon a low woman than upon his own conscience, the laws of God, Christian order, his own honour, and the feelings of friendship. Herberstein demanded that at least the king’s answer should be written down and sealed with the king’s seal, but this Christian declined to do. All that Herberstein could obtain, after long parleying, was a short and unmeaning letter from the chancellor; but it seems that the king, although his honour was insulted, could not but appreciate the straightforwardness of the honest ambassador, for he sent him, as a present, a beautiful horse with saddle and equipments complete.
On the 10th of April he returned to Germany. He found the emperor at Tannheim, in the Tyrol, whom, after having reported the result of his mission, he was obliged to follow to Constanz.
After this, in the course of the same year he was sent several times to Zurich; and finally, at the close of the year, was sent on the most important mission upon which he had yet been engaged, namely, an embassy to Moscow, which expedition had been set on foot for a twofold purpose. It has been already mentioned, that in consequence of the marriage of the daughter of Vladislas with John Zapolski, the emperor entertained fears of his claim to the throne of Hungary being set aside, a fear which was increased by the position assumed by Sigismund, king of Poland, who had married Barbara, John Zapolski’s sister. Sigismund himself likewise laid claim to some provinces in Hungary, which had not been renounced by his mother, Elizabeth of Austria, on her marriage,—the arms of which he included in his heraldic coat. The emperor, therefore, endeavoured to weaken the power of Sigismund by engaging the grand-prince of Russia in a war with that sovereign. Subsequently, however, he resorted to a different line of policy, and thought of gaining his point by bringing about marriages between his own family and that of Hungary and Poland.
One of these plans was, that Sigismund should marry Maximilian’s granddaughter Bona, the daughter of John Galeozzi Sforza, Duke of Milan. With this new view, therefore, the emperor resolved upon sending an embassy to Moscow to mediate for Sigismund. Eighteen months, however, transpired, to the emperor’s dissatisfaction, before the embassy started on its journey; for Christoff Rauber, bishop of Laybach, who had been appointed chief ambassador (Herberstein being only his second), made so many excuses, and, in spite of the instigations of the ambassador of Poland, who had been ordered at the same time for Moscow, and urged his speedy departure, took so long a time in preparing for his journey, that the emperor altered his plan, and charged Herberstein temporarily with the conduct of this embassy, in company with one Peter Mraxi, bailiff of Guntz. As a source of further delay, this latter also was prevented, through a journey which he was compelled to make previous to his departure, from joining Herberstein till some time after. The emperor, who had wished to finish the whole business when in Augsburg, left that place in October, and desired Herberstein to follow him. They passed through Tyrol, Switzerland, and Brisgau, to Hagenau, from which place at last Herberstein was despatched alone to Moscow on the 14th of December.
A journey to Russia at that time naturally offered many difficulties, partly real and partly imaginary. The real ones were caused by the great distance, by the severity of the climate, surpassing in coldness that of all other European countries, the danger of passing the rivers increased at this season by the floating ice, the bad state and insecurity of the high roads, more especially at this time from the cruel war which had been carried on now for many years between Poland and Russia, by the neglect with which foreigners were then generally treated in Russia, and finally by the difficulty of making themselves clearly understood. The imaginary difficulties consisted in the imperfect knowledge and strange notions which they had of the countries to be passed through, and especially of that northern country Russia, the dreadful name of which only summoned up to the imaginations of the then uninformed inhabitants of the south, the thought of encountering Scythians and barbarians, cruelty, ice, and darkness. Any journey, therefore, to Moscow, could not fail of being regarded as a very hazardous enterprise; and whoever managed to avoid it congratulated himself on escaping a great danger. How many qualities then must the man have united in himself who was to keep his dignity in a country so little known and so entirely different to all the countries of Europe in manners and customs, who could gain respect for his own person and a successful result of his mission. And all these qualities were found in a rare and happy combination in Herberstein. Possessing, as he did, a noble prepossessing countenance—a countenance shewing tranquillity and dignity—a demeanour formed by travelling, and long experience in courts and by intercourse with men of all ranks, and, together with all these very rare advantages, attainments such as could rarely be found at all in statesmen of that time, including the knowledge of the Sclavonic language,—Maximilian could not have made a better choice for a negotiation of so delicate a nature in a country like Russia, with a prince such as Vasiley Ivanovich, to whom already had been given the epithet of the “Courageous”. The preference given to Herberstein in this mission was perfectly justified by the result; and although the expected effect for Poland was delayed by the deep-rooted hatred existing between the antagonist monarchs and other circumstances, his stay in Moscow was of effectual service in fastening the alliance between Maximilian and Vasiley. At Augsburg he was joined on his route by a numerous company, mostly consisting of his own attachés, and partly of ambassadors and persons of distinction returning to Moscow. These latter were Dimitrievich Sakrevski, who had been sent by Vasiley Ivanovich to the court of Maximilian, and was now on his return to Moscow, and who must, for several reasons, have been very welcome to Herberstein; and next, Chrisostomos Columnos, sent by Isabella Duchess of Milan, widow of John Sforza, to Poland, to bring about a marriage between her daughter Bona and Sigismund, there being now no obstacle to the marriage, his wife Barbara having recently died.
With this numerous company, then, Herberstein continued his journey through Bavaria. During the last days of December, and the early part of January of the next year, he was compelled by various embarrassments to stay for some weeks in Znaym in Moravia, at which place, his companion Petro Mraxi died. Herberstein was thus obliged to write to Vienna for further instructions. The emperor being absent, he was under the necessity of addressing himself to the imperial council, but received for answer, that as they were not aware of his previous instructions, they could not advise him in the present emergency. Herberstein, therefore, continued his journey alone, a resolution which the emperor afterwards approved of. Others, it is true, were ordered to follow him, but some excuse or another was always brought forward to delay or prevent their departure. He first went to Poland to Wilna, where Sigismund then was, and was admitted to an audience. From Wilna he could not take the shortest and ordinary route by Smolensko, on account of the insecurity which was caused by the war, but was obliged to take a circuitous route and make a passage over many small rivers. Between Wilna and Drissa, he lost the company of the Milanese ambassador, who could not endure the severity of the climate. Near Drissa, he was exposed to a formidable trial of courage, for the passage over the Dwina was on a small strip of ice, and he was informed that not long before six hundred Russians had tried to cross on the ice, and were all drowned. Here he was again joined by the Russian ambassador. At Opochka he was obliged to make a circuit, because it was besieged by Sigismund, although that monarch was at the same time sending messengers of peace to Moscow. He reached Novogorod on Palm Sunday, the 4th of April, and was received with every courtesy by the governor, who expressed his wish to render the stay which he hoped he would make as agreeable as possible, but his real object was of course to gain time, it being the custom immediately to write to Moscow to announce the arrival of an ambassador and obtain permission for the continuance of his journey. Herberstein was anxious to proceed, but was obliged to stay a week in that city, which was even then a place of great note. The German merchants of Novogorod were so impressed with the importance of Herberstein’s journey, and regarded him as so remarkable a person, that they begged him to present them with the sledge in which he had travelled from Cracow, and suspended it in their church for a memorial. He left his own servants and horses at Novogorod, and continued his journey with post horses to Vishni Volotchok, where he kept the feast of Easter. Thence he travelled by the river Tverza to Tver. The travellers were anxious to make their passage in a larger vessel, but could not proceed for the floating ice, which caused them great trouble in reaching the shore. On landing, they had to travel for a short time on foot, but at length found some wretched horses at a peasant’s house. In the convent of St. Ilia he found a man named Michaila Schaffroff, who came to meet him with a present from the grand-prince to him and to his nephew, of two horses apiece. From this point the grand-prince undertook the entire providing of the company. Shortly before reaching Moscow, an interpreter named Gregory Istumen announced to him the arrival of a noble courtier, sent by the grand-prince to meet him, named Timofei Constantinovich Chaldeneff, and begged Herberstein to descend from his horse in order to listen standing to the greeting which was to be offered him in the name of the grand-prince. Herberstein first excused himself on the score of fatigue, and then only agreed to alight on the condition that the other should do the same at the same moment, and when, after long parleying, this was agreed to, Herberstein contrived to descend very slowly, so that he should not touch the ground before the other.
On the 18th of April he arrived at Moscow with a suite of fifteen noblemen and thirty grooms belonging to the household of the grand-prince. He was conducted to the house of Prince Peter Repolovski, which the grand-prince had appointed for his residence, and which had been prepared very hastily with all necessary furniture and conveniences. An officer, named Ostan, called in Russian podietchi, which means under-secretary, and who was charged with his daily provisions, was allotted to him at the same time. His daily provisions were a large piece of beef, a piece of bacon, a live sheep, one live and one dead hare, six live fowls, vegetables, oats, and once a week, as much salt, pepper, and saffron, as he required; also fish, especially large dried sturgeon; together with a bottle of brandy, three different sorts of mead, and two sorts of beer. According to the season the fish were delivered frozen, but on one occasion when Herberstein sent to get live fish with his own money, it was considered an affront, and from that time he was supplied with live fish.
