Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T12:09:04.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A “Black Cult” in Early Medieval China: Iranian-Zoroastrian Influence in the Northern Dynasties*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2017

SANPING CHEN  and
VICTOR H MAIR
SANPING CHEN
Affiliation:
Ottawa Canada and the University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]
VICTOR H MAIR
Affiliation:
Ottawa Canada and the University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Through an analysis of Chinese theophoric names - a genre that emerged in the early medieval period largely under heavy Iranian-Sogdian influence - we suggest that there was a contemporary ‘black worship’ or ‘black cult’ in northern China that has since vanished. The followers of this ‘black cult’ ranged from common people living in ethnically mixed frontier communities to the ruling echelons of the Northern Dynasties. By tapping into the fragmentary pre-Islamic Iranian-Sogdian data, we link this ‘black cult’ to the now nearly forgotten ancient Iranic worship of the Avestan family of heroes centered around Sāma. This religio-cultural exchange prompts an examination of the deliberate policy by the ethnic rulers of the Northern Dynasties to attract Central Asian immigrants for political reasons, a precursor to the Semu, the Mongols’ ‘assistant conquerors’ in the Yuan dynasty.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2017 , pp. 201 - 224
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We thank many friends and scholars, especially Nicholas Sims-Williams, Pavel Lurje, Yutaka Yoshida, and Étienne de la Vaissière for their learned and valuable input and suggestions during the preparation of this article. The constructive criticism of two JRAS reviewers is also deeply appreciated.

References

1 See Pulleyblank, Edwin, “A Sogdian Colony in Inner Mongolia”, T'oung Pao, Second Series, 41 (1952), pp. 317–356 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Qinruo, Wang 王欽若 et al., comp., Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜 (Prime Tortoise of the Record Bureau) (Beijing, 1960) 986 Google Scholar.11584; Xu, Liu 劉昫 et al., comp., Jiu Tang shu 舊唐書 (Old History of the Tang Dynasty) (Beijing, 1975) 8 Google Scholar.182.

3 Guang, Sima 司馬光 et al., comp., Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒 (Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government) (Beijing, 1956) 212.6745-46Google Scholar.

4 Pulleyblank, “A Sogdian Colony”.

5 Hu, Shih, “The Indianization of China: A Cultural Study in Cultural Borrowing”, in Independence, Convergence, and Borrowing in Institutions, Thought, and Art (Cambridge, Mass., 1937), pp. 219–247 Google Scholar.

6 For an introduction to the spread of theophoric names to China, see Chen, Sanping, “Son of Heaven and Son of God: Interactions among Ancient Asiatic Cultures Regarding Sacral Kingship and Theophoric Names”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, series 3, vol. 12 (2002), pp. 289–325 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A recent follow-up is Chen, Sanping, “Were ‘ugly slaves’ in medieval China really ugly?” Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 136 (2016), pp. 117–123 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 There is a rich literature on this subject. For a brief introduction, see Jacobsen, Thorkild, The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion (New Haven, 1976), pp. 147–164 Google Scholar. For in-depth studies, see Vorländer, Hermann, Mein Gott: Die Vorstellungen vom persönlichen Gott im Alten Orient und im Alten Testament (Kevelaer, 1975)Google Scholar, and Albertz, Rainer, Persönliche Frömmigkeit und offizielle Religion (Stuttgart, 1978)Google Scholar.

8 Chinese onomastic data sources used in this paper include the following titles: Changru, Tang 唐长孺 et al., comp., Tulufan chutu wenshu 吐魯番出土文書 vols 1-10 (Beijing, 1981-91)Google Scholar, abbreviated as TLF; Xinjiang, Rong 榮新江 et al., comp., Xinhuo Tulufan chutu wenxian 新獲吐魯番出土文獻, 2 vols. (Beijing, 2008)Google Scholar, abbreviated as XTLF; Geng'ou, Tang 唐耕耦 and Hongji, Lu 陸宏基, comp., Dunhuang shehui jingji wenxian zhenji shilu 敦煌社會經濟文獻真跡釋錄, vols 1-5 (Beijing, 1986-1990)Google Scholar, abbreviated as DH; Yuanming, Mao 毛遠明 comp., Han-Wei Liuchao beike jiaozhu 漢魏六朝碑刻校注, 10 vols (Beijing: Xianzhuang shuju, 2008)Google Scholar, abbreviated as HW; Lizhou, Han 韓理洲, comp., Quan Bei-Wei Dong-Wei Xi-Wei wen buyi 全北魏東魏西魏文補遺 (Xi'an, 2010)Google Scholar, abbreviated as QW; Lizhou, Han, comp., Quan Bei-Qi Bei-Zhou wen buyi 全北齊北周文補遺 (Xi'an, 2008)Google Scholar, abbreviated as QW and QZ (different pagination); Lizhou, Han, comp., Quan Sui wen buyi 全隋文補遺 (Xi'an, 2004)Google Scholar, abbreviated as QS; and to a lesser extent, Haifan, Hu 胡海帆 and Yan, Tang 湯燕, comp., Zhongguo gudai zhuanke mingwen ji 中國古代磚刻銘文集 2 vols (Beijing, 2008)Google Scholar, abbreviated as ZK.

