yf 1$
J it PMC
90 —
What's So Ama/.inc; Aholt C'iUack?
.^rwOi/UF . " *'A
It */«l ^ ff^ ^ ( 5.V*
By the laws of Roman justice, lie had the right to throw the colleague into prison. Jesus did not dispute the servant’s personal loss but, rather, set that loss against a master [God] who had already forgiven the servant several million dollars. Only the experience of being forgiven makes it possible for us to forgive.
I had a friend (now dead) who worked on the staff of Wheaton Col- lege for many years, during the course of which he heard several thou- sand chapel messages. In time most of these faded into a forgettable blur, but a few stood out. In particular he loved retelling the story of Sam Moffat, a professor at Princeton Seminary who had served as a mission- ary in China. Moffat told the Wheaton students a gripping tale of his flight from Communist pursuers. They seized his house and all his pos- sessions, burned the missionary compound, and killed some of his clos- est friends. Moffat’s own family barely escaped. When he left China, Moffat took with him a deep resentment against the followers of Chair- man Mao, a resentment that metastasized inside him. Final! v, he told the Wheaton students, he faced a singular crisis of faith. “I realized,” said Moffat, “that if 1 have no forgiveness for the Communists, then I have no message at all.”
I he gospel of grace begins and ends with forgiveness. And people write songs with titles like “Amazing Grace” lor one reason: grace is the only force in the universe powerful enough to break the chains that enslave generations. Grace alone melts ungrace.
One weekend I sat with ten Jews, ten Christians, and ten Muslims in a kind of encounter group led by author and psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, who hoped the weekend might lead to some sort of community, or at least the beginnings of reconciliation on a small scale. It did not. Pistfights almost broke out among these educated, sophisticated people. I lie Jews talked about all the horrible things done to them by Chris- tians. I he Muslims talked about all the horrible things done to them by Jews. We Christians tried to talk about our own problems, but they paled in contrast to stories of the I lolocaust and the plight of Palestinian
refugees, and so mr two groups recount I At one point ai prior attempts at re< said, ‘1 believe we forgiveness. 1 see n< seems so unfair, to
justice.
I thought back J Helmut Thielicke, I
1 his busincl We say, “Very v don, I will forgi a law of red pro say to ourselves And then I wail will flash a sigil some small hinl he is sorry. 1 an j forgive. I am
The only remol had forgiven his sn| parable of the unfo taking the initiative move, 1 hielicke nu| fairness. He did thi heart of the gospel At the center o| initiative toward u
I ,r
landlord whoj^wict
zno<caTi
employer wi5r=ba\ |
crew, a banqi
of undeservu^giKl
We glimpse the founding in India of Chris- tian churches that endure to this day, com- munities in the empire of Genghis Khan, missions to China as early as the 7th century and even some hints of Christian presence in distant Korea, Japan and southeast Asia
The places and time periods covered here are vast and daunting, but Moffett’s pre- sentation, though encyclopedic and detailed, enables readers to delve selectively into sections of that long history. Consider, for instance, what we learn about Nestorian Christians. Nestorius (d. 451) is known to many mainly as a heretic who failed to affirm the unity of one person, divine and human, in Christ. Moffett rehearses for us the tumul- tuous politics and intrigues that led to the condemnation of Nestorius and summarizes for us information (uncovered in the 19th century) that has encouraged some theolo- gians to rehabilitate Nestorius as a theolo- gian within the boundaries of orthodoxy. Moffett implicitly strengthens the case for Nestorius’ s rehabilitation by highlighting the vigor of Nestorian communities through- out Asia, from Persia to China. The condem- nation of Nestorius’ s teachings in 431 was only an early moment in a promising history of Nestorian Christianity — a history essen- tial to our understanding of Christianity in pre-modem Asia, where the Nestorian con- nection surfaces frequently and unexpect- edly.
Pope Innocent IV, for example, sent sev- eral missions to the Mongol princes of cen- tral Asia in hopes of converting them and keeping them out of Europe. In 1245 he sent John of Plano Carpini (a disciple of Francis of Assisi), who eventually obtained an audi- ence with Kuyuk, grandson of Genghis Khan. Although their conversation did not | lead to the Khan’s conversion, Kuyuk did [ send a return letter to the Pope, asserting his I own authority and challenging the Pope to explain how he knew that his religion was the only true one.
i The Pope apparently did not rise to this challenge, but in 1253 he sent another mis- . sionary ambassador, William of Rubruck, who met with Kuyuk’ s successor, Mongke. William engaged in a formal debate with Buddhist monks and Nestorians — and Man- ichaeans and Muslims — all of whom Wil- liam handily defeated. After that William (by his own account) returned to Europe, while the Nestorians remained behind, evidently f comfortable in their Asian home.
By the time Matteo Ricci and his Jesuit companions set up their mission in China in the late 16th century, the old Nestorian com-
munity had already died out, but in 1623 workmen dug up an eighth-century monu- ment that commemorated the arrival of Nestorians in the Chinese capital in 635. This massive tablet recounts the presentation by Nestorians of Christian teachings in Chinese terms — almost a millennium before the Jes- uits began their similarly novel project by immersing themselves in the Chinese lan- guage and culture.
Moffett’s book is filled with data to under- gird many such fresh perspectives on Chris-
tianity in Asia; it merits close reading as the year 2000 approaches and as we remember the 500th anniversary of Vasco da Gama’s arrival in western India “seeking Christians and spices.”
And what will the next millennium bring? Moffett himself ends on a somewhat gloomy note, with chapters entitled “The Eclipse of Christianity in Asia” and “The Church in the Shadows.” He points to several factors (such as political intrigue, persecution and the rise and fall of empires) that limited the endur-
CIR
WE PROTECT YOUR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
Since its inception in 1989, the Center for Individual Rights has successfully defended the rights of religious individuals, associations, and institutions against government discrimination. For example, in 1991 CIR agreed to represent the publishers of a religious student newspaper in federal First Amendment litigation against the University of Virginia because of the University’s refusal to allow the paper to participate in a neutral funding program. CIR took the students’ case all the way to the Supreme Court and in 1995 won what is perhaps the most significant, pro-religious decision by the High Court in more than 50 years. Since that time, CIR has continued to provide free legal assistance to deserving clients in cases that raise important constitutional issues involving freedom of religion. CIR’s mission is to advance a broad, civil libertarian conception of individual rights. If your religious liberties are being threatened, call CIR today, or visit our Web site at http://www.wdn.com/dr/ to learn about our work in religious freedom, affirmative ac- tion, free speech, political correctness, and sexual harassment.
Center for Individual Rights ■ 1233 20th Street, NW, Suite 300 ■ Washington, DC 20036 (202) 833-8400 a e-mail: cir@mail.wdn.com a web: http://www.wdn.com/cir
AMERICA OCTOBER 31, 1998
17
BOOK REVIEWS
Traditions of Christian Spirituality Series
Essentials of the great spiritual writers of our century, introduced by leading authors.
Brides in the Desert
The Spirituality of the Beguines
by Saskia Murk Jansen 1 -57075-201 -X 1 36 pp. pbk $ 1 3.00
The Way of Simplicity
The Cistercian Tradition
by Esther de Waal 1-57075-195-1 176 pp. pbk $14.00
Prayer and Community
The Benedictine Tradition
by Columba Stewart 1-57075-219-2 1 36 pp. pbk $1 3.00
Mysticism and Prophecy
The Dominican Tradition
by Richard Woods 1-57075-206-0 168 pp. pbk $14.00
ORBIS^^BOOKS
Mary knoll, New York 10545
Through your bookstore or direct (MC/VtSA)
1 -800-258-5838 Dept. SPI
Henri Nouwen
Introduction by Robert A. Jonas 1 -57075-1 97-8 1 60pp. pbk $ 1 4.00
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Introduction by Robert Coles 1-57075-194-3 1 28pp. pbk $1 3.00
Simone Weil
Introduction by Eric Springsted 1-57075-204-4 1 44pp. pbk $1 3.00
Ancient ways and their meaning for the spiritual seeker today.
' Too many words....
Let them just see what we do'
— Mother Teresa of Calcutta
A History of Christianity in Asia:
Volume I:
Beginnings to 1500
By Samuel Hugh Moffett Orbis Books. 560p $25 (paper)
On April 19, 1998, Pope John Paul II presided at the opening eucharis- tic liturgy for the Special Assembly for Asia of the Synod of Bishops, one in a series of special gatherings of bishops in preparation for the mil- lennium. In his homily he recalled that St.
Thomas the Apostle first brought Christianity to Asia and charted the church’s movement east- ward across this vast continent, where more than three-fifths of the world’s population now live. The Pope urged the assembled church leaders to find new vigor for the proclamation of Christ in Asia: “Ours is the task of writing new chapters of Christian witness in every part of the world, and in Asia: from India to Indonesia, from Japan to Lebanon, from Korea to Kaza- khstan, from Vietnam to the Philippines, from Siberia to China. . ..We want to listen to what the Spirit says to the churches, so that they may proclaim Christ in the context of Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism and all those currents of thought and life which were already rooted in Asia before the preaching of the Gospel arrived.” Subse- quent synod discussions introduced realistic and hopeful views on the church in Asia today.
Asia is, of course, a vast continent blessed with diverse cultures, as Samuel H. Moffett, the Henry W. Luce Professor of Ecumenics
and Mission ai Princeton Theolog ical Seminary, con vincingly reminds us in this impres sive volume. It is also the home of very ancient civi- lizations. Christian ity has had a long history in Asia, be- ginning from its birth in West Asia. Moffett’s text be- gins with the prob- able travels of Thomas the Apos- tle to India and ends with the arrival of Western Euro- peans in India by sea in 1498 (opening a new era, to be treated in Volume II). j We leant about the growth | of Christian communities in the East, the establish- ment of vibrant churches in Syria and Persia and the dramatic (and traumat- ic) changes that took place in such communities with the rise of Islam, as well as the centuries of interaction with Muslims.
THIS WEEK’S REVIEWERS
Francis X. Clooney, S.J., is professor of comparative theology at Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Mass.
Patricia L. Skarda is associate professor of English at Smith College, Northampton,
Mass.
James P. Hanigan is professor of moral theology at Duquesne University, Pitts- burgh, Pa.
16
AMERICA OCTOBER 31, 1998
ance of churches in Asia. He believes that conflicts within Christian communities and their compromises for the sake of survival severely diminished their vitality. If only Christians had overcome their ethnic and social differences and stood firm in the mes- sage of the Gospel, he suggests, perhaps Asia would have become Christian a long time ago.
One enduring lesson, certainly, is that we should not try to repeat the past. The era covered in this volume is finished, as is the age when Western Christianity traveled to Asia with the colonial powers. Local churches and indigenous Christian com- munities are now flourishing again in most Asian countries, and as both the recent synod and World Council of Churches meet- ings suggest, these communities have their own voices and are increasingly willing to raise them. So too, many people today are developing new attitudes toward religion. The dialogue of Asian Christians with their Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and Confucian brothers and sisters will be a distinctive fea- ture of this renewed presence of Christianity in Asia. Once the rest of us have been fully drawn into this dialogue, Asia might well
TO CONTACT AMERICA...
Reader Service:
For address changes, delivery problems, or to renew or set up a subscription, please call us at 1-800-627-9533 between 7:30 A.M. and 10:30 P.M. Central Time.
We remain available to assist our readers at (212) 581-4640 between 9 A.M. and 5 P.M. Eastern Time, M-F.
Letters to the Editor:
Write to us at 106 West 56th St.,
New York, NY 10019-3803.
To fax your comments, dial (212) 399-3596.
Our E-mail address is: letters @ americapress.org .
Reprint Permissions:
Mail or fax your requests to the Permissions Manager at our New York office. Requests will be forwarded to the individual authors for a reply.
To Inquire About Receiving AMERICA on Tape:
Contact the Xavier Society for the Blind at 1-800-637-9193, 10 A.M. to 12 P.M. and 1 P.M. to 4 P.M. Eastern Time, M-F.
become again a primary wellspring of glob- al Christian identity.
FRANCIS X. CLOONEY
The Brontes:
A Life in Letters
By Juliet Barker
The Overlook Press. 402p $35
Self-portraits rarely tell the whole truth, but this largely autobiographical portrait of the Bronte family reveals intimate truths about the undaunted faith of this remarkable liter- ary family. Readers of Juliet Barker’s 1995 landmark study. The Brontes, will marvel at this new compendium of letters, diaries, reminiscences, contemporary accounts and reviews of publications, loosely integrated by judicious narrative into a family portrait told almost wholly by the subjects them- selves. Gone are the meticulous descriptions of houses and scenery, dress and hairstyles, furniture and routines. Correspondents are briefly described in a terse appendix, and a spare introductory chronology alone lodges the powerful material in a fitting context. Gone are the excesses of the long-lived father, the Rev. Patrick Bronte, and those of the disappointed and disappointing son, Patrick Branwell (called “Branwell”). Gone, too, are historical analyses and defenses of mythologizing efforts of earlier biographers and recent feminist critics.
What remains are self-drawn portraits of poignant lives, riddled with tragic losses and punctuated by literary successes. The moth- er of the extraordinary six Bronte children died at 38 from cancer in 1821, followed in 1825 by her eldest daughter Maria at age 1 1 and by the second, Elizabeth, at age 10. Charlotte, Branwell, Emily and Anne re- sponded by making their own “little soci- ety” in Haworth Parsonage, where they acted their plays, read avidly and wrote tales and poems to entertain and educate them- selves, until they were ready to entertain and educate others as governesses, teachers and writers. But before they published a collection of verse in 1846, their Aunt Eliz- abeth Branwell, their father’s curate and their school friend, Martha Taylor, died. Small wonder that Charlotte wrote repeated- ly of “low spirits,” “lethargy of the facul- ties,” admitting that “something in me which used to be enthusiasm is tamed down and broken.”
While Branwell floundered, failing as a tutor and as an employee of the railway and
drowning his sorrows with drink, the survi' ing Bronte girls busied themselves by ing, trying to start a school and then by ing as Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell. Nei their father nor brother were aware of venture to publish their poems, which barely noticed by the reviewers. Ui Charlotte, Emily and Anne devoted thei selves to writing The Professor, Wuthei Heights and Agnes Grey respectively, nursing her father after cataract surge: Charlotte began Jane Eyre and published to instant success just before her siste: novels came out in 1847. Anne continui work on The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1 while Charlotte’s Shirley took shape for pul lication in 1849.
But tragedy mocked their success authors. After Branwell died of tuberculosi in 1848 at age 31, Charlotte wrote sensi; tively of her grief: “I do not weep from a'- sense of bereavement — there is no prop with-i drawn, no consolation tom away, no dearj companion lost — but for the wreck of talent,! the min of promise, the untimely dreary* extinction of what might have been a burn- ing and a shining light.” Branwell’ s death revealed to her “the feebleness of humani- ty. . .the inadequacy of even genius to lead to true greatness if unaided by religion and prin- ciple.” Emily soon followed Branwell, dying of “gallopping consumption... proudly en- dured.” Charlotte announced Emily’s death to Ellen Nussey, her constant correspondent: “Emily suffers no more either from pain or weakness now.... We are very calm at present.... [W]e feel she is at peace — no need to tremble for the hard frost and keen wind — Emily does not feel them. She has died in a time of promise — we saw her taken from life in its prime — but it is God’s will and the place where she is gone is better than that she has left”
While still mourning one sister, Charlotte and Branwell learned that Anne’s death from tuberculosis was imminent The record of her last days wrenched their hearts but enlivened their souls. She died at Scarbor- ough, as Ellen Nussey remembers, “looking so serene & reliant.... She clasped her hands & reverently invoked a blessing from Heaven first upon her sister then upon her friend & thanked each for their kindness & attentions.” When asked if she would feel more comfortable on the sofa, Anne said, “It is not you who can give me ease but soon all will be well through the merits of my Redeemer.... Take courage Charlotte! Take courage.”
Recovery from repeated loss may seem
18
AMERICA OCTOBER 31, 1998
fevAcW*
MISS IQ APOSTOLICA
Journal of the Lutheran Society for Missiology
Volume VI, No. 2 (Issue No. 12) November 1998
CONTENTS
Editor’s note 65
Editorial 66
Guest Editorial 68
Articles
Ministry at the Fringes: The Missionary as the Marginal Person
Henry Rowold 70
The Missionary Role in the Formation of the Lutheran Church in Korea:
With an Eye to the “Indigenous Church”
Maynard Dorow 77
Some Missionary Moments I Remember
Shirley A. Dorow 85
Missionaries Walking Together with Indigenous Churches: From Jerusalem to Antioch
Karl Reko 91
Expatriate Missionaries Today
Eugene Bunkowske 101
Mission Observer
What is Really Lutheran About the Lutherans? 11 1
Japan Lutheran Church Celebrates 50lh Anniversary 113
Book Reviews 115
semiannually
Book Reviews 123
M F ' f J 6 H i
the students and researchers on Japan Mission. Chapters VII: “Through the storm — Tensions” (27-33) and XI: “The NRK and Other Churches” (53-64) seem to be specially worth noting. Some of the issues and problems are similar with other parts in world mission.
I strongly recommend the readers to get a copy of this meaningful study, read, learn some new insights, and get much valuable information.
Won Yong Ji
A HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN ASIA, VOLUME I. By Samuel Hugh Moffett.
Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998. 560 pp. Paperback. $25.00.
This laborious work can be mvaluable for church historians, missiologists and students of the history of Christian thought#' who have serious interest for knowing some detailed accounts of various happenings in the cultural and religious history of “Asian Christianity, “ that is, outside the Roman Empire in ancient oriental kingdoms east of the Euphrates extending as far as India and China. Since this volume only deals from the beginnings of the Christian era to 1500 A. D., the readers may anticipate the sequels that deal with the modem period.
The author brings us an extensive panorama of Semitic, Persian, Indian, Chinese, Mongol and other people of many gifts with ideas introducing massive materials frequently unfamiliar to ordinary readers. This could be possible with immense amount of research on the religious pluralism of Asia, and how Christianity went forth to the middle eastern kingdoms and Arabic world in general, especially in Persian context, and to further East. Much information by a detailed assessment is often unavailable in the ordinary history books. The writer made the account stimulating with clarity and fairness.
Dr. Samuel Hugh Moffett, a professor emeritus of Ecumenics and Mission at Princeton Theological Seminary, bom in Korea, taught and worked for many years in China and Korea. The Moffetts are one of the distinguished missionary families m Korea.
The Thomas tradition can be the interest of not only Christian writers but also of increasing number of secular historians. The Syrian Christians, or Thomas Christians of Kerala, India, claim that the apostle Thomas arrived in the middle of the first century and converted the people. The story of Thomas Christians extend to modem time with interesting episodes.
As Christianity spreads to the East, it encountered numerous obstacles, from within and without, such as Zoroastrianism and Manicaeism. Among them was also the Nestorian controversy (5 century). This blight of a violent theological conflict divided
124 Missio Apostolica
the early church, East from West, Asia from Europe. It was the period of the ecumenical councils, from Nicaea to Chalcedon. The former dealt with Arianism’s denial of the full deity of Christ; the latter with the question of the relationship of deity and humanity in the nature of Christ. The Nicaea was successful in defeating Arians, whereas Chalcedon was unable to prevent the splintering of Christendom. One crucial point was the denial of theotokos (“mother of God”) by Nestorians.
On the right were the Alexandrians, defending the deity of Christ even at the risk of his real humanity, know as Monophysites (claiming “single” divine), led by Cyril as opposed by Dyophysites (those who held that in Christ two natures coexist as expressed by Chalcedon). The complex picture and contrast of Alexandrian and Antiochean Schools are noted in the book along with Nestrianism. Prof. Moffett takes a sympathetic attitude toward Nestorian stance at the time (175-180, 247ff.). “...the orthodox Council of Chalcedon tried to resolve in 451 by compromising formula: ‘one person (hypostasis) in two natures (phvsis). ’ taking the Monophysite word for ‘person’ but accepting the Nestorian insistence on two natures” (248).
The story of old Chinese Christianity through Nestorian missionary in China in the 7th century (288ff, 302ff.) is truly interesting with the discovery in 1623 the “Nestorian Tablet” erected in 781 A. D. on the arrival of a Nestorian missionary in the Chinese capital in 635.
The historical account of the Islamic movement, and later the Crusades are intriguingly described from the point of the spread of Christianity, with both negative and positive effects depending upon how one understands them.
The above is merely a part of many historical events in the process of spreading Christianity in Asia, treated in this large volume, as illustrated m the thorough Table of Contents and extensive “Notes.” Furthermore, a lengthy Bibliography (519-48), Index, and “Acknowledgements” (p. 559), all these will be helpful for the interested readers and researchers.
Won Yong Ji
PEOPLE ON THE WAY: ASIAN NORTH AMERICANS DISCOVERING CHRIST, CULTURE, AND COMMUNITY. Edited by David Ng. Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 1996. xxx+300 pp. Paperback. No price given.
That Asians are one of the fastest-growing populations in the United States is no secret. That the Christian church is growing faster among Asian-Americans than among Anglos is also no secret. That, however, assimilation of Asian-Americans into
L'Oriente Cristiano nella Storia della Civil ta
Rome i Accademla Nazionale del Lincei, 1964
Seduta del 31 mano 19(3 - ore 11
t*
Presiede Sua Eminenta il Cardinal t E. G. Tisserant Socio straniero dell A ccademta
Kazuo F.noki (•)
THE NESTORIAN CHRISTIANISM IN CHINA IN MEDIAEVAL TIME ACCORDING TO RECENT HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCHES
The title assigned to me is II Cns/ianesimo nestoriano in Cma nel Medio Evo >
secondo le recenti ricerche stortche e archeologiehe. However, I would like to tell you about some discoveries and researches concerning not only Nestorianispj but also Roman Catholicism in China and Inner Mongolia which have been made since around the time of the outbreak of the World War II. My talk will be divided into three parts:
(1) Discoveries and Researches of Nestorian and Roman Catholic Sites and Remains in Inner Mongolia.
(2) Christian and other Religious Remains in Ch’uan-chou (Zaytun) and its neighbourhood.
(3) Three New Nestorian Documents in Chinese.
Appendix:
liber die nestorianischen Grabinschriften in der Inner Mongolei und in Sud China (by Shichiro Murayama, Tokyo).
Abbreviations
(1) DISCOVERIES AND RESEARCHES OF NESTORIAN AND ROMAN
CATHOLIC SITES AND REMAINS AMONG THE ONGUT IN INNER MONGOLIA
The Ongut were a tribe most faithfully allied with Genghiskan and his descendants throughout the 13th and 14th centuries. It was mainly because of the collaboration of Alaqush Tegin Qori the chief of this tribe, that
(•) University di Tokyo.
(1) For the name and its orthography of Alaqush Tegin Qori, see P PELLIOT et L. Hambis, Histoire des campagnes d* Gengu-kMan, I, Leiden: E. I. Bnll. IQSI. pp. 378-379; MlCHIYO Naka. /irtpsvian Jitruroku, Tokyo: Dai-Nihon Tosho Kabushiki-kaisha, 1907. pp. 268-269; L. LIGETI, A mongolok tUttos t/h-UmU, Budapest 1962, pp. i6$-i66.
Asia
617
ASIA
Samuel Hugh Moffett. A History of Christianity in Asia. Volume 1, Beginnings to 1500. New York: Har- perCollins. 1992. Pp. xxvi, 560. $45.00.
The history of Christianity in the lands east of Pales- tine is a fascinating and complex story that is not well known. Both because of the difficulty of the sources and also because Christianity in these areas faded into insignificance, few have attempted the daunting task of writing a comprehensive history. The last such endeavor was Aziz Atiya’s A History of Eastern Christi- anity (1968).
Samuel Hugh Moffett’s first volume of a projected multivolume work covers developments up to 1500. These are discussed in three parts: from the Apostles to Muhammad, from Alopen to the Crusades, and from Chinggis Khan to Tamerlane. In most respects this is an excellent text with a highly readable narra- tive. The author’s coverage is both comprehensive and balanced, and his scholarship is impressive. Highlights are apposite quotations from both pri- mary sources and secondary discussions. Five maps, indexes, and an appendix of the text of the famous Nestorian monument inscribed in China in 781 are also included.
Christianity in the East survived under the shadow of the centuries-long conflict between the Roman West and the Persians, who embraced first Zoroastri- anism and then Islam. The Church of the East, better known as the Nestorians, succeeded in establishing outposts in India and in China. Moffett admirably clarifies the personal and theological differences among the Byzantine (Melchite), Jacobite (Mono- physite), and Nestorian Christians.
In his conclusions (pp. 503-09), Moffett offers some helpful insights into the plight of Christianity in Asia. He suggests that a major cause of difficulties was the failure to translate the Scriptures into Arabic or Chinese. Another factor was the contempt that one Christian sect had for all the others. Despite the fact that the Persian Nestorians who brought Christianity into Asia were themselves Asians, they were nonethe- less always considered by the Chinese to be “foreign” Asians.
Moffett, who was born in Korea and has taught in China, demonstrates a marked empathy for an Asia- centric view in accepting the traditions, which ascribe the early establishment of the church in Syria to Addai (pp. 50—51), and the church in India to Tho- mas (pp. 35—36, 39). In these issues he wants to err on the side of qualified acceptance rather than skepti- cism. In support of the Indian tradition, Moffett cites (p. 40, n. 4) the fact that, “The Thomas tradition is accepted by almost all Indian Christian writers and by an increasing number of secular historians as well.” He fails to consider that some of the secular historians whom he quotes may be influenced by nationalistic biases.
Some readers may disagree about the depth of
coverage on subjects that may be dear to their hearts. Armenia, a butler state, which became one of the first kingdoms to embrace Christianity, is given rather short shrift as an area that eventually came under Byzantine orbit (pp. 8-9). But certainly in the late Roman empire Armenia was very much under Per- sian (Parthian) influence. The author does not do justice to Christianity among the Arabs before Mu- hammad, nor does he refer to Irfan Shahid’s impor- tant monographs on the subject.
Moffett’s treatment of the rival Manichaean move- ment is rather unsatisfactory. He does not mention the Cologne Codex of Mani’s life or the researches of Werner Sundermann on the important Turfan doc- uments. Although he cites a 1979 work by Samuel N. C. Lieu, he fails to note the latter’s important study, Mamchaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China (1985). He does not consider the possibility that among the groups persecuted by Kartir (p. 109) were the Mandaeans. In his brief references to the Maro- nites, the most important Christian community in Lebanon, Moffett neglects to mention their service to the Crusaders.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio
Brian E. McKnight. Law and Order in Sung China. (Cambridge Studies in Chinese History, Literature, and Institutions.) New York: Cambridge University Press. 1992. Pp. xiv, 557. $74.95.
In his detailed exploration of law enforcement and penal policy during China’s Sung dynasty (960— 1279), Brian E. McKnight pursues two desirable yet redoubtable goals, either one of which might well have warranted a volume in itself. The first goal is to describe how these related institutional phenomena changed (or did not change) over the course of the Sung. The second (and markedly more demanding) goal is “to reveal their ideological foundations and the interactions of these ideological factors with political, social, and economic conditions in determining the shape and functioning of these systems” (p. xii). McKnight’s study, to a remarkably satisfying degree, impressively achieves both of these daunting objec- tives.
McKnight argues that law enforcement in tradi- tional China is best understood as having been a dimension of social control. He brings forward a compelling array of preliminary analyses in support of this assertion, ranging from longstanding Chinese philosophical assumptions about order to tfie pivotal importance of the emperor as the exemplar of order to the role of law as order’s last line of defense. McKnight tacitly indicates that whereas certain tradi- tional ideas about law enforcement have predictably Legalist underpinnings (that is, suppression), many others (persuasion, prevention, and cooptation, for
American Historical Review
April 1994
Gcnghiskan could conquer the Naimam, who were one of his strongest enemies in Mongolia, and pave his way for the unification of the whole of Mongolia ' and Central Asia.'” Genghiskan appreciated so much the cooperation of the Ongut that he promised to make it a rule to get royal princesses of the Mongols married to the descendants of Alaqush TcgirTQori, which seems to have been faithfully observed up to the end of the Mongol dynasty. 1,1
The^X)ngut were also known as followers of Christianity Marco Polo states that their king_Gcorgc was of the lineage of Prestcr John and that ' the rule of the country was in the hands of the Christians, though there were also plenty of Idolaters and Mohammedans.' «» According to the History of YabaUaha 111 of an unknown author, YabaJIaha III (1281-1317) was born in Koshang, the capital of the Ongut country, where his father was serving tlie'Ncstorian church as an Archdeacon; Yahallaha III was trained under ' Rah ban Sauma in Khan balig (Khan-baliq) or what is now Peking Rabban Sauina and YabaUaha III intended to go to Jerusalem, and, when they tra- velled as far as Persia, Yahallaha was appointed to the patriarchate of the See of Ctesiphon -Selcucia, that is to say, he was consecrated as the Catholicos , of the Nestorian church, for the reason that he came from the country of the Ongut, of which the king had a close connection with the khan of the Mongols in Peking ,M And, when John of Monte Corvino was sent to Khan-baliq, he stayed on his way for some time in Koshang and converted the king George from Nestorian ism into Catholicism. The king George “ built a beautiful church on a scale of royal magnificence to the honour of our God, of the holy frinity, and of the lord Pope, and of my (John of Monte Corvino’s) name, , calling it the Roman Church ,*1. ” However, the king George died in 1298 and his brother Shu-hu nan (Johanan or John) ,7’ who succeeded him sub-
(2) Yiinn thao pi-shih. llks. 7. 8: Naka. op. tit., pp 268 ff, 328 (T
(3) /'11 ina Kuo -fang Chung hsien-svang pti < Inscription in memory of the ting George of the Ongut), in \ nan urn lei. Ilk 23 (rd. Kuo hsueh-chi pen ts’ung shu, vol. I, p 295); ll'ang fu IV /Vug t'oiig pn ehi, in • Monumenta Series •, III, pp. 251 255: Yuan -s/11/1, Bks 109. 118; BENEDETTO, Marro Polo: t! Milione, Firenze, l.ro S Olschki. 1928, p. 60: Yuai- ‘ /"/1 Pu tst‘ piao, cd. ftrh-shih wu-shih pti-pien, VI, p. 8314: Naka, op cit., pp. 328 330;
P. Pkij.iot , III TP, XV, 1914. p. 631
(4) BENEDETTO, op. eit., p. 60.
(5) Mere I followed the translation by J. A MONTGOMERY, The History of YabaUaha III, Nestorian Pat nan h ami his Vicar Par Sauma, Mongol Ambassador to the Frankish Courts at the end of the Thirteenth Century, New York, Columbia University, 1927. Also sccMoi'I.E, pp 94 127
(f>) The letter of John lias the date of January 8, 1305. See P. A. van DEN Wync.AKRT, Sinua Francis, ana. I. 1929, pp 348 349; Mout.E, pp. 173-174 Montccorvino writes that the kmj: (»eorgc died six years ago, that is to say, in 1290. However, according to the Inscription in memory of the king, lie died in autumn of the second year of Ta-te, which falls in 1298
(7) Besides Shu liu nan. such Christian names as An-t'ung (Antonin) and Chu an (Johan or John) and Hun \su tan (( nstan, i.e. Constance) among the members of the royal family are another piece of evidence of theirChristian worship. See Fu -ma Kao l ung Chung- hsien svang pa ( Inscription in memory of the king George) in Yuan oven-lei. Bk 23, in which Shu hit nan is written as Mu hit nan (also in cd. 1889) in one plate, but Mu is obviously
47 —
verted all whom John had converted, leading them back to their former schism.