Herberstein himself says that they placed persons in the house who were considered noble, and whose office it was to keep close watch that nobody should come or go without their knowledge. The general cause of this precaution was to be ascribed to the spirit of the times, but Herberstein himself had partly caused it by an inadvertence which he lays to his own charge. He had been very anxious to gain all the information he could respecting Moscow; he began to do this, as he himself acknowledges, too early, and even on the day of his arrival he made various inquiries of his interpreter, and told him that such information would be very interesting to his countrymen. At the same time he offered to give him information of other countries, and to explain to him the maps which he had brought with him, by which of course he caused suspicion, and was observed so closely that nobody was allowed to visit him unless two or more of his watchful attendants were permitted to be present, and to hear what was said. Afterwards he was more cautious, and was obliged to adopt a very circuitous process when he wanted to gain any information. On the 20th of April he was informed that the grand-prince wished to see him on the following day. Early in the morning several noblemen on horseback were sent to his house to escort him. The nearer he came to the Kremlin, the more the procession increased. All the shops were closed, and the crowding of the curious at such a rare sight was so great that force was necessary to make a passage through them. When they came near the steps of the palace, the grooms leading Herberstein’s horse would not allow him to ride near it, but he spurred the horse as near as possible to the steps, in his desire to claim a peculiar honour for his master. Here he was received by the councillors of the grand-prince, who offered him their hands, and saluted him. On the stairs a greater number of courtiers joined the procession. In the ante-room many well-dressed noblemen were sitting and standing, of whom however none spoke to him, or took the least notice of him. In the first state-room were several nobles dressed in silk and brocade. In the second, were the young princes, with other high people, who wore caps richly adorned with pearls and jewels. From this room he was led by the officers into the reception room of the grand-prince, who was sitting on a somewhat raised chair, and had a footstool under his feet. On each side of him sat one of his brothers, and next to the one at his right hand his brother-in-law, Czar Peter, as Herberstein calls him, who was brother of the Tartar Khan, and had been baptized. The whole room was full of princes and nobles, who all arose at Herberstein’s entrance. When he had respectfully approached the grand-prince, the latter addressed him first, and told him to stand before him next to a little low bench covered with carpet, which he did, and spoke a few words by way of introductory compliment. When he mentioned the name of the emperor Maximilian, the grand-prince rose from his seat, stood next to the little bench, and asked, “How is our brother Maximilian, elected Roman emperor and high and noble king?” and when the answer was given that Herberstein, at the time of his departure, had left him quite well, he sat down again, and listened to the rest of the speech. After Herberstein had delivered his credentials, he had to give his hand to the grand-prince, who asked him, “Hast thou travelled well?” To which Herberstein had been instructed to answer, “Through the mercy of God and your grace, quite well. God give your grace good health.” The grand-prince then bade him sit down, called the interpreter, and whispered to him. The interpreter then approached Herberstein, and told him in a low tone that he might now say what he had to say. Upon this Herberstein rose, and explained in a long speech the object of his mission, of which however the interpreter never would translate more than two or three words at once. Herberstein was at the conclusion of his speech desired again to sit down, when the grand-prince himself invited him to dinner, as it was customary that foreign ambassadors should dine with the grand-prince on the day of their presentation, and on the day of their taking leave.
A few days after the presentation of Herberstein, the negotiations concerning the peace with Poland began, but before the Boyars, whom the grand-prince had appointed for that purpose, would enter into any discussion, they demanded, in the name of their master, that the king of Poland should make his defence for having besieged Opochka, an occurrence which had only recently taken place; and, at the same time required, that if peace were really his desire, he should himself send ambassadors to Moscow. Herberstein thought he might modify this demand by proposing that both parties should send their mediators to Riga, or some other place on the Lithuanian frontier, but the grand-prince insisted on having the Polish ambassadors sent to Moscow. Herberstein, therefore, on the 27th of April, despatched his nephew, John von Thurn, to Wilna, with a letter to the king of Poland, requesting him, in the name of Maximilian, to yield to the wish of the grand-prince, and to send ambassadors to his court. He himself endeavoured zealously to clear away all the difficulties caused by the mistrust against Sigismund, and he succeeded in his other conversations with the grand-prince in obtaining his favour and confidence in a very high degree. It was not without great trouble that Herberstein could prevail upon Sigismund to send ambassadors. At length, however, they arrived; but no sooner had he had an audience and commenced negotiations with them, than the grand-prince received intelligence that Sigismund had already sent a new army into Russia, a circumstance which not only made him suspect the ambassadors, but even Herberstein himself. The latter, nevertheless, was soon able to clear his own character; but when the Polish delegates declared that their king insisted on the restoration of Smolensko, then, in spite of Herberstein’s indefatigable exertions, all hopes of a peaceable termination vanished. The grand-prince, however, gave perfect credit to his intentions and his zeal; and in the Russian archives we find, amongst other distinctions given to him, that whenever he was invited to court together with the Poles, the grand-prince always gave him his hand, an honour never bestowed on the other delegates.
At length, on the 15th of November, Herberstein sent in his last memorial, to which he received on the following day a decisive answer, destroying all hopes of a friendly arrangement with Sigismund, and of so definite a character as to cause the Polish delegates to leave Moscow on the 18th of November. Meanwhile Herberstein was treated constantly with regard and respect, and invited to different festivities and amusements of the court; amongst others, he witnessed a coursing match, of which he gives a detailed description; he mentions also a hawking match, in which he makes particular allusion to the beautiful Tartar hounds that were used in the sport. Besides the negotiations for the peace of Poland, Herberstein had received several other communications from the emperor, one about the delivery of the Knes Michaila Lwowich Glinsky from prison, but in this particular he was not successful. As Herberstein at last saw that, in consequence of the obstinate continuation of hostilities by Sigismund, nothing was to be done for the principal purpose of his journey, he asked for his dismissal, which he received at a solemn audience, on the 20th of November, and left Moscow, after a stay of eight months, on the following day.
In his writings, he gives fewer details of this first journey to Russia than of the second. His remarks relate principally to the names of provinces and different tribes of the Russian empire, more especially on the parts of the ocean bordering it, and on the rivers passing through it. At his departure, he received from the grand-prince costly sables, ermines, and Russian hunting dogs, and several rare specimens of produce of the country. He had also made for him a comfortable travelling sledge, with fur accoutrements, and gave him an uncommonly large horse from his own stables, with ample provisions for his journey, and had him conducted to the frontier with a number of his own servants and soldiers, altogether about two hundred horsemen. At the same time a Russian ambassador, named Vladomir Smenovich Plemerikov, and an interpreter, called Ustoma the Little, accompanied him to Vienna, in order to explain at the imperial court the reasons why the peace with Poland could not be established. Herberstein at this time was able to take the shorter road by Smolensko, for which the grand-prince himself gave him a safe conduct, though part of his men and his horses had been left in Novogorod. He travelled by Smolensko, Wilna, Bulsk, and arrived in Cracow the 25th January 1518, where he was well received by the king, and, after some adventures, arrived at Vienna on the 25th February. Here he stopped a few days to refresh himself, and then went to Innspruck to the emperor, who was very well satisfied, not only with the manner in which he had fulfilled his commissions, but also with the account given to him of the state of Russia, and the manners and customs of its inhabitants, and would sometimes listen to his narrative in the evening, long after his usual hour, till sleep overcame him. As a proof of the emperor’s satisfaction with his mission, Herberstein was shortly afterwards presented with the bailiwick of Clamm. After a stay of four weeks, Maximilian sent Herberstein back to Vienna, together with the Russian delegates, and the two new ambassadors destined for Moscow, Francesco da Collo and Antonio de’ Conti, who were glad of the occasion to get information from him, and to turn his experience to their own account.
Before Herberstein’s departure from Innspruck, he had already received from the emperor a new commission, which was to take him to Hungary, it being again reported that the count John of Zips was to be appointed regent during the king’s minority. Maximilian hastened to prevent this innovation as dangerous to his own claims, and being himself the tutor of the young king, he appointed an extraordinary embassy to Hungary, of which Herberstein was a member. The ambassadors met in Vienna, and without delay hastened to Buda, where just at that time the diet was sitting.[20] The king of Poland being also a guardian of the young king, sent Andreas Tanznitski and the Provost Carnorovski. From the pope likewise a delegate was sent, brother Nicolas, of the noble family of Schönberg, a Dominican, who had possessed the unlimited confidence of Leo the Tenth even when he was a cardinal. At the commencement of the negotiations, this cunning priest showed himself so much in the interest of the emperor, that Herberstein himself says, “I thought he was a godsend.” But he soon shewed his real intentions, for by his craftiness and underhand movements, he contrived, with the assistance of the bishops of Hungary, to carry his point that the pope should be allowed to appoint a nuncio [hauptmann] in Hungary, who should be dependent solely upon himself. He had also the effrontery to state before Herberstein that he himself had given his acquiescence to this arrangement. But as Herberstein had the firmness to declare this statement to be untrue, the wily ambassador did not gain his object, and mainly through Herberstein’s adroitness, the adoption of a nuncio was contravened. He was very active all the time he was in Buda, and proved himself a very able diplomatist. He left that city for Augsburg, where Maximilian was holding his last diet before his death, a diet especially celebrated for the presence of Martin Luther, who had been summoned thither by the pope’s nuncio, cardinal Cajetan, on the question of the famous ninety-five propositions.
