_Prester John._
LXXXIII.It is wonderful, considering how slight our information is of
Prester John of India, that even children and rustics are acquainted with
his name, although it is not as yet known with any certainty, who this
prince is, where he reigns, nor why he is called by this name. When
the Portuguese received the first information that the king of the
Abyssinians professed himself a Christian, and that his subjects called
him Belul Gian, or as others have it, John Coi; they imagined this was
Prester John, and their sentiment was adopted, and passed current in all
Europe. When afterwards people came to know, that these words in the
Abyssinian language, had a different signification from what had been
put upon them, and meant the same as _precious king_, or _my king_; and
reflecting also, that those who gave the first accounts of Prester John,
placed him in Asia, and not in Africa, this opinion began to lose ground
with men of letters, and to be considered as erroneous. But the doubts
respecting who this Christian prince is, in what part of Asia he reigns,
and why he is called Prester John, still remain: and with regard to
this matter, there are so many opinions, that the enumeration of them
would be tedious; but in one thing they all agree, which is, that this
prince is of the Nestorian sect; although in other points relating to him
they differ widely: some say his empire was extinguished by the Tartars;
others, that the name of Prester John was given to the Great Mogul, on
account of his assuming the title of _Schah Gehan_, which signifies _king
of the world_; and that, by equivocal and forced interpretation, Schah
Gehan was construed into Prester John. Such a variety of opinions, has
raised in me some suspicion, whether all that has been related of this
Christian king of Asia, is not entirely fabulous. If, upon inquiry,
it shall appear that Paulus Venetus was the first who gave an account
of him, and that all other authors have taken what they said upon the
subject solely from him: I say, if this should appear to be the case, it
will afford a new motive of distrust, and it would be laughable enough,
to find that authors have been beating their brains, and scrutinizing
all the corners of the globe in search of Prester John, when no such man
exists, nor ever did exist in the world; at least, it is not probable,
that he exists at present, because in all the modern voyages and travels
that I have seen, I don’t meet with the least mention of him; and if
there really was such a man, authors in that way, would not have thought
him unworthy of their notice.