However, no material remains had been known to endorse these literary evidences concerning the Christianity of the Ongut. And no clear identifi- cation had ever been made as to where the Ongut kingdom was situated, except that it was vaguely guessed that it was in Tcnduc of Marco Polo or what is now the plain of Kuci-hua-ch'eng and Sui-yiian (Koko-khoto).'81 At the end of the second decade of this century, a considerable number of the so- called Ordos Cross were collected from old tombs in the Ordos region inside the great loop of the Yellow river. As the Ordos region had been a part of the Ongut kingdom, it is beyond doubt that these crosses had belonged to the Ongut who were followers of the Nestorianism. This was the first disclo- sure of Christian remains of this people.
The discovery of the Ordos cross were followed by another and more important discovery of the sites of the capital and other towns and villages of the Ongut kingdom. These sites are situated in the area to the north of Sui-yiian, extending from T’o-k’o-t’o which is located in the southernmost part to Olon-Sumc-in Tor which is in the northernmost (Map. I). The site of Olon-Sume-in Tor is situated about 30 kilometres to the north of Pai- ling-miao and also known under the name of Yisun Sume-in Tor or Ruin of Nine Temples (probably of Lamaism). These sites of Ongut towns were visited by Huang Wen-pi, member of the staff of the Sino-Swedish Expedi-
a scribal error of shu The identity of Huo ssu-tan and Constan has been proposed by Namio Egami ( Yiirashiya HoppS Punka no Kenkyii, Tokyo, Yamakawa shuppnn sha, 1951, p. 260). Huo -ssu-tan is a Chinese transcription of the denasalized form of Con- stant, just like Chi (read Ku)-ssu-ta m or K’u-ssu tan for Kostantinyah, i.e. Constanti- nople (F. Pelliot, Notes on Marco Polo, I, Paris 1959, p. 407). In the meantime, Huo-ssu-tan is identified by Saeki with Koshtanz of an inscription of the Ongut tomb- stone ( Shina Kirisuto kyS no Kenkyii, II, Tokyo, Shunju-sha, 1943. pp 447 450). However, Koshtanz is always used as a female name in the inscriptions of Semirjedic (I). CHWOI.SON, Syriseh-Nestoriamsche Grabinschriften am Semirje/c/ne, • Memoires dcs I'Acadeinie iinperiale des sciences dc St. Petersbourg », VII sib . I XXXVII, No. 8, St. Petersbourg, 1890 and Ncuc Folge of 1807. I followed the translation and photographs published in SAEKI, Keikyb no Kenkyii, Tokyo, The Academy of Oriental Culture, Tokyo, Institute, 1935. pp 79b 888). There is no Koshtanz used for the name of male, while Huo-ssu-tan is a male,
(8) YULE-CORDIER, Marco Polo, I, pp 28b 288; P Pem.iot. Chr/tiens de PA sie ten- hale, •TP*. XV. 1914, p. 629 ff , MOULE, p. 96 Note 7; W. Barthoi r>, Zwdlf Vor/esuiigen iider die Geschichte der Tiirken Mittelasiens, repr. 1962, pp. 129 -130 Tenduc is T'ien-te of Chinese records, which was situated in the north-western corner of Ordos during the Tang Under the Mongol dynasty. T'ien te had been removed to what is now Po -t’a to the cast of Sui-yiian Marco Polo’s Tenduc is used as a general name of the plain of Kuri hu ch'eng and -Sui-yuan Sec S. Wada, Hoshii Tentoku gun no ichi ni /suite (On the location of Feng - chuo T'ien lt-chfm), Shirin, XVI, 2, 1931.
(9) Concerning the Ordos cross, reference is made in Saeki, 1937 (1951), pp 424 425. Now, see I.. Hambis, Notes sur qurlqties sceauz-amulettes nestoriens en broze, « BEFEO », XI.IV, 1954, pp. 483-525.
tion (1020) Owen Lattimorc (1933) (M,f E. Haenish (1936) Desmond Martin (1936) ,Ml, H. Maslund Christensen (1937) ,l4\ and Namio Egami and his party (1933, 1 939. 1942) It was Desmond Martin who most widely > investigated the region to locate a number of sistes of Ongut towns and vil- lages, such as Hitchik Jellag, Dcrriseng Khutuk, Shabc Khuren, Wang-mu near Ch'eng pa t/u II, Boro Baishing, Mukhor Soborghan and Olon-Sumc- in Tor, where he discovered several kind of remains including Chinese stone inscriptions, Nestorian tombstones and other objects. Among others, the Chinese stone inscription found at the site of Olon-Sume-in Tor and studied by Ch'en Viian "M has established in an undeniable way that Olon Sume-in I'or is the site of the capital of the Ongut kingdom, Koshang of the History of Yaballaha HI The inscription also gives informations concerning the history of the royal family of the Ongut, which supplement the records hitherto known. ",l
Olon-Sume-in Tor is a ruin of city of rectangular shape (about 580 m.
X 970 m), enclosed by walls of mud, with an inner site of the royal palace also of rectangular shape (220 m. X 280 m.). It was Egami and his party that investigated the site more in detail than any other else and located there remains of three main buildings. ,,B> These three arc the ruins of a Catholic
(10) Notes on Chinese Research in 1939-30 in • Yen-ch'ing hsOeh-pao », Vol. VIII, 1030, p. 1610
1 1 ) /f Ruined Nestorian City in I finer Mongolia, • Geographical Journal *, 1934. pp. 481 497
(12) Srr Martin’s article, p 232 in the next note.
(13) Preliminary Report on Nestorian Remains North of Kuei-hua, * Suiyiian, Monu- ment® Series*. III. 1, 1938, pp. 232-249, with a map and Pits, I, XVI, and many illus-
(14) See MARTIN, op. cit., p. 232.
(lO SAKKI, Ketkyd no Kenkyii or A Critical Study on Nestoiiamsm, Tokyo, 1935, P I XVII and a supplementary note to it., pp. • 1 *2: Mdko-kdgen ddanki or Across the Mongo- lian Plateau, Tokyo, Asahi Slnmbun-sha, 1937, pp 276-294; SAEKI, 1937. pp 425,426. Saeki published some photographs of Nestorian relics, taken by Egami But, what is published 111 the A 'eikyd no Kenkyii as relics in Pai ling-miao is published in SAEKI, 1937 (1951) as irlirs in Olon-Sumc in Tor At first, Egami considered the site of Olon-Sume-in Tor ad that of tin- period of Ming (Ketkyd no Kenkyii, p *1). Other publications of Egami concerning Olon-Sumc-in Tor will quoted below.
(16) On the Damaged Tablets discovered by Mr. D Martin in Inner Mongolia, • Monu- menta Scrica*, III, pp. 250 IT
(17) /hid., pp. 252 255.
(T 8) Egatni’s publications concerning the site of Olon-Sume-in Tor arc as follows, excluding whet are mentioned in note (15):
1. Iligashi \jta ni okeru saisho no Daishikyd Monte Corvino no Roma Kydkai no ishi 'On the site of the church of Monte Corvino, the first Archbishop of the Roman church in East liia), originally published 111 • Jinbun*. III, 2 and reprinted in Vieras luy a Hopp6 Punka no Kenkyii, pp, 256-276 (sec note 7).
2 Ongut -bu ni okeru Ketkyd no keitd to sono boseki ( Relationship of Nestorianism among the Ongut to Nestorianism in other parts of Asia and the tombstones of the Ongut), • Toy 6 Bunka Kcnkyii-sho Kiyo*. II, 1952, pp 287-315.'
— 49 —
church, Nestorian church and the royal library. The ruin of the Catholic church is situated at the northeastern corner of the city. The cross-shaped plan of building, some pieces of decorative tiles and a broken piece of human figure made of clay indicate, according to Egami, that it is unmistakably the site of the Catholic church erected by the king George and John of Monte Corvino. ,,0) The Nestorian church is situated about 200 m. to the north of the site of the royal palace, but the church had been converted into a lamaistic temple and destroyed in such a way as it was almost impossible to reconstruct the original plan. The royal library is a site inside the ruins of the royal palace. The tomb of the king, which exists some one kilometer to the north of the site of the city,,ao) was also investigated by Egami.
Among the relics discovered in these sites, the tombstones with the so-called Nestorian cross, inscriptions and some other kind of decorations, are the most interesting. The photographs of these tombstones were published by Lattimore, Martin, and Egami. Yoshiro Saeki also published some photo- graphs which he borrowed from Egami as early as 1935 and 1937. ,,,, These tombstones are worked into a shape of coffin, of which one end where the head is supposed to be placed is made higher than the other where the foot is supposed to be placed. The cross is inscribed on both sides of the higher part. The Ongut tombstone makes a distinct contrast to that of Scmirjeche, which consists of a single round stone with no other decorations than cross and inscriptions. Moreover, the cross of Scmirjeche the tombstone is of West Asian style, in the sense that the cross itself is decorated with various kinds of design, while the cross of Ongut tombstones is just a simple cross with no decoration on itself. In some cases, the cross of the Ongut tombstone is enclosed by a frame, which Egami compares to an Islamic lantern, as is seen in the so-called Zaytun (Ch'iian-chou, China) cross In other cases, the cross is represented as placed on a stand decorated with lotus or some other kind of flowers or designs, which is the same in the Zaytun cross.1”’
3: Ongut-bu no tojSshi Olon-Sume ( Olon-Sume , the site of the capita! of the Ongut),
* Shizen to Bunka, Separate Issue*, II, 1955. pp 1-12
4: Die ouver te de * Plsglise romaine • itabhe au XXI ’ silc/e en Mongohe, par Giovanni da Monte Corvino Confereme, Sene Onenlale Roma. VII, ISMEO, 1955. pp 41-55 (1).
5: Olon-Sume et la dicouverte dr Pighse cathohque romaine dr fean de Montecorvino,
• JA*. CCXL, 1952, pp. 155-167.
(19) The plan of the Roman church (« JA *, 1952, p. 165) is very unique. No similar one is found in the plans of Christian church demonstrated by I) T Rice, Arte crishana in Asia, in < Le nviltA dell'Orirnte *, IV, Roma. Edizionc Casini, 1962, pp. 431-450
(20) The body of George was removed from a place called Pu-lo to the graveyard near Olon-sume-in Tor when his son Sliu-an (John) ruled the kingdom (see the biography of George in Viian-shih. Bk. 118).
(21) See note («»),
(22) TALROT Rice (Le civiltii dell'Onente, IV, p, 440) is of the opinion that the cross represented with leaves underneath is considered to be a traditional characteristic in Meso- potamia, as well as in the zone of heretic Christianity and lie gives as examples the cross of the Nestorian Inscription of 781 in Hsi-an and that of tombstones discovered in Ch'iian- chou (Zaytun). However the decoration underneath these crosses is not leaves but either
Quademo N° 62
— 50 —
KRarni considers that the Islamic lantern type of frame was originated in Western Asia and introduced into China where it had long been in usc.,’', In this way, Egami concludes that from the point of view of design and deco- ration the Ongut cross is more closely related to that in Zaytun than that in Scmirjechc.
The difference of type and design of cross may also suggest the difference of ceremony and doctrine between the Nestorianism of the Ongut and that of thc inhabitants of Scmirjcche. That Yaballaha III went to Peking to study under Rabban Sauma and that he first declined thc offer of patri- archate for the reason that he did not know Syriac *»«» will also tell that the Nestorianism of the Ongut was more closely connected with that in China than that in Central and Western Asia.
I he difference between the Nestorianism of thc Ongut and that of Scmir- jcche is also seen from the language and phraseology of inscriptions of thc tombstones Both thc Ongut and Scmirjcche inscriptions arc written in Syriac letters, though the letters used by the Ongut are more formal in style than those used in Scmirjechc But in Scmirjcche thc majority of inscriptions are written in Syriac, while a small number of them in Turkish. On the other hand, the Ongut inscription which is much shorter than that in Scmirjcche is always written in Turkish and their phraseology is a bit different
It was K (iroenbcch who studied the inscriptions of the Ongut tomb- stones on the basis of the photographs taken by Martin. Thc inscriptions are usually too obscure to be deciphered, but from one good specimen (PI. I, fig i) he succeeded in establishing that the passage runs as follows: " bu qwra |kal».t) mug ol (This tomb is that of . . .), the dots giving thc name of the deceased 1 Sacki, who deciphered the same inscription, has established the name of the deceased as Koshtan/.w Sacki also tried to decipher thir-
flowers or some Other designs, hut it may suggest that this type of representation of cross hail come from the West.
(2.t) I he so-called Islamic lantern shaped frame may not necessarily he looked upon as an inlhienre of Islamic architecture. The frame may represent a recess where a sacred no. irc is placed for the purpose of worship Or it may he as simplified representation of an altar with curtain drawn to both sides There are many examples of this kind of recess or altar in ( llincse Buddhist art before the coming of Islam For instance, refer to the caves of Tun Inning. Yun kang and Mci-chi-shan.
(14) Montcomkry. pp. 31. 44
(;<) K (•KOKNRKCli, Turkish Inscriptions from Inner Mongolia, • Monuments Serira *,
• '9.W. PP' ins 307 It is the merit of C.roenbech to have identified the language of the Ongut with Turkish.
1 16) S.um, l V hi A/Mo ttyakureibyS ni fukin ni okeru Ketkyo istki ni t suite ( Notes on the Ales tori a n Sites in the neighborhood of Pai ling -miao. Inner Mongolia), • Tohd Cahulio », Tokyo, IX, 1939. pp 49-89 1 1 based on thc 13th chapter of SAK.KI, Shina KirisutokyS no I ruby it, II, pp 414 471. which is a complete reprint of this article and another in note (*6) On the decipherment of thc name Koshtanz, see pp. 433 ft]. Also see Oocnhech’s criticism to Saeki's decipherment in •Monumenta Serica », IV. pp. 307 308.
teen inscriptions on the basis of their photographs and rubbings brought back by Egami."-’ These inscriptions are being re-examined by Shichiro Mucayama and his study on the same inscciplion deciphered by Groen- bech and Saeki is published at the end of the present article as an appendix.
The decipherment is very important from the point of view that it has established that the Ongut were Turkish speaking people. Bar Hehraeus who gives a brief note upon Yaballaha III and Rabban Sauma idem, ties these two people with Yaghurite, that is to say the Uighur,"” which makes one suppose the Turkish origin of the Ongut. But, the fact that their tomb inscriptions are written in 1 uckish is a decisive evidence that the Ongut were speaking Turkish As Groenbech pointed out, if they were speaking some other language than Turkish, they should have used Syriac for thc inscrip- tions of their tombstone, because Syriac was the sacred language for Ncsto- rians.
The inscriptions of the Ongut tombstones are different from those of Semirjechc in the following points: (t) They consists of a single line just to notify that this is the tomb of such and such person,'’"’ while those in Semi- rjeche are much longer, denoting not only the name of the deceased but also their occupations: (a) No date is given in the inscriptions of thc Ongut, while it is written in the Scmirjcche inscriptions: (3) thc Ongut inscriptions are all written in Turkish, so far as they arc deciphered, but those of Scmirjcche are sometimes in Turkish and sometimes in Syriac: (4) the Ongut inscriptions end in ning ol " ,s of", while those of Scmirjcche in mug turur for the same meaning, of which mug is used as copula.
The sites of the Ongut kingdom have been investigated only very super- ficially and still it was enough to let one realize their importance It is the- refore, earnestly desired that systematic explorations and investigations will be taken up in near future, which will certainly reveal many new facts concccning thc history and culture of this Turkish ally to the Gen- ghiskanitls.
(27) sacki, FuWoM HyahnnM f„h„ !„n ,n„ff
Tnkv Sil v7'°Z'"' "" "**•“** °f iTflhn GakuhA >,
Tokyo, Vol. XI. No. pp ,60-1,3 (- Stinn KiriMokyS no K.ntyu II
PP 457-473). ' ' '
(28) Montgomery, p. ,8, Mo, or. p. ,4 , Moule wriles that another Info of Ynin-
Ma says that he was a Turk from Cathay.
A* ,or Turkish language of Nestnrian insrriplions of Ihc Ongut and in ■Wiche, see MEcniT Mansur,,,,,,, . Di, l„„lr,f,r„ „,„y „
, m * Philologiac Turcicae Fundaments ». 1959. pp. 108 112; S F. Malov /«„. myatni^ dreiinetyurhsko, pis' mennosti Mongo/,, , Kirg,;„. Moskva Leningrad. ',959.
(3°.) ECAMI f* JA P- ,63> wr,tf,s • Lw inscriptions gravies en dcriture syriaque
1. “T iUrqU0 IE IW S°nt ,rt* br<‘v« C* rnmPor,,'n* <ou„-s la mi'mc formule; cette ITT ” ' ' d<“ <IC ‘W du ro' <;eorS‘- W»ns P'upart des cas) .. Bu, I do not know
winch inscription Egann is indicating.
— 52 —
(2) CHRISTIAN AND OTHER RELIGIONS REMAINS IN CH’ DAN -CHOU (ZAYTUN) AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD
The city of Ch’iian-chou (called Chin-chiang-hsien at present) situated at the mouth of the Chin-chiang river, on the coast apposite to Formosa, is at present a small local centre of the province Fu-chien. However, it was known under the name of Zaytun (Zaitun) and had been one of the most prosperous international ports in the world from the 9th century down to the 15th.
Since 1087 the Superintendent of Trading Ships had been established there to control the foreign trade "" and during the period of Sung (960-1279) and Yiian (1279-1368) Ch’iian-chou grew rapidly in importance for its prosperous international trade' which was one of the most important source of income for both the Sung and Yuan governments.133’ The government of Yuan tried to encourage the foreign trade by building ships on their expenses and invited merchants to charter them for going abroad to trade.'34’
Marco Polo, who left Ch’iian-chou at the end of 1290 or at the beginning of 1291 to set sail for his native country, <3*’ says about Zaytun as follows: “ At this city (Zaytun) you must know is the Harbour of Zaytun, frequented by all the ships of India, which bring thither spicery and all other kinds of costly wares. It is the port also that is frequented by all the merchants ofManzi (South China), for hither is imported the most astonishing quantity of goods and of precious stones and pearls, and from this they are distributed all ovcrManzi. 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 harbour of Zaytun; for it is one of the greatest harbours in the world for commerce.” ,vs’ Marco Polo continues to say that the Great Khan derives a very large revenue from the duties paid in this city and haven and that between freight and the Khan's duties the merchant has to pay a good half the value of his investment. '”’ And Ibn Batuta who visited Ch’iian-chou about 1346 states as follows: " I must tell you that the first Chinese city that I reached after crossing the sea was Zaitun ... It is
(31) Kuwaiiara, I, pp. 19-20.
(32) Kuwaiiara, I, pp. 20-21, 25-28.
(33) Kuwaiiara, I, pp 24-25: II, pp. 77-79; /Cm Han, Tfng-hsia-chi, Peking, 1961 pp. 6-7
< 34) Kuwaiiara, II, pp. Ro-83 anil Biography of Lu Shin-YING in Yuan- shih, Bk.
205.
(35) Yang CHIH-CHIti and Ho Yang-CHI, Marco Polo quits China, *HJAS*, IX, 1945 47. p 51; M OTAGI, Marco Polo Genchd tai:ai nenjikd (A Chronological Study of Marco Polo's Stay 1/1 China), • Bunkn •, XV, 2. March 1951. pp. 31-44; G. VACCA, Un documento etnest sulla data del ntorno di Marco Polo, * Studi Colombiani *, III, 195 1, pp. 45 48.
(36) YULE and CORDIER, Marco Polo, II, London, 1903, pp. 234-235.
(37) Ibid., p. 235.
— 53 —
a great city, superb indeed The harbour of Zaitun is one of the greatest in the world, — I am wrong; it is the greatest! I have seen about one hundred first class junks together; as for small ones they were past counting. The harbour is formed by a great estuary which runs inland from the sea until it joins the Great River.” 081
Many merchant? gathered in Ch'iian-chou not only from other parts of China but also from abroad. Foreign merchants and their families stayed in a special quarter of the city where they built their dwellings and gardens according to the fashion of their own country. This special quarter was called Ch’iian-nan or the Southern Fart of the city of Ch’iian-chou because it was situated in the south of the city. 091 It faced the Chin-chiang river and was convenient for the communication with ships stayed in the port. As is well known, the foreign community in the special quarter was ruled by a head or heads of their own, enjoying a sort of extraterritoriality.'40’ Ibn Batuta writes that the Mohammedans had a city of their own and that he had visits of the qadi of the Mohammedans, Tajuddin of Ardebil, the sheikh of Islam, Kamaluddin Abdallah of Ispahan and the chief merchants of the place.'4'1 Many stories are told about the huge fortune, luxury, and strange experiences of Chinese traders and foreign merchants who stayed in Ch’iian-chou. 14,1
Chau Ju-kua who was the Superintendent of Trading Ships at Ch'iian- chou compiled a book in 1225 and named it Chu-fan-chih of a Record of Several Foreign Countries .'4J| He writes about a big Arabic merchant named Sira vi who settled in Ch’uan-nan and built a graveyard for foreign merchants in southeastern suburbs outside the city; about an Indian merchant named Shih-Io-pa-chi-li-kan and his son, who came from the Malabar coast of India and settled in Ch'iian-nan; and about a Buddhist monk Lo-hu-na who came from India and built a Buddhist temple named Pao-lin-yiian in Ch’iian- nan.'44’ Another record states that a Mohammedan who came from Bahrein near Oman and lived in Ch’iian-nan made a great fortune with foreign trade and that he married to a daughter of the family P'u who was also Moham- medan and the most powerful in the city.145' In this way, the population of this city consisted of several nationalities. The existence of Genoese,
(38) YULE and CORDIER, Cathay and the IVay Thither, IV, London 1916, pp. 118-119.
(39) Kuwabara. I, pp. 33. 3R 4o
(40) Kuwabara, I, pp 34, 40-41
(41) YULE and CORDIER, Cathay and the way Thither, IV, 1 19.
(42) For instance, see I-chien chic. Section Chia, Br. 7, pp 52-53, Section Ting Bk 6. p. 47 (edition Ts’ung shu chi-ch’cng). These two stories of I-chien chi have not yet been noticed by scholars.
(43) However, Chu -fan-chi is mostly copying Ling-wai tai-ta of Chou Ch'u-fei. See K Enoki, Some Remarks on the country of Ta-ch'in, etc., • Asia Major*, IV. p.
(44) HlRTHand ROCKHIIL, Chau Ju-kua, St. Petersburg, 1912, pp. 119. 88-111, Pao-lin- yiian is written as Buddhist temple in Chau Ju kua, but Wu W'en-liang identifies it with a Hindu temple («JRAS», 1954, 1/2, p. 4).
(45) Kuwabara, II, p. 95.
— 54 —
Armenian and Jewish merchants is referred to in letters of Franciscan brothers at the beginning of the fourteenth century.14''1
It was Mohammedans who commanded the majority of foreign popu- lation in the city of Ch'iian-chou as we can see from the statement of Ibn Matuta that Mohammedans had a city of their own.147* Under the Yuan, many Mohammedans stayed in Ch’iian chou not only as merchants but also as governors of the city and as other governmental officials. Among these Mohammedans, there was such an influcncial man as P’u Shou-keng who was the Superintendent of Trading Ships in the latter half of the thirteenth century and played an important role as a collaborator of the Mongol govern- ment to destroy the Sung ,4K' His ancestors were probably Arabs and lived in S/.c -chuan until they migrated to Ch'iian-chou, 449’ and his descendants and their relatives had been very wealthy and powerful throughout the Yuan dynasty.
Together with the increase of these foreign populations, foreign religions were introduced. T hey were worshipped primarily by these foreigners and later by native converts. Among these foreign religions introduced into Ch'iian chou, the Mohammedanism and the Manichaeism are well known. A local tradition claims that the Mohammedanism was introduced into Ch’iian chou in the period of Chen kuan (627-649), of T’ang, but it was in 1131 that the mosque named Ch'ing rhing-ssu Temple was established by a merchant of Siraf There are also tombs of two Mohammedan saints, who are said to have come to Ch’iian chou to preach their religion, at a mountain named Ling slum, two kilometres to the east of the city.4'0' The Mani- chaeism had been very widely spread in South China in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in spite of several persecutions by the government of Sung. And it revived and onec more persecuted under the Mongols. There still exists a Manic 'liaean temple at the top of a mountain named Hua-piao- shan to the south of the city of Ch'iian chou. At present, the Manichaean tradition and teaching arc quite forgotten, it being specialized in incantation and prayer for the cure of disease and obtaining fortunes, but it is of no doubt that it is the remain of a Manichaean temple.45" I shall refer to this Mani- chacan temple later.
(46) MOULE, pp. 102, 104. 'OS. 209.
(47) YliI.K and ( oh mm. Cathay and the H ay Thifhr, IV, p. 1 ic>.
(48) See Kuwahara, I, and II
140) 1.0 I IsiANi. I IN, .7 A eii 1 Study of Pm Shnu keng and his. Times, Hong Kong, Insti- tute of ( liinesc Culture, 1059, pp. 11 38.
50) < oncerning the history of Mohammedanism in Ch'iian chou see KuWABARA, I, p 14 II. pp. 33-34; (>RKG Arnaiz et Max van Bf.RCHKM, Mhnoirt sur tes antiquit/s musul- manes de Ts'iuan-fcheou, «TP*. ion, pp. 704 74°. 720-727. Wu WfiN-LIANC, Ch'iian- chou tsung chiao shih k'o (hi. Peking 1957, pp. 22-25.
151) Concerning the manichaean temple of Hua-piao-shan, I shall again refer at the end of this chapter. In the meantime the following articles may be consulted about the spread of Manichaeism in South China.
55
There are also records concerning the Franciscan mission in Ch'iian-chou in the fourteenth century. Brother Peregrine wrote in 1318 that an Arme- nian lady had donated a good church with residence in the city [which later was made a cathedral], and that outside the city they had a beautiful place with a wood where they wished to build cells and an oratory.'5" Brother Andrew of Perugia also wrote in 1326 of this church in the city where he removed from Khan-baliq about 1323, as well as of a new church which he built in a certain grove near the city, that is to say, the same place as men- tioned by brother Peregrine Brother Andrew was receiving a royal charity to maintain the church 4,31 and Marignolli refers to a third church in 1347. 1541
The Nestorian church had disappeared in China since the persecution in 845 until it revived under the Mongol rule. The yeh-li-k' o-w£n was a general appelation of Christians in that period, including the followers of Nestorianism.'”’ Many yeh-li-k' o-win played an important part in China as missionaries, governmental officials, military officers, men of letters and so on. They spread in various parts of China. Among others, in Chen chiang near the mouth of Yang-tzu-chiang, one of the most important political and commercial centres in South China, 5 per cent of population was occupied by the yeh-li-k' o-wen. 4 v') So, it is quite likely that there were Nestorian inhabitants in Ch’iian-chou, too.
- Wang Kuo-wfi, Ma - ni- chiao liu hsing Chung kuo i'ao (A study on the introduc- tion and Diffusion of Manichaeism in China) (in Kuan fang pi eh du hou pirn, especially fol. I3a-I4a for the development in South China and the prohibition under the Yuan).
— Ed. CHAVANNES et P. P ELLIOT; Un trait)1 manicheen retrouvt en Chine, * JA •, 191 1 ct 1913. especially 1913, pp 339 343. TijrJge a part, pp, 301 305).
— Ch’P.N YOan, Mam chiao liu hsing Chung huo k'ao, * Kuo hsuch chi-k'an », I, 2, 1923, pp. 203 -240.
— P. PELLI0T, Les traditions manichfennes an Fou him, «TP», XXII. 1923, pp. 193-208.
— SHUNSHdSHIGF.MATSU, TO- St jidai no Mam kySto MahyO to Mandat ( Manichaeism in China under the T'ang and Sung and the [persecution against the) Teaching 0/ Demon), «Shven», XII, 1936, pp. 85-114 (rsp. p. 107).
— M0U JUN-SUN, De Manichaeismo tempore Dynastiae Sung (in Chinese), • Fu jen, hsueh-chihl, VII, 1/2, 1938, pp. 125-146.
— Wu Man, Ming-fhiaa yii Ta ming ti huo ( Manichaeism and the Great Ming Em- pire), «Ching-hua hsiich pao*, XIII, 1, 1940 (I quote from the article reprinted in Wu Han, Tu shih cha chi, Peking, 1961. pp. 235-270).
— LlU MlNG— JU, Ch'iian-chou shih h'o sail po (Commentaries to Three Stone Inscrip- tions of Ch'iian chou), «K'ao-ku t'ung-hsiin », 1958, 6, pp. 60-62
— In spite of so many persecutions, the Manichaeism could survive in disguise of Buddhism or Taoism. On this point, also see PUECH, in Ac Civil ta dell'Oriente, Religione,
. 1. . p 28 J
(52) A. VAN DEN Wyncakrt, Sinica Franc iscana, I, p 867; MoULE, p. 209
(53) A. VAN DEN Wyngaert, Ibid., |>p. 192-193; MOULE, p. 209.
(54) A. Van den Wyngaert, Ibid ., pp. 536; Mout.E, p. 259.
(55) Ch’P.N YOan, Yuan yeh-li-k' o-wen k'ao (The yeh h k'o-wrn under the Yuan) is the best study available for the moment.
(56) A.C. MOULE and L. (ill.F.S, Christians at Chcn-chiang fu, « TP *, XVI, 1915. pp. 627-686 (= MOULE, pp. 145-165).
— 56 —
However, except the three crosses discovered in the city of Ch'iian-chou and its neighbourhood in 1 593 and 1643 and published by Father Emma- nuel Diaz ',7' S J in 1644 ,WI, no relics had ever come to the knowledge of academic world up to 1905 or 1906 when another Nestorian cross turned up in the city.1'''1 The photograph of this cross was published in T'oung Pao, >914, and stimulated scholars interested in the history of Christianity in China A systematic investigation of religious sites and relics of Ch'iian-chou was initiated by G. Ecke and P. Demieville who published a monograph on the Twin Pagodas of Zaytun in 1935. ,5'’1 This is a study of architecture and iconography of the K’ai-yiian-ssu Temple which is the biggest and oldest Buddhist temple in the city. Among the photographs they publi- shed, there are pictures of the graveyard of Mohammedans outside the city, of remains of stone carvings of Hinduism, which are now used as a part of construction of the K'ai yiian-ssu temple, of the same cross which was pu- blished in T'oung Pao, and of a part of the old port of Ch’iian-chou and some other historical sites. Their study revealed that Ch’iian-chou is an extremely interesting and important field of archaeology and history. But no further systematic investigations were undertaken until after the World War II.