In October 1518, the estates of Styria appointed Herberstein to be their councillor at the imperial court, and the emperor confirmed his appointment. Maximilian died on the 12th of January 1519, and Herberstein was one of the bearers of the imperial pall at the funeral. Maximilian had ordered that all the affairs of the government should remain unaltered until the arrival of his successor, and therefore had appointed a special regency; but several provinces, and more especially Lower Austria, took advantage of the interregnum for introducing alterations in their constitution. In Vienna a committee was formed, consisting of the nobility, university, and citizens, who upset the regency, and got possession of the arsenal and the treasury. At last they agreed to hold a meeting in Pruch an der Muhr, at which Herberstein also was present, and there they came to the conclusion that the provinces of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, and Austria ob der Enns, should send embassies to king Charles, to lay their complaints before him, and to invite him to a speedy assumption of the reins of government. Styria appointed Herberstein as their ambassador. The ambassadors met at Villach, and went to Spain by way of Italy, passing through Treviso, Venice, Rome, and Naples. At Naples, Herberstein took ship for Barcelona, but was wrecked at Sardinia. A similar accident happened off Minorca, but at length, after many adventures (among which may be mentioned, that the ship in which he was took fire twice, because, says Herberstein, the German cooks could not manage with small fires), he reached Barcelona. At Barcelona an epidemic was prevailing, so that the emperor had shortly before left the place for Molimo del Rey, where the first audience was given.
After a short stay in Spain, during which the new emperor seems to have become much attached to Herberstein, they had their farewell audience on the 17th of December 1519. They returned by the south of France, by Piedmont, Milan, Peschiera, Verona, and Vicenza, to Villach.
Soon after the coronation at Aix-la-Chapelle, the emperor appointed the 6th of January of the next year, 1521, for the celebrated diet of Worms, the principal object of which was the re-establishment of peace in Germany, but at the same time the emperor was to decide upon several private affairs. Herberstein, therefore, was ordered to appear there on the 24th of February, in order that an interchange of territories, which had already been sanctioned by Maximilian, should be finally settled. This consisted in a transfer of the castle and town of Mährenfels, which belonged to the family of Herberstein, in exchange for the territory of Neyperg in Styria. During the term of his stay, he was appointed to a seat on the imperial council. He mentions in his diaries Martin Luther, who then came to Worms; and speaks of the astonishing crowd of men of all classes that came to see him.
Shortly before his departure from Worms, he saw the archduke Ferdinand, to whose share all the Austrian provinces had fallen, and was received very kindly by him. He returned from Worms to Linz, where he stopped till the arrival of Ferdinand, who came to Linz for his marriage with Mary, daughter of Vladislaus of Hungary. Before Ferdinand returned to the Netherlands, he requested Herberstein to accompany him. Herberstein was then about to marry Helena von Saurau, widow of Graswein zu Weyer, consequently he was obliged to hasten his betrothal, which took place on the 7th of October, and left on the 18th for Brussels, where he arrived on St. Andrew’s day, for the celebration of the chapter of the Golden Fleece, which Charles the Fifth celebrated with great pomp. The emperor on that occasion gave him in reward for his services the uncommon distinction of allowing him to add to his own arms those of the archduke of Austria, and of the king of Castile, and to bear as his crest the portraits of the Roman emperor, of the king of Spain, and the czar of Russia. From the Netherlands Herberstein went to Nuremberg, where at the imperial diet he had to represent the archduke Ferdinand. Subsequent to this he was employed upon various commissions: first at Stuttgard, twice to Prague, then to Nördlingen, where the Swabian diet was held, then twice to Hungary, where he succeeded in bringing about an amicable relation between the archduke Ferdinand and king Louis of Hungary.
It was not till this year that Herberstein’s marriage with Helena von Saurau, which had been arranged in 1521, could be solemnized. In his Latin autobiography, he mentions his marriage in these few words:—“Hoc anno uxorem duxi”; and, as has been mentioned above, he never speaks about his wife’s family, nor of his wife, nor had he any children. But she survived him by nine years, and died in 1575.
Herberstein’s second journey to Poland and Russia took place in 1526. The more immediate purpose of this new mission was to return the civilities of Vasiley Ivanovich, who, on receiving the news of Charles the Fifth’s election as emperor of the Romans, had sent ambassadors to Spain, expressing his wish for a continuation of the amicable relations between the two countries, and a renewal of the league concluded with Maximilian against the Poles. Charles and Ferdinand, however, were still influenced by the same motives as had caused the first mission of Herberstein, viz., to bring about a durable peace between the grand-prince and the king of Poland. Sigismund, on the other hand, seemed to wish to trust the matter solely to the success of his arms, and possessed too much pride to ask for peace so far as he was concerned. Count Nugaroli, therefore, was sent on behalf of Charles the Fifth, and Herberstein on behalf of the archduke Ferdinand, to Hungary, in order that the king of Poland might be persuaded through the mediation of the king of Hungary; and in this they were successful.
Herberstein, after his return to Vienna, gave an account of the success of his mission to the archduke Ferdinand, then at Augsburg, and received from him a letter of praise, together with his credentials for the embassy to Russia; and, at the same time, Ferdinand desired him to write an account of all the things he might observe in this journey, as he had done before. Charles the Fifth, likewise, who had been obliged by the disturbances in Spain to return to Toledo the year before, expressed his approbation of the choice of Herberstein in a letter to his brother, as well as of the instructions given to him, at the same time bestowing the utmost praise upon Herberstein with respect to his former embassy. A copy of this letter was sent by the archduke to Herberstein, who already had departed on his journey; and, at the same time, unlimited power was given to the ambassadors for all cases in which the instructions received should appear insufficient. They left Vienna on the 12th of January 1526. Besides the principal personages, there were also in the embassy Gunther and Christoph von Herberstein, two distinguished sons of Herberstein’s second brother, George. They took the route through Moravia and Silesia to Poland. They had not advanced far when an order from the archduke Ferdinand, dated Augsburg, February 1st, was sent after them, in which both ambassadors were expressly desired to pay the utmost attention to the religion, ceremonies, and ecclesiastical rules of the Church of Russia, for which purpose they had to use as a guide a little book recently published by Johann Fabri, the materials of which had been collected by the author from the above-mentioned Russian ambassadors to Spain during their stay at the court of Ferdinand in Tübingen. It was very favourable for Herberstein’s journey that he could join these ambassadors, who were returning to their country by the way of Vienna, and travel to Moscow in their company. The king of Poland imagined that he had good reason to mistrust the intentions of Austria, and from the beginning of this new embassy he ascribed another purpose to it than that which was really correct; and in this suspicion he was corroborated by the circumstance that the ambassadors travelled in the company of the returning Russian delegates. He was therefore quite convinced, as Herberstein afterwards learned from himself, that the emperor was forming a new league with the crown-prince against him. He therefore appeared at the first not to take any notice of the embassy; and contrary to the law of nations, the ambassadors were not received, or provided for, either at the frontier of Poland, or during their travels through that country. The king was then attending the diet at Pedrikov’, to which place the ambassadors directed their course, and at some distance they sent messengers to the court to give notice of their arrival, but an answer was sent back to them that the diet was already at an end, and that the king was about to go to Cracow, where they would be received. Upon their arrival in the capital, they were much astonished that there was nobody to welcome them, and that there was not the least preparation made for their reception. Moreover, they had reason to apprehend from different circumstances that the continuation of their journey through Poland would be impeded. Six days after their arrival, however, they obtained an audience of the king, in which they informed him that they were sent to Moscow to negotiate peace between him and the grand-prince, and begged his assistance in effecting so desirable an object, by making some concessions himself. Sigismund, however, received this communication very ungraciously, and asked the ambassadors indignantly, who had desired their masters to trouble themselves about him? that he knew well enough how to bring his enemies to their senses, and wanted no mediator. “What have your masters to do with the Muscovite,” said he; “is he their neighbour, or even friend, that they trouble themselves so much about him?” Herberstein then explained to him quietly and with dignity the purpose of their journey, and proved that their travelling in company with the Russian ambassadors was only by accident, and that their sovereigns could not decline to receive an embassy sent from so great a distance purely for the purpose of asking their friendship; that, moreover, their intention was to act according to the precepts of religion in trying to make peace between two Christian sovereigns. If, however, the king should not feel inclined to have these negotiations carried on through the German ambassadors, they were ready to return home, and to give an account to their respective sovereigns of the king’s wish, and to wait for the answer. They even would go so far as to show the king their instructions, although this was quite contrary to all custom. This open and noble speech was effectual: Sigismund became more friendly, gave up his mistrust, and finally showed himself ready to enter into a negotiation for the peace which was to be interceded for at Moscow. He endeavoured to facilitate the continuation of their journey, and sent fifty florins to each of them to pay their bill at the hotel, as properly and according to custom he ought to have provided for them from their first arrival. Herberstein thought this occasion favourable for producing the bond which he had received eight years before from the duchess of Milan for the same, to be paid to him in case he succeeded in bringing about the marriage of her daughter Bona with the king of Poland. He therefore delivered this paper to the king, begging for his assistance, and had the pleasure to find the king quite willing to take upon himself the payment of this debt. Herberstein says, in his own words, “He sent me word that when I returned he would give me a favourable answer, and afterwards sent me a thousand florins in good Hungarian gold, like an honest king.”