9 Gershevitch, Ilya, “Amber at Persepolis”, in Studia Classica et Orientalia Antonino Pagliaro oblata II (Rome, 1969), pp.167–251 Google Scholar; p. 216.

10 DH 1.269, 1.296, 2.19, 214, 431, 3.426, 5.322, etc.

11 DH 5.239.

12 Benveniste, E., Titres et noms propres en iranien ancien (Paris, 1966), p. 79 Google Scholar.

13 Weber, Dieter, “Zur sogdischen Personennamengebung”, Indogermanische Forschungen 77 (1972), p. 199 Google Scholar.

14 Gabain, Annemarie von, Das Leben im uigurischen Königreich von Qočo (850-1250), Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica, vol. 6 (Wiesbaden, 1973), p. 74 Google Scholar.

15 About this important clan, see Ebrey, Patricia B., The Aristocratic Families of Early Imperial China: A Case Study of the Po-ling Ts'ui Family (Cambridge, 1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Shou, Wei 魏收, comp., Wei shu 魏書 (History of the Wei Dynasty) (Beijing, 1974), 40 Google Scholar.911. Though this source lists only the Tuoba noble's ‘gentrified’ names Rui, Lu 陸叡, Weiyuan, Yao 姚薇元, Beichao huxing kao 北朝胡姓考 (Beijing, 1958), p. 30 Google Scholar, notes that the story was about the son-in-law's atrocious full “Barbarian” name Buliugu Heluhun 步六孤賀陸渾.

17 Taken from the verse 天錫公純嘏 “[May] heaven bestow great fortune on our duke”, in the poem ‘Bigong 閟宮’, providing a classic link between Zhang's given name and style name.

18 Xuanling, Fang 房玄齡 et al., comp., Jin shu 晉書 (History of the Jin Dynasty) (Beijing, 1974), 86 Google Scholar.2250

19 Da-Tang Da Ci'ensi Sanzang fashi zhuan 大唐大慈恩寺三藏法師傳 (A Biography of the Tripiṭaka Master of the Great Ci'en Monastery of the Great Tang Dynasty), in Junjirō, Takakusu 高楠順次郎 and Kaigyoku, Watanabe 渡邊海旭, comp., Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經 (Tokyo, 1924-1932)Google Scholar T50, 1.223b.

20 Zheng, Wei 魏徵 et al., comp., Sui shu 隋書 (History of the Sui Dynasty) (Beijing, 1973) 4 Google Scholar. 90.

21 According to Dumont, Paul Émile, “An Appendix on Indo-Aryan names”, in O'Callaghan, Roger Timothy, Aram Naharaim: A Contribution to the History of Upper Mesopotamia in the Second Millennium B.C. (Rome, 1948), p. 152 Google Scholar, this “Indo-Aryan” theophoric suffix was attested in the Middle East as early as the mid-second-millennium BCE.

22 Justi, Ferdinand, Iranisches Namenbuch (Marburg, 1895), p. 51 Google Scholar et passim; Phillipe Gignoux, Iranisches Personennamenbuch Band 2, Fasc. 2, Noms propres sassanides en moyen-perse épigraphique (Wien, 1986), pp. 216-217.

23 On the deification of the animal cycle in archeological findings, see for example Feng, Luo 羅豐, Guyuan nanjiao Sui-Tang mudi 固原南郊隋唐墓地 (Beijing, 1996), pp. 26–27 Google Scholar; Zhang Lihua 張麗華, “Shi'er shengxiao de qiyuan ji muzang zhong de shi'er shengxiaoyong 十二生肖的起源及墓葬中的十二生肖俑”, Sichuan wenwu 四川文物 (2005), no. 5, pp. 63-65. See also Sanping Chen, “Were ‘ugly slaves’ in medieval China really ugly?”

24 TFL 4.2, 2.334 5.87, QW 59, 482, 588, etc.

25 TLF 3.319 and 3.260. Though mo 莫 was often a short form of mohe 莫何 (c.f. n. 53), this name may also stand for max-vandak, “moon's slave”.