Under the Mongol government, such religions as Buddhism, Taoism, Mohammedanism, and Christianism could enjoy the equal freedom because of the tolerant policy of the Mongols. The only exceptions were the Mani- chaeism and l.amaism, the former having been strictly prohibited and the later very earnestly worshipped by the emperor and the royal family, though tfie^Klanichaeism known under some different names K',‘ were still popular among the people especially in South China But, when the Ming replaced the Mongols in 1368, only the Taoism and Buddhism were considered as legitimate national religion and the others of loreign origin were expelled from 'China. Foreigners who had been staying in China were forced either to go out of China or to mix with Chinese population and, as a rule, foreigners were admitted to come to China both by land and by sea only on the occasion
(57) Hr published them in his study on the Nestorian Insrription of 781, entitled T'ang Citing chiao pei sung chrn ch'uan, Hang -chou, 1 <>44
(58) Moule is of the opinion that Martini reported in 1655 about the existence of Chri- stian relics in Chang chon which Moule takes for mistake of Ch'iian-chou (Moi'I.E, p 83); I* os tsar, « | RAS *, 1054. 1/2 p 3); Sakki, Krikyd no A'rnkyu , Tokyo 1935, p. 972, states that among the (iovcrnnrs of Ch'uan chon during the Yilan there was one Ma-ya-hu which hr reconstructs into Mar Yabali and identifies with a Nestorian. However, there is no such names among the officials in Cliilan rhou in the period concerned. Sec Fu-chien t'ung-ehih (cd. CltlEN ii'NO), Bk 23, and Ch'uan chou fu chili. Hk 26. though there is no doubt that ma- ya-hu is a Nestorian name ( Yiian-shiss, Bk 7. fol. 14a. ed. Po-na-pP.n).
(59) See the bibliography of < ■ Eckf. and P DEMlf.viu.E, The Twin Pagodas of Zay- lum /t \tudy of Inker Huddhtst Sculpture in China (Harvard-Yenching Monograph Series, 2). Cambridge. Mass., 1935
(60) Sec the articles quoted in note (”).
— 57 —
when they wanted to see the emperor to pay tribute to him."''1 Under the circumstances, in Ch'iian-chou too, the followers of Nestorian and Franci- scan churches may have decreased in number until there were none of them. The Manichaeans and Mohammedans survived the new policy of Ming, but Mohammedans who had been so influencial in Ch'iian-chou under the Yiian were subject to agitation of non-mohammedans who did not like them To make the matter worse, the Government of Ming closed the port of Ch’iian-chou to concentrate the foreign trade by sea only at Canton in 1528 and, thus, Ch'iian-chou had no opportunity to regain its former prosperity
Under the Ming and the Ch'ing which succeeded the former, old tomb- stones of Mohammedans and Christians and other religious constructions were removed and used for the repairment of the city walls or for some other purpose of new construction. Many monuments were destroyed in this way and very little became known about foreign settlers and their settlements in this city.
It was the Sino-Japanese War that changed the situation. In 1941, the Japanese forees occupied the city of Fu-chou, the capital of Fu -chien Province, to reenforce the blocade of the coast of South China. Against this, the Chinese authorities ordered to demolish the eity wall of Ch’iian- chou at several parts for the reason of strategy.'6’1 Thousand and thousand pieces of stone were removed and so many tombstones of foreigners and other stone constructions which originally made a part of building of temples and churches were discovered among them These stones were a part of those which were removed from their original place and used for the repairmen t of the city walls during the Ming and Ch’ing. However, because of the war with Japan, no proper attention was payed either for recording or preserving precious historical relics. Many of them were again cut into pieces to be used for another purpose of construction
Since the establishment of the Communist Regime, these relics and other sites of historical importance ' of Ch'iian-chou hawe been investigated and preserved systematically by a special committee And two museums have already been set up to keep and exhibit the most important remains of this
(61) It was not only because of the new nationalistic and anli-fnreign policy of the Ming government, but also because of the destruction of the Mongol empire that the forei- gners. especially Europeans, could not get in to China under the Ming The Asian trade which had been open to every merchant of any nationality under the Mongols were once more monopolized by Mohammedans However, even the Mohammedans outside China could not come in China except when they were accepted as a diplomatic mission representing their king
(62) For instance, see Ch'iian-chou fu-chih, Bk 11.
(63) Wu Wen bang writes, according to FOSTER (« JRAS», 1954, 1/2, p 4). that the order was issued in 1938. But this must be a mistake. The Japanese military operation in Fu-chien did not take place until 1941 As to the meaning of this ordrr to demolish the city walls, see Foster, p. 3 note.
— 5« —
city. Another committor has also born organized for the preservation of the historical monuments of K’ai-yiian-ssu Temple.'6”
However, the investigation and recording of tombstones and carvings thus turned up had already been started by Wu Wen-liang as early as 1928 His interest in Ch'uan-chou antiquities was awakened in 1920 when he saw a number of stone fragments with carvings unearthed from a part of the city wall demolished to build a railway.'*” He also witnessed during the war that so many new carved stones turned up and used once more for another pur- pose of construction.'1*’ In 1944, ha compiled a book entitled Ch'uan-chou kn tai s/uh-k'o-chi or Collection of Ancient Stone Carvings of Ch'uan-chou , in which he put together the items he investigated up to that time, but, for the reason of finance, he could not afford to circulate it among scholars.'67’ In 1957. I»y the aid of Academia Sirfica, he published Ch'uan-chou tsung- chiao shih k'o or Religious Stone Carvings of Ch'uan-chou , edited by the Institute of Archaeology, Academia Sinica. Peking: K'6-hsiich ch’u-pan-she, August 1957, lext, pp. 66; Plates, pp 98, which seems to be an enlarged edition of the former The book is divided into two parts, texts and illustrations, and it is subdivided into five sections: (1) Mohammedan stone carvings and monu- ments (illustrations 1 70): (2) Christian stone carvings (illustrations 71-104): (3) Manichacan stones (illustrations 105-110): (4) Hindu stone carvings (illu- strations 114 146): and (5) Miscellaneous stone carvings (illustrations 147- 161). These are followed by supplementary illustrations 1-25, which contain photographs of Indian, Mohammedan and Christian relics not published in the main text. A short bibliography is attached on pp. 65-66. As for epi- taphs, Wu published here not only their photographs but also photographs of their rubbings As Wu himself admits, there are many relics which are known of their existence but not yet photographed to be published here.'68’ Still this is the best collection and study of the antiquities of Ch'uan-chou, which turned up between 1927 and 1957.*^’ After the publication of this book, a number of articles were issued in connection with new findings in
I'M) The Museum of History of International Intercourse of the City of Ch’iian chou (( iiao Wan 11, Non /nine jih-chi {Diary of an Academic Journey in South China), • Wfn- wu ». 1962, |> 27. the Museum in memory of Eminent People in History {/hid, p, 2R) and the ( omniilter of Administration of Cultural Remains of the K'ni-yiian ssu Temple {/bid , pp. 2# 20) are the names of these museums and committee. As for the investigations condurted by the. Museum of International Intercourse, see • Kaogu*. 1959, 11, pp 611-618, PI. VII,
I 6. As for other investigations of the antiquities of Fu -eliien in recent years, see, « Wfn- 'vii san k'ao tzu-liao*, 1055, 11, pp. 80 90; /hid , 1957. 1, pp. 7 f.-68; t VVen-wu ». 1959, 2, p. 41 and • Kaogu », 1959, 11, pp. 619-621.
(65) • J RAS *, 1954. 1/2, pp. 3-4.
(66) Ibid., p 4.
(67) Ch'iian rhou hung chiao shih h'o. p 2; FOSTER quotes Wu’s, Ch'uan-chou ku tai shih k'o c/u thien viian {Introduction to the Collection of Ancient Stone Carvings of Ch'iian chou) It seems that til's was the only printed portion of the hook.
(68) Wu Wen i.ianc, pp. 38-39, 41-42.
(6 9) Two short recensions were published in • K’ao-ku t'ung-hsun », 1958, 1. pp. 100- 101 and 1958, 10, pp. 73 74.
— 59 —
Ch'iian- Chou ,7°\ but, except in some cases, there are almost nothing to add to Wu’s work so long as the religious relics are concerned. In this sense, Wu's contribution is very much appreciated The only drawback of Wu’s book is that no map is published to show the places where these findings were made To tell the truth, it was not by this publication that Wu’s investigation was first made known to the academic world. John Foster published twenty photographs of stone carvings of Ch'uan-chou, which he selected from what Wu gave to Foster’s friend with the hope that someone in the West might publish it.'7'1 These photographs include relics of Hinduism, Mohammeda- . nism and Christianism, both Nestorian and Roman Catholic (Franciscan), and well represent the variety of Ch’iian-chou findings. It goes without saying that all these photographs are included in Wu’s publication, except that of a stone image of Buddhist priest, which appears at the top of the first plate of Foster, as well as that of wrongly assembled Christian-Mohammcdan tombstones of Foster's Plate VII. But this docs not necessarily mean that Wu's book replaces Foster’s publications. The decipherment of epitaphs of Mohammedan and Christian tombstones made in Foster's article give a good clue to the understanding of the nature of the relics, while Wu has published some decipherments in a very insufficient way.
Now, the Christian relics catalogued by Wu arc classified into four . The first is the stone slabs inscribed with the so-called Zaytun cross. They are actually the variety of those discovered by Fmanuel Diaz and Moya.
Wu photographed five of them (illustrations 7 1 74) (Supplementary Illu- stration 19), of which three have already been published by Foster IRAS, 1954,
(PI I, fig i; fig 1 in text) and one is the same thing discovered by Moya, the only one published here for the first time being that of Supplementary Illus- tration 19. These stone slabs are of the so-called ” Islamic lantern shape " and carved with a cross with flowers or an angel or some other decoration under- neath it Whether these stone slabs arc Nestorian or Roman Catholic is a question which remain to be solved and so is their usage. Wu’ is of the opinion that they were placed on the top of tombstone which may be called of altar type (sec below). Among the Mohammedan relics, there is a stone slab which resembles to the that with cross, both in shape and in design.17” According to Wu, it is also to be placed on a tombstone.' 7,1 But these stone slabs can
(70) Among others, two articles of Chuang Wei -chi concerning the sites related to the history of international intercourse recently discovered in Ch’iian chou (« K’ao-ku t'ung hsiin ». 1956, 3, pp. 43-47, and 1958, 8, pp. 62-64) and a report concerning the results of investigations carried nut by the Research Department of the Museum of History of Inter- national Intercourse of the City of Ch’iian chou (• Kaogu *, 1959. 1 '• PP 6t 1-618) are impor- tant. Some errors of Wu in the decipherment of inscriptions arc corrected and some more details about the sites are given by these articles
/ (71) John Foster, Crosses from the Walls of Zaitun, « JRAS », 1954, 1/2. pp. 1 15
with Plates I XVII However, W'u critisizes Foster for having published these photographs withouth his permission (Wu WP.N-LIANG, p. 2).
'72) Wu WftN LIANG, Illustration 29 (pp. It, 75)
(73) This type of tomb is published in « JRAS», 1954. </J. PI. VI.
— 6o —
— 61 —
not be placed on a tombstone unless some device is made to fasten it to the latter. Wu’s interpretation is possible, but it will not be justified until the existence of such a device is confirmed.
The second one is tombstones. One type of Christian tombstones unearthed so far consists of four five layers of stone (See « JRAS», 1954, 1/2, Pl.V I), of which the uppermost ond is of a shape of house with cross carved on each end (PI. I, fig 2). The rest arc fiat square stones, one piled about the other, with decorations carved on four sides. One of the so-called Zaytun cross publi- shed by Emanuel Diaz seems to be representing this type of tombs as seen from the side on which the cross is carved. ,74» No inscriptions arc made on these stones. A Mohammedan tombstone of the similar type is shown here for comparison (PI. II, fig. •)-
The third is also a part of tombstones of the type different from the above. This type of tombstones may be called the altar type, and, according to the reconstruction of Wu (cfr. above p. 62), they consist of a pedestal, a flat top and a middle portion. Some fragments of the middle portion have been unearthed They arc either carved with a cross between two angels or with inscriptions in Syriac letters. Originally, the cross-carved part was placed at the centre between two parts with inscriptions. As is mentioned above, Wu is of the opinion that a stone slab carbed with a cross was to be placed on the top.
These two types of tombstones show the close relationship between the Christian and Mohammedan tombstones and it is obvious that the former (Christian) copied the latter (Mohammedan) as this type of tomb is originally Mohammedan. In the case of tombstone of altar type, the Mohammedans placed a stone carved with “ a moon with clouds underneath at the centre of the middle part where the Christians put one carved with “ a cross between the two angels " In the case of the house-shaped stone, the Christian one is carved with " a cross with flovers underneath ", which the Mohammedan one with “ a moon with clouds underneath." No tombstones of the Ongut type have sever been discovered in Ch’uan-chou.
The fourth one is another kind of stone with or without an epitaph. It is usually a large and thicker, square and flat piece of stone, of which the top is some time cut round. It may have been erected on another flat piece of stone which covered the deceased Wu has published eleven stones of this kind with epitaph, seven of which have already been published by Foster. From the point of view of letters, these epitaphs are written in Chinese, P'ags-pa, Nestorian Syriac and Latin. Some of these epitaphs are yet to be deciphered, but, so long as what have been diciphcred arc concerned, Chinese and P ags- pa letters arc meant for the Chinese language, Syriac for cither the Syriac or the Turkish and Latin for the Latin.
(74) Foster’s PI. VII represents tombstone with a cross on the first stone from the top and Arabic inscriptions on the second. However, these stones arc assembled in a wrong way as we can see it from the discontinuity of ornamental designs between the first and second stone.
62 —
The dcchiphcr (i) The Nest ed the
of these epitaphs has revealed some interesting facts , in fli'iian-rhou of the il.iri.-.nlh and fourtc
>lh
enturics
nSSThTSyriac.'”' This may mean that j Syriac was used among them as tK.~acred language Tins forms a contrast
» .ha, the { ingot of., he penotl d^no^.he Syr.ae language u.
only used Svnar. letters to write their oWTil^-, that ts to say, tirh.
(2) Among these epitaphs, there are two which are bilingual. One IS , 'em in Syriac on one side and five lines of inscriptions in Chinese' characters on the other. The Trimtarium has been published by "but lhe Chines inscriptions have no,.- According to the decipher ] men, „f Wu, , he Chinese inscriptions say tha, it is the tomb of Wang Fou_,an who to!, k service to the government of Yuan and died ,» .340 Wang Fou-
'"n AtmZrfs^ncpimph in'memory of Yt U-k'o Wm (A Pierian) Ma-li Sin h -ml,, (.Mar Slim,,,,) and a p, rsu ku-pa (Episcofa) Ma-li Ha.^l
(Mar H«k »F ™ "" - S“° ma ^rn Sa“"'h) anf ml r.o°nMar Sh le 1 t ... . x.h month of the 2nd year of Huang-ching (-1313) Mar ' m
mum’ and Mar Hasya are titled the adimn.stra.orW of Mtng-chtan (to Teaching of Brightness, that is, the Mamchaeism) and t h m-ch,.o (i.c 1 , hing Of T a eh m, that is, the Nestorianism) in various district. of Ch.ang-
Lr
S::r-M»r,yuma-; Turkish of the same phraseology as ,ha, of |he Or^ut Inscriptions. The name of Ma-li Ha hr, ya appears in an mscnption
;;; ,2«, * .he ™..r^ *», ». * ^
th„ „f Ma rrh Ski* li. which is likely to be identified with Ma-tiSk,
. , ,i i iL.i nf h0 t>i ssu-hu, which is identical with a pi ■
" t T't w n, pi Thte^eo le are described as important Nestorian tus,: !ho wcrcP invi,cd .0 the city of Chen-chiang where they stayed from ,277 to I2», or later than that. The inscription states nothing about he na ive place, but i, is likely that i, was in Ongu, or in some ^other place ,f Central Asia, As for David Sauma is difficult to establish has nauona- |ity. but probably Chinese because of .he Chinese inscrtpttons made under
his name.
s c iiisyinl.rrmrntB published in Foster's article.
g§ MRAS ., Z. ./a? Pi, XIV. P. .Ik WU Win Uano. Ulustr. 77 (■- »- 3k Test.
P'’ w„ WfN usso, lllullr .08; Test PP 4S 4<-. Wu states that the »«« «»
« '* ?*“' !".,;ta,a!r,|ra:M,'’Io$4)" tolTpraTST Cta-Cou-pu ” h»<
«-• brt, ‘ TZ rnu.u, a M igolL K'ao ku t uny hstlu ., .0* 3. P *>.
a talk uii I8, a, the Congress of a, held
in T,'Z TaTL CMn a-p. — ku pa 1. welt a, a. a lltle. but as
Moreover, it is interesting that, this inscription shows tha, the Mam- chaeism and Nestorianism in South China were under the control of Nrsto- rian priests Wu identifies two tombstones with a cross carveu between a canopfTSd a flower with Manichacan ones One of these two is published ,n IRAS, 1954, i/2, PI. X, and l am here reproducing another (1 1. 1 1 1 . fig 11 l,ut their Manichacan identity has no ground.1""1 T he reason is not known, but ,1 may tell that it was one nf the ways by which the Mantchacstn survived the persecution of the Mongol government. It is also interesting to see that
(3) The epitaph in Latin has been proved to be that in memory of Andrew of IVrugia of the Franciscan order and it has fixed that he died in n,2 in Ch'iian-chou.'*" Wu locales the site of the Franciscan church built by Andrew in a quarter callcs Se-ts'o-wci, a graveyard situated outside the Eastern Gate of the city■,8,, . .
According to Wu. the ancient graveyards for foreigners arc located in the suburbs to the east of Tung-huai-men (South-Eastern gate of the map atta- ched) and Tung-men or Jen-feng-mfn (Eastern Gate of the map) (FI. III. fig 2). He divides the region into three main quarters: (l) the C hint oti-pu quarter; (2) the Nan-chiao-ch'ang quarter; (3) the quarter outside the Tung- men or Eastern Gate, which is subdivided inlo (a) the Hsia ts’n-shan quarter, (6) the Sfr-ts o-wei quarter, (c) the Jen-ffng Street quarter, (d) the Sacred Tomb (of Mohammedan Saints) quarter and (c) the Tung yuan (Eastern Garden) quarter. And it is in the northern part of the Se^ ts’o-we, quarter where there was the graveyard for Christians, all other quarters being the graveyards for Mohammedans,1*.' Unfortunately, no map detailed enough to understand his description is available. I am attaching here a very simp ( one which I copied from the artirle of Chuang Wei-chi (Map II), 1 hope that it will give the reader a rough idea of location nf these graveyards.
(80) Wu WfcN-l.lANC. Illustrs 109 and no; Text. |>|> 46-47
8.) . IRAS., .054. 1/2, p,». .7 20 WU WftN-UANG, Ulustr. 75 (>• 2);Tcxt,pp 29-30.
82 Wu WftN -LIANG, PP- 42 43- Wu reasons as follows: .) In h.s letter of .3*6 Andrew of Perugia wn.es that the beautiful church he has built is situated ... a small wood which .s of 250 m ’s distance from the Eastern Wall (or .he Eastern part of the city) and the quarter 0 Sc-ts'o wc. is located at the same distance; 2) the tombstones with cross were mostly found from the north-eastern corner of the city wall, which is near Se -ts'o wet. and in Sc ts o we. W„ found two lombsloncs with eross; 3) W„ found a blur ..He for pi.vcn.ru, ,» bis qunr c wbrn he made a lomb for his family. The na.ivo people told him Iha, formerly Here ... ed a big building which was robbed and demolished by official sol, dec of Mmg an. that Ides, Slones and other in.Knals mined up wheree.e, they dug ,be ground to pkml. U'" Ch"*"8 Wei-chi consider that the quarter named Se I.’ o we. was so named because „ was formally the graveyard of the Se family (1 K'ao ku I’ung hum •. iV5<k 3. P 441
(83) See hole ("). Chilling Wei-chi gives a ,lalcnic..l semewhal dideient about Ihe lo- cation of graveyards for fine, gners. He divide. ,1 „„„ five quarters; 0 11,,,-ls o oha,,. ,) Chin ts'o wc. 3) Se-ts'o wei, 4) Tung yuch and its neighbourhood, and 5) the neigh- hourhond of the Sacred Tomb, . K'ao ku l ung I, sun .. ioSb, 3. p 44) Uul be, loo published
— 64 —
Wu's investigation has fnadc the following points clear:
(i) There had been quite a number of Christians in Ch'uan-chou in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries: (2) these Christians consisted of Nestorians and Roman Catholics, of which the majority were Nesto- rians from the point of view of relics known to us so far: (3) the Ch’uan- chou Ncstorian were different from the Ongut Nestorians in the sense they used Syriac as the sacred language, but some of the Ch'uan-chou Nesto- rians must have been the Ongut because they used the same Turkish lan- guage written in the same Ncstorian Syriac letters as the Ongut Nestorians did: (4) the style and construction of tombstones of the Ch’uan-chou Chri- stians was a copy of that of Mohammedans and it is different from that of Ongut Nestorians, except the* cross, which is represented in a resem- bling way.
Wu's investigation has also made it clear that, besides the Christian remains, there are many other interesting and important things which remain to be studied. Remains of stone carvings of the Hindu Temple, inscriptions in South Indian (?) letters (PI II, fig 2) and Chinese inscriptions of Sung, Yuan and Ming arc just a few examples of them. But I have no time to refer to them However, I would like to say a word about the Mamchaean Temple, which still exists on the top of a mountain called Hua-piao-shan to the south of the city. A stone image of Mani (PI. IV, fig. 1) with a halo behind him is enshrined in a temple also built of stone (PI. IV, fig. 2) and a Chinese inscription erected near the temple states that the image was enshrined in the fifth year of Chili yuan (1268) by a follower named Ch’en ch'i tse. The height of the image is 154 cm. and that of the halo is 168 cm. The halo is made of stone, too, but is gold-plated Another Chinese inscription on a natural stone in front of the temple reads that this is the image ofMani, the Brilliant Buddha, who is the purest, brightest, strongest, wisest and surpassed by no others and the truest The inscription is dated 1445. ,84* The image is unmistakably that ofMani in the light of literary evidence of M in-shu , BK. 7, which is a local gaze I ter of the province of Fu~chin.(8*> It is rather fascinating to see the image of Mani of the thirteenth century still exist in its original shrine However, according to Wu, Buddhist monks and laymen in Ch'uan-chou believe that it is not the image of Mani, but of Sakyamuni or Gautama Buddha, Mani being a corrupt form of Muni No record is available as to the date of such a belief, but it may have been some time under the Ming. It was when the Ming unified China (1368) that the Manichaeism was again prohibited because of the name of Ming chiao (Teaching of Brightness) by which it was used to be called. The new government ofMing did not admit a religion
(84) Wu WP.N I.IANC, Text, pp. 44-45: Illustrs. 105-106. The same image and temple arc described in .Win wu s.in kao tzu lino*. 1958. «, p. 28, which corrects Wu’s inaccu- racy of decipherment of inscriptions.
(85) The passage is quoted by Wang Kuo-Wt XXII, 1923. pp. 193-208). Sec note (•').
El, CH'fcN Yuan and Pelliot («TP*.
— 65 —
of the name which is the same as that of the new dynasty.'861 Hence, the persecution. But it must have been just an excuse. Probably the truth was that the Ming believed that the Manicheans were harmful for the consolidation of the new empire. ,87) Anyway, that the image ofMani and its shrine in Ch'iian- chou survived the persecution will mean that the local belief to lookc upon the image as that of Buddha had existed as early as the beginning of Ming.
In Mediaeval China, there were several other international commercial centres besides Ch'uan-chou such as Canton, Ningpo, Hang-chou, and Yang- chou where there were foreigners and their communities. 1881 And, just like in Ch’uan-chou, remains and sites concerning foreign inhabitants are expected to turn up in these cities. The discovery of two Latin epitaphs in memory of Antonio and Catarina respectively, who were the son and daughter of Domingo, from the walls of the city of Yang chou ,89’ is one of its examples. (PI. V). It is earnestly desired, therefore, that Chinese scholars would orga- nize a systematic investigation to explore invaluable cultural remains of international relationship between China and other countries in Mediaeval period, which are expected to exist in these cities.
(3) THREE NEW NESTORIAN DOCUMENTS IN CHINESE
The discovery of Nestorian documents in Chinese from the grotto of Tun-huang created a new epoch in the study of Ncstorian in Mediaeval China These documents are the (Ta-ch'in) Ching-chiao san^wei tneng-tu tsan ,go1
(86) Min-shu, Bk. 7, under Hua-piao-shan.
(87) Wu Han is of the opinion that the government ofMing prohibited the Manichaeism because the name of Ming was adopted from a Manirhaean treaty. Sec Wu Han's article quoted in note (SI).
(88) See Kuwabara, I and II
(89) The epitaphs are in Latin and dated 1342 and 1344 respectively. The one dated 1342 was published and studied by Francis A ROULAN, S.J., The Yangchow Ijitin Tombstone as a Landmark of Medieval Christianity in China, • HJAS 17, 1954. pp. 346-365 The other dated 1344 is published, together with the first one, by K'P.ng Chian -t'ing, Two Latin Tomb Inscriptions of the period of Yuan found from the city walls of Yang-chou (in Chinese), t Kaogu », 1963. 8, pp. 449-45
(90) The (Ta-ch'in) Ching-chiao tan-wei meng-tu tsan is identified by A C. MOUI.E with the Tun-huang Gloria in F-xcelsis Deo , which he translated in to English with a bibliogra- phical note .Sec MOULE, pp 52-55; SAEKI, pp 266-272; 71-73 (Chinese text): P D'ELIA, Fonti Rieciane, I, Roma 1942, pp LVII-LVIII. By the way, SAFKI has published besides the Christian Documents and Relies in China (see abbreviation list) three books in Japanese.
I hese arc 1) KeikyS no Kenkyii or A Critical Study on Nestorianism, Tokyo, The Academy of Oriental Culture, Tokyo Institute, 1937; 2) Shina KirisutokyS no Kenkyii or The History of Christianity in China, 4 Vols., Tokyo, Shunju-sha, 1943-1949. (The fourth volume is publi- shed under the title of Shin-chS KirisutokyS no Kenkyii or A Study of (the History of) Christia- nity under the Ch'ing); and 3) Chiigoku ni okeru KeikyS SuibS no Rekiihi or A History of the Decline of the Nestorianism in the Middle Kingdom, Kyoto, Doshisha University, 1955 In this article, references are made to the Christum Documents and Relics in China unless it is necessary to refer to these Japanese publications.
Quadcrno N° 62
— 66 —
and Tsutir-eJihtg,'"" the Hsu t ing mi-shih so ching,™ 1 shin lun,19" and Chih- hsuan an-lo thing ,‘01 * * * * * * * 9«» (PI. VI) all of which were published, translated and commented in the pre-war period. Among these three, it is the first two (written on the same sheet of paper) that were collected on the spot by P. Pcl- liot at Tun-huang, but the rest which arc of unknown origin are also believed to have come from Tun-huang and their authenticity is beyond doubt.
After the war, another three documents have appeared. The first one is entitled Ta ch'in thing rhino ta sking t'ung-chen kuci-fa tsan or the Hymn to tlif Great , Sacred {and Merciful Father Allah whose benevolence and power enable l]e believers to) get the truth and obtain the law The second is the Ta- ch'in^ihtng chiao hsnan yuan chili pen c/nng or the Treaty to let one attain to the root (of Christianity) through the preaching on the origin (of the truth). ThVTTurd <mTrs named 1 a-eh'in thing -chiao hsiian-yuan pin dung , which is generally believed to be of the same name as that of the second one, pin being an incomplete copy of chih pin.
The first and second documents had been in the library of Li Shcng-tu (t 1935) who was well known for his collection of Tun-huang manuscripts. In 1943, that is to say, eight years after his death, these two documents were sold to Yasushi Kojima ,VM who sent their photographs to Yoshiro Saeki and Torn I laneda Saeki first published their photographs and transliterations in his Shut did Kinsutokyb no Kenkyu or A Study on Christianity in China during the Citing Period, Tokyo: Shunjusha, 1949, Appendix, pp 1-24. And two years later, he again published the same photographs, together with their F.nglisli translations and commentaries, in the second edition of The Nesto- rian Documents and Relics in China, Tokyo: Maruzen Co. Ltd., 1951, pp. 3'3A‘ 314C And for the third time, better photographs in Chugoku ni Okeru Kei- kvb Suibo no Rekishi or A History of the Decline of the Nestorianism in the Middle Kingdom, Kyoto: Doshisha University, 1955 ,n >95> Haneda pu-
(01) On the Turn clung, see MoULE, pp 5S S7: SAEKI, I9S». pp. 273-2*0 (English translation and notes), 248 254 (bibliographical notes). 74 -76 (Chinese text).
| |, , //,„ rmg mi dull to dung was edited by T. HANEDA and reproduced in fac- simile Ml 1931 by the Academy of Oriental Culture. Kyoto Institute It was published toge- ther with (hr / shin tun. See HANEDA, pp. 240 z(x)i Moui.E, pp. 58-/»4; SAEKI, pp. 1 1 3- 1 24 (bibliographical notes). 125 160 (English translation and notes), 13-29 (Chinese text),
(93) On the / dun tun. sec Haneda. pp. 235-239 and the facsimile reproduction edited by T Haneda in 1931; SAEKI, 1951, pp. 1 13, 161 247 (English translation and notes), and
30 70 f Chinese text).
(<>4) The Chin hiiian on to dung was published and studied by HANEDA, pp. 270 291 (see Moui F. p. 68). which was based on a copy of the text made by HANEDA and his friend
,,t the I I Shrug in's in 1928. Later, Haneda obtained the photograph of the manuscript,
which is partly published in Haneda. pi 6. According to the photograph. L.i Shrug to inscri-
bed a note at the end of the manuscript, which runs as follows: " In autumn of the year ptng- d, 'in (that IS, 1916), Mr Yu, who came back from Su-chou. presented this (manuscript) to me" This will suggest the Tun-huang provenance of the manuscript. The manuscript is catalogued in a list of Tun huang manuscripts in the collection Li Shcng-to. See Tun huang 1 dm /mug mu so yin, Peking, Commercial Press, 1962. p. 318
(95) Saeki, Shin-chi KirisutokyS no Kenkyti, p. *i.
— 67 —
blished his researches of these two documents on the basis of the photo- graphs he got from Kojima in 1945 *n a periodical named Toho-gaku, No. t (1951), PP- 1 — 1 1 ■ The article is reprinted in the Haneda Hakushi Shigaku Ronbunshu or the Collection of Dr. Haneda' s articles on History , II, Kyoto: Toyo-shi Kcnkyu-kai, 1958, pp. 292-307.
The Ta-ch'in ching-chiao ta -siting t'ung-chen kuei-fa tsan (PI. VII), which consists of t8 lines and 199 characters is divided into three parts: (l) the Hymn to the Great, Sacred and Merciful Father Allah, (2) Salutation to Yiihan-nan (John), as well as to three Ncstorian treaties, and (3) the colo- phon. The Hymn beging with the passage " Pious salutation to the Great, Sacred, anJ Merciful Father Allah, His figure is as brilliant as the sun and the moon; His virtuous influence is so high that it supercedes that of any other saints; His virtuous voice and its deep meaning is just like that of gold bell; and His religious benevolence widely covers hundred millions of soul ; etc. ”. 1 1 is an adoration of Allah's figure, virtues, eloquence, benevolence and salvation. On the basis of the statement that “ His figure is as brilliant as the sun and the moon,” Saeki identifies the hymn with that of the trans- figuration of Christ, which has been celebrated on August 6 by the Ncstorian Church. The Salutation to Yii-han-nan (John) and to the three treaties is, according to Saeki, a rubrick or liturgical direction to the recitation of the three treaties, which was to take place after the recitation of the Hymn.,9,', It goes as follows: " Pious salutation to Yii-han-nan, the King of Law (Pa- triarch): recite one by one the T'ien -pao-ts'ang dung ( Treaty on the Treasure House of Heaven), To- hut siting -tuang ching ( Treaty on the Sacred King David) and A-ssu {Jor *wan)-diu -h-lii (Jor *yung) thing ( Treaty on the F.vangehyon). The colophon runs as follows: “ So Yuan, believer ad the Ta-ch'in-ssu Temple in Sha-chou, collated and copied (this) to study the reading. Second day of the 5th month of the 8th year of K'ai-yuan (June 16, 720)". Unfortu- nately, the original manuscript was lost in China when Kojima was coming back to J apan and no one knows of its whereabout.