On the 14th of February, Herberstein and his party left Cracow; and were now able to continue their journey on sledges, which was very convenient for their luggage. They proceeded by way of Lublin to Brest, through a dreadful and very dangerous snow-drift, which compelled them to pass the whole night on the ground under their sledges, which they turned upside down for a screen. Thence to Borisov on the Beresina, which Herberstein supposed to be the Borysthenes of the ancients, drawing his conclusions from Ptolemy and the similarity of the name. From Beresina they did not take the nearest way by Wilna, in consequence of the wildness of the road, but took the way by Mohilev and Dobrovna to Smolensko.
Upon Herberstein’s arrival at the Russian frontier, before reaching Smolensko, the providor who had been sent from Moscow, instead of treating him hospitably by providing him with provisions and a roof, allowed him to be two nights under the open air—one on the snow, and another during a fall of rain. Nor would he even permit him to buy food with his own money, saying, that he ought to be satisfied with the provisions with which he supplied him; until Herberstein used a different tone, and threatened to report his conduct to the grand-prince.
The latter part of the journey to Moscow was very dangerous, on account of the great inundations. Most of the bridges were so much damaged, that it was only with the greatest trouble they could get the horses over them. Half-a-mile before reaching Moscow, they were received with great honour by some noblemen, who came on the part of the grand-prince.
The description given by Herberstein of his reception at Moscow, and of the preparations for his first audience, is so similar to that given in the account of his visit in 1517, that it is needless to repeat it here. The audience is thus described:—“When we entered the room,” says he, “where the prince was sitting, directly we made our first obeisance, all the old princes and noblemen sitting around stood up, and only the grand-duke and his brothers remained sitting. Then one of the chief councillors, equal in rank to a marshal, approached the grand-duke, and said: “Great master and king of all the Russians, Count Leonard strikes his forehead before thee for thy great favour.” Then, “Sigismund,” etc., “strikes his forehead before thee.” The seat of the grand-duke as well as his footstool were one palm higher than the rest. He sat all the time uncovered; over him, on the wall, was a picture of an angel or saint. On his right-hand lay his cap, and on his left his staff or possoch, and next to it two ewers and a washhand basin, that he might, after the departure of the foreigners, wash his hands from the pollution of having touched those of an ambassador of another creed. It is likewise the custom for ambassadors coming from Lithuania, Sweden, Livonia, etc., to offer presents to the grand-duke, which are delivered publicly at their first audience; and, indeed, it is customary not only for the ambassadors themselves, but also for the friends who accompany them, to bring presents. It is usual, therefore, after the delivery of the address, for one of the chief councillors to say to the prince:—Great Master, N. N. strikes his forehead to thee, and gives thee pominki—so they call the presents—which he mentions by name; after which, a secretary writes down the names of the donors, and the description of the presents. When we had delivered our address, those who stood behind us amongst our suite called out ‘pominki’, in order to remind us to deliver the presents, to which our attendants answered, that this custom was no longer in use at the court of Austria. It was true, that this had been the custom also amongst us in former times; but as it was generally expected that presents of as much value were to be given in return, in consequence of which they became more and more extravagant, the custom was at last abolished.”
The first dinner is described at length by Herberstein, from which we only quote the following details as peculiarly worthy notice:—Brandy was served round before the eating commenced. The principal dish consisted of swans, which was served round with sour milk, pickled gerkins, and plums. The principal drinks were malmsey, Greek wines, and mead. The grand-prince first called for drink, tasted the wine, and summoned the Count Nugaroli to his table, and then handing him the goblet, said, “Leonhard, thou art sent from a great master to a great master on great affairs, and hast travelled a long distance—it is well for thee to have received marks of my favour, and to have beheld the lustre of my eyes. Drink, therefore, drain your glass, and eat your fill, that thou mayst return in health to thy master.” These words he addressed also to Herberstein, of whom he inquired in a familiar way, whether he had ever shaved off his beard; and when Herberstein, without the aid of an interpreter, replied in the affirmative, the grand-duke remarked, that he also had once done the same, and this was on the occasion of his marriage. Not only the tables at which the company sat, but also certain tables of state ranged along the middle of the room, were covered with golden plate. The servers and other court attendants wore on this festive occasion a dress called therlik, which was like a herald’s coat, covered with pearls and precious stones.
On taking leave of the grand-prince after dinner, the noblemen accompanied Herberstein to his own private residence, and here began again to drink bravely. The gentlemen from the court said it was the order of the grand-prince that they should remain with the ambassadors and make them merry; for which purpose a cart with silver vessels, and two smaller carriages with drink, were sent from the palace, accompanied by the secretaries and other honest people, “for the very purpose,” as Herberstein quaintly describes it, “of making the ambassadors full”. As it was considered an honour to pledge one’s guests, they omitted no sort of persuasion to drink, and when all was in vain, one got up and proposed the health of the grand-duke, which, of course, admitted of no refusal; and after an interval of continued pressing to drink, the health of the emperor of Germany was proposed; afterwards the health of all those present, foreigners as well as residents, in which cases also there was no excuse. “Such drinking,” says Herberstein, “is done with great grace; the person who proposes the toast, stands in the middle of the room and pronounces the sentiment,—such as fortune, or victory, or health, or what not, with the wish, that not so much blood may remain in his enemies as he means to leave in his goblet. Having said this with uncovered head, and finished the draught, he turns the goblet upside down over his head.[21] Both on this and on my former visit, not wishing to drink so much, I had no alternative but to assume the appearance of being drunk, or to say that I was too sleepy to drink any more.”[22]
At the outset Herberstein met with no small difficulty with regard to carrying out the object of his embassy, in consequence of the bitter feeling which existed between the two courts of Russia and Poland, and the probable prospect of advantage to the grand-prince from a continuance of the war. In spite of this, however, Herberstein’s endeavours were not without good results; and he had the gratification, after his first report to the archduke Ferdinand, to receive a letter, in which he showed his great satisfaction at what he had accomplished. The grand-prince, nevertheless, demanded, as he had done in Herberstein’s former embassy, that the king of Poland should, as a proof of his own wish to establish peace, himself send ambassadors to Moscow, and the imperial legates accordingly sent to Sigismund, who was at that time staying at Dantzig, to request his compliance with this demand. The king received the proposal without objection, and sent two noblemen as negociators; a delegate was, at the same time, sent from the pope, likewise to plead for peace between the two sovereigns; and by these means, after many difficulties, and a considerable lapse of time, an armistice for five years was finally agreed upon.
During Herberstein’s abode in Moscow, he had an opportunity of witnessing several of the festivities and recreations of the court,—especially some hunting scenes, of which he gives a particular description: such as hunting the hare, bear-baiting, and hawking. In speaking of a hare-hunt, he says that an immense number of hares were preserved in narrow enclosures, and the entire circuit spread round with nets. The huntsmen in various dresses, each leading two dogs in a leash, made their way, with loud shouts, through the enclosure to rouse the game. The grand-prince hunted with particularly fine dogs, called kurtzen (probably the beautiful long-haired Siberian greyhound). His hunting-dress consisted of a white cap, with a border covered all round with precious stones, and adorned in front with feathers of gold, which waved with every motion of his head. His garment was a therlik, “similar to a herald’s coat”, embroidered with gold; a couple of knives and a dagger hung from his girdle, and at his back, beneath the girdle, was a weapon called kestene, which was a staff of wood two spans long, with a thong of the same length attached to it, at the end of which was a large angular piece of metal ornamented with gold. The train consisted of nearly three hundred horsemen. The grand-prince called the strangers frequently to him, and invited them to follow his example, and also to lead dogs, as he did, to the chase. This encouragement was necessary, remarks Herberstein, because with them dogs, being regarded as unclean beasts, are not usually to be handled by honourable persons. The produce of this hunt was three hundred hares.
On the morning of their leave-taking, the ambassadors received very costly dresses from the grand-prince, in which they were to appear at their last audience. After the dinner which followed this audience, they were each presented by the grand-prince with eighty rubles, three hundred ermine, and fifteen hundred miniver skins. When they had finally taken leave, and returned to their residence, the grand-prince again sent to them, to ask which way they intended to return. Their answer was, by Wilna and Cracow to Vienna; to which the secretaries replied, that the grand-prince had just received information from the frontier of the taking of Buda by the Turks, which news he communicated to them for their own guidance.