26 TFL 4.13, 4.188; XTLF 146, 373, 368; DH 1.263; 2.28, 2.84, 2.391, 2.404, 2.428, QW 658, etc.

27 TLF 4.76.

28 TFL 2.283, 4.67, DH 2.479, 3.351, etc.

29 TLF 4.144, 6.361, 6.381, XTLF 5, DH 1.160, 2.212, 3.355, 8.158, etc.

30 TLF 8.255, DH 3.174.

31 One recent such effort is Wang Shoukuan 汪受寬, “Jianshui Jinguan Hanjian ‘heise’ ren qunti yanjiu 肩水金關漢簡‘黑色’人群体研究”, Zhonghua wenshi luncong 中華文史論叢 2014, no. 3, pp. 111-142.

32 TLF 9.24, DH 1.139, 1,143, 1.368, etc.

33 DH 1.3231, 1.333, 1.383, 2.210. 2.403, 2.440, 2.470, etc.

34 This term is widely used in medieval Buddhist sources. For example, Hongming ji 弘明集 (Collection for the Propagation and Clarification [of Buddhism]), Taishō T52, 11.70b, Guang hongming ji 廣弘明集 (Expanded Collection for the Propagation and Clarification [of Buddhism]), Taishō T52, 11.161b, and Fayuan zhulin 法苑珠林 (A Grove of Pearls in the Garden of the Dharma), Taishō T53, 10.365c.

35 TLF 10.25, XTLF 366, DH 2.434, 4.461, etc.

36 There are dozens of such cases in Taishō, e.g., Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 (Supplement to the Biographies of Eminent Monks), T50, 20.605c, and Fayuan zhulin, T53, 26.480c.

37 http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T, accessed August 14, 2015.

38 TLF 4.25, 4.52, 4.89, 4.3525.206, DH 1.248, 1.309, QW 662, 673.

39 TLF 4.238, 5.45, 6.162 etc.

40 TLF 2.29, 2.82, 2.85; QW 69 and 596, QQ 236 and QS 110.

41 TLF 6.48 and 6.376.

42 TLF 2.292, 2.331, 2.344, 3.42, 3.44, 3.145, 3.239, 4.189, 4.57, 6.168, 6.362, 6.376, etc.

43 TLF 6.319, 6.264, 8.152-53, 10.30, 2.250 and 3.102.

44 DH 2.466.

45 In addition to the well-known role played by immortals in Zoroastrianism, particularly the hero Sāma Keresaspa, to be cited later, the theophoric suffix anōš ‘immortal’ and its variations are a constant feature in ancient Iranian nomenclatures, as can easily be seen in all Iranian onomastic sources cited in the paper.

46 TLF 4.67, 5.144, 5.206, 6.167, 6.361, and 8.158-60 etc.

47 TLF 4.234, 9.165, DH 2.417, 2.433, 4.521, etc.

48 DH 1.270, 1.143, 1.149, 1.167, 1.170, 1.177, 1.190, 1.195, 1.247, 2.429-30, 3.264, 3.290, etc.

49 TLF 4.132.

50 TLF 6.101 and 7.460. A more appropriate interpretation of the character shi 是 here could be derived from the binome shifei 是非, ‘right and wrong’.

51 The “ubiquitous vulgar forms” in Turfan–Dunhuang documents have become a major area of study in past decades. See, for example, Yongquan, Zhang 張涌泉, Dunhuang suzi yanjiu 敦煌俗字研究 (Shanghai, 1996)Google Scholar, and Zheng, Huang 黃徵 Dunhuang su zidian 敦煌俗字典 (Shanghai, 2005)Google Scholar.

52 TLF 6.487 and 8.390.

53 TLF 6.89, 6.217, 6.483, 6.496, 7.171, 7.194, 7.443, 7.524, etc. Given the early medieval pronunciation mək for the character mo, this may well have been influenced by the Iranian term baga ‘god’, often transcribed in Chinese as mo 莫 (early medieval pronunciation mak) or mohe 莫何 (mak-γa). Medieval Chinese pronunciations cited here are largely based on Pulleyblank, Edwin, Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin (Vancouver, 1991)Google Scholar.

54 On Zhaowu surnames, see Yoshida, Yutaka, “On the Origin of the Sogdian Surname Zhaowu and the Related Problems”, Journal Asiatique, 291 (2003), pp. 35–67 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Wei shu, 9.241.

56 TLF 8.434.

57 DH 1.230.

58 Qian, Sima 司馬遷, Shiji 史記 (Records of the Grand Historian) (Beijing, 1959) 27 Google Scholar.1308, with annotations by Tang dynasty scholars Sima Zhen 司馬貞 and Zhang Shoujie 張守節. The image of Xuanwu has always been partly turtle and partly snake.