The Ta-ch'in ching-chiao hsuan -yuan chih -pen ching (PI. VIII) consists of 30 lines, of which the first and second lines are damaged and incomplete tand he last two lines are colophon. Saeki translates the title as the Ta- ch'in Luminous Religion Sutra on the Origin of Origins. However, the title literally means “ The Treaty to let one attain the root (of Christianity) through the preaching on the origin (ot the truth)"" AtTywayTITIs the final part of the treaty^ which deals with neither the Origin of Origins nor the origin of the truth, but the nature and work of tao (way) which probably means the Chri- stianity.
Haneda is so ingenious as to point out that some passages of this treaty are borrowed from the 62nd chapter of Lao-tzu and that the statement is a mixture of the main text and its commentaries. For example, in line 3-4,
(96) As for the opinion of SAEKI, see. Shut -chi Kinsntokyi no Kcnkyii, pp. *3 *io.
(97) Tihi-gaku, I, pp. 5 7 (= Haneda. pp. 298 301).
the main text says, “The niiao-tao or superior way would cnvolve the ao or gist of all things," to which commentaries follow in line 4-5 to the effect that " the tao means the superior principle which comes into, and goes out of, everything, as well as the fundamental nature of all beings: and the ao means deep and unseen (existence)." Then, the main text goes on to say (line 5) that " it (the miao tao ) is also the home of all souls," to which com- mentaries follows in line 5-6. It seems that by mistake of the copyist the commentaries arc confused with the main text. Haneda is quite right, though ) I myself am of the opinion that in some part what Haneda considers as com- mentaries could be looked upon as main text and vice versa. Anyway, in the light of Haneda’s opinion, the English translation published by Saeki should be revised in several important points. 1,81
The colophon which follows the text reads: “ On the 26th day of the 10th month of the 5th year of K'ai-yiian (December 7, 717), Chang Hsiang, ,w” believer, copied (this) at the Ta-ch’in ssu Temple In Sha-chou."
The original manuscript of the second treaty, which belongs to Kojima, is now kept in the safe of the Doshista University Library in Kyoto. The photograph which Haneda receiveH from Kojima in 194s and published in Tohogaku, Vol. 1 (March, 1915) shows that a slip of paper is attached at the right side (that is to say, at the beginning) of the manuscript, with inscript- ions of Li Sheng-to, which run as follows: " (Here is) Ching-chiao hsiian yuan chill phi ching , 30 lines, with the nien-hao (name of the year) of K’ai-yiian. This is very rare and precious. I have found this in what was mounted at the back of a (Buddhist?) treaty. Actually, this is well worth treasuring." According to this note, the manuscript was discovered by chance by Li Sheng to. However, it is very strange that Saeki says nothing about this, slip of paper and that any photograph of the manuscript, which he published, too, shows no trace of it I11 March 1963, by the courtesy of Professor Tomoo Uchida of the Doshisha University I studied the original manuscript which is deprived of the slip in question Saeki got the photograph at the end of 1943, that is to say, two years earlier than Haneda did. If the chronology given by Haneda and Saeki is right, the slip was attached to the manuscript some time between 1943 and 1945 and removed after 1945. As Li Sheng-to died in 1935, this will challenge the authenticity of inscriptions of the slip. In the meantime, Saeki also states that he got the photograph in i947.(iup| Then, the slip seems to have been removed some time between 1945 and 1947. If both Saeki and Haneda got the photographs in the same year (1945?), it is strange that one has got the slip and the other not. I have no means to identify the handwriting of Li Sheng to but Haneda confirms that the inscriptions of the slip is undoubtedly of his.
(98) Not only the translation, but also the transliteration of the text made by Saeki is not accurate in some places For the transliteration, see Hanf.DA, p. 296 (= TdliS-gaku, I. p. 4)
(99) Saeki misreads the name Chang Chii. Sec SAEKI, p. 99 (Chinese
(100) Saeki, p. 313 A.
text), and 313 D
— 69 —
In connection with these two documents, the most controversial points are the chronology and statement of their colophons. If they are reliable, they will disclose two which are quite new to the history of Nestorianism under the T'ang. The first is that the Nestorian temple had already been, called Ta -ch'in-ssu or Temple of (Ching-chiao which came from the country °0 Ta-ch’in as early as A.D. 717, while it is generally believed that the Nesto- rian temple had been called Po-ssu-ssu or Temple of (the religion which came from the country of) Po-ssu (Persia) until the 9th month of the 4th year of T'ien-pao (October 4-November i, 745) when it was renamed Ta- ch'in-ssu by an imperial edict. "0,» The second is that there existed a Nesto- rian temple in Sha -chou (Tun-huang) in the period of K’ai-yiian, while no other evidence is available to support it. Saeki has identified Tun-huang as a part of the metropolitan Bishopric on some basis unknown to us,,,0’> but, still, there is no other evidence to prove the existence of a Nestorian temple there But, before I deal with these questions, I shall describe the third document.
The third document which is entitled Ta-ch'in ching-chiao hsuan-yiian (chth?-) phi ching is an unfinished copy of manuscript, consisting of 27 lines which are followed by a blank of some length The first ten lines were pu- blished by Saeki, on the basis of a handwritten copy sent to him by Ch'cn Yuan then at the Catholic University in Peking, in the Keikyo no Kenkyu or A Critical Study on Nestorianism, Tokyo: The Academy of Oriental Culture, Tokyo Intitute, 1935, pp. 736-742 and an English translation in the Nesto- rian Documents and Relics in China, 1st de , 1937, pp 3 1 2—3 1 3 which is repro- duced in the 2nd ed. of 1951 ThTongTnal manuscript was also in the possestoh of Li Sheng-to, of which no one knows the present whereabout. Fortunately, a photograph of the whole of the manuscript is published in the second volume of Haneda Hakushi Shigahu Ronhunshii (PI. IX), though Haneda never published his study on it except a few casual mentions.001'
(101) T'ang hui-vao . Bk, 40 -See MOUI.E, p 65 and note (»«) In the quotation of T'ung-tien, Bk. 121 under Sa pao, the edict is dated the 7th month of the 4th year of T’icn-pao
(102) Map II on the Difusion of Nestorianism, which Saeki edited on the basis of 18 works of modern authors, including Assemam and Lc (^uien of the 18th century, to which I can not get access. (Saeki, KrikyA no Kenkyu, Tokyo 1935, and Saeki, 1937 [= 1951]) It is not clear if Thun-huang was a part of bishopric of Khumdam (Chang- an) under the I ang or of Qanbaliq (Peking) under the Yuan It is Marco Polo who records the existence of Nestorian population in Saciou (Sha chou) at the end of the 13th century. (BENEDETTO, Marco Polo: It Milione, p 44) And among the twenty- seven metropolitan sees in the list of Amrus (MOULF., p, 21), as well as is the History of laballalia III (MONTOOMF.R V. p. 43; Moui.e, p. 103), there is one which was situated in Tankut Tankut or Tangut was a general name of region which comprised Sha-chou. Su-chou, Kan-chou. Lmg-chou. Hsi-ning and (Ssu-ch'uan) so on in the 13 th and 14 th centuries. If Amrus and the History of Jaballaha III mean that a Nestorian church existed in Sha-chou. we can not conclude that there was one at the time of Tang.
(103) Haneda, pp. 242. 270, 306.
— 70
It is generally believed that the seeond and third manuseripts form respectively the beginning and ending parts of the same treaty and that the lacuna between these two is yet to l>e found. The similarity of their title will support this belief, but the difference of their literary style and construction will not. The third treaty is a sermon, but the second treaty can not be looked upon as a concluding part of the same sermon both in its style and content. However, even if they are the part of the same treaty, they can not be the part of the same manuscript. As I have already mentioned, the manuscript of the third treaty is unfinished and followed by some length of blank, each line usually containing 18 characters, while the manuscript of the second treaty is obviously written by a different hand and each line usually contains 17 characters. Moreover, the manuscript of the third treaty, in which the character r/iih is not tabooed, <,°4’ seems to have been copied in or after 806 when the taboo of this character was relieased. Chih is the personal name of emperor Kao-tsung (649 683) and it had been tabooed from 649, when Kao tsung took the throne, up to 806. 1,051 In the meantime, the colophon claims that the manuscript of the second document was copied in 717, no matter whether the colophon is authentic or not. So, from the point of view of the date, too, the second and the third document can not be a part of the same manuscript.
As I have mentioned above, the third treaty is a sermon delivered by Patriarch (/a trang) Ching-l'ung at the Ho-ming-kung "°?1 Palace or the Palace of Peace and Light at Na sa lo (Nazareth) of the country of Ta-ch'in to " the attendants gathered from seven parts (of the world) who consist of several Nestorian monks, kings of miraculous law, such as all kinds of spirit and heavenly being, countless number of enlightened people, and the people who believed in 365 kinds of heterodoxy." The sermon intends to explain " the two principles ( erh-thien , literary means: two views) in order to clarify decisively the real origin of (truth of) the teaching (of Christianity).” According to the sermon, these two principles are the hsiian-htta and thiang ti. The hsiian- him (literary, the supernatural creation) means the activities of creation ,,o0> and the ehiang-ti (literally: the carpenter emperor or the greatest
(104) SAEKI, p. wo (Chinese text) docs not transliterate the character faithfully
(105) Ch'Pn Yuan, Shih-hui rhu-ti, cd. 1058. pp. 76-77.
(106) The same name appears in the 7 sun thing (MOUI.K. p. 55) As to its identifica- tion, see Saiki, KeikyS no Kenkyii, p 618 and 740 741, and Saeki, 1951, pp 273, 312, 313D. Saeki identifies ( hing t’ling of the Tsung-thing with Mar Sergis and that of the Hsuan-yuan ( Chili 1 ) phi thing with the Messiah or the Catholicos.
(107) In the Nestorian Inscription, the Heavenly Palace is named just Ming-kung or the Palace of l ight (Saf.ki, 1951. p. 55; MoULE, p. 37).
(108) The hsiiitn-hnti is an abridged expression of /rung hsuan-shu erh /sao-hua of the Nestorian Inscription, which means " to hold the very key of the existence and create (everything)." Moule translates the passage into " holds the mysterious source of life and creates" (MOUJ.E, p. 35) and Saeki “ holding the Secret Source of Origin" (SAEKI, 1951, P S3)-
— 71
carpenter) means the crcatorship."0,) However, it is not easy to understand the meaning of the sermon because of its phraseology which is extremely difficult and complicated. Usually, in the writings of Buddhism, this kind of sermon is conclued by saying that the attendants greatly enjoyed the sermon which they understood completely and retired. But, the second document which is generally believed to be final portion of the same treaty says nothing to this effect. This is one of the reasons why I can follow blindly the general opinion to see the second and third document as a part of the same treaty.
Now, I would like to discuss the date and authenticity of these three documents. First of all, from the point of view of the name Ta-ch‘in and Ching-chiao, Chinese Nestorian documents now extant are divided into three groups. To the first group belong the Hsii-ting nii-shi-so thing ( Trtaty on Jesus the Messiah) and I-sheit lun ( Distourse on the Monotheism), in which the mother country of Christianity is called Fu-lin (From) and the name of Ta-ch’in and Ching-chiao never appears. The H sit- ting nti-shih-so thing states that the Christ was born in Wu-U-shih-lien (Jerusalem) of Fu-lin and the / shen- lun calls the region where the Christianity was worshipped FuJin. The I she Inn was compiled in or around 64 1,"101 which will also indicate the date of compilation of the Hsii-ting mi-shih-so thing which is closely related to the I-shen-lun in phraseology and terminology. To the second group belongs the Chih-hsitan an-Io thing ( Treaty on the True Happiness ), in which the name Ta-ch'in does not appear but the Ncstorianism is called Ching-chiao. To the third group belong the Ta-th'in sail wei meng-tu tsan ( Gloria in Extelsis Deo), as well as the three documents I am dealing herewith In this group of treaties the Nestorianism is called Ta-th'in thing-thiao or (’hing - chiao (Nestorianism) of the country of Ta-ch'in. So, in these documents the designation for the Nestorianism changed from the religion of Fulin into that of Ta-ch’in.
Ta-ch’in had been the Chinese designation of the Mediterranean Orient or what is now Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan, from the first or second century A. D. 1,1,1 down to the middle of the fifth century when it was replaced
(109) The word rhiang means carpenter, but in the Nestorian Inscription the word is used a combined form such as thtang th'eng or ehiang-hua, which means " to perfect " and " to create " respectively. So, thiang h is used for the meaning of " the great creator " or " the crcatorship ”.
(110) In the I shin tun, it is stated that only 641 years have passed since the appea- rance of the Messiah (Saeki, 19s 1, p. 226, 66 [Chinese text)). See Haneda's Introduction to the facsimile reproduction of the I-shen tun, p. 3.
(111) It was in A.n. 97 that Pan Ch'ao sent his official Kan Ying to Ta-ch'in (t/ou- Han shu, Bk. 88 under An-hsi or I’arthia. See F IllRTH, China and thr Roman Orient, Shan- ghai and Hongkong, 1885, p. 98) This is the first appearance of the name Ta-ch’in. Howe- ver, in the preface to Bk 88. it is stated that Pan Ch'ao sent Ins official Kan Ying not to Ta- ch'in but to Hai hsi or the region to the west of the sea. So, Ta-ch’in under A.D. 97 may be a later replacement for Hai-hsi In the meantime. Chang Hi'-ng writes in his Tung thing fu or the Poem in praise of Lo-yang that the benevolence of the emperor covers the world as
*11
— 7* —
by Fu-lan nr Fu-lin, which is for From or Romc.,,,,, According to the Nesto- rian Inscription, the Nestorian missionaries, who became acquainted with Chinese historical records, realized that Ta-ch'in had been looked upon as a sort of Utopian country by the Chinese and that it had been the civilized region where the people had worshipped the Christianity.,,,,, In this way, the Inscriptions writes as if the Nestorianism was known as the religion of Ta ch'in from 635 when it was introduced by A-lo-pen into China But this is not the truth.
According to the chronicles of T'ang, the king of Fu-lin sent seven embassies to China in 643, 667, 701, 711, 719 (twice in the 1st and 4th month) and 742.",<' Among others, in 643 a king named Po-to-li, that is to say, Patriarch, sent an embassy and both in 719 (the 4th month) and in 742 came " monks of great virtue " as the representatives of the king of Fu-lin This means that Fu-lin was another nam • of the Nestorian Church, its king must have been the Catholicos in Ctcsiphon; and the Nestorian mission had been called the mission from Fu-lin up to 742 On the other hand, the Nestorian mission had also been called the mission from Persia. For instance, A-lo-pcn is recorded as a monk of Persia and another Nestorian missionary named Chi lieh (Gabriel), who came to China for the first time in 714 or earlier than that and for the second time in 732, is also called a monk of Persia. '"s' These facts endorse the accuracy of the statement of the edict of 745 to the effect that the Nestorianism had been believed to have originated in Persia and
far as Ta ch’in in the west (IVen-hsuan, Bk. 3, tol. i8r. Taipei, 1055. Reprint of edition of 1811). As Chang Heng lived from A. D. 78 to 1 39 (Chiang LlANG-FU and T'ao Ch'iu-ying, fj tai jtn ivu nien H fin ch'uan tsung-piao, Peking, Chung-hua shu-chii, 1959, P- 18). this will mean that the name Ta-ch’in had already Been in use in his time
(112) Fu Ian appears in the Annalcs of Wii ihu, under 456, 465 and 467 (P. PELUOT, Sur 1' origin e du now Foil fin, • JA *, 1914, p 498) Fu lin appears for the first time in the Liang r/ii/i -hung t'u which was compiled between 526 and 539 («Toh6gaku », XXVI. 1963, pp. 31 46, especially p 44. Also rrfer to B. LAUFER in * TP ». XVI, 191 5, p. 203 note (5) and 77/e Diamond a Chinese and Ifellenislir Folklore, Chicago, iqi 5, pp. 6 ff).
(t 13) Mot'I.E, p. 40; SAEKI. pp. 58-59.
(114) The embassies in 643, 667, 701 and 719 are recorded in the Chiu T'ang-shu Bk. 198 under Fu-lin: the embassies in 711 and 742 in the Ts'e-fu yuan-kuei, Bks. 970 and 971 Hie embassy in the first month of 719 was the big chief of Tukharestan, who came as the representative of the king of Fu lin-Thismeans that (the Nestorian church in) TukhA- rcstan was under the control of the king of Fu-lin. (The T'ang-hui-yao, Bk 90, under Fu-lin, dales the embassy of Tukharestan not the 7th year of K'ai-yuan (719) but the loth (722). but 10 is a scribal error for 7 in Chinese character. The T'ang-shu, Bk. 221b, Ts'e-fu yuan- kuei, Bk. 971 and the (Chiu ) Tang ihu quoted in T'ai-ping huan-yu chi, Bk. 975 record it as in 719. That no further embassies from Fulin are recorded in the annales of T'ang may be because of the establishment of the Abbasid Caliphate in Bagdad in 750, which might forbid the Nestorian catholicos to intercourse with China as an independent sovereign. On this point, see K Siiiratori, A New Attempt at the Solution of the Fu-lin Problem, «Memoirs of the Research Department of the Tdyo Bunko*, 19, 1956, p. 329.
(115) A In pen is recorded as a monk from Persia in an imperial edict of 638 ( T'ang - hui yao, Bk 49). See MOULE, p. 65; Saeki, p. 456 and so was Chi-lieh (Gabriel) ( Ts'e-fu yiiankuei, Bks 546 and 971) (KUWABARA, pp. 6-7; MOULE, pp. 65-66; SAEKI, pp 459-462).
— 73 —
called the religion of Persia up to that time The Nestorian Inscription describes A-lo-pcn and Chi-lieh (Gabriel) as monk of Ta-ch'in, but, it is obviously the later correction. The Nestorian Inscription also states that a monk of great virtue, named Chieh-ho (George), came from Ta-ch'in in 744 However, this must also be the writer's correction just like the case of A-lo-pen and Chi-lieh (Gabriel). So it was in 745 that the name Ta-ch'in was first used as the designation of the mother country of Christianity.
As to the name Ching-chiao, it does not appear either in the Hsii-ting mi-shih-so ching or in the I-shen-lun, both compiled around 641 The most authentic record in which the name appears is the Nestorian Inscription of 781 and it explains that the Nestorianism was named Ching-chiao or brilliant teaching because of its merits and use which are so manifest and splendid.'"''1 As is well known, the Nestorian Inscription was written by Ching-ching who is also recorded as the compiler of thirty-five Chinese Nestorian treaties, catalogued in the Tsun-ching or Treaty of Veneration}"1' The Chih-hsiian an-lo ching is one of these thirty-five treaties. The identity of the authorship of the Nestorian Inscription and Chih-hsiian an-lo ching is justified by the similarity of their phraseology and terminology, as well as of the Chinese transcription of the word: messiah ( mi shih-ho). Seeing that the Nestorian Inscription uses the combined name Ta-ch'in ching-chiao, while the Chih -hsiian an-lo ching only the single name Ching-chiao, it may mean that the later was written earlier than the former. Anyway, the appear- ance of the name Ching-chiao was some time between 641 and 781. And if we take into our consideration that the name Ta-ch'in was applied to the homeland of Christianity in 745, the appearance of combined name Ta-ch’in ching-chiao must have been after 745.
The titles of the three documents I am dealing herewith all start with Ta-ch'in ching-chiao, which makes us presume that they are of the period later than 745. And their style, phraseology and terminology which is so closely related to that of the Nestorian Inscription, will mean that they were written by the same author or by authors closely connected with each other According to the catalogue in Tsun-ching or Treaty of Veneration, not only the Hsiian-yiian chih-peng ching, but also the T'ung-chen ching is attributed to the compilation of Ching-ching The Hsiian-yiian- chili - pen ching is obviously the same as the Ta-ch'in ching-chiao hsiian-yiian chih-pen ching for the reason of the similarity of the name and T'ung-chen ching may be the same as the Ta -ch'in ching-chiao ta-shfng t'ung-chen kuei-fa tsan, just like the Ta-ch'in ching-chiao san-wei meng-tu /sail seems to be indentical with the San-wei-tsan ching of the catalogue. '"Bl So, even if Ching-ching did not compile all these things by himself, it can not be denied
(116) Moui-e, p 38; Saeki, p. 56.
(117) MOULE, p. 55; SAFKI, pp 255-275, 274-257 Among these thirty-five, one is not Nestorian but Manirhean. Sec Ed. Chavannf.S and P. Pei.LIOT, Un trait / manichten retrouvf en Chine, * JA », 1913, pp 133-161
(118) Saeki, p, 256; Haneda, p. 296.
— 74 —
that these were written by some author or authors closely related to Ching ching In other words, these three documents may be looked upon as the compilation of the latter half of the eighth century.
Now, the colophon to the first document claims that the manuscript was copied on the second day of the fifth month of the eighth year of K’ai- yiian (June 16, 720) by So Yuan,1"*1 believer at the Ta-ch’in-ssu Temple in Sha-chou. In the manuscript, the characters min (lines 7 and 8) and chih (line 7) are tabooed, the former being the name of T'ai-tsung and the latter that of Kao tsung. As I have already mentioned, the character thih had been tabooed from 640 to 806, while the character min from 649 up to the end of the T'ang dynasty (qo7).,,,'>i In the meantime, character sung (line 13) which is the personal name of emperor Shun (805) is not tabooed. As emperor Shun had been the crown prince form the end of 779 to 805, the taboo of the character should have started in 779. So, taking all these into our consider- ation, the manuscript is considered to have been copied between 649 and 779. This does not contradict the date of the colophon However, the usage of the names of Ta ch'in ching-chiao and Ta-ch'in-ssu Temple is an ana- chronism unless we admit that these names had been already in use in 720 in the region of Shachou or Tun huang.
The same thing may be said about the colophon to the second document. It says that the manuscript was copied by Chang Hsiang, believer, at the Tai ch'in ssu Temple in Sha-chou, on the 26th day of the tenth month of the fifth year of K'ai-yiian (December 7, 717). And no other evidence is avail- able to support the existence of the name Tai-ch'in ching-chiao and Tai- ch’in ssu Temple in Tun-huang in 717.
From the textual point of view, there arc four characters in the manu- script, which are identical with the names of one emperor and three members of the imperial family. These characters arc ping (lines 5 and 10) which is the name of the father of the first emperor Kao-tsu (618-626); eh' eng (line 5) which is a part of the name ( ('hirn eh' eng') of the crown prince of emperor Kao tsu; hrng (line 15) which the personal name of the 12th emperor Mu- tsung (820 824); and hung (line 17) which is the name of the crown prince of Kao tsung (649-683). None of these characters are tabooed in the manu- script.
As the personal name of emperor was used to be tabooed during his own reign, as well as during the reign of seven emperors who followed him, the character hrng should have been tabooed from 820, when Mu tsung took the throne, to 888, when the taboo was to be released by emperor Chao- tsung's enthronement.
(1 in) So is one of the commonest names which appear m the Tun-huang manuscripts. See 1 . tints, Descriptive Catalogue of the Chinese Manuscripts from Tun huang in the ftritish Museum. London, 1957. p. 2951* •
(120) The character min is tabooed in (lie Chinese Classics inscribed on stones in 837, tint I ran not produce an inscription or writing in which the character is tabooed after 837. However, theoretically it should have been tabooed up to 907, the end of the T'ang Dynasty.
— 75 —
As for the characters eh' eng and hung, no evidence is available to prove that they were tabooed under the reign of Hsiian-tsung (712-756) or not. However, there is a strong reason to believe that the character hung ought to have been tabooed in that period. According to the biography of Prince Hung, the fifth son of emperor Kao- tsung, he was installed as Crown Prince in 656 and died a premature death in 657 at the age of twenty four. He was very much lamented by his father emperor who entitled him Hsiao-ching huang-ti or the Emperor of Filiality and Respect and held his funeral according to the ceremony for a deceased emperor. He was enshrined in T'ai-miao or the Imperial Mausoleum and had been worshipped as the late emperor during the reign of Ching-tsung (683-710) and Jui-tsung (710-712). It was in 718 that he was removed from the Imperial Mausoleum Since then he was dealt with as a late crown prince. ",l’ Under the circumstances, it is quite likely that his personal name had been tabooed from 656 up to 718.
As to the character ping, it was usually replaced by the character thing. Among the T'ang inscriptions which are edited and published in the Chin-shih ts'ui-pien of Wang Ch'ang and its Supplementary Volume,'"" there arc sixteen inscriptions in which the character ping is or is to be used Among these sixteen, four inscriptions do not taboo the character, while the rest replace it with the character thing (of Ching chiao) The sixteen inscriptions cover the period from 689 to 780 and the four are of 736, 643, and 776. In the inscription of 743, both characters ping and thing are used, if the edition is reliable. And I can add another example in an inscription of 789, in which ping is replaced by thing.'"" Seeing that the character ping is never tabooed in the Chinese classics inscribed on stones by the Imperial order in 837, the taboo had already been released by that time Actually, in the manuscript of the second document, ping is a scribal error of po which means " hundred " and it reads pmg-ling or brilliant souls instead of po-lmg or hundred souls. This error is repeated twice. As the tabooing of character or characters iden- tical with the name of emperor or crown prince or important imperial family started in the time of Kao-tsung (649-683), the character ping which is a part of the personal name of Kao-tsung's great-grand father, should have been tabooed from the middle of the seventh century up to some time bet- ween 789 and 837. However, as the inscriptions show, the character was sometimes tabooed and sometimes not.
In this way, from the point of view of the period when the characters heng, hung and ping had been tabooed, we may fix the date of the manuscript of the second document either as between 718 and 820, if we neglect the taboo of the character ping, or as after 888, if we apply strictly the rule of tabooing to the character ping. Both of these dates can not be reconciled with the
(121) Chiu-T' ang-shu , Bk. 86 (pp. 766-767 of the Po-na pen in one volume).
(122) The lithographic edition of 1919.
(123) A rubbing of the funeral inscription of queen Cheng, wife of Li Ch’i entitled King S9fl-ts'ao, in the collection of the Toyd Bunko (the Oriental Library).
— 76 —
chronology of the colophon which claims that the manuscript was copied December 7, 717.
Moreover, here is another point which will make the date of the colophon more disputable. If the Ta-ch'in ching-chiao hsiian-yiian chih-pbi dung withe colophon of 717 and the Ta-ch'in ching-chiao ta-sheng t'ung-chcn knri fa tsan with the colophon of 720 were compiled by Ching-ching as is stated in the postscript to the catalogue of Tsun-ching,u,,) and if this Ching- ching was the same person as Ching citing who wrote the Ncstorian Inscript- ion in 781, it will mean that he wrote the Ncstorian Inscription at the age of nearly ninety, if we presume that he wrote the above two treaties at the age of twenty-five Ching-ching also translated a Sanskrit text of Lu -po-lo-mi ching (S a t pa ra m i ta) i n to Ch i nese in collaboration with Pan-la-jo (Prajna) in the second year of Cheng-yiian (786) or later than that,,,’,' which may mean that he was engaged in the translation work at the age of ninctyfour or so. As Hane- da has already pointed out,,,,<', it will be not impossible, but quite unlikely.
In short, the date of the colophons of the two documents can not be justified at the present stage of our knowledge The reasons are as follows: (1) There is no other evidence to prove that the Nestorianism was known as the religion of Ta-ch’in as early as 717 or 720; (2) No other evidence, too, to prove the existence of Ta-ch’in-ssu Temple in Sha-chou or Tun- huang at that period; (3) the anachronism of the date of the colophon of the second document (717) in the light of the rule of tabooing of some cha- racters in the texts; and (4) the close relationship in phraseology and termi- nology of these documents with that of the Ncstorian Inscription of 781 will indicate that they were written around the same period as the Ncstorian In- scription, even if they were not written by the same author.
However, apart from the colophon, we can not deny the genuine Nesto- rian nature of these documents. The very confusing style of the second document and the very difficult construction of the third one are rather exceptional among the Chinese Ncstorian documents hitherto known, which are much less difficult to understand Still, it is of no doubt that both of them and Ncstorian
(124) The postscript to the Tsun-ehing. which ascribes to Ching-ching the compi- lation of thirty-five treaties, is taken as authentic by Moulf. (p. S7. note (M)) though he consi- dered that it was written by a different hand from that of the Gloria in Exrclsis Deo and the list of persons and books On the other hand, SAF.KI (p. 279 and 249) rejects the view ofMoule to insist on the identity of the hand and tries to establish that the manuscript including the postscript was copied in a period later than the T'ang for the reason that the name T’ang is written in the postscript just as T'ang and not as the Great T'nng. Hankda ipp. 302 -303) agrees with Saeki's opinion with some reservation. 1 myself am of the opinion that there are many examples of inscriptions of T’ang, in which the Tang is written just T'ang and not the Great T’atig, and so Saeki’s criticism does not make much sense There is no obstacle to look upon both the text and postscript as written at the end of the T'ang period by the same hand.
(125) MotiLE, pp. 67-60; SAEKI, 1951, pp. 466-470.
(126) Haneda, p. 302.
— 77 —
Then howr wc can reconcile the texts of genuine nature with the colophons of dubious authenticity? One plausible explanation is that the colophons were intentionally antedated for such a purpose as to date back the (pre- tended?) origin of the Ta-ch'in-ssu Temple in Sha-chou as early as the period of K'ai-yiian. According to the Nestorian Inscription, the Nestorianism in China was declining both in Lo-yang and in Chang-an at the end of the era Sheng-li (698-700) and at the beginning of the era Hsicn-t’ien (712 713), that is to say, at the end of the seventh century and at the beginning of the eighth, that is to say, just before the period of K'ai -yiian. This was because of severe criticism against the Nestorianism from the side of Buddists and Taoists, who were both patronized by the empress Wu (684-705). To meet the situation, the Head-Priest (or Archdeacon) Lo-han (Abraham) and the monk of great virtue (or Bishop) Chi-lieh (Gabriel) were sent to China Gabriel was already in China in 714 Their efforts resulted in the re-enforcement and revival of Nestorianism which became once more prosperous in the period of K'ai-yiian under the patronage of emperor Hsiian-tsung In this sense, in the history of Nestorianism in China, the period of K’ai-yiian was memora- ble as an epoch of revival. I wonder if the writers of the colophons tried to emphasize the importance of the K’ai-yiian period, and if it was the reason why the colophons were dated fifth (717) and eighth (720) years of K'ai yuan respectively. However, this is just a speculation. No final solution may be possible until new evidence has been produced, which will either completely deny the authenticity of the colophons or fully justify it
OBER DIE NESTOR IAN ISCHEN GRABINSCHRIFTEN IN DER INNERN MONGOLEI UND IN SODCHINA
Shichiro Murayama, Tokyo
Desmond Martin hat in Monunitnta Serica, Journal of Oriental Studies of the Catholic University of Peking, Vol III, Fasc. 1, 1938, einen sehr wich- tigen Aufsatz « Preliminary report on Nestorian remains north of Kuci- Hua, Suiyuan » veroffentlicht. In diesem Aufsatz sind ein Grabstein mit ziemlich gut crhaltcnen Inscrift in syrischer Schrift, der in der Nahe von Derriseng Khutuk gefunden wurdc, und sieben Grabstcine, die in Wang -Mu gefunden wurden, bcschriebcn. Auf dem ersten, dritten, vierten sechsten und siebenten dicser sieben Grabsteinc sind Inschriften in syrischer Schrift geschrieben. Von dicsen fiinf ist nur die erste gut erhalten und lesbar. D. Martin zeigt in seinem Aufsatz die Photographic dicser Inscrift. Fn Mukhor Soborghan hat cr auch einen Grabstein gefunden, der aber keine Inschrift enthalt.