One circumstance ought to be mentioned here particularly as having caused an injurious impression against Herberstein in Poland, viz., the pride and jealous rivalry of the Poles, who would not allow to the sovereign of their hostile neighbours the title of czar, much less that of emperor, although already under Vasiley Ivanovich it was the general custom to translate the title of czar into Latin by the word imperator. Herberstein also was accused at the Polish court, on his second return from Russia, with having in his address given to the grand-prince the title of king; but this he denied, declaring that he had used no other title than Magnus Dux. On his way from Smolensko to Wilna, he learnt from a Lithuanian providor the news of the battle of Mohacz, and the death of King Louis of Hungary, which news affected essentially the interests of Austria, and had a very important bearing upon the object of Herberstein’s embassy to Poland. He describes the journey from Wilna to Grodno as so intensely cold, that his nose was frozen. He only saved it by very quick and long rubbing with snow, which remedy was recommended him by his Polish guide; but some of his suite had their hands and feet frozen, and others fell sick under the cold, so as to detain the embassy.
He arrived at Cracow on the 12th of January 1527, where the king then was. His reception was very different to what it had been on the former occasion, for the king now had satisfactory reason to be convinced that the intentions of the emperor and the archduke were sincere and faithful, and expressed to both the ambassadors his satisfaction at the peace concluded in his favour. Here again Herberstein had an opportunity of showing his ability as a statesman and his fidelity to his sovereign; for having received the report of the death of the king of Hungary, and being certain that the archduke Ferdinand, who was newly elected king of Bohemia, would also be entitled to the crown of Hungary, he took advantage of his knowledge of these circumstances to bespeak all the consequent alterations in the relations between his master and the king of Poland, so that when the archduke’s ambassador Johann Mraxi arrived, everything was already prepared and settled; and as Mraxi was taken ill immediately after his arrival in Cracow, Herberstein took the management of the whole affair which Mraxi had been commissioned to carry out.
The ambassadors then travelled by way of Silesia to Prague, where they found the archduke Ferdinand, who, by the free election of the States, was declared king of Bohemia upon the death of Louis, and were in time to be present at the celebration of his coronation. The Russian ambassadors arrived soon after, and Herberstein was sent to receive them, and to escort them through the town of Prague as a guide to show them the curiosities. The beautiful situation and the great size of Prague surprised one of the ambassadors so much that he exclaimed, “This is not a city, it is a kingdom; and a great thing it is to acquire such a kingdom without bloodshed!”
When Herberstein reported the result of his mission to the archduke, and mentioned his negotiations in Poland, Ferdinand considered it necessary immediately to send another ambassador thither, and proposed to Herberstein to undertake the journey. The answer of this indefatigable servant of his royal master was, that although he was very ill, he would immediately set out on his journey if the king considered it necessary; nay, if he could not go on horseback, he would ride in a carriage; or, if he could not ride in a carriage, he would be borne by men, but he would never neglect the cause of his majesty for the sake of his own health; but in his opinion the journey was not at all necessary, as he had already settled all the negotiations with the king of Poland with respect to the recent change in the position of affairs. He even showed reasons why an embassy should not be sent, which reasons Ferdinand finally agreed to, and the idea was given up.
Herberstein now begged permission to retire to his own estate for some time that he might recover his health, which permission was granted to him after the Russian embassy had left. Before his departure, however, Ferdinand honoured him with the public expression of a threefold thanksgiving: firstly, for the settlement of the affairs of the peace embassy in Moscow; secondly, for the attention paid to the interests of his masters in Poland; and, thirdly, for the offer of undertaking a new journey in spite of his bad health. From Prague he went to Vienna, where he lay ill for four weeks.
After the death of Louis, John Zapolski put himself at the head of an army of forty thousand men, and succeeded in obtaining possession of the throne of Hungary; so that Ferdinand, who had already been crowned in Prague, and taken possession of Moravia and Silesia, was obliged to enter Hungary with a powerful army, in order to enforce his clainis upon that country. He became master of Buda, and shortly after of the greater part of the kingdom, and was at length crowned king of Hungary at Gran, on the 13th of November 1527. As it was to be feared that the pretender to the crown of Hungary would succeed in gaining the assistance of his brother-in-law Sigismund, Ferdinand thought it necessary to send an embassy to Poland, of which embassy Herberstein had the essential management, and had the special honour of being entrusted with separate private instructions. This gave rise to so many private interviews with the king, that it caused the envy of his colleagues, and they even went so far as to complain to the king on the subject. His majesty himself explained the cause of the preference given to Herberstein, saying that it was because he had been to Poland many times before, and was so much initiated in Polish affairs, that he himself was unwilling that every body should know all that Herberstein was already acquainted with. In returning from Poland he had a narrow escape, as Nicolas von Tschaplitz, an old enemy of his, laid wait for him, with the view of wreaking his vengeance on him, and he only saved his life by having accidentally chosen another road for returning. After his return to Vienna, he was taken ill of the Hungarian sickness, which soon increased so much, that there was great fear for his life, and the recovery was slow, and required several months of quiet life to restore his strength. Meanwhile, the Turkish Sultan Suliman, having become an ally of John Zapolski, had sent back with insolence the ambassadors that Ferdinand had sent to demand the restoration of Belgrade, and in a new invasion on Hungary had made such progress, that his advances became more and more alarming for the house of Austria. After having plundered and burnt Buda, and again proclaimed John Zapolski king, he advanced at the head of an immense army, now become habituated to victory and plunder, towards the states of Austria. It consequently became more and more necessary for Ferdinand to avail himself of the friendship of Sigismund of Poland. Herberstein was employed upon this errand. In short, during the remainder of Herberstein’s life, the Hungarian question underwent so many fluctuations, that it would be tedious to the reader to lead him even cursorily through their details.
From the year 1527 to the year 1533, Ferdinand was kept in suspense as to his claim to the throne of Hungary, a suspense occasioned mainly by the interference of the sultan Solyman, whose invasion of Hungary met with fluctuating success; and during this period Herberstein was engaged in the most harassing political expeditions from Ferdinand, both to the court of Poland and the various congresses which were held in different places from time to time in Hungary. From 1533 to 1541, with the exception of the year 1535, he was repeatedly employed in diplomatic missions to Bohemia and various parts of Germany, as well as to Hungary and Poland, and so unremitting was the labour of this portion of his life, that during the intervals of these embassies he had to perform the duties of the various honourable offices which he held at home, amongst which may be mentioned that he was president of several diets, a member of the war department, and a councillor of the ministry of war. In 1537 he was rewarded by the dignity of freyherr or baron, which he had asked for in the year 1531, and had been then provisionally granted, but was not solemnly confirmed until the year 1537.
The remainder of the life of Herberstein was spent in similar political labours, among which should be specially mentioned an embassy to the camp of Sultan Suliman II, in 1541, while that monarch was engaged in active defence of his ally, John Zapolski, the rival of Ferdinand.
So late as the year 1560, when he was in his seventy-fourth year, we find his still arduous labours in the cause of the state thus alluded to by Petrus Paganus:—“Cujus opera iam ætate confecti et emeriti Cæsar Ferdinandus adhuc indies in arduis negotiis vtitur, quique annum agens LXXIIII Austriacis prouentibus adhuc Præsidens incumbit, vt non sibi, sed domui Austriæ, cui se ad extremum vitæ articulum deuouit, natus esse videatur.”
He died at Vienna on the 28th of March 1566, being then in his eightieth year. The archduke Charles of Styria caused the following inscription to be placed on his tomb, which we quote on account of the quaint verses with which it concludes:—“Den 28 Martii im 1566 Jahr starb der wohlgebohrne Herr Herr Sigismund Freyherr zu Herberstain, Neyperg vndt Guetenhag, Obrist Erbcamrer vndt Obrist Erbtruchsäss in Khärnten, Romisch Kays. Mjt. Rat vndt President der N. Oe. Cammer.
Hier liegt, welchs Lob zu aller Stund
Wurd seyn bey Kaysern wohlbekannt,
Auch bey aller Leuten in ihren Lannt.
Dann er bey 4 Kaysern hat
Gelebt als getreur Diener und Rat,
Ums Vatterlandt sich wohl verschuldt,
Davon er bracht hat Ehr und Huldt.”
We now proceed to the bibliography of the “Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii”. The first edition was published at Vienna in 1549, under the following title:
Rerum Moscoviticarum Comentarii. In hijs Comentariis sparsim contenta habebis, candide lector, Russie et que nunc eius Metropolis est, Moscouie breuissimam descriptionem. De religione quoqꝫ varia inserta sunt: et que nostra cum religione non conueniunt. Corographiam deniqꝫ totius imperii Moscici: et vicinorum quorundam mentionem. Quis deniqꝫ modus excipiendi et tractandi oratores: disseritur. Itineraria quoqꝫ duo in Mosconiam sunt adiuncta. Vindobonæ, (1549), folio.