59 Xiaowei, Zhou 周曉薇, “Song-Yuan-Ming shiqi Zhenwu miao de diyu fenbu zhongxin jiqi lishi yinsu 宋元明時期真武廟的地域分佈中心及其歷史因素”, Zhongguo lishi dili luncong 中國歷史地理論叢 19 (2004) no. 3, pp. 47–55 Google Scholar.

60 Yiliang, Zhou 周一良, Tangdai Mizong 唐代密宗 (Shanghai, 1996)Google Scholar, Xiaorong, Li 李小榮, Dunhuang Mijiao wenxian lungao 敦煌密教文獻論稿 (Beijing, 2003)Google Scholar, Guangxing, Xia 夏廣興, Mijiao chuanchi yu Tangdai shehui 密教傳持與唐代社會 (Shanghai, 2008)Google Scholar, etc.

61 Yao, Wang 王堯, “Mohegela chongbai zai Beijing 摩訶葛剌崇拜在北京”, in Meibiao, Cai 蔡美彪, (ed.), Qingzhu Wang Zhonghan xiansheng bashi shouchen xueshu lunwenji 慶祝王鍾翰先生八十壽辰學術論文集 (Shenyang, 1993), pp. 441–449 Google Scholar.

62 E.g., Malalasekera, Gunapala Piyasena, Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, 2 vols. (London, 1937-1938)Google Scholar and van Velze, Jacob, Names of Persons in Early Sanscrit Literature (Utrecht, 1938)Google Scholar.

63 Vaissière, Étienne de la, “Oncles et frères: les qaghans Ashinas et le vocabulaire turc de la parenté”, Turcica, 42 (2010), p. 270 Google Scholar.

64 Sinor, Denis, “The Establishment and Dissolution of the Türk Empire”, in Sinor, Denis, (ed.), The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia (Cambridge, 1990), p. 290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Von Gabain, Das Leben im uigurischen Königreich von Qočo, p. 73.

66 Clauson, Gerard, An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-thirteenth-century Turkish (London, 1972), p. 643 Google Scholar.

67 Rásonyi, László and Baski, Imre, Onomasticon Turcicum: Turkic Personal Names, 2-vol. (Bloomington, 2007)Google Scholar. The only potential case Qulum-qara (vol. 2, p.490), ‘My slave-black’ or ‘Chicken-black’, is at most an endearing familial hypocorism.

68 Clauson, in particular, concludes that the Tuoba spoke an l/r-Turkic tongue. See An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-thirteenth-century Turkish (London, 1972), Preface.

69 See, for example, the most extensive study of Mongolian colour terms by Khabtagaeva, Baiarma, “Colour names and their suffixes: a study on the history of Mongolian word formation”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 54 (2001), pp. 85–165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; p.99 in particular. See also Comrie, Bernard, The Languages of the Soviet Union (Cambridge, 1981), p. 40 Google Scholar.

70 “Recherches sur les parlers T'o-pa”, T'oung Pao, 39 (1951), pp. 228-327. See also Boodberg, Peter, “The Language of the T'o-pa Wei”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 1(1936), pp. 167–185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Chen, Sanping, “Turkic or Proto-Mongolian? — a note on the Tuoba language”, Central Asiatic Journal, 49 (2005), pp. 161–174 Google Scholar.

71 Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, pp. 161 and 280.

72 Justi. Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 275, and Skjaervo, Prods O., “Karsāsp”, Encyclopaedia Iranica vol. 15, Fasc. 6 (London, 2011), pp. 601–607 Google Scholar.

73 For a more detailed exposition, see Chen, Sanping, “From Azerbaijan to Dunhuang: A Zoroastrianism Note”, Central Asiatic Journal 47 (2003)Google Scholar. An unauthorised Chinese translation appears in Zhongguo bianjiang minzu yanjiu 中國邊疆民族研究, vol. 3 (Beijing, 2010).

74 Pulleyblank, Edwin, “The Chinese Name for the Turks”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 85 (1965), pp. 121–125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In particular, he lists five cases of an “entering tone” character (lək, lat, lat, luwk, and lwit) representing the liquids l/r, three of which were from Xuanzang's Da Tang Xiyu ji 大唐西域記 (Great Tang Records on the Western Regions). We can add at least four more such cases from this famous source. Moreover, Pulleyblank noted the tendency to use a labialized syllable for a terminal consonant, of which our atouliu is one more example.