Der bekanntc japanische Forschcr des Nestorianismus in China, Y. Saeki, hat in seinem Aufsatz « Ober die nestorianische Ruinc in der Nahe von Pailing
CEUVRES POSTHUMES DE PAUL PELLIOT
RECHERCHES SUR LES
D’ASIE CENTRALE ET D’EXTREME-ORIENT
CHRETIENS
ed. J. Dauvillier & L. Hambis
En marge de Jean du Plan Carpin
II
Guillaume de Rubrouck
III
Mar Ya(h)bhallaha, Rabban Sauma et les princes Ongiit chretiens
PARIS
IMPRIMERIE NATIONALE
MAR YA(H)BhALLAHA, RABBAN SAUMA ET LES PRINCES ONGUT CHRETIENS
[James A. Montgomery, The History of Yaballaha III, Nestorian Patriarch, and of his vicar Bar Sauma, Mongol ambassador to the Frankish Courts at the end of the thirteenth Century, translated from the Syriac and annotated, New York, Columbia University Press, 1927, in-8°, 4 f. n. ch. + 82 pages; f 2.00. Fait partie des Records of civilization, Sources and Studies, 6dit6s sous la direction du Prof. Austin P. Evans.
Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, The monks of Kdblai Khan Emperor of China or the History of the life and travels of Rabban $dwmd, envoy and plenipotentiary of the Mongol Khdns to the Kings of Europe, and Markos who as Mar Yahbhalldhd III became Patriarch of the Nestorian Church in Asia, translated from the Syriac, Londres, The religious tract Society, [1928,] in-8°, xvi + 335 pages, avec 16 planches; 12 sh. 6 d.]
Les premieres informations sur 1 'Histoire de Mar Ya(h)bhalld,hd et de Rabhan $&umd parurent en 1885 a Ourmiah et aux £tats-Unis, mais l’ensembie du texte ne devint accessible que par l’6dition complete du texte syriaque publi6e par le P. Bedjan, Histoire de Mar Jabalaha patriarche et de Rabban Qauma, Paris, 1888, puis par la traduction frangaise de l’abb6 Chabot parue dans les t. I et II de la Revue de l’ Orient latin en 1893-1894; le tirage*a part, en volume, porte la date de 1895. Vers la fin de 1895, le P. Bedjan publiait une deuxieme Edition syriaque qui pr&entait plusieurs lemons am61ior6es, Histoire de Mar Jabalaha, de troifi autres patriarches, d’un prStre et de deux laics nestoriens, Paris-Leipzig, 1895. L’abb6 Chabot en prit occasion pour faire paraltre dans le t. IV de la Revue de TOrient latin un article additionnel de 8 pages qui utilise d’ailleurs surtout des documents d’autre origine. Avant et apr&s le travail de Chabot, des notices ont 6t6 consacr6es a 1’ouvrage par divers orientalistes, mais la traduction de l’abb6 Chabot 6tait devenue introuvable et d’ailleurs la plupart des orientalistes de langue unglaise ignoraient mSme qu’elle exist&t. On a done
240
RECHERCHES SUR LES CHRETIENS D’ASIE CENTRALE ET D’EXTr£mE-ORIENT
salu4 avec joie I’apparition successive de deux traductions nouvelles fondles sur la deuxieme Edi- tion du P. Bedjan et dues I’une a un professeur americain, I’autre a un orientaliste anglais 0).
A l’dpreuve, notre joie se tempere de regrets. Le travail de M. Montgomery est fait s&ieusement, mais ne porte que sur une moitie du texte original, et il y a par ailleurs bien des faiblesses dans l’annotation. Quant a 1’ouvrage de Sir W. Budge, il est complet, mais singulierement hatif et fautif. De tout cela, nous n’aurons que trop de preu\»s a citer au cours de cet article. Ces deux publications n’en donnent pas moins une bonne occasion de « faire le point » de ce que nous savons, et d’ailleurs 1’une et I’autre, sans remplacer 1’ouvrage de 1’abbe Chabot, ne laissent pas de fournir parfoi9 un contrdle utile pour sa version ou pour ses notes (2).
On connait le thdme gdndral du livre : deux chretiens nestoriens nds dans la premiere moitie du xme sidcle, 1’un a Pekin, 1’autre pas tres loin de Pekin decident de se rendre en Mdsopotamie et aux Lieux Saints; retenus par les circonstances en Mdsopotamie, 1’un d’eux a I’invraisemblable fortune d’etre du patriarche des Nestoriens sous le nom de Ya(h)bhallaha III <3); quant asoncompa- gnon, le roi mongol de Perse 1’envoie en mission a Byzance, a Rome, a Paris, en Gascogne; le9 voyages
(1) MM. Montgomery et Budge sont bien informds de l’histoire meme du texte, mais ni Pun ni 1’autre n’ont connu l’exi9tence des deux articles suppld- mentaires publids en 1896-1897 par Chabot (cela rdsulte de la p. 6 de Sir W. Budge et de la fagon dont M. Montgomery parle de la biographie due k $liba et de I’article de Siouffi d la p. 20, n. 8). M. Moule a rendu compte du livre de M. Mont- gomery dans J.R.A.S., 1928, 448-453.
(,) Aucune des traductions ne donne les noms propres en dcriture syriaque; toutefois les tran- scriptions de Sir W. Budge sont plus rigoureuses que celle9 dont Chabot avait du se contenter par insuffisance de ressources typographiques.
(,) [Ya(h)bhalldhd signifie « Dieu a donnd » et a dtd frdquemment employd comme nom d’homme chez les Nestoriens — il Test encore de nos jours; il correspond k Deusdedit dans 1’Occident latin, nom qui a dtd illustrd au xie sidcle par le cardinal Deusdedit, qui vdcut auprds de Grdgoire VII et d’Urbain II et dcrivit une collection canonique pour promouvoir la rdforme grdgorienne; cf. P. Foumier et G. Le Bras, Histoire des collections canoniques en Occident, t. II, Paris, 1932, p. 37-53. Dans la langue romane, Deusdedit a donnd au Moyen Age les formes Dausdet, Dauzddi [Comptes consu- lates d’Albi), puis Daudd en Daiifahind et Daudet en Languedoc et en Provence; A. Dauzat, Die- tionnaire etymologique des noma Ae famille et prinoms de France, Paris, 1951, pi 177. On peut rapprocher de ce nom Deodatus^iLDieudonnd, qui a subsistd comme prdnom francaife; mais ce der- nier est au passif, alors que Ya(jh)bhallahd a un sens actif qui s’accorde avec les tendances des
langues sdmitiques. Le he qui appartient a la racine du mot ya(h)bh, « a donnd », ne se prononce pas. En syriaque classique, le lamadh du terme ’Allahd, « Dieu » est redoubld, alors qu’il a cessd de 1’dtre dans la prononciation des Chalddens actuels. A la fin du xme sidcle, dans la prononciation orien- tale, le beth aspird avait ddjd la valeur du w ( = ou consonne) qu’il a de nos jours. C’est ce dont tdmoi- gnent les Registres des Papes, qui transcrivent Yaulaha; Bullarium franciscanum, t. IV, p. 10, n. 10. De mdme, dans les inscriptions du Semirdd'd, §eltbha, « la croix », employd comme nom de per- sonne, est dcrit $ellwa avec un waw au beu du bet h — ce qui atteste que cette prononciation dtait dgalement rdpandue en Asie centrale. Nous gardons la transcription classique Ya(h)bhallaha. La transcription phondtique serait Yawallahd (les deux demiers o ont le mdme timbre obtus) ou Yawalaha ; cette demidre correspond k la pro- nonciation actuelle des Assyriens du Kurdistan et des Chalddens de la Mdsopotamie.] (J. D.)
Sur la destinde de Marqus, qui fut saerd en 1280 par le patriarche Denbft mdtropolite de Catai et d’Ong, e’est-d-dire de la Chine du Nord et des Ongiit, sous le nom de Ya(h)bhaUdhd, ne put gagner sa lointaine province et fut dlu en 1281 « catholicos patriarche de 1’Orient » (tel est le titre que portait celui que les Byzantins et les Jacobites qualifiaient de patriarche des Nestoriens — alors que ses fiddles se disaient seulement « chrdtiens », krlspdnd ou « Syriens », Suraye), E. Tisserant, Nestorienne (VEglise), Dictionnaire de Theologie catholique, t. XI, 1931, col. 211-224. On y trouvera, outre I’histoire du patriarcat de Ya(h)bhalldh4 III, le
241
mAr ya(h)bhallAha, rabban §Auma et LES PRINCES ONGUT CHRETIENS
de Rabban §auma sont une magnifique contrepartie de ceux de son contemporain Marco Polo. Sans vouloir etudier ici toutes les questions que souleve le bvre, ce qui equivaudrait a en donner une nouvelle edition, je voudrais tenter de preciser quelques points speciaux, a savoir i’origine de nos deux moines, la date de leur voyage de Chine en Mesopotamia 'et les Stapes de leur itin&raire et reprendre ainsi 1’histoire des Ongiit chretiens. j ; i
Au cours de cette enquete, nous devrons nous rappeler que, selon toute vraisemblance, le texte qui nous est parvenu n’est pas, pour la partie qui nbus occupe, la redaction originale. Ce texte actuel peut Itre divis^ en trois parties : la premiere raconte la jeunesse des deux moines, leur voyage de Chine en Mesopotamie et 1’election de Mar Ya(h)bhallaha III; la deuxieme est le r6cit du voyage accompli en Europe par Rabban §auma; la troisieme va du retour de Rabban §auma a la mort de Mar Ya(h)bhallaha III. Or, a la fin de ce que j’appelle la seconde partie, i’auteur de la pr&ente compilation dit (Bedjan, p. 86, trad. Chabot, p. 93-94) : « Comme nous ne nous sommes pas propose de raconter ou de transcrire tout ce que Rabban $auma a fait ou a vu, nous avons omis beaucoup de ce qu’il avait 4crit lui-meme en persan <D; et parmi les choses que nous avons cities ici, les unes sont plus abr^gees, les autres moins, selon que les circonstances 1’exigeaient. » Ainsi, et tout le monde est d’accord la-dessus, le recit syriaque du voyage de Rabban §auma en Europe est abr6g6 d’un recit plus considerable que Rabban §auma lui-meme avait 6crit en persan. Mais en est-il de m&me pour la premiere partie? Si nous nous rappelons que celle-ci porte egalement sur des faits que Rabban
r6cit de la mission de Rabban §aumd en Occident, ou il regut a Rome la communion de la main de Nicolas IV et rencontra a Paris le roi de France Philippe le Bel et en Gascogne le roi d’Angleterre Edouard Ier. Ya(h)bhallahi III conclut 1’union avec l’Eglise romaine, ce dont temoigne sa corres- pondance avec Nicolas IV et Benoit XI, comme l’a 6tabli Son Eminence le cardinal Tisserant. C’est bien vainement qu’A. R. Vine, The Nestorian Churches, Londres, 1937, p. 152-153, a tent6 de contester ce point. Du reste, ce patriarche ne par- tageait nullement les doctrines nestoriennes et d6fendit les missionnaires latins qui combattaient les theories de Nestorius, comme en t6moigne Ricoldo de Monte Croce.
M. Jean Richard montre que c’est a tort que Chabot a contest^ l’exactitude des lettres de Nico- las IV qui reconnaissaient l’autorit6 du patriarche sur tous les chretiens orientaux. II pense qu’il a r6ellement exist6 deux bulles qui confirmaient express6ment Ya(h)bballaM III dans sa dignity de patriarche, comme Rabban Saumd dans celle de « visiteur », sd'drd. Elies avaient accompagn6 1’envoi de la mitre et de 1’anneau que le pape avait lui-meme port6s et qu’il destinait au catho- licos — presents qui signifient clairement la recon- naissance de la juridiction. Ce n’est pas le seul cas oil on avait omis de transcrire les bulles sur les
registres de chancellerie. Le Souverain Pontife avait en effet proc6d6 de mSme vis-i-vis du catho- licos de l’Arm6nie, comme du patriarche des Maro nites ; J. Richard, La mission en Europe de Rabban $aumd et T union des Eglises, Accademia nazio- nale del Lincei, XII convegno « Volta » promosso dalla Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filo~ logiche, Rome, 1957, p. 162-167; cf. aussi Les missions chez les Mongols aux XIII* et XIV * siecles, dans Histoire universelle des missions catholiques, t. I, Paris, 1956, p. 192-193.
C’est a 1’instigation de Ya(h)bhaUahi III que fut realisee la codification du droit de 1’Egbse cbal- deenne par le grand canoniste 'Abhdls6' bar Berikh&, qui a redig6 son Epitome des canons synodaux, puis Les rigles des jugements eccle • siastiques. Ya(h)bhaUaM mourut k Maragha, oil il faisait sa residence habit uelle, le 15 novembre 1317.“ Rabban §4uml 1’avait pr6c6d6 dans la tombe le 10 janvier 1294.] (J. D.)
(1) Sir W. Budge traduit aussi (p. 197) par « we have abridged very much », et d&s 1889 Rubens Duval ( J.A. , 1889, I, 323) comprenait de meme, mais M. Montgomery (p. 73) a « we have somewhat abbreviated »; bien que la nuance soit differente, ce qui nous importe surtout ici est le fait m£me de I’abr6g6.
242
RECHERCHES SUR LES CHRETIENS D’ASIE CENTRALE ET D’EXTRfiME-ORIENT
$&uma ou Mar Ya(h)bhallah£l pouvaient 9euls conter, et que, de 9on propre aveu, Mar Ya(h)bhailaha lgnorait lui-mSme le syriaque, nous conclurons, je crois, que la remarque de I’abr^viateur syriaque vaut pour toute la portion de YHistoire qui precede cette remarque, c’est-a-dire pour la p4riode du s^jour de9 deux moines dans la Chine du Nord et celle de leur voyage de Chine en Mdsopotamie, tout comme pour celle du voyage de Rabbao $aum;i seul en Europe <D. On verra que l’existence d’un original persan pour toute cette premifere partie jouera un role dans notre discussion.
La premiere question qui se pose est de savoir qui 4taient ces chrdtiens n6s dans la Chine du Nord; le texte de YHistoire ne parle pas de leur nationality (2). Dans un article Chretiens d’Asie centrale et d’ExtrSme-Orient publie par le T’oung-Pao en 1914 (p. 623-644) <3), j’ai dit que Mar Ya(h)bhallaM III tout au moins devait &tre un Ongiit, ou, comme les Chinois disaient 6galement, un « Tatar blanc »; les Ongiit vivaient au voisinage de la Grande Muraille, et leur principal centre ytait a I’angle nord-est de la grande boucle du Fleuve Jaune. Par ailleur9 la biographie arabe ne9- torienne de Mir Ya(h)bhallah£ le donne comme un « Turc » qui est venu du Data (Cathay, Chine du Nord) <4). [Dans un mSmra en I’honneur de Ya(h)bhallaha III, ins^r^ dans l’6vang61iaire ycrit en 1295 pour I’^glise de Karm^lei par l’6vSque 'Abhdiso\ il est dit que ce patriarche est originaire «du pays des Turcs » : men 'athra Turk&yd <5h] (J. D.) La Chronique eccl6siastique jacobite de
Bar Hebraeus (en syriaque) parle de nos deux moines comme de « YaghflrayS #, c’est-a-dire de
11 1 Je ne vois pas que Tabby Chabot ou M. Mont- gomery expriment une opinion sur ce point, mais Sir W. Budge (p. 5) est du mSme avis que moi.
Le pr6antbule de l’ouvrage, dans la traduc- tion de Tabby Chabot (p. 7), parait dire que le9 deux moines ytaient des Turcs orientaux, mais M. Budge (p. 120) fait de « Turcs orientaux » un gynitif dypendant de « visiteur g6n6ral » [La dif- ficulty tient au texte mSme, tel qu’il est encore donny dans la 2® ydition de Bedjan : Mdr Ya(h)bhalld.hd qathdltqd pdfriarkts d,madhenhd Rabban $dumd sd’Srd TdrkAyi madtenhAyd. D est peu vraisem- blable que Tauteux anonyme ait voulu faire de « Turcs orientaux » une apposition aux deux noms, suivi8 de leur titre : « Mir Ya(h)bhaHih4, catholicos patriarche de 1’Orient » et « Rabban $&umfl, visiteur » — comme Chabot le traduit littyralement. II est plus vraisemblable que le copiste a omis le dAlath qui rendait le gynitif devant TfirkiyS, « visiteur des Turcs orientaux*, comme le comprend Budge.] (J. D.)
(,) Cet article de 1914 fut ycrit rapidement et sans ryfyrences, k la veille de la gtierre, pour con- signer & tout hasard un certain nombre de rysultats auxquels j’avais abouti; il s’y eBt glissy quelques erreurs que je corrigerai ici.
(4) Chabot, Supplement, tiragfe k part, p. 5; Montgomery, p. 21.
(8) [Ce m^mri a yty dycouvert et publiy par le P. Vosty, qui avait trouvy cet yvangybaire dans 1’ygbse paroissiale de Karmylel, & six heures envi- ron k I’Est de Mossoul. L’auteur en est probable- ment cet yvSque 'AbhdlS6', qui copia 1’yvangy* liaire; ce nom est fr6quent chez les Chaldyens et nous ne pouvons savoir quel siige ypiscopal ce personnage occupait. Dans cette composition heptasyllabique, cadencye et rimye, il dycerne au catholicos de grands yioges et timoigne de la sen- sation qu’avait produite en ce temps l’yiyvation sur le siige patriarcal d’Orient d’un ytranger venu de cette lointaine contrye. Parmi les formules styryo- typyes, empruntyes aux Ecritures et les ypithites pompeuses, chires aux Orientaux, on reconnaft quelques traits de la physionomie de Ya(h)bhallAhft III : sa piyty, sa bonty, son courage, son sens de la justice, le gofit qu’il avait pour les constructions : « Il fonde yglises et ycoles, bStit des couvent9 et des monast^res. » En citant les couvents et les yglises que ce patriarche fonda ou restaura, Tauteux du m^nini complete quelques points de son his- toire. 11 qualifie le catholicos de « lumifere de 1’or- thodoxie » — ce qui tymoigne que cet yvSque avait bien accueilli I’union conclue avec l’Eglise romaine, qu’il ne pouvait ignorer; J. M. Vosty, Memra en I’honneur de Iahballaha HI, Le Mu- seon, t. XLII, (cahiers 3 et 4), 1929, p. 168- 176.] (J. D.)
243
mAr ya(h)bhaliAha, rabban §Auma et les princes ongOt CHRETIENS
« Ouigours », en glosant ce nom par celui meme de Turkey £, a Turcs » <0. Les Ouigours vivaient loin de Pekin, dans la region de Tourfan, en plein Turkestan chinois, et ont toujours parte turc; mais est-il admissible que des contemporains informes aient qualifie de « Turcs » et surtout de « Ouigours » des gens dont 1’un et peut-etre tous les deux auraient des Ongiit?
Une hypothese en apparence assez naturelle serait de supposer que nos deux moines etaient des Ouigours dont les families avaient £te transplantees du Turkestan chinois, 1’une a Tangle nord- est de la boucle du Fleuve Jaune, 1’autre a P6kin. Mais les chretiens Etaient une minority chez les Ouigours, et ce serait un hasard singulier que, de cette minority chr&ienne, deux famiiles fussent allies se fixer en des points differents de la Chine du Nord et que des membres de ces deux families se fussent rejoints et assoctes dans 1’entreprise d’un commun pelerinage aux Lieux Saints. Puisque nous savons que Tun au moins des deux moines 6tait n6 en plein centre des Ongiit, que ces Ongiit Etaient Itetement turco-mongol le plus voisin de P6kin, et enfin que I’ensemble de la tribu des Ongiit 6tait chtetienne, le plus simple est d’admettre que nous avons probablement affaire & des Ongiit; je m’en tien3 done sur ce point a l’id6e que j’ai exprimee en 1914.
Dans le monde arabo-persan des environs de 1300, le nom de « Turc » s’employait d’une fa?on assez lache pour designer toutes les populations altaiques, celles de langue mongole corame celles de langue turque, et Ra§idu-’d-Din, dans ses notices sur les tribus, parle successivement : o. Des tribus « turques » qu’on appelle « mongoles » bien qu’elles aient eu auparavant d’autres noms et des chefs sp^ciaux (Jalair, Tatar, Merkit, etc.) ; b. Des tribus « turques » qui ont eu leurs noms et leurs chefs, mais qui ne sont parentes ni des precedentes, ni des Mongols proprement dits, tout en se rappro- chant d’eux par le type et par la langue (Kerait, Naiman, Ongiit, Tangut <(l) * 3>, Ouigours, Bakrin, Kirghiz, Qarluq, QipCaq); c. Les tribus « turques » qui sont appetees « Mongols » depuis 1’ancien temps (e’est-a-dire les Mongols proprement dits). Ainsi, en tout etat de cause, il n’y aurait rien de bien etonnant a voir quahfier de « Turcs » deux moines Ongiit, mais T6pitltete serait mieux justifiee, et surtout la qualification de Ouigour serait moins erronee si les Ongiit, comme les Ouigours, avaient parl£ turc et non mongol.
Alors que le premier et le troisieme groupe de Rasidu-’d-Din sont surement mongols, le second pose en effet un probteme plus complexe : a laisser de cote les Tangut (qui ntetaient pas altaiques), les Ouigours, les Kirghiz, les Qarluq et les Qipdaq sont surement de langue turque, et je montrerai plus loin qu’il en 6tait bien probablement de meme des Bakrin. Restent les trois premieres tribus : Kerait, Naiman et Ongiit. Les Ongiit sont aujourd’hui de langue mongole; bien qu’il y ait des
(l) Abbeloos et Lamy, Gregorii Barhebraei Chroni- con ecclesiasticum, Paris et Louvain, 1872-1877, in-8°, III, 451. La meme orthographe du nom des Ouigours se retrouve 4 plusieurs repri- ses dans le Chronicon syriacum du meme Bar
Hebraeus (6d. Bruns et Kirsch, Leipzig, 1789, in-4°, p. 555, 573). [La vocalisation YagdrayS ou
Yagkdrdyi est conforme a la phon6tique du syria- que oriental. C’est elle que suppose la transcription latine Iaguritae que donnent Abbeloos et Lamy. Bar Hebraeus a dd 6crire cet 6thnique tel qu’il
Tentendait.prononcer autour de lui par les Chal- d6ens et les Syriens jacobites.] Marco Polo a Icogu • ristan (mss de 1’Ambrosienne), qui peut se ramener a * Iogyyistan ; Rubrouck 6crit Iugures et on a Iogours chez Het'um (Hayton) 1’historien.
(a) Cf. la trad, de Berezin dans les Trudy Vost. Otdel. Imp. Russh. Arkh. Obi£., V [1858], p. IH- IV.
(8) Toutes les tribus de cette division sont “ altaiques », sauf les Tangut, e’est-i-dire les Si-Hia, de langue sino-tib6taine.
244
RECHERCHES SUR LES CHRETIENS D’ASIE CENTRALE ET D’EXTr£mE-ORIENT
dans turcs 9e rattachant par leur nom aux Kerait, c’est aussi le mongol que parlent les principaux descendants des Kerait, a savoir les Toryot (Tury’aut); quant aux Naiman, leur nom meme e9t mongol ( naiman = «huit» en mongol <1J). Mais en meme temps Bar Hebraeus parle des Kerait comme de « Turcs » a propos de leur conversion au christianisme vers 1008 (2) ; leur9 chefs portaient, au moins en partie, de9 titres et des noms turcs; le nom de leurs descendants, les Turya’ut est le pluriel mongol d’un mot turc ( turyaq , « garde », « sentinelle »)^3). Nous savons peu de choses de la langue des Nai- man, mais un mot special que Rasidu-’d-Din leur attribue e9t rattach6 par lui a une racine turque(4). Quant aux Ongiit, et bien qu’il y ait eu peut-Stre d4s le9 T’ang de9 tribus de langue mongole au voisinage meme de ce qui 6tait ou allait etre leur habitat <5), les notices chinoises leur donnent une ascendance turque <fl) et leur onomastique de l’6poque mongole, quand il ne 9’agit pas de noms
Cf. Journal asiatique, 1920, I, 173-174.
(*> Cf. Abbeloos et Lamy, Chron. eccles., Ill, 280.
[Nau, L’ expansion nestorienne en Asie, p. 270- 271, cite un passage de Mari ibn Sulaiman, dans son Livre de la Tour ( Kitab al-mijdal), du xne sie- de, qui est sans doute, dit-il, la source de Bar Hebraeus, et qui fait le r6cit de cette meme conver- sion, amv6e d’aprfcs ce texte au temps du patriar- che Jean VI Nasuk (19 janvier 1012-23 juiliet 1016). II y est seulement question d’un des rois turcs qui Be fit chr6tien avec deux cent mille personnes. On n’y fait pa9 mention des Kerait. A cause de cela, Pelliot se demandait si dans le r6cit de Bar Hebraeus le nom des Kerait n’avait pas 6te inter- poU.] (J. D.)
<*> Cf. T'oung Pao, 1930, 29-30.
**> Cf. T’oung Pao, 1930, 25-26.
<•) Cf. Toung Pao, 1929, 250-252.
Leurs traditions familiales les rattachaient aux Turcs f'p P'£ Cha-t'o de clan f|5 Tchou-ye qui, sous Ie9 T’ang, gouvemaient la region de DU Yen-men dans le Nord-Ouest du Chansi, c’est-4-dire sensiblement 14 mSme oil les Ongiit btaient installs au xme sifecle (cf. les noms 4 1’in- dex de Chavannes, Docum. sur les Tou-kiue occi- dentaux; pour ce9 traditions des Ongiit, cf. 1’ins- cription fun^raire du prince Georges, par ff^] f|{ Yen Fou, au ch. 23 du X ^ ^ Yuan wen lei, 1’inscription relative 4 Arft’31, sceur du prince Geor- ges, dans le ch. 1 du tfpj| ^ ^ F^inrtchai tsi de ff ijff f Siao Kiu, et la notice sur ia famille prin- ci4re des Ongiit dans le ch. Il8'du Yuan che, simplement r6sum6e d’ailleurs dii>i texte de Yen Fou). Dans l’inscription relative 4 lAra’ol, le nom de clan de la famille princibre des Ongiit est donn6 comme Kie-lie (^ fa 5V J£), ce qui parait bien ramener 4 Karait (Kerait); la transcription usuelle est 5]J K’ie-lie. Bien que les Ongiit et les
!>ij ;
i i-
Kerait soient aux environ de 1200 les uns au Nord du Gobi et les autres au Sud, il a pu y avoir quelque parent^ entre les families princibres chrbtiennes de ces deux tribus, et cette parent^ aiderait 4 com- prendre que la 16gende du Pr6tre Jean ait pass6 de 1’une 4 1’autre. D’autre part, l’inscription du prince Georges et son r6sum6 dans le Yuan che disent que le premier ancStre des princes Ongiit est [n ^ Pou-kouo, c’est-4-dire 6videmment ce meme khan Biigii que nous connaissons au d6but de 1’histoire plus ou moins 16gendaire des Oui- gours, et dont le nom reparalt aussi dans la 16gende qiptaq (cf., en dernier lieu, JA, 1913, I, 188, 196- 197; 1920, I, 158; Toung Pao, 1929, 134; 1930, 22). Une inscription, malheureusement tr4s muti- Ide, nous renseigne de fa?on plus precise sur les ancetres turcs dont se r6clamaient les princes ongiit; c’est la « st4le de la reconstruction de la salle du portrait (j|? ying-t’ang) du prince de Tsin, au ^ Po-lin-sseu » (4 7 li 4 l’Ouest de »J|| Tai-tcheou, Chansi), dat6e de 1355. Mentionn6e dans le Houan-yu fang-pei lou, elle est l’objet dans le * Tai-
tcheou tche d’une notice tr4s m6diocre que le Chan-si Cong tche de 1892 (96, 62-63) s’est content^ de reproduire; Ts’ien Ta-hin en avait tir6 meilleur parti dans son Kin-che wen pa-wei, 20, 19 b; et surtout tout ce qui en est d6chiffrable actuellement est reproduit dans le |]j ft g|] g| ^ Chan- yeou che-k’o ts’ong-pien, 39, 5-10. Malgr6 les lacu- nes du texte, ce qui subsiste ne laisse aucun doute — comme d’ailleurs la 9eule mention des Turcs Cha-t’o de clan Tchou-ye gouverneurs de Yen-men suffisait 4 le faire supposer — que les princes ongiit de l’6poque mongole se considbraient comme les descendants directs du Turc ff j
Li K’o-yong, prince de Tsin (856-908; cf. sur lui Giles, Biogr. diet., n° 1155, d’ailleurs assez ine- xact), dont le fils ^ $ Li Ts’ouen-hiu fonda
245
mAr ya(h)bhallaha, rabban §auma et les princes 5ngut CHRETIENS
i ] I
chrCiens d’origine syriaque, est largement turque. II est possible en iin de compte que nous ayons
affaire, sinon dans les trois cas, au moins avec les Ongiit, a une tribu de jUngue turque qui, d&s 1’epoque mongole, etait fortement en voie de se mongoliser. Si les Ongiit du xmP pi&cle, ou du moins une bonne partie d’entre eux, parlaient turc, il sera plus facile d’admettre qu’qn ait applique a deux moines ongiit le nom plus connu de la principale et de la plus civilisee des nations turques de 1’Asie Cen-
trale, celles des Ouigours (1); en tout cas les faits
en 923 la dynastie des T’ang postCieurs et dont le tertre funeraire, aitu6 sur les terrains du Po-lin- sseu, aurait encore subsist^ intact a la fin du XII® side; k ce moment, Ala-qus tigin-quri,
« en compulsant les registres gen^alogiques, con- nut que le prince (de Tsin) Cait... son ancetre et pr6sida a un sacrifice pour lui » (^ |g]
si ft I p p I li -Jt & €)• £vi-
demment, il y a quelque incertitude a nos yeux dans cette filiation quasi impCiale qu’on retrouve documentairement apr&s trois sides. Une infor- mation du Tai-tcheou tche, reproduce par le Chan- yeou che-k’o ts’ong-pien, veut que la tombe, situee k 1’Est du Po-lin-sseu, ait C6 viol6e en 1138-1140 par les moines du temple; it la fin du xme side, le prince Georges lui aurait affectd plus de vingt families chargees de son entretien ^ cheou- tch’ong); populairement, on appelait cette tombe le « tertre fun6raire du prince de Tsin » (-||- -£ gjjjj); les <i cypres du tertre de Tsin » etaient un des « huit sites » (A ^ pa-king ) de Yen-men. Cela n’est pas bien d’accord avec le tertre invio!6 ( to wou-kao) dont parle 1’inscription de 1355. L’affectation k la tombe de plusieurs dizai- nes de families est dgalement mentionn6e dans une inscription de 1310 due k Yao Souei
(dans I’Adition du Kouang-ya-chou-kiu, 26, 7 a, cheou-kia est 6videmment a corriger en cheou-tch’ong), mais y paraitrait attribu6e a Al-buqa, le p&re du prince Georges, si on ne devait voir plus loin que Yao Souei a vraisemblablement rduni en un seul ces deux personnages. Quoi qu’il en soit, le temple, remis k neuf et bien dot6 dans la periode yen-yeou (1314-1320), brula par la suite, steles comprises; reconstruit par le zele de pieux moines, il fut presque enticement d6pouille et annex6 par une « famille puissante ». En 1335, le temple 6tait pris sous la protection du prince de Tcbao Ma-tcba-han; enfin, les batiments furent entiCement remis en 6tat et le portrait de Li K’o- yong peint sur la muraille par les soins du prince de Tchao Batu-tamiir. [Sur la tombe de Li K’o- yong, cf. Sin wou tai chi, 4, 4a.] C’est i cette occasion, semble-t-il, que I’inscription fut gravde,
sont la, et il y a 4’autres exemples oil le nom
Mil .
en 1355. Dans ce! qui reste de I’inscription, tout atteste son caractere nettement bouddhique; il n’en est pas moins digne de remarque qu’il la fin, juste apres la date du 6e mois de 1355, il y a encore, avant la lacune finale, deux mots ^ tch’ong-fou qui ne sont pas sans exemple dans le bouddhisme, mais qui sont aussi les premiers mots du nom de 1’ad ministration dite tch' ong-fou-sseu qui, sous les Yuan, 6tait chargee d’administrer le culte chr6tien. Comme la famille princiere des Ongiit 6tait chrCienne, il n’est pas impossible qu’il y ait eu, apr&s la date, une mention d’un person- nage qui appartenait au tch’ ong-fou-sseu.