A copy of this exceedingly rare first edition is in the Grenville collection, British Museum. It is without imprint or colophon; but the dedication to King Ferdinand is dated from Vienna (“Vienne Austriæ”), March 1, 1549. That this was the year in which the book was printed likewise clearly appears from Herberstein’s own statement in his autobiography published at Vienna in 1560, entitled, “Gratæ posteritati Sig. lib. B. in Herberstain actiones suas reliquit,” etc.; where he says: “MDXLIX. Historiam Moscoviæ stilo simplici congessi eandemque typis excudi curavi.” On the reverse of the title-page are the arms of Herberstein. The dedication is followed on fol. iii and iv by some Latin panegyric verses addressed to the author by various writers; the text commencing on fol. v. The work is divided into three sections: I. Itinera in Moscoviam; fol. v-xii, reg. B-C. II. Moscovia; fol. i-ix, reg. A-E. III. Chorographia; fol. i-xxxvii, reg. A-G. The rarity of this book is such, that Denis, who wrote on the early history of printing at Vienna, was not able to see a copy, and describes it only from Gesner’s “Bibliotheca”, whose description, in fact, applied to the second edition of 1551.
Two years later an improved edition appeared at Basle, at the instance of Wolfgang Lazius. The title is the same as that of the first, except that we find this addition to it: “Accessit etiam locuples rerum et verborum in his memorabilium Index. Basileæ, per Joannem Oporinum”: s. a. (1551), fol., 175 pages, and 3 leaves of index; and also the work of Paulus Jovius, “De Legatione Moscoviticarum.”
In a letter addressed to the publisher, printed on the reverse of the title-page, Lazius says of the first edition: “Fuere quidem obiter hi (commentarii) apud nos excusi—sed adeo corrupte, adeoque absurdis typis, uti vides, ut ni tua industria accedat, opus mehercule memorabile iniuriam patiatur”; and, in a postscript, he says: “De prærogativa uti tu statues res certa erit; eo enim loco is vir est. Sed cupit insignia sua sub finem, et chorographiam a frontispicio operis collocari, quæ tu sumptu tuo curabis sculpi.” The copy in the British Museum has the large map of “Moscovia” dated 1549, followed on the next page by a portrait of the grand-prince seated, with the following lines placed above it:
Sanguinis, imperii titulos a nemine, quavis
Mercatus prece, vel precio, nec legibus ullis
Subditus alterius, sed Christo credulus uni
Emendicatos aliis aspernor honores.”
The colophon runs thus: “Basileæ, ex officina Joannis Oporini, 1551. Mense Julio.” On the verso of the last leaf are the arms of Herberstein.
Five years after, another edition was required, which received the author’s additions and improvements. The title is like the preceding, with the following addition: “Ad heec, non solum nouæ aliquot tabulæ, sed multa etiam alia nunc demum ab ipso autore adiecta sunt: quæ, si cui cum prima editione conferre libeat, facile deprehendet. Cum Caes. et Regiæ Maiest. gratia et privilegio ad decennium. Basileæ. Per Joannem Oporinum”: s. a. (1556), fol., 205 pages, and 16 pages of Index. After the title-page comes Oporinus’s dedication to Daniel Mauchius, who was in Moscow at the time of Herberstein’s second residence in Russia. It is subscribed, “Calendis Julii 1556,” and in it he says that he sends him at last “toties efflagitatam, tantoque jam tempore expectatam Moscoviam”; and in an edition, certainly “longe aliam quam priore editione in publicum prodierat: plurimis nempe non solum Chorographiis atque aliis Tabulis, sed et rerum scitu dignissimarum descriptionibus passim de novo insertis locupletatam.”
Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii. Sigismundo Libero[23] authore. Russiæ breuissima descriptio, et de religione eorum varia inserta sunt. Chorographia totius Imperii Moscici, et vicinorum quorundam mentio. Antuerpiæ in ædibus Joannis Streelsii, 1557. In octavo, 198 leaves.
This edition appears to be a reprint made without Herberstein’s sanction, as the imperial protective privilege does not appear on the title-page.
Antuerpiæ, 1557, fol. This edition is only quoted in the Hamburg “Bibliotheca Historica,” where, on page 267, it says: The “Antwerp edition of ao. 1557, in fol., is indisputably the best.”
Francofurti, 1560, fol. This impression, Denis only mentions in his work, “Wien’s Buchdruckergeschichte bis MDLX” (Wien, 1782, 4to.), where he says: “Ao. 1560, the Oporin edition was reprinted at Frankfort by Wechel’s heirs.”
Basileæ, 1567, fol. This edition, Adelung says, is only to be found in the superficial and untrustworthy Burch. Ad. Sellius in his Schediasma Literarium de scriptoribus qui Historiam Rossicam scriptis illustrarunt.” Revaliæ, 1736, 8vo., p. 19.[24]
Basileæ, 1571, fol., ex officina Oporiniana; 327 pages. A more correct impression of the edition of 1556, with several additions, which are thus announced on the title-page: “His nunc primum accedunt, Scriptum recens de Græcorum fide, quos in omnibus Moscorum natio sequitur: et Commentarius de bellis Moscorum aduersus finitimos, Polonos, Lituanos, Suedos, Liuonios et alios gestis, ad annum usque LXXI, scriptus ab Joanne Leuuenclaio.”
Basileæ, 1573, fol. This edition likewise is only mentioned by Sellius, in his “Schediasma Literarium”, and is consequently not to be trusted.
Basileæ, 1574, fol. This edition Meusel mentions in his “Literatur der Statistik”, but it is not found quoted anywhere else.
An exact reprint of the Basil edition of 1556, is found in the well-known collection—
Rerum Moscoviticarum Auctores varii: vnvm in corpvs nvnc primvm congesti. Quibus et Gentis Historia continetur: et Regionvm accvrata descriptio. Francofurti apud haeredes Andreae Wecheli, Claudium Marnium et Joan. Aubrium, 1600, fol., p. 1-117.[25]
TRANSLATIONS.
Italian. An Italian translation of Herberstein’s work appeared at Venice a year after the publication of the original, and with his own permission, as he himself says.[26] The title is—
Comentari della Moscovia et parimente della Russia, et delle altre cose belle e notabili, composti già latinamente per il signor Sigismondo libero Barone in herberstain, Neiperg et Guetnhag, tradotti nouamente di latino in lingua nostra uuolgare Italiana. Simelmente vi si tratta della religione delli Moscouiti, et in che parte quella sia differente dalla n’ra benche si chiamino chr’iani. Item una discrittione particolare di tutto l’imperio Moscouitico, toccando ancora di alcuni luoghi vicini, come sono de Tartari, Lituuani, Poloni, et altri molti riti et ordini di que’ popoli. In Venetia per Gioan Battista Pedrezzano. Cum priuilegio del Illustriss. Senato Venetiano, Per anni X.MDL. 90 leaves, in quarto.[27]
Respecting this translation, Adelung states that “it is very rare; the author of it is not known; but in a manuscript note he found it ascribed to F. Corvinus, without, however, having been able to find this statement confirmed by any authority.” It was again printed in the “Raccolta di Navigazioni e Viaggi di Ramusio”. Venezia, 1583, fol., t. ii, p. 137, etc.; and this reprint is sometimes erroneously mentioned as a distinct translation, or as a new edition of the impression of 1550.
German. Moscouia der Hauptstadt in Reissen, durch Herrn Sigmunden Freyherrn zu Herberstain, Neyperg und Guetenhag, Obristen Erbcamrer, vnd öbristen Erbtruckhsessen in Kärntn, Römischer zu Hungern und Behaim Khii. May. etc. Rat, Camrer vnd Presidenten der Niederösterreichischen Camer zusamen getragen. Sambt des Moscouiter gepiet, vnd seiner anrainer[28] beschreibung und anzaigung, in weu (sic)[29] sy glaubens halb, mit vns nit gleichhellig. Wie die Potschaften oder Gesandten durch sy emphangen vnd gehalten werden, sambt zwayen vnderschidlichen Raisen in die Mosqua. Mit Röm. Khii. May. gnad vnd Priuilegien getruckt zu Wienn in Osterreich durch Michael Zimmermann in S. Anna Hoff, 1557. Small folio, 24 double sheets, without pagination; reg. A—Zij.
This translation was made from the Basle edition of 1556, and seen through the press by Herberstein himself. It is also very rare. A circumstantial account of this translation, and of its relation to the original, will be found in Siegm. Freih. v. Herberstein, etc., von Friedr. Adelung, p. 343-353.
Moscoviter wunderbare Historien: In welcher desz treffenlichen Grossen land Reüssen, sampt der hauptstatt Moscauw vnd anderer nammhafftigen vmligenden Fürstenthumb vnd stetten gelegenheit, Religion, vnd seltzame gebreüch: Auch desz erschrockenlichen Groszfürsten zu Moscauw härkommen, mannliche thaten, gewalt, vnd lands ordnung, auff das fleyszigest ordenlichen begriffen: so alles bisz här bey vns in Teütscher nation vnbekandt gewesen. Erstlich durch den wolgebornen herren Sigmunden Freyherren zu Herberstein, Neyperg, vnd Guttenhag, etc., welcher zu etlichen malen Röm. Kay. vnd Künig. May. in selbigen landen Legat gewesen, fleyszig zu latein beschriben: Ietz zu malen aber, zu ehren vnd wolgefallen dem wolgebornen herren Johans Grauen zu Nassaw etc. durch Heinrich Pantaleon, der Freyen Künsten vnd Artzney doctorn zu Basel, auff das treüwlichest verteütschet vnd in truck verfertiget: Alles gantz wunderbar, nutzlich, vnd kurtzweylig zu lesen. Mit sampt H. Pauli Jouij Moscouitischer Landen, und H. Georgen Wernhern Ungarischer wunderbaren wasseren beschreibung, auch etlichen schönen Figuren und Landstaflen, darzu einem vollkommenen Register bezieret. Basel, anno 1568. 215 pages, folio.