75 TLF 2.318, 2.302, 3.37, 3.150, 3.163, 4.132, 4.154, 4.160, 4.188, 5.7, 7.396, DH 1.163, 1.179, 1.187, etc.

76 DH 1.275, 1.331, 1.365, 1.402, 1.412, etc., particularly an Aduonu 阿朵奴, yanjiuyuan, Dunhuang 敦煌研究院, comp., Duanhuang Mogaoku gongyangren tiji 敦煌莫高窟供養人題記 (Beijing, 1986), p. 157 Google Scholar.

77 TLF 7.327.

78 Duanhuang Mogaoku gongyangren tiji, p. 118. See also QW, p. 658.

79 TLF 2.339 and 3.6.

80 TLF 4.484 and 8.282.

81 Examples of ‘god's favour’ names are too numerous to cite. For the ‘god-victorious’ type, see, for example, Lurje, Pavel, Iranisches Personennamenbuch. Band II: Mitteliranisches Personennamen, Faszikel 8, Personal Names in Sogdian Texts (Wien, 2010), p. 276 Google Scholar, and Sims-Williams, Nicholas. Iranisches Personennamenbuch, Band II: Mitteliranisches Personennamen, Faszikel 7, Bactrian Personal Names (Wien, 2010), pp. 41 Google Scholar, 68, and 91.

82 Gershevitch, “Amber at Persepolis”, p. 189.

83 Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, pp. 76, 83-84, and 487-488.

84 Pulleyblank, “A Sogdian Colony”, p. 333n1.

85 Schafer, Edward, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand: A Study of T'ang Exotics (Berkeley, 1963), p. 4Google Scholar; Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 489.

86 TLF 3.119, 6.470, 6.472, 7.470, 9.27, 9.41, DH 1.230 (two cases), and Huayan jing zhuanji 華嚴經傳記 (Notes on the Transmission of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra), Taishō, T51, 5.171c.

87 Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 489.

88 Müller, Friedrich W. K., Ein Doppelblatt aus einem manichäischen Hymnenbuch (Mahrnamag) (Berlin, 1912), p. 11 Google Scholar, line 100.

89 Phillipe Gignoux, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, Band 2, Fasc. 2, Noms propres sassanides en moyen-perse épigraphique (Wien, 1986), p. 156, #824.

90 TLF 6.51; DH 1.205, 1.401, 1.331, 2.311.

91 Altiranisches Woerterbuch (Strasburg, 1904), column 1571,

92 Monier-Williams, Monier, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages (Oxford, 1899), p. 1095 Google Scholar.

93 Boyce, Mary, A Word-list of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian, Acta Iranica 9a. Troisiéme Serie, Textes et Memoires, vol. 2 Supplement (Teheran, 1977), p. 83 Google Scholar; MacKenzie, David N., A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary (London, 1971), p. 104 Google Scholar.

94 Gershevitch, Ilya, A Grammar of Manichean Sogdian (Oxford, 1954)Google Scholar, §§194 and 1238; MacKenzie, David N., The “Sūtra of the Causes and Effects of Actions” in Sogdian (London, 1970), p. 71 Google Scholar; Sims-Williams, Nicholas, The Christian Sogdian Manuscript C2 (Berlin, 1985), p. 226 Google Scholar.

95 MacKenzie, David N., “The Khwarezmian Glossary III”, BSOAS 34 (1971), p. 324 Google Scholar, “The Khwarezmian Glossary V”, BSOAS 35 (1972), p. 63.

96 Again, such names go back to Elamite tablets of Persepolis circa 500 BC. See Gershevitch, “Amber at Persepolis”, p. 233, and Benveniste, Titres et noms propres, p. 93.

97 The special link between the fire god and Sām may be explained by the Zoroastrian story about Sām (Karsāsp) offending or killing the Fire, son of Ohrmazd (see, for instance, Skjaervo, “Karsāsp”). We also note another legend in the later epic Shāh-nāma, where Hushang, only the second shāh on earth, who “first showed the fire within the stone”, was the son of “the blessed Siyamak”. See Warner, Arthur G. and Warner, Edmond, translation, The Sháhnáma of Firdausí Done into English, vol. 1 (London, 1905), pp. 121–123 Google Scholar. Siyamak is of course a variant of Sāma or Sām. See Christian Bartholomae, Altiranisches Woerterbuch, column 1571, and Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 299.

98 Gignoux, Philippe et al., Pad nām i yazdān: Études d’épigraphie, de numismatique et d'histoire de l'Iran ancien (Paris, 1979), p. 76 Google Scholar.