!l) M. Montgomery (p. 18) dit que les deux moines « may not have been Chinese by race #; mais c’est evident et rCulte des textes eux-memes; jamais des Chinois ne sont qualifies de « Turcs »; et c’est bien en vain que M. Montgomery croit trouver au recit de la jeunesse de Rabban SaumA « a distinctly Chinese flavour ». Dans la meme note, il est fait Cat d’un passage de Bretschneider (Med. Res., I, 262) qui dirait, d’aprC M. Mont- gomery, que « in the syriac sources the name [« Yagh write »] denotes Turks of Eastern Cathay »; et ceci expliquerait que le nom fht employ^ pour des Turcs de la region de PCdn. Mais M. Mont- gomery a mal cit6 Bretschneider qui dit que, d’aprC Assemani, le nom « denotes the Eastern Turks of Khatai », et Bretschneider invoque ensuite la Chronique syriaque de Bar Hehraeus selon qui, dit-il, les Ouigours sont « a numerous tribe of the Eastern Turks belonging to Khatai ». On voit qu’il ne s’agit pas en r6alit6 de Turcs du Cathay oriental, mais de Turcs orientaux (par rapport k ceux de 1’Asie occidental) et qui sont dans la d6pen- dance ‘du Cathay; c’est le cas des vCi tables Oui- gours de la region de Tourfan. Le nom de « Turcs orientaux » a pu d’ailleurs etre etendu aussi aux Ongiit. Quand il figure dans le prdambifle de notre texte, c’est bien en ce sens d’ « oriental » qu’il faut 1’entendre, et non, comme l’a fait M. Budge (p. 120), en une sorte d’6quivalence semi-technique k « Nestorien »; ce qui est vrai de 1’expression de « chretiens orientaux » ne s’applique pas, selon moi, aux « Turcs orientaux ».
246
RECHERCHES SUR LES CHRETIENS D’ASIE CENTRALE ET D’EXTRfiME-ORIENT
d’ « Ouigors » a appliqu6 a des Kerait et peut-Stre mSme a des Ongiit O).
L’ain6 des deux moines, Rabban $auma, 6tait fils d’un certain Siban, « visiteur » ( sa'drd ) <a> de la communaut^ chr^tienne de Khan-ballq (P6kin) et de la femme legitime de Siban, Q®yamt3; longtemps sans enfants, ils prierent, et finalement un fils leur naquit, qui fut appel4 $auma, ou plus compl&tement Bar $auma, « fils du jeGne ». Bien que la date de cette naissance ne soit pas indi- qu6e, on peut la placer vers 1225 (3>. P6fem avait 6te conquis par les Mongols sur les Kin en 1215, mais rien ne montre que la communaut^ nestorienne de P6kin ne soit pas ant4rieure a la conquete mongole. S’il en 6tait autrement, nous admettrions que Siban 6tait vraisemblablement venu du vrai pays ongiit peu aprfes 1215.
Khan-ballq, la « ville du khan », est le nom turc (et non mongol comme on le dit parfois) de P6kin <4b II ne nous est attest^ jusqu’ici, a ma connaissance, qu’apres que Khubilai eOt fix6 a P6kin la capitale de Pempire mongol en 1264, et le texte syriaque de VHistoire de Mdr Ya(h)bhalldhd non seulement n’est pas ant^rieur aux environs de 1320, mais meme son prototype persan ne nous mfene pas au-deli de 1264, puisque de toute fagon le depart des deux moines pour les Lieux Saints
(1) Le ministre Clnqa! 6tait un K6rait (cf. J” oung Pao, 1914, 628-629), mais les textes per- sans le disent Ouigour (Barthold, Turkestan *, 389). De Cin-Tamiir, qui 6tait certainement un Ongiit, juwaini fait im Qara-Khitai (cf. Barthold, Turkestan1, 415); par contre, Howorth (III, 39, le qualifie de Ouigour, et bien qu’il ajoute k la p. 760 qu’Erdmann le dit Ongiit, il ne semble pas dire qu’il s’dst tromp6 p. 39; mais je ne retrouve pas actuellement de texte qui parle de Cin-Tamiir comme d’un Ouigour. En r6alit6, 1’objection qu’on pourrait faire A l’origine ongiit que je suppose pour Rabban-$&umfi et pour Mir Ya(h)bhaUih& est d’un autre ordre, i savoir que les Ongiit devaient etre en grande partie des nomades, au lieu que nos deux moines sont n£s dans des agglomerations s6den- taires, 1’un k Pikin, 1’autre k « Kosang », et que Rabban $iumft, devenu vieux, ne s’accommodait plus d’une vie nomade dans laquelle il n’avait pas 4te 61ev6 (cf. texte syriaque dans Bedjan, p. 85, trad. Chabot, p. 99). Mais rien n’empeche d’ad- mettre qu’il y avait chez les Ongiit, depuis si long- temps au contact de la Chine, nine proportion assez forte d’616ments s6dentaires.
** C’est le titre que portera plus tard Rabban §&um& lui-mSme et qui lui est donn6, transcrit en mongol, dans la lettre d’Aryun i Philippe le Bel; on s’etait m6pris sur cette transcription; M. Van Hoonacker est le premier, i iba connaissance, i avoir r6tabli 1’original, dans le Museon de 1889 (VIII, 271), plusieurs ann6es avint que M. Chabot 1’indiquit k son tour ( Histoire , p. 225).
■ u
[V.
Rabban $iumft 6tait tris sensiblement l’ain6 de Mir Ya(h)bhallahi III, et celui-ci a dfl naltre en 1245; on verra plus loin une autre raison qui donne k penser que Rabban §iumi n’a guire pu naltre apris 1225. D’ailleurs Rabban §iumi est mort au d6but de 1294, mais dfes 1291, il « avait d6jik beaucoup vieilli » (Bedjan, p. 95; Chabot, p. 99) et supportait mal la vie presque nomade de la Cour mongole de Perse; il devait done avoir assez largement pass6 la soixantaine k ce moment-U. M. Budge qui, 4 la p. 57, fait naltre Rabban §&umfl entre 1230 et 1235, avait donn6 & la p. 44 ses rai- sons pour placer la naissance du mSme Rabban $4umA entre 1220 et 1230; la date de 1220 me paralt un peu haute, et je doute que Rabban $£kum£l ait 6t6 presque septuag6naire quand Aryun 1’envoya en Occident. La phrase du texte relative k la naissance de Rabban §&um& est manifestement mal coupee chez M. Montgomery (p. 28); le point et 1’appel de la note 4 doivent Stre places apr&s « chamber ».
(4) M. Montgomery (p. 27) dit que Khan-ballq signifie « Khan’s city » selon Yule, « or rather Khan’s Camp (Loewe, p. 640) ». J’ignore qui est Loewe que M. Montgomery cite une autre fois, et de mfime sans titre d’ouvrage, k la p. 16; mais si la citation faite par M. Montgomery est exacte, « Loewe » s’est tromp6; baltq en turc, balyasun (< balaya - sun) en mongol ne sont connus qu’au sens de « ville ». Le « Kambulic » que Sir W. Budge donne deux fois & la p. 105 et r6p£te 4 1’index est un monstre.
mAh ya(h)bhallAha, rabban §Auma et les princes qngut chr£tiens 247
et encore plus le journal persan de Rabban $auma sont post6rieuxs a cette date-la (1). Toutefoia, avant d’etre la « grande capitale », ou ^ Ta-tou, de Khubilai, Pekin avait 6t 6 toutefoia celle des Kin ou Juien, et il est tres possible que le nom turc de Khan-babq lui ait 6t6 appliqu^ d6a ce moment- la, c’est-a-dire bien avant 1215
Des trois noms des parents et du fils, deux sont purement syriaques et assez usuels : Qeyamtl, nom de la m&re, est frequent dans 1’onomastique nestorienne, et apparait une douzaine de foia dana les inscriptions funeraires du SemireS'e <3) ; de meme §auma, ou plus completement Bar §aumi, est un nom syriaque courant, et en Chine m&me, chez les Ongiit, nous connaissons un Bar §£um£ ’EliSii', nd en 1113 <4). Plus interessant est le nom du p&re, Siban. Le nom n’est pas syriaque, ni n’a 6t6 relev6 dans 1’dpigraphie fun^raire du Semirei'e, mais on le retrouve, je croia, dans i’ono- mastique turco-mongole, car ce doit etre lui qui a ete port6 par le cinqui^me fils de Join (le fils aind de Gengis-khan). Le nom de ce fils de Jo2i est g^neralement ecrit jjL-Jo par lea auteurs musulmana, et on le transcrit usuellement Seiban ou Saiban <5) ; il est bien connu pour avoir servi d’6ponyme a la dynastie des S&ibani ou Seibani. Toutefois, au xne siecle, une forme Saiban (et a plus forte raison Seiban) est a peu pres aussi invraisemblable en turc d’Asie Centrale qu’en mongol; je ne doute guere que, post6rieurement a la conversion de la Horde d’Or a 1’Islam, la prononciation du nom n’ait dt 6
(1) Je reviendrai plus loin sur les langues que nos deux moines ont du connaltre.
1,1 L’emplacement de ^ Yen-king, le P6kin des Kin, ne coincide pas exactement avec le Ta-tou que Khubilai fit construire de 1264 a 1267, mais les deux emplacements sont si voisins que le nom turc de « Ville du khan » a pu passer sans peine de Tun a 1’autre.
[Le terme syriaque tyyamta signifie « resur- rection » et a 6t6 employe comme nom de femme chez les Nestoriens. Remarquons que le mot grec ’AvdaTaais, qui a le meme sens, a ete aussi donne comme nom de femme chez les Byzantins, ou il designe a la fois la fete de la Resurrection et la basilique du Saint-Sepulcre.] (J. D.)
Sur la frequence de ce nom en Asie Centrale, cf. la liste de Kokovcov, Nes'kol'ko novykh nadgrobnykh kamnet s khristiansko sirilskimi nadpisyami uz Srednel Azii, dans Izv. Imp. Ak. Nauk, 1907, 455 et 458.
(4) Cf. T’oung Pao, 1914, 630; le nom est ecrit ■ft! M Pa-tsao-ma-ye-li-tch’ou dans
I’inscription due & % £f Pp1] Yuan Hao-wen (1190- 1257); ed. du & A Kieou Kin-jen-tsi, 27, 6 b), |0 jj£ & M ^ P° Vu al°rs Pai]-so-ma- ye-li-chou dans les oeuvres de Houang Tsin
(1277-1357; ed. du Sseu-pou ts’ong-k’an, 43, 1), •}£ ill $3 ifil J§| Pa-tsao-ma-ye-li-chou dans une inscription composee par ® jjjj[ ^ Ma Tsou- tch’ang, descendant de ce Bar S&umil (1279-1338; cette inscription se trouve, entre autres, dans le
ch. 67 du Yuan wen lei); ce nom, mal coupe par Palladius, a abouti au « Pa-sao-ma-ie-li » de Yule et Cordier, Marco Polo *, I, 289; le second element, ’Elisu', s’est rencontre au Semir66'e (Chwolson, Syr.-nest. Grabinschr., N. F. [1897], n° 4, et il n’y a pas de raison pour en supprimer la voyelle labiale et y chercher le nom d’Elis£e comme M. Kokovcov a propose de le faire ( loc . cit., 441). UHistoire de Mar Ya(h)bhallahd ne donne au futur Rabban $aumi que le nom de bapteme de §tkum£; mais son nom complet de Bar §aumi, « fils [obtenu] par le jeune », est atteste par une serie d’autres sources; cf. Chabot, p. 11. §ilum& s’employait d’ailleurs aussi seul comme nom (par abreviation de Bar $aum&, dit M. Noeldeke, dans Z.D.M.G., xliv [1890], 527); les inscriptions du Semir6£'e ont meme livre plus de quinze $aum& et pas un seul Bar §aum4 (cf. Kokovcov, loc. cit., 450, 458); ceci suffit a montrer que le « $&um& » de notre texte est conforme k un usage dors courant.
(6) Naturellement, en se pla^ant au seul point de vpe graphique, on pourrait vocaliser de m£me la transcription en 6criture syriaque du nom du p£re de Rabban §&um<L Le nom du prince est t^nscrit Seiban ou Saiban entre autres par Ham- mer, Berezin, Lane-Poole, Howorth, M. Barthold, 1 'Encyclopedic de VIslam; d’Ohsson (Hist, des Mongols, II, 8, 626) serait presque seul k lire Siban, s’il n’y avait k lui joindre Bretschneider, Med. Res., I, 309, et M. Blochet, Hist, des Mongols, II, 114 suiv.
3 992024 8 96
17
at 19P1°0 ‘I3PdS IB<^ 9919^9-1 919 v maxi a 91)33] ajqBqoad snjd bj ijsmd mj (0 nsasio » ‘un(vqif iBd) apuoaas bj inop 89[o2uoui 69i3ojouiX)9 xnap uiou aj mod gsodojd b (og 'ddy *jj ‘sjoSvoffl sap ’jsijj) pqooig -(;g^ ‘1 ‘gJ6l "V f P 189
joSuoui mon ibja aj inop ireq^Bb aj mod n8uBjy ernoSmo aoiioj bj aiojdtua ji4nb auigm op) aiou np amo8mo aauoj bj ojrp-^-isa^ ‘UBqig isa jureMnf op 9)X9) aj 6xrep luaiuaAiinnpp J9)dopB 9 uo5aj bj anb ‘snaBjqapj mg ap uo5aj bj ha ‘auop appis •□09 of taqBJB om)U99i| eoBp aoiuioo aimpoid as SBd inad an / ap ia s ap anbiqdBiiJ uoisnjuoa bj ‘anbBuXs amiua9 ug -UBqjg 11109 ((&p -pBJ) ‘ggp •p9) snaBiqapj mg ‘pof ap sjq aauud aj mod ‘iq •raiBMnf 9 6ajBp9ds sauuoj sap 9[ iuos aa i(<t tuai •JBJJ » )IBJ B ‘(ftp *d ‘aoponpBl) BJ lUOp ‘a IUJOJJ » B ‘anbpuoBqi iinod un4p )aauiaoBjd9p JBd ‘ggp *d ‘smug ap p^.j) npjog )a (6Pf ‘PBI* ;6£t ‘P?) K9I B snaBjqajj iBg aupui aq ‘sanbtiuoBtp siuiod ap iaainaoBjd9p md q nuaAap )sa aqsm amiuag □a mb jbi)iui j aj ‘uoiiBpijB 9 pi SBd aiaid au mb onbBuXs amiua9(j suap ‘aAjasuoa mb sreui ‘3919110 yf9P acuioj ‘uausi-inqp^ 11109 (6tt ‘‘PB-H 58St ‘6imjg -p9) snaBjqafj mg anb isure )6a4a fiureMnf op siuosnoBui sou ap snopBJ9)[B sap 6aure)jaa subs sreui ‘rareM.nf 9 sajBp9ds saouoj sap smaisnjd lunavuXs uoaivojyj uos suBp suoAnoiiai snou tsnaejqaj-j mg aiiqoasf utBAuagg isa4a ‘9imud -ma dnoansaq b mj ‘juiBAvnf ap aiAnao4j ap luaui -8A9q9B4j sgjdB sdoia) ap nad ‘mb ureAua9 un )sa ji jq •(u3u9i-qBji =) jjSuBi-qnj^ ap naq no pBui -umqnj^ 9ZJJW ’JV ap uoqqpg simp 9pm3 u8uBi-)ng aj aoiuioa ‘saABiS zasso sainBj sap yf^p iuo sji ‘siuosnoBui soa luaios anb saapuB mog rnaqig
rl
9iqB9i ua isa iqjBMnf op aApnuud uo5aj bj anb Bjorn af ‘)uas9jd sbo aj 6ubq -suiou 6ap sajo3uom luamreiA sauuoj oaj luounop aoiuioo agjppisuoa 9119 mad aa ia ‘-aia |‘(603*802 ‘0£6T <ovJ ^no,l *P) BpjQ no npiq Jiiod npjgg ‘(09t*6St ‘I *£ 161 ‘‘yf jioa tuidjjjq irejg md smaqre4p 9uiiyuoa) ;2Pj^ mod igojL oaAB aioBuaqs zassB )sa raiBMnf ap anbiisouioao^j anb iibs no sreui ‘iirenaidms ai9nreui ainoi aj) isa UBbqjg no irebqig 'irebqig mod 93uouoid jsa4s ‘(xapm uos ’ja) uopip9 uos 6uup ‘p8uiumqn^[ !n»qig no irebqig 94nb
ipinjd UBqig no irebqig 9 ‘rreqig
aauud np mou aj mod ‘laaauiBi naiq luajqmas rareMnj^ ap siuosnuBin sap saiuoimA saq (>)
•uiou np < ajoSuoai • aoiioj bj 9J 9n]i)sai re4f anb aomd ireqig treing IU39 ref no ‘j£9 ‘tf6t ‘°VJ ^noj, -jq (1)
*l€E ‘I ‘’ssy "P3N ‘^appuqos -laag suap 9ip yf9p )sa aSossod jannajd oq (l)
•uopBsq
•BOOA 3)133 ai)Q03 3JJTB mb UOSIBJ ap SBd 6I0A 9U Of ia ‘bBisg auop ‘bj-bj f|$ V apd^Bg ( v S *AOl) aya vvn^ aj 6reui iaja^p Bmx np imnb aui9p -loi) aj snap tbibXbq ap snjnt j op 6aauud sap un4p <*\f mou aj ‘jamuiBjq uoa zaqo « qsxiog » amgui no ‘(bBigg) a qfmg « no « qBJog » amj smofno) irej mb auisnuBjsi4j ap aauanpui auigm bj )sa4[) *smof 6on ap urns snjd ire4j au auuosaad anb ajquias (i sreui ‘UBqig iresq ‘stinjj sap ajiojsifj uos sirep ‘sau3m0 aq *anbmi aui2uotp luarep < sapiunjn^ » saj anb ires uo iajagis ax np inqgp ns a)cLt8^4p 0 apiunjnj » ai)SBuXp bj ap uremAnos np mou aj ireqreg iq uotnb anSojBUB uoiibuiuibiuoo aun md SBd )sa4u aa is pi jaqaiaqaai 9 SBd retu of (I)
ireqig auuoj bj i (t) UBqig^ jaauouojd as iiBAap ji jno3mo ua4nb )a ‘aui3uo4p jno3mo luauiajqBjq •uiasiBXA ;sa uiou aj anb auop asoddns af fasjaAui suas ua4nb joSuoui ua jno2mo4p sjojb sjibj lginjd iuos as sanbjisBuiouo siuiuduia saj luepuadaa tiuaddBqa94ui uBqig ap aui3uo(j ;a suas aq m(v g ‘g^ *ayo gggf ap 6ioxu e6 aj snos at p tivnj^ aj simp auinqisod aiiji 9 ^uuojiuaiu isa ‘jruib^
UBqig ‘jna-noui-ai4i-UBd-ig ^ ^ ^ & ?pddB ‘it)3uq annB ujq q8) usqig UBlng ajip-9-;sa4a
‘usd-is-uaif-nog 3 $ & £ irejaddB4s inSuQ sap saj^iouud ajjjuiBj bj ap aiquiaui un ‘ap^is 9mx np
91110m aj^nuajd aj susp ‘uyug ’inoSinQ un 11B19 mb ia aiiideqa ns aaino ua aAnoai as a^jjiBi^p aiqdBoSoiq bj iuop uiBijjodoi^ui aiiBuuoiiauoj ;neq un jnod "QIZI »9uub4j snos ‘5 aaiideqa ns sioj aj)nB aun tsanuuooui ;uos saui3uo saj iuop pyuiiAOjd ajreuuoipuoj un jnod ‘g^T- »9UUB4j snos ‘gf anideqa nB 6ioj aun : sa^Buuosjad 6aJinB xnap jnod uvnj^ sap 9Jtojsijjl\ suBp aAnojiaj as ‘aqdBjSoqpo auigui bj obab ‘uiou auigui aq ‘unqigg no ueqijg uou ia ‘(^uBqig, > usqig >) usqig ijjasuBJ) aj)9 auop pop uiou aa f(s) (o jj, ‘99 j, tpg ‘fgj,) uBd-ig 3j£ ^ 6asudaj xnap 9 axqdBj3 -oqijoj uvn^ sap ajtojstjji[ ia ‘JJQ£ ap 6jg np mou aj UBqig lua^ uidreq ubj<j 6rep^ *(X) uBmjnsnui apuom aj susp iuamajnau9;uB uaiq auiuioa ‘unqrgg sap nqu; bj ap mjaa ap aauanjjui4j snos 39191^
iNaiuo-awgnxxa.a xa aivaxiaaD aisv.a sm3ix^uhd saa Hns saHDHaHDau gpg
— v
mJIr ya(h)bhallAha, eabban §Xuma et les princes ongOt CHRETIENS 249
de YHistoire de Mar Ya(h)bhallaha serait deja mongolisee, et reiativement tardive mSme pour ie mongoi
Quand Bar §auma atteignit i’age adulte, on le maria (2) ; il re^ut ia prfitrise, et devint sacristain
Horde, 24 et 25.] (J. D.), mais eat phonAtiquement impossible; quant k la premiere, par Sibaya ou Si- bayan, « sort (qu’on tire) », elle a contre elle l’origine ouigoure probable du nom et le fait que le mot mongoi, Atant iibayan et non Siba’an, ne se prSte pas it une contraction en Sib an. L’adoption de la forme Siban (et non Sibqan ou Slbqan) dans juwaini amene a supprimer cet exemple de ceux d’ailleurs assez h6t6rog£nes que M. Mirza Muham- mad a invoquAs, it propos de gutturalea mongoles Avanescentes, dans son Edition de Juwaini, I, 51 et 142. Le « Stican » ou « Stichan » de Rubrouck, vraisemblablement issu de *Sciban, pourrait etre 1’indice d’une pronunciation Siban des le mibeu du XIII6 siAcle, mais ne suffit pas k 1’assurer. Je ne fais pas intervenir ici le « Cibai ou Ciban », ou « Cibai » et « Ciban » de Marco Polo (cf. Yule et Cordier *, II, 459, 462), dont la forme est incer- taine et dont l’original doit etre en tout cas different.
(1) La date oil, en mongoi, si- et si- ont abouti k ii- n’est pas dAterminAe jusqu’ici de fa?on prAcise. Les transcriptions de YHistoire secrete des Mongols ont Si-, mais, si 1’original de YHistoire secrete est de 1240, la transcription en est du xiv® siAcle et ne vaut que pour cette date lit. J’ai exprimA rAcem- ment ( T’oung Pao, 1930, 28-29) i’idAe que le pas- sage de s- k S- en mongoi devant t « doit se placer vraisemblablement vers la En du XIII® siAcle, et peut-Atre d’abord dans certains dialectes seule- ment »; j’aurais dti faire remarquer toutefois que les formes en Si- semblent dejit gAnAralisAes en Acriture ’ phags-pa dAs une inscription de 1276, ce qui rend probable qu’elles aient AtA adoptees dans cette Acriture dAs sa creation en 1269. Mais alors la survivance de si nombreuses formes en si- dans YHistoire des Yuan devient plus difficile k expliquer; je n’ai pas de solution satisfaisante k proposer. [Cf. Pelliot, Notes sur I’histoire de la Horde d'or, p. 44-47.] (J. D.)
1,1 Chabot avalt traduit pur ■ inarier *, tout on disailt an noto quo lo mot pout Agaleniont staiiHier « flauoor >| M. Muugtoiuery (211) «t Mir W. llnduo (125) ont edoptA ootte dorniAre truduollon, ot Sir W. Budgo a brodA sur oo thAnio (p. 43).
[Dans l'£gliao ohaldAonno, pas plus quo duns les uutros Egllaoa orleutulos ou duus nolro liuul Moyen Age latin, on n’ a jamais pensA que le muriuge ddt nAcessairornent se former en un soul temps, et ne pQt acquArir son Atre par Atapes successives. Au
Moyen Age, chez les ChaldAens, le mariage est conclu en deux temps, qui en apparaissent comme les parties copstitutives. Au premier moment (mekhlrdtha ou mekhdryd), les parties expriment, en presence de la croix et d’un prStre, la volontA de se prendre pour mari et pour femme. Le lien ainsi crAA est presque aussi fort que celui qui nalt d’un mariage parfait — c’est pourquoi on ne saurait sans abus le designer du nom de fian^ailles. II ne peut etre rompu que pour certaines causes dAter- minees, a peine plus nombreuses que celles qui permettent de rompre un mariage parfait : 1’une d’elles est 1’entrAe en religion d’un des conjoints (c’est le divorce pour cause de pi6t6), mAme contre le grA de 1’autre Apoux, qui du reste est libre de se remarier.
L’autre moment, qui est sAparA du premier par un intervalle qui va de plusieurs mob k plusieurs annees, et qui est aussi entourA d’une cArAmonie religieuse, marque 1’Atablissement de la vie com- mune et la consummation du mariage ; J. Dauvillier- C. de Clercq, Le mariage en droit canonique orien- tal, Paris, 1936, p. 48-58.
Du texte syriaque de la Vie de Ya(h)bhalldhd dAcoule nettement que Rabban $aumi avait seu- lement conclu, sur les instances de ses parents, le premier temps du mariage : ’amk^rdlj^y « ils le mariArent », est un aphel du verbe m*khar, qui est le terme technique qui dAsigne le fait de con- clure le mekhdryd ou la mekhirdtkd. Rabban §&um& ne poussa jamais plus loin son experience matri- monial e, et ne passa jamais au second moment du mariage. C’est ce que conErme la suite du texte : « il se conduisit en toute chastetA * (nakhpdthd signiEe chastetA ou continence) — ce que Chabot rend inexactement en traduisant « en toute honnA- tetA ».
AprAs avoir conclu la m*khir(UhA, Rabban $&uiu& recut l’ordination sucerdotale. Le droit coiiiiiiuii des £gilses orientales a de tout tenipa poriiiis mix gens marlAs de reoevolr lea ordrea, en ooiitinuaiil A vlvre dans le mariage. Le droit oano- Viiquo cbuldAen du Moyen Age autorlsalt inAino lea prAtros k se marier aprAa lour ordination, ou encore, dovcnus veufs, k se remarier. NAanraoina, 1’ usage Aluit de se marier event do rocevoir la prA- Iriso, et o’est ce qu’attesle la Vie de Yu(,h)bHalldhd.
[Rabban $iuui attendit ainsi trois ans, pour ne pas mAcontenter sea parents. Puis il se sApara de
47.
THE DYNASTIC
ARTS
OF THE KUSHANS
John M. Rosenfield
• N
University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles 1967
V. SAKAS AND PARTHIANS 129
the reigns of Azes II and Gondophares with the span of an adult’s career. This unusual custom of joint issues is of great assistance in outlining the chronology. Gondophares probably lived in the middle third of the first century a.d., which would place Azes II within a decade or two of the birth of Christ.25
GONDOPHARES
In the highly abstract body of evidence for Saka and Parthian history in India, the only prince whose name took on a legendary aura is called Gondo- phares (on his coins [T]ynao<i>epoy in Greek, Guduphara in Kharoshthi). These coins bear the distinctly Parthian motif of the bearded and ornately armored royal portrait (Coins 280, 281) as well as Iranian titulature and per- sonal names. Although there is no doubt of Gondophares’ Parthian origins, his coinage retained many Indo-Greek and Saka elements— the equestrian king, Nike, Siva— and is basically distinct from the imperial Arsacid issues. Most were minted at Taxila, which was probably Gondophares’ chief seat of power.
The earliest of his coins seem to be those issued jointly with an Arachosian Prince Orthagnes (whose name is close to that of orlagno, Lord of Battles on Kushan coins; see Chapter III). Later, Gondophares became ruler of a vast domain, including Arachosia, Seistan, Sindh, Gandhara, and the Kabul Valley into the Paropamisadae, but he does not seem to have extended his rule east of the Pan jab. The excavations at Taxila have revealed that this rule was a pe- riod of great prosperity and cultural achievement characterized by the spirit of philhellenism. The affinity for Greek culture had been one of the distinctive early traits of the Parthians in Iran, but it had been eclipsed by the revival of Iranian nationalism and the bitter warfare with the Romans throughout the last half of the first century b.c. After the settlement of the Augustan peace, however, Greek and Roman influence again flowed along the trade routes to the Orient. The Saka-Parthian strata at Sirkap yielded great quantities of such Occidental luxury goods as metal work, jewelry, gems, seals, and statuettes.26 The stucco decorations on the Apsidial Temple at Sirkap reveal a strong Hel- lenistic flavor; the Ionic temple at Jandial, the most Hellenic structure yet found on Indian soil, may well have been a Parthian fire sanctuary of this pe- riod.27 The archaeological evidence from Taxila is confirmed to a degree by literary sources. The legends of the mission of Saint Thomas the Apostle state that he had been summoned to the court of King Gudnaphar (or Gundofor) of India, who wanted a carpenter who might b'iiild a palace in the Roman style.28 The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, written about a.d. 217, gives evidence that a ruler with the Parthian name Phraates was installed at Taxila about a.d. 43- 44.29 The historicity of these legends cannot be taken at face value, but there are many reasons to believe that the Indo-Parthians were ruling at Taxila in the first half of the first century a.d.
