204 J. HORNELL ON 



not remarkable that he should mistake a Chinese junk for an Indian ship. Mukerji 

 also ignores Varthema's description (1503-8 A.D.) of the ships built at Calicut — • 

 sambuks, kapels, etc., although he quotes the passage on p. 203. 



A final quotation from Marco Polo shows how enormously valuable this trade 

 with India was. After describing Zaitun (probably the modern Tsiuen-chau or Chin- 

 chau near Amo}^), the great port of arrival for ships from India, he adds: — -"Hither 

 is imported the most astonishing quantity of goods and of precious stones and pearls, 

 and from there, they are distributed all over Manzi, and I assure you that for one 

 shipload of pepper that goes to Alexandria or elsewhere, destined for Christendom, 

 there come a hundred such, aye and more too, to this haven of Zaitun." ^ 



It would seem that the commencement of regular sea-trade between China and 

 India cannot date back earlier than the end of the fourth century A.D.* The first 

 direct intercourse between China and Ceylon is ascribed to the early years of the East- 

 ern Tsin dynasty (317-420). The earlier phase of this trade appears to have been 

 conducted in Arab, Indian, and Sinhalese ships, which gave way in great measure to 

 the larger Chinese junks as soon as the Chinese began to appreciate the great value 

 of Indian merchandise. This probably took place under the great T'ang dynasty for 

 the 300 years of their rule (618-907) was a period of great expansion and progress. 



How and exactly when Chinese trading fleets ceased to frequent Indian seas is 

 something of a mystery. We know that a Chinese fleet arrived in Ceylon in 1409 and 

 deported the royal family to China and that tribute was paid regularly by Ceylon to 

 China throughout the reign of Parakkana Bahu Raja VI from 1410 to 1462. Nicolo 

 Conti's description of the great trading ships seen by him in Indian seas in the earlier 

 part of the 15th century is probably the latest surviving account of the oversea 

 Chinese junk trade with India. Cont isays, however, that they were built by Indians, 

 obviously an error in view of his detailed description of them i7i almost the same words 

 as Marco Polo ; he describes them as having five sails and as many masts, the lower 

 part of the hull constructed of triple planks and some provided with watertight bulk- 

 heads.* Conti was a careless writer and I incline to think that he had Marco Polo's 

 Travels before him when he wrote this. Probably, like Prof. Mukerji in recent times, 

 he was led into this error by Polo's use of the term " Indian ships" already referred 

 to above. 



It is certain that no Chinese ships were in the Indian trade when the Portuguese 

 arrived in India (1498) ; from Abd-er-Razzak's account of the trade of Cahcut,* and 

 his omission to refer to the Chinese junk trade, we may further infer that even as 

 early as this, Chinese ships had ceased to come to India. His reference to the seafaring 

 population of Calicut under the term China boys, indicates that Chinese influence 

 could not have been severed for any considerable length of time. 



We shall not be far wrong if we put the approximate date of the cessation of the 

 Chinese junk trade with India at about 1424 A.D., a date which coincides with the 



1 Yule, loc. cit., p. 185. 2 Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither, I. 66, lyondou.iQis. 



s India in the Fifteenth Century (Hakluyt Society), Vol. 11. 

 * India in the Fifteenth Century, loc. cit., Vol. I. 