99 Gignoux, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 27.

100 Ibid., pp. 94 and 156.

101 Konow, Sten, Kharoshthi Inscriptions with the Exception of Those of Aśoka (Calcutta, 1929), pp. 163 Google Scholar and 165; Mukherjee, B. N., “The Title Devaputra on Kushana Coins”, Journal of the Numismatic Society of India 20 (1968), pp. 190–193 Google Scholar.

102 Lévi, Sylvain, “Devaputra”, Journal Asiatique 204 (1935), pp. 1–21 Google Scholar; Pelliot, Paul, Notes on Marco Polo, vol. 2 (Paris, 1963), pp. 652–661 Google Scholar.

103 Philip Huyse, Iranisches Personennamenbuch Band V, Fasz. 6a, Iranische Namen in den griechischen Dokumenten Ägyptens (Wien, 1990), p. 58.

104 Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 487.

105 Bailey, Harold, Indo-Scythian Studies: Being Khotanese Texts (Cambridge, 1961)Google Scholar, vol. 4, pp. 94 and 191.

106 Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 440.

107 Ibid ., p. 429.

108 Ibid ., pp. 275 and 280.

109 Gignoux, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 164, #872.

110 Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 510.

111 Bailey, Harold, The Culture of the Sakas (Delmar, 1982), p. 46 Google Scholar.

112 Pulleyblank, Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin, p. 218.

113 The most persuasive source is the exhaustive dictionary of all inscriptional data from the Han dynasties up to the Sui reunification compiled by Yuanming, Mao 毛遠明, Han-Wei Liuchao beike yiti zidian 漢魏六朝碑刻異體字典 (Beijing, 2008), pp. 318 Google Scholar and 627. See also Gong, Qin 秦公, Bei biezi xinbian 碑別字新編 (Beijing, 1985), p. 373 Google Scholar, and Huang Zheng, Dunhuang su zidian, p. 280.

114 This is from the famous Northern Wei tomb inscription of Zhang Heinü 張黑女. See citation below.

115 The only exception is Mingyuenu 明月奴, which the great Tang romantic poet Li Bai 李白 (Li Po, 701-762) was supposed to have given to one of his children. See, e.g. Xu Tuiyuan 瞿蛻園 and Zhu Jincheng 朱金城, edited and annotated by Li Bai ji jiaozhu 李白集校注 (Shanghai, 1980), p.1791. But with three characters, it can hardly be considered a formal given name.

116 Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 232.

117 pp. 81, 179, 186, passim.

118 For a particular example, see Sanping Chen, “Were ‘ugly slaves’ in medieval China really ugly?”

119 Yarshater, Cf. Ehsan, “Iranian National History”, in The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3 (1) (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 450–451 Google Scholar; note that Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, p. 300, interprets the variant name Syāwaršan as “schwarz (lockige) Mann”.

120 Yarshater, “Iranian National History”, p. 429; Carnoy, Albert J., “Iranian Views of Origins in Connection with Similar Babylonian Beliefs”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 36 (1916), p. 306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

121 A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism (Oxford, 1977), pp. 120 and 284.

122 Gignoux, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 11.

123 Ibid ., p. 131, #661, and p. 174, #942; Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, pp. 349-350; Sims-Williams, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 101, #313.

124 Henrik Samuel Nyberg, A Manual of Pahlavi, vol. 2 (Wiersbaden, 1974), p. 275.

125 Chen, Sanping, “Bai Juyi and Manna”, Central Asiatic Journal 58 (2015), pp. 17–25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

126 DH 2.385, 3.134, 3.354, 3.373-74. See also Duanhuang Mogaoku gongyangren tiji, p. 104.

127 For the use of the Chinese character sha 沙 to transcribe Sogdian šaw, see Ikeda On 池田温, “Hachi seiki chūyō-ni okeru Tonkō-no sogudo-jin juraku 8 世紀中葉における敦煌のソグド人聚落”, Yūrasha bunka kenkyū ユーラシャ文化研究, 1 (1965), p. 64 Google Scholar, and Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, pp. 116 and 367.

128 TLF 6.194, 6.198, DH 2.380, and 3.269.

129 Silian, Yao 姚思廉, Chen shu 陳書 (History of the Chen Dynasty) (Beijing, 1972), 6 Google Scholar.105 and Wei shu, 52.1158.