THE “SCYTHIAN” PERIOD
AN APPROACH TO THE HISTORY, ART, EPIGRAPHY AND PALAEOGRAPHY OF NORTH INDIA FROM THE 1ST CENTURY B.C. TO THE 3rd CENTURY A.D.
BY
J. E. VAN LOHUIZEN-DE LEEUW Ph.D.
WITH 29 TEXTFIGURES AND 72 FIGURES
LEIDEN E. J. BRILL
1949
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 349
i
high titles. Thus we have coins with the following legends 93) : obverse: BAZIAEHZ BAZIAEilN MErAAOY AZIAIZOY reverse: maharajasa rajarajasa mahatasa ayasa. obverse: BAZIAEUZ BAZIAEilN MErAAOY AZOY reverse: maharajasa rajarajasa mahatasa ayilisasa. Besides as Gondophernes, as we shall see, did not reign from 19 A.D. -45 A.D., as Rapson thought, there is no need for us to fill in the gap between Azes — who, according to Rapson, ascended the throne already in 58 B.C. 94) — and Gondophernes with an Azilises and Azes II. Further Whitehead, one of the greatest authorities in this field of numismatics, although he makes a distinction between the coins of Azilises and Azes, says with regard to Rapson’s opinion that an Azes I and an Azes II existed: “The difference in type and style between the abundant issues of Azes can be adequately explained by reasons of locality alone, operating through a long reign.” 95)
Recapitulating, we propose the following sequence of kings:
Vonones Spalahora Maues
(= Spalyris = Spalirises = Spalirisa)
? ?■
Spalagadama Azes
?
? = no certain
family-relationship. Gondophernes
The date of Azes can in a measure be approximated by the fact that the square omikron, which as we saw above is met with for the first time in the period of 57-37 B.C., is not found on the coins
93) R. B. Whitehead, Catalogue of the Coins in the Panjab Museum, Lahore, vol. I, p. 132.
94) E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, pp. 572 and 577.
95) R. B. Whitehead, Catalogue of the Coins in the Panjab Museum, Lahore, vol. I, p. 93.
350
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
of Maues, so that this last king must therefore have lived before or about 57 B.C. Azes, therefore, must have reigned in the third quarter of the 1st century B.C. This tallies with the information gained from the strata of Taxila from which Sir John Marshall not only deduced that Azes’ coins immediately follow those of Maues, but also that they date from the third quarter of the 1st century B.C.96). Therefore Azes must have reigned almost con- temporary with or a little later than Orodes, e.g. about the years 50-30 B.C. Now it so happens, that just on some of Azes’ coins the square omikron appears, which would tally excellently with the date suggested. Another argument is the fact that the coins of Spalirises (so, the latest coins of Spalahora), on which the square omikron also appears, show a great similarity to the coins of Hermaeus, one of the very last Greek kings in Kabul. This Hermaeus, according to Tarn, reigned about 50-30 B.C.: “... it is also certain that Hermaeus did not live till A.D. 25 or anywhere near it...” 97 ) and “...he cannot well have come to the throne later than c. 50 B.C. or died before 30 B.C.” 9S)
Our conclusion, therefore, must be that Azes must have reigned about that time, for instance 50-30 B.C. In connection with this it is interesting just to point out that Konow thought he was able to distinguish in the inscription of Shahdaur (in the first line of which “Ayasa” can be read), the date 102, or 80 and still something illegible or 90, and again an undecipherable unit, so that the in- scription dates from the period 80 to 102 of the old era. This calculation would give us: 49 to 27 B.C., and therefore coin- cides with the period suggested above for other reasons.
Let us now consider whether this date for Azes tallies with other information. We noticed already that the coins of Spalahora, who, judging by the coins is partly contemporary with Azes, are indeed a type copied from Hermaeus of about 50-30 B.C. According to the genealogy Vonones must have reigned somewhat earlier. This also tallies wholly with the information gained from his coinage, for they display exclusively the round omikron, so that we can fix the
96) J. Marshall, The Date of Kanishka, J.R.A.S., 1914, pp. 973-986, esp. p. 977.
97) Tarn, p. 338.
98) Tarn, p. 497.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. /\rD. 351
date of Vonones somewhere between the years 60-50 B.C. When Rapson made known his pleasing discovery about th^ epoch in which the square omikron appeared, he made an exception for this rule with regard to the coins of Vonones: “...it appears that this epigraphical test cannot be applied in this particular instance, since the square form seems not to occur in connection with these types until much later.” ") A propos of this Konow thought that the rule about the square omikron was worthless 10,)). The two types of coins struck by Vonones are the type of Demetrius’ “Heracles standing”, and the type of Heliocles’ “Zeus standing”. In the first type we notice the appearance of the square omikron only on the coins of Hermaeus issued together with Kujula Kadphises. In the second type the square omikron appears on the various coins of Gondophernes with the “standing Zeus” but not on this type of coins issued by his predecessors.
Rapson made the exception to the rule about the square omikron, because he thought that Gondophernes reigned only from 19-45 A.D. 101) and that Kujula Kadphises who succeeded him reigned about the middle of the 1st century A.D. 102). As we have seen, and further on shall still see, these kings reigned already in the last quarter of the 1st century B.C., so that there is not one single reason to say that the rule about the appearance of the square omikron does not apply to the types of coins used by Vonones, and we might consequently accept ± 50 B.C. as “terminus ante quern” for Vonones. So one thing and another tallies with the dates proposed by us for the kings Azes, Spalahora and Vonones. Moreover, by this the rule about the square omikron appears to be confirmed on every point.
After Azes Gondophernes ascends the throne. He immediately follows Azes, because he has the same general Aspavarma, son of Indravarma 103) in his service, as appears from his coins. Ar-
99) E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, p. 573.
100) Corpus, p. XLII.
101) E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, pp. 576-577.
102) Ibidem, p. 562.
103) For more details about this family see R. B. Whitehead, The Dynasty of the General Aspavarma, Num. Chrou., 6th series, vol.,JV, London 1944, pp. 99-104.
352 THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
chaeological strata also point to an immediate sequence. Perhaps they are relatives, and we might suppose ± 30 - ± 15 B.C. as an approximate date for Gondophernes. The only available in- scription mentioning him, is that of Takht-i-Bahl 104) of the year 103 = 26 B.C. which corresponds exactly with our just expressed supposition regarding his time.
The year 26 mentioned in this inscription might refer to the years of Gondophernes’ dynasty, and in that case Maues or Vono- nes could have begun to reign in 77 = 52 B.C. That the principal date in this piece is 103, in our opinion, can be taken from the fact that month and day are written after it and not after 26. Furthermore "year” is here indicated as sambatsara, which was always the custom in the old Kharosthi inscriptions of this time, while after the date 26 vase is written, by which it was evidently distinguished from another kind of year.
Finally, concerning Gondophernes’ government, we are able to make out from his coins that he ruled over the territory of Azes as well as over that of Vonones, id est the Punjab and Aracho- sia 105). We do not know whether he brought this great kingdom under his sway only by conquest. It is clear, however, that alto- gether Gondophernes was the mightiest king of this Parthian dynasty. In concurrence with this is the fact that exactly his name appears to be known in the far West in the first centuries A.D. 106).
Now we still owe an explanation for our conviction that Gon- dophernes reigned so^ much_ earlier than is generally accepted. Neafly~all historians follow Rapson’s opinion, that this king reigned from 19 until about 45 A.D. They build this opinion entirely on one piece of information, namely the apocryphal Acts of St. Thomas, the value of which we shall consider more closely further on. Herzfeld thinks that Gondophernes was supreme king from 20-65 A.D. “Er hat mindestens 40 Jahre geherrscht”.107) He believes his name is mentioned in a western source, viz. the
104) Corpus, pp. 57-62.
105) V. Smith, The Indo-Parthian Dynasties, Z.D.M.G., vol. 60, 1906, p. 65.
106) See pp. 352-355.
107) E. Herzfeld, Sakaitan, Arch. Mitt, aus Iran, Band IV, Berlin 1932, p. 104, see also p. 105.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 353
Romance of Philostratus about the life of Apollonius of Tyana 108), in which is related that in the time of Apollonius, that is, in the middle of the 1st century A.D., a Phraotes ruled in Taxila, who paid tribute to the barbarians of the North. Herzfeld states that the name “Phraotes” could be the same as the word apratihata, which appears on the coins of Gondophernes, and consequently the Phraotes in Philostratus’ Romance is the same person as Gondophernes. This seems to us quite impossible, in spite of Tarn’s adhesion to it109). There is nothing which linguistically justifies the identification of “Phraotes” with “apratihata”, and it is more probable that the name “Phraotes” is the same as one of the two very often occurring Parthian names Phraates (id est Fra- hata) or Phraortes (id est Frawarti) 110). The only conclusion which we might perhaps be able to draw from the communication of Philostratus could be that ± 45 A.D. semi-independent kings still resided at Taxila.
Another western source, the Excerpta Latina Barbari, appears, however, to have preserved the name of Gondophernes, viz. as Gathaspar or Gathaspa * * 11 1), id est Gaspar, Caspar the Indian, one of the three kings of the Christmas tale n2). We do not dare, however, to use this argument to fix the date of Gondophernes about the time of the birth of Christ. The only thing that can be
108) 2, 26; 78. Philostratus, The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, with an English translation by F. C. Conybeare, vol. I, London 1927, pp. 183 seq.
109) E. Herzfeld, Sakastan, Arch. Mitt, aus Iran, Band IV, 1932, p. 101, note 1 ; Tarn, p. 341.
110) See W. Pape, Worterbuch der griechischen Eigennanten, vol. Ill of the Handworterbuch der griechischen Sprache, Braunschweig 1850, 2nd ed., p. 411 and F. Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, Marburg 1895, pp. 101-103 and 105.
111) In Appendix VI to Eusebii Chronica, ed. A. Schoene, Berlin 1875, vol. I, p. 228; J. J. Scaliger, Thesaurus Temporum, Excerpta ex Africani Pentabiblo et Eusebii priore parte Canonum Chronicorum omnimodae historiae, homine barbaro collectore et interprete ineptissimo, utilissima alio quin, et bonae frugis refertissima, nunc primum edita, 1st ed., Leyden 1606, p. 67; 2nd ed., Amsterdam 1658, p. 81.
112) See A. von Gutschmid, Die Konigsnamen in den apokryphen Apostel-
geschichten, Rheinisches Museum fur Philol., Neue Folge, vol. XIX, Frankfurt a.M. 1864, pp. 161-183 and 380-401; also in Kleine Schriften, vol. II, Leipzig 1890, pp. 332-394 (ed. Franz Ruhl) ; F. Justi, Miscellen zur iranischen Namen- kunde, Z.D.M.G., vol. 49, 1895, pp. 681-691, esp. p. 688. *'
Van Lohuizen-de Leeuw, The “Scythian" Period
23
354
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
said on this ground is that the name Gondophernes had apparently penetrated to the Near East of the early Christians (Syria and Armenia), and that it gave the early Fathers of the Church an association with distant India.
In our opinion, just as much or as little historical value can be attached to that other early Christian source, the legend of St. Thomas, the Syrian original of which dates from the 3rd century A.D.; Reinaud113), and not Cunningham114) as is always maintained 115), was' the first to recognize already in 1849, in the name ro-uvSacpoQos116) of the Indian king into whose service St. Thomas entered, the name “Gondophernes” of the coins. We have no doubt whatever about the exactness of this identification; yet it does not seem to be justifiable to us, on the grounds of such a legendary communication only put into writing centuries later, to draw the historical conclusion that consequently Gondophernes must have lived in the fourth decade of the 1st century A.D. 117).
113) J. T. Reinaud, Memoire geographique, historique et scientifique sur I’lnde, anterieurement au milieu du XIe siecle de I’ere chretienne, Memoire de I'academie national e des inscriptions et belles-lettres, tome XVIII, 2e partie, Paris 1849, p. 95.
114) A. Cunningham, Coins of Indian Buddhist Satraps, with Greek In- scriptions, J.A.S.B., vol. 23, 1854, pp. 679-714.
115) S. L£vi, Notes sur les Indo-Scylhes. III. Saint Thomas, Gondophares et Mazdeo, J.A., 1897, 9e serie, tome IX, pp. 27-42, esp. p. 27; H. Kehrer, Die Heiligen Drei Konige in Literatur und Kunst, Leipzig 1908-’09, vol. I, p. 69.
116) Supplementum Codicis Apocryphi, vol. I, Acta Thomae, ed. M. Bonnet, Leipzig 1883, pp. 2, 3, 14 and 19.
117) Garbe has the same point of view: “Die genannten auslandischen Ge- lehrten haben dabei nicht bemerkt, dass sie Opfer eines Trugschlusses geworden sind. Sie haben daraus, dass der Konig der Thomas-Legende historisch ist, ohne weiteres den Schluss gezogen, dass auch das Apostolat des Thomas in dem Reiche dieses Kdnigs historisch sei, und iibersehen, wie ausserordentlich haufig es vor- kommt, dass in Legenden, hinter denen niemand einen geschichtlichen Vorgang vermuten wird, eine aus der Geschichte bekannte Personlichkeit — insbesondere ein Konig — auftritt’’, R. Garbe, Indien und das Christentum, Tubingen 1914, p. 135; “Vor dem dritten Jahrhundert hat es keinenfalls Christen in den indischen Grenzgebieten gegeben”, ibidem, p. 143. See about this subject pp. 128-159- L. DE La Vall£e-Poussin says, when discussing this question: “Une critique rigoureuse ne retiendra que 1’identification de Gudafara avec le roi indien des Actes; indice trop faible pour etayer une lourde these. La legende fut elaboree dans un milieu oil on savait quelque chose de 1’Inde’’, L’Inde aux temps des Mauryas et des Barbares, Grecs, Scythes, Parthes et Yue-tchi, Paris 1930, p. 280. See also
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 355
The only thing that can be said again, is that the name of Gondo- phernes was already known in the West in the 3rd century A.D., and that the Indian association with his name was the cause that he was connected with the legend of St. Thomas. Pjrobably the phenomenon that legendary persons of different times become contemporaries again crops up here.
The (mistaken) conclusion, drawn from the St. Thomas Acts, that Gondophernes must have lived ± 40 A.D. was the cause that a great gap was created between him and Azes, which scholars tried to fill up by accepting an Azes I, Azilises and Azes II, which now appears to be unnecessary.
Further it is clear that earlier archaeologists then tried to bring the date 103 of the inscription of Takht-i-Bahl, in which Gondo- phernes is mentioned, into agreement with the (incorrect) date of the reign of Gondophernes, which was accepted on grounds of the St. Thomas Acts. The era, used in the Takht-i-Bahl inscription must then have had its beginning about 57 B.C. and so the conclusion was obvious to identify this era with the Vikrama era which just began in that year. This reasoning has always been the most im- portant argument in favour of the identification of the old era as the Vikrama era118). The year 26 mentioned in the inscription would indicate that Gondophernes was already governing for 26 years, so that this covers a period from 19 A.D. to 45 A.D. 119).
We see from this course of affairs, how, on the grounds of the mistaken conclusion drawn from the apocryphal Acts of St. Tho- mas, the use of the Vikrama era by the Parthian kings came to be supposed. After all we have said about the use of this era by the Scythian rulers it is not necessary to make any addition to it con-
P. Peeters' review of Dahlmann, Die T homas-Legende, Analecta Bollandiana, vol. XXXII, Bruxelles 1913, pp. 75-77. The two Jesuits J. Dahlmann and A. Vath have tried to show that the St. Thomas Acts are historically quite reliable. J. Dahlmann, Die T homas-Legende und die altesten historischen Be- ziehungen des Christentums zum jernen Osten, Freiburg im Breisgau 1912; A. Vath, Der hi. Thomas der Apostel Indiens, eine Untersuchung iiber den histo- rischen Gehalt der T homas-Legende, Aachen 1925.
118) J. F. Fleet, St. Thomas and Gondophernes, J.R.A.S., 1905, pp. 223-236; by the same author The Date in the T akht-i-Bahi Insert ption, J R. AS., 1906, pp. 706-711; E. J. Rapson, Indian Coins, § 62, p. 15.^
119) See for instance E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, pp. 576-577.
35 6b THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
cerning the Parthian kings. The era of the Takht-i-Bahl inscription is, we think, no exception to the rule and therefore the era used in it is the old era, so that the inscription, in our opinion, dates from the year 26 B.C.
As well as the already before mentioned arguments for this earlier date for Gondophernes, there are still others: In the coin- legends of Gondophernes we find namely, next to the round omikron a square omikron 12°). This is a distinct proof that we must date this- king not long after the year 40 B.C. for although the square omikron appears for the first time on the Parthian coins of Orodes II, 57-37 B.C., we are of the opinion that, on the other hand, this fashion did not last very long. The coins of Kujula Kad- phises still display both forms of the omikron, but on those of Wima, as far as we have been able to trace, the square omikron was no longer used but exclusively the round form, so that in the time of Kujula Kadphises, ± 25 B.C. to — 35 A.D., the square omikron must have fallen into disuse. The square omikron there- fore was employed for a very limited space of time, and, indeed only from ± 40 B.C. until about the beginning of our era. The appearance of the square omikron on Gondophernes’ latest coins we would like to use as another argument against dating him about 40 A.D., or even as Herzfeld will have it, 60 A.D. Moreover, it is not clear how the Parthian kings who reigned after Gondo- phernes can still be fitted into the scheme of time after ± 40, or even 60 A.D., and be contemporary with or even before Kujula Kadphises, when we assume with Konow that Wima started the Saka era of 78 A.D.
Further the fact that one of Gondophernes’ titles on his coins is AYTOKPATilP might point to a fairly early date of this king, as Wroth says that this title is only found on coins of monarchs reigning in the centuries B.C. 121 ).
Finally yet one last argument in favour of our opinion of Gondo- phernes’ date and at the same time a proof of the unreliability of
120) E. J. Rapson, Notes on India n Coins and Seals, part V, J.R.A.S., 1903, pp. 285-312, esp. p. 285.
121) W. Wroth, A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum, Catalogue of the Coins of Parthia, London 1903, p. XXX.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 357
the Acta of St. Thomas: After Gondophernes Abdagases reigned who, on the coins issued by Gondophernes together with him, is clearly indicated as his nephew 122). Cunningham thought already in 1890 123) of bringing this Abdagases in connection with the person having an almost similar name, Abdagaeses, mentioned by Tacitus in Annales VI, 36, where the events in the year 35 A.D. are related in which Abdagaeses and his son Sinnaces played a part. Cunningham combines these data with those conveyed by the Indian coins in such a way, that he takes Sinnaces, the son of Abda- gaeses in Tacitus, to be the father of the Abdagases of the coins, and thus at the same time a brother of Gondophernes. Herzfeld agrees with this last, but wants Abdagases to be the son of Gudana, whom he believes to be mentioned on the coins of Gondophernes, and whom he takes to be a brother-in-law of Gondophernes 124). Vath thinks Gad or Gudana is Gondophernes’ brother125). Konow has, in consequence of a suggestion by Fleet, convincingly shown that this “Gudana” is an adjective derived from “Guda”, just as “Kusana” from “Kusa”, so that we must consider “Gudana” as a pedigree-indication of Gondophernes in the style of “Kusana” 126). Moreover, the fact that on the reverse of some of Orthagnes’ coins Gudana in stead of Gondophernes is mentioned, gives another proof in our opinion for this view as we will see further on when discussing the Orthagnes coins 127 ). Consequently this last point of Herzfeld’s theory, viz. that Gondophernes had a brother-in- law Gudana, is not proved. It is, moreover, not clear what gives Cunningham and Herzfeld the right to make Sinnaces the brother of Gondophernes, and to suppose two persons named Abdagases in the place of one. The explanation for this strange
122) P. Gardner, The Coins of the Greek and Scythic Kings of Bactria and India in the British Museum, p. 107.
123) A. Cunningham, Coins of the Sakas, Class B: Coins of the Sakas or Sacae-Scythians, Num. Chron., 3rd series, vol. X, 1890, p. 119.
124) E. Herzfeld, Sakastdn, Arch. Mitt, aus Iran, Band IV, pp. 79-80.
125) A. Vath, Der hi. Thomas der A post el Indiens, erne Vntersuchung iiber den historischen Gehalt der T homas-Legende , pp. 29 and 77.
126) Corpus, p. XLVI.
127) R. B. Whitehead, Catalogue of the Coins in the Panjab A\useum, Lahore,
vol. I, p. 155. *'
358
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
conception of Tacitus’ text is as follows: The date of Gondo- phernes founded on the legend of St. Thomas does not tally with the Roman source, and so another Abdagases was added. It seems to us, however, to be more advisable, if we must choose between the trustworthiness of the St. Thomas Acts and that of Tacitus, to give preference to the latter, as this author had at his disposal very authentic sources and the relative trustworthiness of Tacitus’ writings is universally recognized. The data we have at our service and on which we can build up the history of this time, are as follows:
According to Tacitus, there lives in 35 A.D. an Abdagaeses, who has a grown-up son Sinnaces. In India we have coins of Gondo- phernes who partly issues coins together with his nephew Abda- gases, who also independently strikes coins with the legends “gudu-
PHARABHRATAPUTRASA MAHARAJASA TRATARASA AVADAGASASA” and ‘‘MAHARAJASA RAJATIRAJASA GADAPHARABHRATAPUTRASA
avadagasasa”. The most obvious conclusion to be drawn from these data is, we think, that Abdagaeses of Tacitus and of the coins must be one and the same person. If Abdagaeses was an old man in 35 A.D., then the time when he took part in the government as viceroy, as a rather young man, at the end of Gondophernes’ reign, must be about 10 B.C. Consequently the reign of Gondophernes must have been about 30-10 B.C., which we already have suggested on other grounds. With these arguments for a reign of Gondo- phernes earlier than is generally supposed, we will now leave this subject.
There is, however, still one point which we should like to touch upon in connection with this king. A number of coins of the type ‘‘standing Nike”, such as was used by Gondophernes has been found, but with the following legend: obverse: BACIAGYC BACIAGON MGT AC OPQArNHC reverse: maharajasa rajatirajasa mahatasA gudupharasa
GUDANA.
According to Herzfeld ,2r) this Orthagnes (which name is equi- valent to Verethragna) must be the anonymous person mentioned
128) E. HERZFELD, Sakastan, Arch. Mitt, aus Iran, Band IV, pp. 102-104.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD C£NT. A.D. 359
by Tacitus in Annales XIII, 7: In 55-58 A.D. a son of Vardanes rises up against Vologases I. This “filius Vardanis'’ without a name would then be the same as Orthagnes 1-9), under whom Gondo- phernes, according to Herzfeld, struck coins as viceroy. We do not see any foundation for this hypothesis. Firstly,; the text is here perhaps unreliable. Nipperdey-Andresen suspects that it must be “filius Vardanes”, so that the person in question, did, in fact, possess a name 13°). As Herzfeld himself remarks: “... sind die Orthagnes- Miinzen denen von Gundopharrs Nachfolger Pakores so ahnlich, dass die Ruckseiten ohne Lesen der Inschrift nicht zu unterschei- den sind. Die Orthagnes-Miinzen stammen also fraglos aus den spaten Jahren Gundopharrs.” 131 ) Should Herzfeld’s theory be correct, then the great King Gondophernes would have been at the end of his reign a viceroy to another Parthian king, Orthagnes. Rapson believes Gondophernes succeeded Orthagnes 132), while Justi 133), Otto 134), and Schur 135) believe they were brothers. To us these hypotheses do not seem very probable. If a humiliation as Herzfeld proposes could have befallen Gondophernes, then it was more likely to come from the Kusanas than from the Parthian side. Moreover, it is definitely strange that Orthagnes and Gondo- phernes bear equally high titles on both sides of the coins. This was also the case with Azes and Azilises, and convinces us that presu- mably we have here again two different names for one and the same person. This time the two names are not so similar as was the
129) E. Herzfeld, ibidem, p. 103.
130) “... hatte Tacitus einen solchen (viz. filius Vardanis) genannt, so wiirde er dessen eigenen Namen angegeben haben”, Nipperdey-Andresen, 2nd ed., Berlin 1855, p. 75. W. Schur believes the text to be correct, Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero, Klio, Beitrage zur alten Geschichte, Beiheft XV (Neue Folge, Heft II), Leipzig 1923, p. 73.
1\1) E. Herzfeld, Sakastdn, Arch. Mitt, aus Iran, Band IV, p. 103.
132) E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, p. 578.
133) F. Justi, Geschichte Irans, von den dltesten Zeiten bis zum Aus gang der Sasdniden, Grundriss der Iranischen Philologie, herausgegeben von W. Geiger und E. Kuhn, Band II, Strassburg 1896-1904, pp. 395-550, esp. p. 507.
134) W. Otto, s.v. Hyndopherres, Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopadie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft, vol. IX, Stuttgart 1916, col. 183-191, esp. p. 191.
135) W. Schur, Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero, Klio, Beitrage zur alten Geschichte, Beiheft XV (Neue Folge, Heft U), Leipzig 1923, p. 77.
360
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
case with Azes and Azilises. We might be able to explain this by supposing that “Orthagnes” was a surname or title of Gondopher- nes136). It seems to us that we can make this more acceptable. “Gondophernes” corresponds to the Persian “Vindapharna”, which signifies “the winner of majestic glory” 137). “Orthagnes” is the graecized form of the Persian “Verethragna”, meaning “the vic- torious”, so that both names, in our opinion, point in the same direction and the Nike figure on Gondophernes’ coins is per- haps a symbolic emphasis of this surname. Such parallels of per- son’s names occur in the whole field of Greater-Indian culture 138).
Confirming this idea, and at the same time in connection with the foregoing, we should like, moreover, to suggest concerning the apratihata (which Herzfeld identified with the name “Phrao- tes” of the king whom Apollonius of Tyana found in Taxila about the middle of the 1st century B.C.) that it is the Sanskrit equivalent of Gondophernes’ title “Orthagnes”: “Apratihata” means “the irre- sistible”, “the undefeated”, “the triumphant”. Earlier already this epitheton ornans had been used on coins, “inter alia” by Lysias (who writes ANIKHTOX as an equivalent on the reverse) and still later by Raj uvula in the compound apratihatacakra 139) which obviously proves that Herzfeld’s opinion about this word is in- correct. The epitheton Verethragna continues to exist at the Sas-
136) After this had been written down we found that Konow also thought that the two names concerned one and the same person.
137) Noteworthy, because it is curious, is Cunningham’s explanation of the name “Gondophernes” as “Ganda-phor”, i.e. “sugarcane-crusher”. Cunningham arrived at this peculiar opinion on grounds of the fact that the channels for the cane-juice of a sugar-mill are chiselled in the same form as the Gondophernes-
monograph ^ . See A. Cunningham, Coins of Indian Buddhist Satraps, with
Greek Inscriptions, f.A.S.B., vol. 23, 1854, pp. 679-714, esp. p. 712.
138) The different names of King Candragupta II give a nice instance of this r Vikramaditya, Ajitavikrama, Vikramanka, Simhavikrama, Simhacandra, Devagupta, DevasrI, Devaraja, see L. DE La Vallee-Poussin, Dynasties et Histoire de I'Inde depuis Kanishka, Paris 1935, p. 47. Our attention was drawn to this list by Prof. Gonda. Another instance is the consecration-names of King Krtanagara of Singasari: Jnanaiivabajra, Jnanabajresvara and Jnanesvarabajra, see N. J. Krom, Hindoe-Javaansche Geschiedenis, 2nd ed., Den Haag 1931, p. 341.
139) P. Gardner, The Coins of the Greek and Scythic Kings of Bactria and India in the British Museum, pp. 29 and 67.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 361
sanian court for some time as the coronation-name of different kings. The coins mentioned on which Gondophernes calls him- self Orthagnes must, in our opinion, have been struck at the end of his reign. Not only because they, as Herzfeld already remarked, strikingly resemble those of Gondophernes’ successor, Pakura, but also because the round form of sigma C which appears on them represents the last stage of the development which this character undergoes (see textfig. 29 on p. 378).
Resuming, we see therefore, that we need not suppose the con- fused situation of Gondophernes as viceroy of an unknown Or- thagnes. This again supports our belief that Gudana is a pedigree- indication, for we see that coins with Orthagnes on the obverse mention Gudana on the reverse.
If Abdagases succeeded Gondophernes in his Indian domains, then this was not for long, for his coins are scarce. Another Parthian king, Pakura, naxoeriG, issues coins, just as Gondophernes did, with the General Sasa, a relative of Aspavarma 140), and he therefore probably immediately succeeds Gondophernes as independent king. Abdagases was perhaps driven out by Pakura to the West, where he is mentioned by Tacitus.
Possibly we find already under Gondophernes the Kusanas in the Punjab, for Kujula Kadphises seems, according to Konow, to be mentioned in the inscription of Takht-i-Bahl in 103 = 26 B.C. as Kapa erjhuna, so, as a young prince. In 122 = 7 B.C. there is no longer any doubt about this and we find him as lord and master in Panjtar, and apparently the Kusanas have taken over the terri- tory west of the Indus from the Parthians, be it perhaps only for a short time. In 136 or 7 A.D. we find Kujula Kadphises also in Taxila, on the other bank of the Indus, as appears from the silver scroll of that year discovered there. Afterwards we only hear again of the Kusanas in the inscription of Khalatse of 187 = 58 A.D. in which Wima Kadphises is mentioned. It is quite probable that in the intermediate period the Kusanas had only nominal power over these North Indian territories, especially on the east side of
140) R. B. Whitehead, The Dynasty of the General As pavarma, Num. Chron., 6th series, vol. IV, 1944, pp. 99-104.
362
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
the Indus. The Hou ban shu remarks very emphatically that Wima Kadphises in his turn conquered T’ien-chu; which Indian territory is meant does not matter here. It seems therefore that a previous decline of Kusana power had taken place, and this is in accordance with the information in the Romance of Philostratus that Apol- lonius of Tyana still met a Parthian king Phraotes in Taxila about the middle of the 1st century A.D., who was obliged to pay tribute to the barbarians of the North. Marshall also presumes a tempo- rary decline of the power of the Kusanas 141 ).
Probably the person to whom this Parthian king was obliged to pay tribute was Wima Kadphises. The Parthian kings Sapedana and Satavastra, whose coins were found in Taxila, reigned, judging by these coins, in that city during the reign of Pakura and before the afore-mentioned Phraotes. It is to this period of decay of Parthian power after the mighty King Gondophernes (in which through their coins we hear about different, for the rest unknown Parthian kings), that the report of the Pen plus refers: . . . xard vcotou ^eaoveioQ r| ptitqojtoXk; avcfjsrrjs ZxuSiai; Mivvayde ’ PaoiXedetai 5e vno IIdQ0a)v, cruvexwc d^A/nA.ous exSuoxovttov. 142)
We have seen that for different reasons Kujula Kadphises seems to have begun his career in the last quarter of the 1st century B.C. There are still several other arguments to be advanced for this. First of all the fact that Kujula Kadphises struck coins with Her- maeus. When discussing this argument we can, at the same time, make it clear how careful one must be in drawing conclusions. Konow, proceeding from the fact that Fan ye seems to mention only incidents later than 25 A.D., and thinking in connection with his theory regarding the commencement of Kaniska’s reign, that Kujula Kadphises therefore at the earliest could have begun his career only after 25 A.D., and stating that Kujula Kadphises issued coins together with Hermaeus, concludes that Hermaeus therefore
141) J. Marshall, Excavations at Taxila, A.S.I.A.R., 1929-30, pp. 55-97, esp. p. 57.