At the end stands, “Getruckt zu Basel bey Niclauss Brillinger vnnd Marx Russinger, 1563.” It is curious, that in this translation no allusion is made to that published by the author himself six years previously; indeed, as the title-page sets forth, that this work had been hitherto unknown in Germany, we should infer that Dr. Pantaleon was ignorant of Herberstein’s translation.
A reprint of this translation by Pantaleon, appeared at Basle, 1567, fol. Upon the title-page, after the words, “Pauli Jovii Moscovitischer Landen”, is added—
Vnd h. Heinrich Pantaleon Littauwischen, Polnischen, Schwedischen, Leyfllendischen, Nordwegischen, Ungarischen, Türckischen, vnd Tartarischen völkeren, so zu ringharum an die Moscouiter stossend. Alles gantz wunderbar, nutzlich und kurtzweylig zu lesen. 246 pages, and five pages of index. The Beschreibung von Litthauen, etc., mentioned in the title begins at page 192.
Prag, 1567. A copy of this edition is in the Royal Library of Dresden. It corresponds in respect with the foregoing.
Die Moscovitische Chronica, d. i. Beschreibung des Grossfürsten in der Moscau sammt dessen Ländern, etc. erstlich von Paul Jovio und Sigm. Herberstein in Latein, hernach von Pantaleon ins Teutsche übersetzt. Frankfurt, A.M. 1576, folio.
Frankfurt, A.M., 1579, folio. A repetition of the edition just mentioned.
Frankfurt, A.M., 1589, folio. This impression is mentioned by G. C. Gebauer (Progr. de Vita, Fatis et Scriptis Sigismundi L. B. ab Herberstein), who gives the title as follows—
Die Moscouitische Chronica edita et Georgio a Munster Consiliario Herbipolensi Præfectoque Arnsteinensi inscripta; prioribus merito postponenda cum priorem Pantaleonis, vt reor, editionem secutus, eiusdem de populis Moscouiæ vicinis commentarios non addiderit, et insertis more suo dudum sculptis nihilque ad rem facientibus figuris, Czari Basilii effigiem, Tabulas Geographicas, Chorographicamque, Vri Bisontisque imagines, et reliqua in vtraque Pantaleonis editione seruata ornamenta omiserit.
Wien, 1618, folio. This edition is quoted by G. H. Stuck, in his “Verzeichniss ält. u. neuern Land-und Reisebeschr.” I, p. 142. It appears to be a reprint of the first Vienna edition of 1557.
St. Petersburg, 1795, folio. This edition of the translation by Pantaleon was printed by order of Catharine II.
Bohemian. Zymunda swobodncho Pána z Herbersteina Cesta do knjzetstwj Moskewského.
This is an extract from Herberstein’s work, referring only to his journey to Russia. It is printed in the work—
(Frant. Faustyn Prochazka). Weytah z Kronyky Mozkewské nēkdu Latinē ad Alexandra Gwagnyna sepsané, potom w Cesky gazyk prelozené od Matausse z Wysokého Meyta. Pridana gest Zygmunda z Herbersteina dwogi cesta do Moskwy. (W. Praze) 1786; 8vo., pp. 144-175.
EXTRACTS.
Printed from the Basle edition of 1557, in—
(a) Polonicæ historicæ Corpus; hoe est Polonicarum rerum Latini scriptores recentiores et veteres, quotquot extant uno volumine comprehensi omnes, ex bibliotheca Jo. Pistorii. Basileæ (1582); fol., tom. i, pp. 151-157.
(b) Alex. Guagnini Res Polonicæ. Francofurti, 1584; 8vo., tom. iii, p. 550.
(c) Historiæ Polonicæ et magni Ducatus Lithuaniæ scriptorum collectio magna ed. Laur. Mitzler de Kolof. Varsaviæ, 1761; fol., tom. i, cap. 7.
Fragmentum de bello Poloni et Moschi.
This is an extract from the “Commentaries”, in the Basle edition of 1557, and is printed in the “Polonicæ historiæ corpus”, t. iii, p. 13-15.
Eight chapters from Herberstein’s “Commentaries” are printed in the Elzevir edition of the work, “Russia sive Moscovia.” Lugd. Bat. 1630, 16mo., p. 79-100.
It only remains for the editor to express his great obligations to his friend William Brenchley Rye, Esq. of the British Museum, both for his obliging contribution of the etching of the grand-prince, which forms the frontispiece of the second volume, and also for most valuable assistance in this introduction, and more especially in the bibliography, which forms so considerable a portion of it.
- ↑ Siegmund Freiherr von Herberstein mit besonderer Rücksicht auf seine Reisen in Russland. St. Petersburg, 1818, 8vo.Kritisch Literärische Uebersicht der Reisenden in Russland bis 1700. St. Petersburg, 1846, 4to.
- ↑ See “Asserus de rebus gestis Alfredi in Anglica, Hibernica, etc., scripta, ex bibliotheca Camdeni.⟨”⟩ Auctore Silvestro Giraldo (properly Giraldus de Barry, but better known as Giraldus Cambrensis, born 1146, in Wales). Francf. 1602, fol., p. 5.
- ↑ Very circumstantial accounts of King Alfred’s work, and Ohthere, will be found in Beckmann’s Litter. d. ält. Reisebeschr. Th. i, p. 450, etc.
- ↑ See Petheram’s “Anglo-Saxon Literature in England”. London, 1840; p. 46.
- ↑ Author of the well-known “Muajim Albuldan”, a very valuable alphabetical dictionary of countries.
- ↑ Cooley’s “History of Maritime and Inland Discovery,” i, 254.
- ↑ The following observation is made by Adelung in a note:— “Ruysbroeck spoke first of Goths in the Crimea, and Barbaro and Busbeck confirmed his accounts. It is known that no remains of them are to be found there at the present day, as Pallas informed me in 1810, in reply to my request for information thereupon.”
- ↑ We say inappropriate, because with all the merits of Marco Polo he could lay no claim to an acquaintance with science and philosophy, while in these the illustrious Humbolt even at this day stands preeminent.
- ↑ Ramusio, “Raccolta”, vol. ii, p. 6, says, Marco Polo may have obtained this name on account of the great wealth of the Asiatic court, which he mentions in his travels (e.g., the income of Kublai Khan from Kinsai, with its districts, alone amounted to 23,200,000 Venetian ducats), at first as a kind of nickname, but afterwards given by the Venetian government itself.
- ↑ Ramusio says: “Fece venir da Venezia le sue scritture e memoriale che avea portato seco.”—See Zurla, vol. i, p. 18.
- ↑ See Zurla, vol. i, p. 19.
- ↑ The following note, bearing reference to this narrative, is given by Price in his edition of Warton’s “History of English Poetry,” 1824, vol. ii, p. 167, and is inserted here from its interesting connexion with a portion of our own history:—“A curious collection of German poems, evidently compiled from these heraldic registers, has recently been discovered in the library of Prince Sinzendorf. The reader will find an account of them and their author, Peter Suchenwirt (who lived at the close of the fourteenth century), in the fourteenth volume of the Vienna Annals of Literature.—Jahrbücher der Literatur, Wien, 1814 [1821]. They are noticed here for their occasional mention of English affairs. The life of Burkhard v. Ellerbach recounts the victory gained by the English at the battle of Cressy; in which this terror of Prussian and Saracen infidels was left for dead on the field, ‘the blood and the grass, the green and the red, being so completely mingled in one mass,’ that no one perceived him.—Friedrich v. Chreuzpeckh served in Scotland, England, and Ireland. In the latter country he joined an army of 60,000 (!) men, about to form the siege of a town called Trachtal (?); but the army broke up without an engagement. On his return from thence to England, the fleet in which he sailed fell in with a Spanish squadron, and destroyed or captured six-and-twenty of the enemy. These events occurred between the years 1332-36.—Albrecht v. Nürnberg followed Edward III into Scotland, and appears to have been engaged in the battle of Halidown-hill. But the ‘errant-knight’ most intimately connected with England was Hans v. Traun. He joined the banner of Edward III at the siege of Calais, during which he was engaged in cutting off some supplies sent by sea for the relief of the besieged. He does ample justice to the valour and heroic resistance of the garrison, who did not surrender till their stock of leather, rope, and similar materials—which had long been their only food—was exhausted. Rats were sold at a crown each. In the year 1356 he attended the Black Prince in the campaign which preceded the battle of Poictiers; and on the morning of that eventful fight, Prince Edward honoured him with the important charge of bearing the English standard. The battle is described with considerable animation. The hostile armies advanced on foot, the archers forming the vanguard. ‘This was not a time,’ says the poet, ‘for the interchange of chivalric civilities, for friendly greetings, and cordial love: no man asked his fellow for a violet or a rose; and many a hero, like the ostrich, was obliged to digest both iron and steel, or to overcome, in death, the sensations inflicted by the spear and the javelin. The field resounded with the clash of swords, clubs, and battle-axes, and with shouts of Nater Dam and Sand Jors.’ But von Traun, mindful of the trust reposed in him, rushed forward to encounter the standard-bearer of France. ‘He drove his spear through the vizor of his adversary: the enemy’s banner sunk to the earth never to rise again. Von Traun planted his foot upon its staff, when the King of France was made captive, and the battle was won.’ For his gallantry displayed on this day, Edward granted him a pension of a hundred marks. He is afterwards mentioned as being intrusted by Edward III with the defence of Calais during a ten weeks’ siege; and, at a subsequent period, as crossing the channel, and capturing a (French?) ship, which he brought into an English port, and presented to Edward.—It is to be hoped these poems will be published.—[They were published three years afterwards, as above mentioned, but this fact is not noticed in the last edition of Warton published in 1840.]—The slight analysis of their contents given by Mr. Primisser, and on which this note is founded, is just sufficient to excite, without gratifying, curiosity.”