130 QW 668, Lurje, Iranisches Personennamenbuch, p. 446.

131 For instance, fenghuang 鳳皇 “phoenix” was sometimes written as 鳳黃 (see, e.g., Jinglong, Liu 劉景龍 et al., comp., Longmen shiku beike tiji huilu 龍門石窟碑刻題記匯錄 (Beijing, 1998)Google Scholar, vol. 2, p. 401), and the popular surname Huang 黃 frequently appears in inscriptions as 皇 (QW 514, 605, 612, 661). As the famous Tang dynasty scholar Lu Deming 陸德明 (?-630) noted in Jingdian shiwen 經典釋文 (Textual Explanations of Classics and Canons) (Beijing, 1983, 26.364 and 27.384), this interchangeability extended to such classics as Zhuangzi 莊子, in which the term 皇帝 could be written as 黃帝. For the reverse, see Zheng, Huang 黃徵 and Wei, Wu 吳偉, ed. and comp. Dunhuang yuanwen ji 敦煌願文集 (Changsha, 1995)Google Scholar, vol. 2, p. 943. Moreover, Tang dynasty Buddhist sources often write the Taoist double-sage Huang-Lao 黃老 as 皇老 (Taishō T50, 29.0698a, T52, 3.0381a, etc.)

132 BZ 22.384b, 24.423b, CB 36.612a, QW 59, 74, 448, 482, 621, 627, etc.

133 BZ 42.716a, DH 2.275, Wang Yun 汪鋆, Shi'eryanzhai jinshi guoyan lu 十二硯齋金石過眼錄, reprinted as Lidai beizhi congshu 歷代碑誌叢書, vol. 12 (Nanjing, 1998), 7.371a.

134 Niansun, Wang 王念孫, Dushu zazhi 讀書雜誌 (Beijing, 1985),11 Google Scholar.9; Huang and Wu, Dunhuang yuanwen ji, vol. 1, pp. 23 and 127; vol.2, pp. 520, 594, 638, 640; Qin Gong, Bei biezi xinbian, p.31.

135 Yuerang, Zhou 周悅讓, Juanyou'an qianji 倦游庵槧記 (Jinan, 1996)Google Scholar, preface regarding the author's style name.

136 Dunhuang xian bowuguan kaogu zu 敦煌縣博物館考古組 et al., “Ji Dunhuang faxian de Xijin Shiliuguo muzang 記敦煌發現的西晉十六國墓葬”, Dunhuang Tulufan yanjiu lunji 敦煌吐魯番文獻研究論集, vol. 4 (Beijing, 1987), p. 630.

137 St. Petersburg Institute of Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of Russia et al., E-cang Dunhuang wenxian 俄藏敦煌文獻 (Shanghai, 2009) vol. 10, p. 136; Xiaohong, Mie 乜小紅, E-cang Dunhuang qiyue wenshu yanjiu 俄藏敦煌契約文書研究 (Shanghai, 2009), pp. 91–92 Google Scholar.

138 Jinglong, Liu 劉景龍 (ed.) Longmen ershipin: Bei-Wei beike zaoxiang juzhen 龍門二十品: 北魏碑刻造像聚珍 (Beijing, 1997), p. 24 Google Scholar.

139 QW 477, 485 and 491.

140 Anchang, Shi 施安昌, Huotan yu jisi niaoshen: Zhongguo gudai Xianjiao meishu kaogu shouji 火壇與祭司鳥神: 中國古代祆教美術考古手記 (Beijing, 2004), p. 173 Google Scholar.

141 HW 7.117, 212.

142 HW 7.100

143 QW 69, 555-56, 572, 625, 646, 658, 662, 673, 679; HW 8.113.

144 ZK 2.172.

145 QQ 557.

146 QZ 55, 66.

147 Changshou, Ma 馬長壽, Beiming suojian qian-Qin zhi Sui-chu de Guanzhong buzu 碑銘所見前秦至隋初的關中部族 (Beijing, 1985), pp. 57 Google Scholar and 93.

148 QQ 217, 224, 254, QZ 59.

149 Song, Li 李淞, Chang'an yishu yu zongjiao wenming 長安藝術與宗教文明 (Beijing, 2002), pp. 420 Google Scholar and 423.

150 QS 389-390.

151 HW 4.28-29.

152 Wei shu, 77.1702.

153 Wei shu, 48.1069.

154 Yao, Beichao huxing kao, p. 312.

155 See, e.g., Yongyan, Guo 郭永琰, Bei Wei Zhang Heinü muzhi jiexi 北魏張黑女墓志解析 (Beijing, 2007)Google Scholar.

156 Defen, Linghu 令狐德棻 et al., comp., Zhou shu (Beijing, 1971), 45 Google Scholar.813.

157 jinshizu, Beijing Tushuguan 北京圖書館金石組, comp., Beijing Tushuguan cang Zhongguo lidai shike tuoben huibian 北京圖書館藏中國歷代石刻拓本彙編 (Zhengzhou, 1989)Google Scholar, vol. 7, p.41.

