Page 52 - History of Portuguese in the Gulf_Neat

a I
xcviii INTRODUCTION.
(iv) In his numerous and sometimes very lengthy1
digressions throughout the first booh of the Kings of
Persia, Teixeira has brought together (in a somewhat
inconvenient form, it is true) a mass of information, more
or less valuable, respecting Asiatic and African topography,
ethnology, natural history, pharmacology, etc.—much of it
from his personal observation, but a good deal, on the
other hand, from mere hearsay.2
As Mr. W. F. Sinclair, who undertook the translation
and editing of Teixeira’s book, has, unfortunately, not lived
to complete his task,3 it may be well here to quote his
opinion regarding the author, and the rule observed by him
in his translation. Writing to me on January 20th, 1899,
Mr. Sinclair says :—
“ The view I take of Teixeira is that he was an excellent
observer and eye-witness, and is still valuable in that
character. I cannot attach much importance, at this day,
to what he reports at second-hand, in spite of his own
stout confidence in his informants.
“The Voyage is to me, from a ‘ Hakluytian’point of
view, the main part of the book ; and I have translated it
bodily without omission.
“ The 1 Kings of Hormuz’ represents the lost Shahnama
of ‘ Torunxa,’ and I have therefore translated it bodily,
except one silly story of the mercheta mulicrum, which
la plupart, transoms de la fagon la plus barbare” (as regards this
latter accusation, see Teixeira’s own remarks on the subject in his
Prefatory Note infray p. cv, and Mr. Sinclair’s comment thereon).
1 In several chapters the digressions occupy six or eight times as
much space as the history.
* Not a little, also, appears to have been abstracted from the
Colloquios of Garcia de Orta, whom Teixeira occasionally names.
but generally to find fault with.
5 Mr. Sinclair died on May 15th, 1900. An appreciative obituary
notice of him, from the pen of Dr. 0. Codrington, appeared in the
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, July, 1900, pp. 610-612.
INTRODUCTION. xcix ii
I am sick of finding continually turn up in all sorts of ii
' places. i
i “The ‘ Kings of Persia* is of little historical value to a
generation that has translations of the Rauzdt-us-Safd,
and is represented, in my MS., only by extracts from
!
Teixeira’s digressions, wherever (as I have said) he speaks
as an eye-witness, or the passage cannot be separated from
such testimony.”
Again, on January 23rd, 1899, Mr. Sinclair writes:
“ I look upon him as an early—or the first—‘globe-trotter,*
and value him chiefly in that capacity. However, he and
\
his translator Stevens had the honour of a couple of
quotations by Gibbon, in the notes to the Decline and. ; :
Fair ;
On February 5th, 1899, Mr. Sinclair wrote: “I cannot
look upon Teixeira, myself, as a man about whom fieya
J3l/3\lov could be wished for, only as an interesting traveller, !
and as having had the sense and good fortune to preserve
f
fragments of the lost ShaJindma of Ormuz.”
some
Then, on May 10th, 1899: “As to matters which he
I
reports on the faith of others, I have not found any reason
for repentance of having excluded them from the extracts
i
(’spite of Pedro’s protest in their favour, in his preface) ; j
but he seems to have been quite as careful and critical as
could be expected in his day.”
In view of the fact that Mr. Sinclair was not able to !
make any final revision of his translation and notes, I have
altered the former only in a few cases where it was
absolutely required, and have left most of the notes intact,
putting any additions of my own in brackets.
I feel that an apology is due to scholars for the (I
I can only
fear) somewhat unscientific spelling of names.
plead that my knowledge of Arabic and Persian is of the
slightest.
In conclusion, I have to express my thanks to the
!
!i
!
t