- ↑ Dem erbern unnd vesten herrn Jacoben Fugger, Rö Kay. May. u. Radt, meinem günstigen lieben herren. Empent ich Johañ Mair von Eckh doctor, etc. Mein freuntlich willig dienst. Als ich doctor Mathis von Miechaw büchlin darinn er die völcker gegen mitternacht, zu ern dem hochwirdigen fürsten uñ herren herrn. Stanislaw Tursso Bischove zu Olmitz meinem genädigen herren, weyt und wol beschriben von euch empfangen, hab ich das mit höchster begierd überlesen. Unnd in anschung das bemelter doctor Mathis von Miechaw, in poln anhaym, und seiner beschreybung mer weder andern lateinischen oder Kriechischen schreibern, die solche lanndt nye gesehen, auch von andern Nacionen von wegen irer rauhen und groben art, mit streyt und Kriegen nit geöffnet, zu gelauben ist, Wie wol der hochwirdig fürst und herr herr Nicolaus Cusa, der geleerten teutschen Kron, in ainem Mäpplin von disen länden vil auzaigt. Bin ich bewegt Euwer ernnste zu gefallen solch püchlin auss dem latein in teutsch zu transferiern. Wölliches ich dann in Kurtzen tagen mit der eyl gethon und dasselbig Euwer ernnste hyemit zusende. . . . .
- ↑ Called by Strabo and Pliny, Zygi; by the Greeks, Ζυγοι. The word Zichu, or as some write it, Dsich, in Circassian means “a man”.
- ↑ His words are:—“Li detti Sani sono quasi à modo di una casa, et con un cavallo davanti si strascinano, et sono solo per i tempi del ghiaccio, et à ciascuno conviene haver il suo. In questi sani vi si siede dentro, con quanti panni si vuole, et si governa il cavallo, et fanno grandissimo cammino, et portansi anche dentro tutte le vettovaglie, et ogn’ altra cosa necessaria.”
- ↑ The ambassador sent by the grand-prince with Poppel was Jurj Trachaniota, or, as Müller calls him, Trachaniotton, the well-known Greek, who had arrived in Russia on the marriage of the grand-prince with the Greek princess Sophia, and was frequently employed in affairs demanding talent and subtlety.—Adelung’s note.
- ↑ Müller on this observes:—“Thus at this time they sought to strengthen the power of the German empire by an alliance with Russia, notwithstanding the remoteness of these countries, a fact of which history gives many proofs.”—Adelung’s note.
- ↑ For the amusement of the reader, we give here Herberstein’s German in all its original quaintness. “Von meinen Eltern hab ich auch vernomen, die gleichwol nur von hörn sagen geredt, das siben Ritter zu ainer zeit da zu Herberstain gewont soltn haben darunder nur ainer hosen getragen, Gleicher masse auch vernomen, das Neun Herberstainerin auss ainem Mantel verheyrat wärn. So ist mir zu meinen tagen ainer zuckumen der gesagt hat, Er wär deren ainer von den Neun die auss ainem Mantel verhayrat sein. Das setz ich auch für khain gewishait, So es aber also war alsmüglich ist, So findt man daraus, wie sich das weltlich wesen verendert nach der zeit, Jetzo wil Kainer an (ohne) siben Par hosen auch Khaine an neün Mantln zu friden oder benugig sein, So wirt vnser jtzigs weesen auch nit ewig besteen.”
- ↑ Published by Kovachich; Ofen, 1805, 8vo.
- ↑ Hungarian invention of coaches.—Herberstein, in his autobiography, published by Kovachich, 1805, when alluding to his journey to Hungary, speaks of coaches under the name of cotschien or kotzschi wägnen, and adds: “They are so called after a village ten miles distant from Buda (Kotsee, Kotsch, now Kitser); they are drawn by three horses, which run abreast of each other, and at those times when there is little or no ice on the ground. They carry four persons along with the driver, and it is indeed a very agreeable conveyance—so that any one can convey his bed, clothes, eatables and drinkables, and other conveniences, provided the load be not a heavy one.” See also upon this subject, Beckmann’s Hist. of Inventions, where Herberstein’s work on Russia is quoted, but not the above passage, which was not then published.
- ↑ This reminds one of the German nagel probe, or “nail test”, in which the goblet was shewn to be empty by there not remaining sufficient in it, when turned upside down, to wet the thumb-nail.
- ↑ With respect to the drinking habits of the Russians, the editor has thought it would not be unacceptable to the reader to add, by way of appendix to this introduction, the curious and rare metrical epistles of George Turberville, described by Ant. à Wood (in his Athenæ Oxonienses, i, 627), as “much admired for his excellencies in the art of poetry. Being esteemed a person fit for business, as having a good and ready command of his pen, he was entertained by Thos. Randolph, Esq., to be his secretary, when he received commission from Queen Elizabeth to go ambassador to the Emperor of Russia. After his arrival at that place, he did, at spare hours, exercise his muse, and wrote, Poems describing the Places and Manners of the Country and People of Russia”; an. 1568 (1569). The three poetical epistles, in the last of which he alludes to Herberstein, are addressed to the author’s friends, “Edward Dancie, Spencer, and Parker.” Ant. à. Wood, in his life of Turberville, refers to the second name as Edm. Spencer, meaning, of course, the poet; but there is no mention of Edmund in Turberville or Hakluyt. He is merely called Spencer, and certainly was not the celebrated author of the Fairy Queen, who was then only about fifteen years of age. The same error has been made by the editor of the reprint of Turberville’s Tragical Tales; 4to., Edinb., 1837. Of the two other persons, the editor can find no account. These letters on Russia are likewise included among the Epitaphs and Sonnets attached to the Tragical Tales, the original edition of which work (printed in 1587) is exceedingly rare. A reprint of this, limited to fifty copies, 4to., appeared at Edinburgh in 1837. A copy is in the Grenville Library.
- ↑ Herberstein’s correct designation was, Siegmund Freyherr zu Herberstein, Neyperg, etc., which, literally translated, becomes, “Sigismundus Liber Baro in Herberstein”, both of which forms of title he himself uses. But as the title of “Freyherr”, Free Baron, is peculiar to Germany, its Latin rendering of “Liber Baro” has led many into the mistake, that “Liber” was the family name, and “Baro” the title. Hence the blunder in the above title. In the Italian translation of his works, he is called “Sigismundo Libero et Barone in Herbesten”. Some have shortened his name into “Sigismundus Baro et Herr Siegmund”; and in the Russian archives and annals, according to Adelung, he is called Siegmund Herbenster, Shidimant and Schichdimont Herbenstene, Shiginon Hirbresten, Hermonster, etc., etc.
- ↑ It is he who says that Herberstein was in Russia in 1497 and 1523.
- ↑ This edition contains some points of advantage over those which preceded it, as containing nine documents, then printed for the first time, having reference to Herberstein’s travels in Poland and Russia. These are letters of Maximilian, Charles V, Ferdinand, Ludwig II. of Hungary, and Sigismund of Poland, which the editors, Claude Marne and Jean Aubri, appear to have obtained from the family archives, through the Baron Felicianus von Herberstein, whose personal acquaintance they boast of in a dedication to Marquard Freher.
- ↑ In the preface to his German “Moscovia”, Herberstein says: “I wrote the whole in Latin, and so printed it, and lately it has been printed in the Italian tongue.”
- ↑ Buhle “de antiquis delineat. geograph. Russiæ,” p. 7, regards this Italian translation as the earliest edition of Herberstein’s work, as he was not aware of the Latin original of 1549.
- ↑ Frontier countries.
- ↑ Worin.