158 This is Figure 103 in Shi Anchang, Huotan yu jisi niaoshen, p. 166.

159 Yanshou, Li 李延壽, comp., Bei shi 北史 (Beijing, 1974), 82 Google Scholar.2761.

160 Chao, Zhao 趙超, comp., Han Wei Nancbeichao muzhi huibian 漢魏南北朝墓誌彙編 (Tianjin, 1992), pp. 397–398 Google Scholar.

161 Baiyao, Li 李百藥, comp., Bei Qi shu 北齊書 (History of the Northern Qi Dynasty) (Beijing, 1974), 15 Google Scholar.195, mistook Heinü as being the younger sister. But her tomb inscription shows that she was born five years earlier than her sister.

162 Bei Qi shu 9.123-24.

163 Shaoliang, Zhou 周紹良 et al., comp., Tangdai muzhi huibian 唐代墓誌彙編 (Shanghai, 1992), pp. 1975 Google Scholar and 2219. The second tomb inscription was dated the seventh day of the twelfth month of the first year of Huichang 會昌 (841), which fell under the next year in the Julian calendar.

164 Bosworth, C. Edmund, “Sistan and Its Local Histories”, Iranian Studies 33 (2000), p. 36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

165 The reading here follows Shi Anchang, Huotan yu jisi niaoshen, p. 174.

166 The majority of the individuals listed in this inscription had the surname Ru 茹, which, in addition to indicating a Rouran or Ruru 茹茹 ethnicity, was also the Sinified version of the Tuoba clan name Pulouru/Puliuru 普陋茹/普六如. See Wei shu, 113.3007. The Sui imperial family once also bore the surname Puliuru.

167 Shanxisheng kaogu yanjiusuo 山西省考古研究所, “Taiyuanshi Bei-Qi Lou Rui mu fajue jianbao 太原市北齊婁叡墓發掘簡報”, Wenwu 文物 1983, no. 10; Wu Zuoren 吳作人 et al. “Bitan Taiyuan Bei-Qi Lou Rui mu 筆談太原北齊婁叡墓”, Wenwu 1983, no. 10. A more extensive report is: yanjiusuo, Taiyuanshi wenwu kaogu 太原市文物考古研究所, Bei-Qi Lou Rui mu 北齊婁叡墓 (Beijing, 2004)Google Scholar.

168 Shanxisheng kaogu yanjiusuo 山西省考古研究所, “Taiyuan Suidai Yu Hong mu qingli jianbao 太原隋代虞弘墓清理簡報”, Wenwu 2001, no.1; Shanxisheng kaogu yanjiusuo 山西省考古研究所, “Taiyuan Bei-Qi Xu Xianxiu mu fajue jianbao 太原北齊徐顯秀墓發掘簡報”, Wenwu 2003, no. 10. Yu was an official of the Northern Zhou and Sui dynasties of Central Asian origin, whereas Xu was a prominent Northern Qi courtier. Both tombs are now described in extensive book-length reports: yanjiusuo, Shanxisheng kaogu et al., Taiyuan Sui Yu Hong mu 太原隋虞弘墓 (Beijing, 2005)Google Scholar; yanjiusuo, Taiyuanshi wenwu kaogu 太原市文物考古研究所, Bei-Qi Xu Xianxiu mu 北齊徐顯秀墓 (Beijing, 2005)Google Scholar.

169 Shi Anchang 施安昌, “Bei-Qi Xu Xianxiu Lou Rui mu zhong de huotan he liqi 北齊徐顯秀婁叡墓中的火壇和禮器”, Gugong bowuyuan yuankan 故宮博物院院刊 2004, no. 6.

170 Xiu, Ouyang 歐陽修 and Qi, Song 宋祁, comp., Xin Tang shu 新唐書 (New History of the Tang Dynasty) (Beijing, 1975), 221Google Scholarb.6244.

171 Jin shu, 107.2791; Zizhi tongjian, 98.3099.

172 Wei shu, 13.338.

173 Sui shu, 7.149.

174 Paris, 2014.

175 By Xuanzhi, Yang 楊衒之; edition used: Xiangyong, Fan 范祥雍, emended and annotated, Luoyang qielanji jiaozhu 洛陽伽藍記校注 (Shanghai, 1978), 3 Google Scholar.161.

176 Zhitui, Yan 顏之推, Yanshi jiaxun 顏氏家訓 (Yan's Family Instructions), edition used: Liqi, Wang 王利器, annotated, Yanshi jiaxun jijie 顏氏家訓集解 (Beijing, 1993),Google Scholar 5.301.