142) neQiJtXovs rijs 'EeuGgai; BaX-docnis, ed. Hjalmar Frisk, Goteborgs Hogskolas Arsskrijt, vol. XXXIII, Goteborg 1927, § 38, p. 13.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D.;. 363
f.l •
reigned until about 30 A.D. 143). Rapson, however, thought that Hermaeus reigned about 40 B.C. l44). Tarn also, ion the grounds of his data about the Greek kings, concludes a 4ate f°r Hermaeus of before 48 until ± 30 B.C. 145). Starting from this point Tarn, attaching belief to Konow’s theory that iKujula Kadphises only began to reign in 25 A.D., concluded that the “joint issue” of Hermaeus and Kujula Kadphises is impossible, and that Kujula Kadphises only imitated the coins, because he was a relative of Hermaeus, and at the same time hoped to get the Greeks who lived in his country to side with him against the Par- thians. The one reason seems to us to be even more fantastic than the other 14li) ; the more so, as usurpation or a joint rule is always accepted in the case of a “joint issue”. An exception would have to be made to this, and so it would have to he assumed then, that Kujiila Kadphises imitated, lor such a far fetched reason, the coins of a Cireek kin^ who reigned at least 5 5 years before lum. 1 akn himself apparently leels the weakness ot his argument, judging by his last words: "The old belief that these coins were a joint issue of Hermaeus and Kadphises I has in consequence been universally abandoned, for it is recognised that a considerable interval of time separated the two kings; but nothing else has taken its place.” l47) Indeed there is nothing that can bridge over the gap of 55 or more years, and it appears to us that it is unwise to attack violently the now once for all clearly evident “joint issue”. We must therefore choose between the calculations of Tarn about the date of Hermaeus based on his other data about the Greek kings in Bactria and India, and the theory of Konow about the corn-
143) Corpus, p. XLII.
144) E. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, p. 562.
145) Tarn, pp. 326 and 497.
146) Tarn, pp. 339, 343 and Appendix 17. Even for E. Bazin-Foucher who generally has great praise for Tarn's theories — witness her expression: “simple- ment grace au don de divination qu’il a regu du ciel et qui est la sorte de genie de9 historiens”, this representation of affairs is too much. In lief review of The Greeks in Bactria and India in J.A., tome 230, 1938, pp. 501-528, she says on page 518: “... ces hypotheses ... n'emportent plus la conviction du lecteur."
147) Tarn, pp. 338-339. Italicized by us. *'
__364
THE HISTORY OF NORTH INDIA
mencement of Kujula Kadphises’ career which connects with his whole hypothesis about the beginning of Kaniska’s reign. It seems to us then, that our choice, without hesitation, must fall upon the first. Against Konow’s hypothesis sufficient arguments have been advanced in the preceding pages, and the calculations of Tarn in so far as they concern the Greek kings tally nearly always excellently with our outline of the history of the Scythians, unless he again seeks support from Konow as in this case.
Consequently Kujula Kadphises’ reign, in our opinion, connects directly with that of Hermaeus which, we believe, ended about 25 B.C. Accordingly Kujula Kadphises began his career at the be- ginning of the last quarter of the 1st century B.C. (and this would confirm Konow’s opinion that he is mentioned in the inscription of Takht-i-Bahl of the year 103 = 26 B.C. as a young prince). Moreover the evidence of the discoveries at Taxila affirms that Kujula Kadphises was partly contemporary with and partly later than Gondophernes and succeeded him at that place 148). As Kujula Kadphises probably did not conquer Taxila at the be- ginning of his career we are justified in saying that this monarch started on his career somewhere about 25 B.C.
In connection with the shortly before discussed joint issue of Kujula Kadphises and Hermaeus we must now bring forward the following. Marshall remarks in one of his reports 149) that a remarkable fact came to light during his excavations, viz. that in Taxila he found many coin-specimens of Hermaeus and Kujula Kadphises as well as the joint issue type, in strata dating after Gondophernes, and also in strata of “the early half of the first century B.C.” (This last must undoubtedly be a misprint: “B.C.” instead of “A.D.”, for elsewhere in the article coins of Hermaeus and Kujula Kadphises are mentioned as of “the early half of the first century A.D.”.) The for Marshall seemingly inexplica- bleness and absurdity of coins of Hermaeus and Kujula Kadphises of the first half of the 1st century A.D. and at the same time after
148) F.. J. Rapson, C.H.I., vol. I, p. 562.
149) J. Marshall, Excavations at Taxila, A.S.I.A.R., 1929-’30, pp. 55-97, esp. p. 56.
FROM THE 1ST CENT. B.C. TO THE 3RD CENT. A.D. 363
Gondophernes, is for us who date Gondophernes at the end of the 1st century B.C. nothing more than a plea for our conception.
But numismatics provide still more arguments. It is a generally known fact that many gold Roman coins have been found in India. They were the legal tender of merchants from the West, who, taking advantage of the monsoons, came to buy spices and other valuable articles in India. These Roman coins date for the greater part from the time of the Julian-Claudian dynasty. The series of coins after this breaks off suddenly, and therefore the coins date chiefly from the reign of Augustus, until and including Nero, id est 27 B.C. until 68 A.D. This phenomenon made Schur remark that the Julian coins seem to have had a high value in India 150). Thiel ingeniously explained this sudden break in the stream of Roman coins by the depreciation of the money under Nero 151). The silver money was alloyed and the gold lessened in weight.
Now we have many gold coins of Wima Kadphises and the kings after him. The gold standard was imitated from the Roman aureus which was instituted by Augustus. Kennedy formerly doubted whether the standard of the Indian coins was indeed that of Augustus 152). His argumentation was, however, not at all con- vincing and very weak, so that it has been refuted by many. It is obvious that the motive to mint gold coins under Wima Kadphises must be sought for in the enormous influx of Roman coins between the years 27 B.C. until 68 A.D. A copper coin of Kujula Kad- phises 153) with the representation of the king’s head proves that
150) W. Schur, Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero, Klio, Beiheft XV (Neue Folge, Heft II), 1923, p. 57.
151) J. H. Thiel, Eudoxus van Cyzicus (Een hoofdstuk uit de Geschiedenis van de Vaart op Indie en de Vaart om de Zuid in de Otidheid), Mededeelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandsche Akademie van W etenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks, deel 2, N° 8, Amsterdam 1939, p. 2 66.
152) J. Kennedy, The Secret of Kanishka, f.R.A.S., 1912, pp. 665-688 and 981-1019, esp. pp. 996-1001 ; and by the same author Kanishka' s Greek, f.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 121-124; Sidelights on Kanishka, f.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 369-378; Fresh Light on Kanishka, f.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 664-669; The Date of Kanishka, J.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 920-939- Fleet agrees with Kennedy in The Date of Kanishka, f.R.A.S., 1913, pp. 913-920, esp. p. 916.
153) See R. B. Whitehead, Catalogue of the Coins in the Panjab Museum,
Lahore, vol. I, pi. XVII, 24. •'
MIAMI UNIVERSITY
Department of History
254 Upham Hall Oxford, Ohio 45056 513 529-5121
May 22, 1994
Dr. Samuel Hugh Moffett Princeton Theological Seminary Princeton, NJ 08540
Dear Dr. Moffett,
Enclosed is my review of your book which appeared in the American Historical Review 99 (April, 1994), As I expected, they printed the shorter version.
For your information, I have enclosed a page from John M. Rosenfield's book on Gondophares.
As to the problem of the ethnic identity of Mark, which I had noted (on pp. 411, 431) as either an Uighur or an Ongut,
I believe that the enclosed pages from a posthumous work by Paul Pelliot may help to clariy the problem. He notes that the Syriac history of Yaballaha III (published by J. A. Montgomery and F. A, W. Budge) does not give the identity of Mark or of his companion, Sauma (p. 242), but^an Arabic Nesto- rian writer identified Yaballaha as a "Turk"; the Jacobite Bar Hebraeus in a gloss indicated that Turk meant "Uighur. " Pelliott, on the other hand, suggested that he was probably an Ongut in T* oung-Pao in 1914, a position which he reaffirms with considerable detail (pp. 242-46).
You may be interested in a new book by Jerry H. Bentley,
Old World Encounters (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), which deals in part with the Nestorian Christians in China.
Edwin Yamauchi Professor
History Department
Excellence is Our Tradition
352 pp. K-009
$24.95
ISBN 1-887983 09.0
G I
G
280 pp. P-00 1
$19.95
341 pp. 0-007
$27.95
Why do it al one?
Make these new publications your partners in mission
New from
ROGER S. GREENV MARC
Sexually Exploited Children
Working to Protect and Heal
Phyllis Kilbourn & Marjorie McDermid, editors
The sexual exploitation of children is a difficult issue to face. However, when the United Nations reports that one million children are forced into child prostitution every year and that an estimat- ed 10 million children worldwide are victims of the sex industry, we can no longer avoid the problem. This new volume is a hands-on, practi- cal resource for people who are ready to respond. Become an instrument for Christ's healing and hope to these children.
The Global God
Multicultural Evangelical Views of God
Aida Besan^on Spencer &
William David Spencer, editors
Our culture is a powerful force that shapes our view of God. This volume breaks new ground by providing views of God from around the world for us all to learn from. Each contributor addresses two questions: Through what attribute is God most understood in your culture? and. What attribute of God needs to be more fully understood? An indispensable resource for cross-cultural workers, cultural anthropologists and all global Christians.
Bearing the Witness of the Spirit
Lesslie Newbigin's Theology of Cultural Plurality
George R. Hunsberger
Respected mission thinker George Hunsberger does us a great service by interpreting the work of another great mission thinker, Lesslie Newbigin.The author provides a solid theologi- cal assessment of multiculturalism and its impact on mission as revealed through Newbigin's work. "A pioneering assessment of Lesslie Newbigin’s legacy" — Gerald H. Anderson
Together
Again
Kimhip of word and deed
40 pp. 0-006
$5.95
ISBN: 1-887983-08-2
ssionol Church
280 pp. M-041
$25.95
tsgr
270 pp. M-042
$29.95
Together Again
Kinship of Word and Deed
Roger S. Greenway
Respected missionary statesman Roger Greenway calls for a reuniting of evangelism and social action under the banner of evangeli- cal missions in this concise but powerful new book. In a recent executive forum, the author fired the imagination of church planting mis- sionaries and relief executives about the possi- bilities for closer fellowship to recognize their essential kinship in the work of Gods kingdom.
Missional Church
A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America
Darrell L. Guder, editor
What would our theology look like if we really believed that North America is a mission field? Six noted mission thinkers address this question and issue a firm challenge for the church to recover its missional call to North America.The authors examine todays secular culture and the church's loss of dominance in contempo- rary society and present a biblical theology that considers the consequences of this upon the structure and institutions of the church.
The Missions of Jesus and the Disciples According to the Fourth Gospel
With Implications for the Fourth Gospel's Purpose and the Mission of the Contemporary Church
Andreas J. Kostenberger
Creatively integrates theology and missiology to call the church to a contemporary presentation of the fourth gospel in our postmodern world. Provides a new bibilical foundation for mission as a fundamental privilege for all Christians.
New from
CHOOSING MARC
FUTURE
FOR U.S. MISSIONS
128 pp. R-021
$1 1.95
ISBN: 1-887983-07-4
MINISTRY &
I HEOLOGY IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
Don A. Pittman Ruben L. F. Habito Terry C. Muck '
524 pp. M-043
$34.95
A III STORM OF
ClirisHanity in Asia
SAMfEI. HUGH MOFFETT
560 pp M-040
$24.95
Choosing a Future for U.S. Missions
Paul McKaughan, Dellanna O'Brien &
William O'Brien
This forward-looking new volume takes a hard look at current mission realities and offers you promising new possibilities for the future of your organization.lt articulates a new learning methodology to help you identify and choose a vision for the future of your organization. Ideal for mission strategists and agency executives.
Ministry and T heology in Global Perspective
Contemporary Challenges for the Church
Don A. Pittman, Ruben L. F. Habito &
Terry C. Muck, editors
This new volume brings together thoughtful reflections from several leading theologians and mission thinkers about the impact of globalization on ministry and mission. After examining past and present theological and missiological perspectives, this insightful book presents key challenges to the church entering the 21st century.
History of Christianity in Asia
Volume I, Beginnings to 1 500
Samuel Hugh Moffett
Renowned mission scholar Samuel Moffett weaves immense amounts of research into this epic work. He highlights the religious pluralism of Asia and shows how Christianity spread long before the modern missionary movement went forth in the shelter of Western military might. Finally the history of Christianity in the East has received the attention it deserves.
AV(/ord
Season
Lesslie Newbigin
208 pp. 0-008
$14.95
PARTNERING TO
Build and measure Organizational Capacity
190 pp. S-018
$1 1.95
248 pp. 0-004
$10.95
A Word in Season
Perspectives on Christian World Missions
Lesslie Newbigin
The respected voice of Lesslie Newbigin, one of the most influential mission thinkers of our time, continues to advocate on behalf of evangelical world mission through his work. This new book contains seventeen never-before-published essays. sermons and addresses that reveal Newbigin's agenda for Christian mission from 1960-1992.
Partnering to Build and Measure Organizational Capacity
Lessons Learned from NGOs Around the World
Christian Reformed World Relief Committee
This new book highlights lessons learned from NGOs around the world who have sought to employ appreciative inquiry in community development. This practice involves partnering with the community to identify community values, which become the basis for development. A useful tool to help NGOs and mission agencies discover their capacity for such practices.
Incarnational Agents
A Guide to Developmental Ministry
John R. Cheyne
Incarnational agents — people involved in relief and development work who live among the community — are key to holistic transformation. This new volume moves you beyond the usual call for evangelism and social action to a holistic approach to min- istry. It contains many helpful aids, such as material on how to appraise community needs through surveys, research and feasibility studies and a comprehensive guide to strategic planning.
MARC Publications • A Division of World Vision • Toll Free: 1-800-777-7752 • Direct: (626) 301-7720
Monrovia, CA • 91016-3198
E-Mail: MARCpubs@wvi.org
800 W. Chestnut Ave. • Fax: (626) 30 1-7786
Serving as Senders
Neal Pirolo
This refreshing new book meets a previously unmet need in the mission community — a publication on how to support missionaries while they’re preparing to leave, in the field and upon their return. Mission is not just about those “out there on the frontline,” it s also about those who support them. Those who go and those who serve as senders are two units of the same cross-cultural outreach. This new book is designed for those who want to become effective missionary supporters. Ideal for group study.
208 pp. S-019 $7.45
Living Faithfully in a Fragmented World
Lessons for the Church from MacIntyre’s AfterVirtue
Jonathan R. Wilson
Examines contemporary culture and the opportunities and threats it poses to Christian mission. Wilson then presents a history of the church in relation to Western culture and draws upon specific suggestions from AfterVirtue. He analyzes, among other things, the assumption that we live in a fragmented rather than a pluralistic world and the implications of the end of “the Enlightenment project.” 82 pp. M-044 $8.95
Christian Voluntarism
A Guide for Volunteers
Martha VanCise
Step-by-step tips for mission volunteers preparing for a trip. Answers such practical questions as, “What should 1 take?” and “Do I need shots?” Good advice for both first-time volunteers and seasoned missionaries.
230 pp. S-014 $18.95
Quan. Title
Code
Price
Postage & Handling
U S. customers add $3.00 for first book ordered and $.50 for each additional book.
International customers add $4.00 for first book ordered and $ 1 .00 for each additional book.
Subtotal «
8.25% sales tax for CA residents $
Postage & Handling
TOTAL
Overcoming Missionary Stress
Marjory F. Foyle
Everyone has stress. Missionaries can be especially vulnerable to stress. Living in another culture, typically without normal support networks, the mission- ary faces a unique type of stress. Drawing from years of experience as a mis- sionary doctor and psychiatric counselor, Dr. Foyle examines the causes and effects of missionary stress, such as culture shock, burnout and mental health. She also addresses the marriage relationship, singleness, raising chil- dren abroad and relationships with co-workers. 1 59 pp. M-046 $ 1 2.95
Sharing the Good News With the Poor
Bruce J. Nichols & Beulah R. Wood, editors
This volume answers the call from evangelical Christians worldwide to con- textualize the gospel for the poor. Several case studies clarify key issues and provide glimpses of successes and failures that resulted from applying evan- gelical theology in different contexts. Successfuly integrates evangelism, church planting, social service and justice. 285 pp. 0-005 $22.95
Become a MARC Subscriber
When you become a 1998 MARC subscriber, you will receive these important mission publications at a savings of over 20%!
• Beyond Duty (study guide)
• Sexually Exploited Children
• Together Again: Kinship of Word and Deed
• Choosing a Future for U.S. Missions
• and more to be announced
Only $65.00 in the U.S. (A-098) or $75.00 overseas (A-098i)
Your 8-digit ^
inr Nnmhpr ▼
Account Number Name:
Address:
Phone:
To use credit card, fill in number below
□
|
l/ZC A |
□ am |
Exp.
date:
Signature:
Complete form and send to: MARC Publications • 800 W. Chestnut Ave • Monrovia. CA • 91016-3198 • USA • Or Call Toll Free: I -800-777-7752
Catalog # C989
Need a new perspective on mission?
Mission should not be a “weight" to be carried. As Tim Dearborn says in his new book Beyond Duty, we should be engaged in mission “not just because the need demands it, but because our hearts require it if we’re going to be fully formed and if we ’re going to have the heart of Christ take full expression in us. Through this unconventional approach to mission, caring for people is no longer a duty — it is a delight.”
If you feel like you’ve been carrying the burden of mission instead of experiencing the joy of participating in God’s plan for his creation, then Beyond Duty is just one of many MARC books that stand ready to help you find a new per- spective on mission.
Make MARC’s mission books your partner in mission. See inside for more resources.
BEYOND DUTY
A Passion for Christ,
A Heart for Mission
Tim Dearborn A provocative new study guide that will transform your concept of mission. Ideal for group study.
Study Guide* V-009 $8.95 Leader's Guide V-0 10 $2.95 Video V-0 1 I $15.95
Complete Set V-0 1 2 $ 1 9.95
* ISBN: I -887983-04-X
ARC
A division of World Vision 800 W. Chestnut Ave. Monrovia, CA 91016-3198
Hon Profit Org U.5 Postage P fi :i D Arcadia, Cfl Permit IM36
Carrying the Weight
of World Mission Alone?
Let MARC’s mission resources help
or. Samuel H. Moffett 1004-8189
ISO Leabrook Lane Princeton NJ 08540
William Carey Library
tfooks and Materials Distributor for the 14. S. Center for World Mission
Joining with God’s people around the world in fulfilling the Great Commission is the most exciting venture possible in the world today. All of us at the U.S. Center for World Mission work together with you to give you the tools and materials you need to pray, go or give. In this issue we offer a sampling of the books you can use to spread and participate in the vision.
NOTE: In the prices “Disc” stands for Discount, the price for 1-2 copies postpaid. “Whsl” stands for Wholesale, the price if you buy 3 or more copies, plus shipping. If you would like our free Mission Resource Catalog, request a copy on the order form following these pages.
The Missionary Movement in Christian History , Studies in the Transmission of Faith i/
i Andrew F. Walls
analysis of the modem missionary movement scholar of world Christianity! This series of essays is rich in missiological lessons gained from years of field experience and teaching church and mission leaders in Africa and the U.K.
Walls’ biblical scholarship and wealth of knowledge of initial Mediterranean Christian- ity, early Catholicism, Celtic monasticism, Ref- ormation Protestantism, and West African Spirit Christianity, together provide ex- traordinary insights and successful counters of secular critiques of world Christianity. This is truly a treasure trove!
An unmatched by a renowned
by the World Evangelical Fellowship Missions Commission, seeks to answer that question in this crucial work. Using ReMAP’s 14-nation study, this collection of es- says supplies some very encouraging answers.
Case studies focus on missionaries from Af- rica, Asia, Europe, Latin America, and North America.
There is no more important subject affecting missions today than MISSIONARY attrition!
And there is no other book that offers such a well-researched and global perspective on this critical topic. If you are concerned with missions — preparing to go, woridng in the field, serving on your church missions committee, or guiding others as a mission executive — you can- not afford to ignore this book.
William Carey Library/World Evangelical Fellowship, 1997, paper, 398 pp.
WCL277-8 ‘Retail $23495 ‘Disc $15.75 -Whsl $13.17
Orbis, 1996, paper, 266 pp.
ORB059-9 ‘Retail $20^0 ‘Disc. $15.75 ‘Whsl $14.38
A History of Christianity in Asia Volume 1: Beginnings to 1500
Samuel H. Moffett
If you missed out on this magnificent work when it first ap- peared in 1992, don’t miss your chance this time! Dr. Samuel Moffett, veteran missionary and scholar, has done a masterful job of pulling together the most up-to-date information on the Christian church in the East, all the way from Syria to China.
But this is not just the best history of God’s work in Asia. Its lessons, in country af- ter country, are for today! Read how the East- ern church faced extreme persecution when the Roman Empire — the Persian Empire’s greatest enemy — turned Christian. See what happened to the Nestonan outreach as far as China — one of the Finest missionary churches of all time! and more ... This is indeed a fine treasure of missiological insights. (And it’s fascinating reading, too!) Orbis, 1998, paper, 574 pp.
ORB 162-5 ‘Retail $2^00 ‘Disc $19.75 ‘Whsl $18.25
Too Valuable to Lose Exploring the Causes and Cures of Missionary Attrition
William D. Taylor, editor
Does God really care about His servants? Yes! Do we care for our people who are serving the Lord out there in the world of cross-cultural ministry?
Reducing Missionary Attrition Project (ReMAP), launched
The Unseen Face of Islam Sharing the Gospel with Ordinary Muslims Bill Musk l
Getting down to where it’s at for most Mus- lims— ordinary people dealing with life’s problems. That’s what this excellent work on folk Islam is all about. Beneath their outward conformity to Islam, nany Muslims find deep unmet needs and turn to the world of spirits, saints, and spiritual powers.
In this very readable series of short stories, based on his experiences in the Middle East,
Musk helps Christians learn to share how the risen Christ meets the needs of Muslims. These lessons also offer insights for workers among Hindus, Buddhists, and tribal peoples who turn to the same sort of spiritual powers when facing problems.
Monarch MARC/Evangelical Missionary Alliance (U.K.),
1989, paper, 315 pp.
MON018-8 ‘Retail %¥h95 ‘Disc. $16.50 ‘Whsl $15.19
Ethnic Realities and the Church Lessons From Kurdistan Robert Blincoe
This remarkable book fairly bristles with in- sights about how to get beyond centuries-old misunderstandings and move forward ef- fectively with Biblical faith in the world of Is- lam. Its lessons apply equally well in Hindu and Buddhist spheres
Taken to heart, this book can produce a dynamic new era in the greater part of the world of missions! Its appeal can easily
September-December 1998 Mission Frontiers Bulletin 47
USCWM 1605 Elizabeth, Pasadena CA 91 104. 626-797-11 1 1
(L H- ^LCV) "X-
(MX '
A HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN ASIA. Volume I: Beginnings to 1500.
By Samuel Hugh Moffett.
(Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1998; revised from the 1992 HarperCollins edition).
Pp. xxvi + 560. $25.00 (paper).
On April 19th of this year Pope John Paul II presided at the opening Eucharistic liturgy for the Synod of Bishops for Asia, one in a series of synods in preparation for the millennium. In his homily the Pope recalled that it was St. Thomas the Apostle who first brought Christianity into Asia, charting the Church's movement eastward across this vast continent where more than three fifths of the world's population now live. The pope urged the assembled church leaders to find new vigor for the proclamation of Christ in Asia: "Ours is the task of writing new chapters of Christian witness in every part of the world, and in Asia: from India to Indonesia, from Japan to Lebanon, from Korea to Kazakhstan, from Vietnam to the Philippines, from Siberia to China... We want to listen to what the Spirit says to the Churches, so that they may proclaim Christ in the context of Hinduism, Buddhism,
Shintoism and all those currents of thought and life which were already rooted in Asia before the preaching of the Gospel arrived." Subsequent synod discussions introduced realistic, diverse and hopeful views on the Church in Asia today.
Asia is of course a vast continent blessed with diverse cultures and, as Samuel H. Moffett (Henry W. Luce Professor of Ecumenics and Mission at Princeton Theological Seminary) convincingly reminds us in this masterful volume, it is also the home of very ancient civilizations. Christianity itself has had a long Asian history, right from its birth — in west Asia. With Moffett's help, we move from the travels of Thomas the Apostle (the
1
May 1998
tradition of whose visit to India Moffett respects as quite probable) all the way to the arrival of the Western Europeans in India by sea in 1498 (opening a new era, to be treated in volume II). We learn about the growth of Christian communities in the east, the establishment of vibrant churches in Syria and Persia, the dramatic (and traumatic) changes that took place in such communities with the rise of Islam, as well as the centuries of interaction with Muslims thereafter. We glimpse the founding in India of Christian churches which endure to this day, communities in the empire of Genghis Khan, missions to China as early as the 7th century, and even some hints of Christian presence as distant as Korea, Japan and southeast Asia.
The places and time periods covered here are vast and daunting, but Moffett's presentation, though encyclopedic and detailed, enables reader to delve selectively into sections of that long history. Consider, for instance, what we learn about Nestorian Christians. Nestorius (d. 451) is known to most of us mainly as a heretic who failed to affirm the unity of one person, divine and human, in Christ. Moffett rehearses for us the tumultuous politics and intrigues that led to his condemnation, and summarizes for us information (uncovered in the 19th century) which has encouraged some theologians to rehabilitate Nestorius as a thinker within the boundaries of orthodoxy. He implicitly strengthens the case for rehabilitation by highlighting the vigor of Nestorian communities throughout Asia, from Persia to China. For it turns out that the condemnation of Nestorius' teachings in 431 was only an early moment in a promising history of Nestorian Christianity, a history essential to our understanding of Christianity in pre-modern Asia, where the Nestorian connection surfaces frequently and unexpectedly.
2
May 1998
For example. Pope Innocent IV sent several missions to the Mongol princes of central Asia in hopes of converting them and keeping them out of Europe. In 1245, he sent John of Plano Carpini (a disciple of Francis of Assisi) who eventually had an audience with Kuyuk, grandson of Genghis Khan. Although their conversation did not lead to the Khan's conversion, Kuyuk did send a return letter to the Pope, asserting his own authority and challenging the pope to explain how he knew that his religion was the only true one. The pope apparently did not rise to this challenge, but in 1253 he sent another missionary ambassador, William of Rubruck, who met with Kuyuk's successor, Mongke. William engaged in a formal debate with Buddhist monks and Nestorians — and Manichaeans and Muslims — all of whom (by his own account) William handily defeated. Unfortunately, however, their response to defeat was not conversion, but only loud singing followed by heavy drinking. After that, William returned to Europe while the Nestorians remained behind, evidently comfortable in their Asian home.
By the time Mateo Ricci and his Jesuit companions set up their mission in China in the late 16th century, the old Nestorian community had already died out, but in 1623 workmen dug up an eighth century monument which commemorated the arrival of Nestorians in the Chinese capital in 635. The massive tablet recounted their presentation of Christian teachings in Chinese terms — almost a millennium before the Jesuits began their similarly "novel" project of immersion in Chinese language and culture.
The book is filled with data to undergird many such fresh perspectives on Christianity in Asia; it merits close reading as the year 2000 approaches and as we remember the 500th anniversary of Vasco da Gamma's arrival in western India "seeking Christians and spices." And what will the next
3
May 1998
millennium bring? Moffett himself ends on a somewhat gloomy note, with chapters entitled "The Eclipse of Christianity in Asia" and "The Church in the Shadows." He points to several factors (such as political intrigue, persecution, the rise and fall of empires) which limited the endurance of churches in Asia. His own view is that conflicts within Christian communities and their undue compromises for the sake of survival most severely diminished their vitality. If only Christians overcome their ethnic and social differences and stood firm in the message of the Gospel, perhaps Asia would have become Christian a long time ago.
One enduring lesson, certainly, is that we certainly should not try to repeat the past. The era covered in this volume is over, as is the age of a Western Christianity which traveled to Asia with the colonial powers. Local churches and indigenous Christian communities are now flourishing again in most Asian countries, and as both the recent Synod and World Council of Churches meetings suggest, these communities have their own voices and are increasingly willing to raise them. So too, most people today are developing new attitudes toward religion; the dialogue of Asian Christians with their Hindu and Buddhist and Muslim and Confucian brothers and sisters will be a distinctive feature of this renewed presence of Christianity in Asia. After the rest of us have been fully drawn into this dialogue, Asia will once again be a primary wellspring of global Christian identity.
Francis X. Clooney, S.J.,
Professor of Comparative Theology, Department of Theology,
Boston College, Chestnut Hill MA 02167-3806 Phone: 617 552 3883 Fax: 617 552 8219
4
May 1998
John C. England, The Hidden History of Christianity in Asia: The Churches of the East before the year 1500. Delhi & Hong Kong, 1996. xiii + 203 s.
Samuel Hugh Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, vol. I: Beginnings to 1500. Second revised edition, New York 1998. xxvii + 560 s.
The old church history of Asia before the European discoverers and missionaries arrived in the 16th century is a fascinating, though often neglected history. Very often even Asians think of church history through the medieval ages as a history of the two great Churches of Europe, the Roman-Catholic Church of the West and the Greek-Orthodox Church of the East. There is, however, no doubt that this view is wrong. Historically speaking, the Church of the East is the Asian Church. It spread very rapidly to India and Syria, and got a strong centre under the Sassanids in Persia. From there it spread as a result of conscious missionary work through Central Asia to China, where the first missionaries arrived long before their European counterparts had reached the northern parts of Europe! We may safely conclude, then, that the old Asian Church was a powerful Church that was very much alive; it must therefore certainly be included in a historically well-founded view of the church of the world.
The books that are selected for this review enforce this perspective very strongly. Samuel Hugh Moffett is Henry W. Luce Professor of Ecumenics and Mission Emeritus at Princeton Theological Seminary, and has his Asian background from Korea and China.
He has in his A History of i ' hristianity in Asia, vol. I, written the first part of what undoubtedly will be considered the standard work on the history of Asian Christianity for a long time. The book was originally published in 1992, but has been out of print, and is therefore recently released in a new and slightly revised edition. In volume two, which is due soon, the author will follow the history of Asian Christianity till our time.
Moffett gives a broad and detailed presentation of the old Asian Church. He first presents and discusses the traditions concerning the work of the Apostle Thomas in India and the old Indian Church. He then goes on to concentrate on the Church in Syria and (particularly) in Persia, and presents its battles, victories and failures, and its relation to the various rulers and dynasties. In contrast to Europe, Asia never got an emperor who made the Church the central religious institution of the empire. Under the Persian Sassanids and their successors, Arab and Persian Muslims, the church experienced both severe persecution, but also long periods of toleration. During these periods, the church could both organise and expand, and Moffett tells the story of both.
The old Asian Church in the end, however, all but disappeared, and was by 1500 found only in two small enclaves, one in northern Syria and one in southern India. Moffett also shows how this happened. The Church’s relation to the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan and his successors is here important. This Empire, which encompassed all Asia from China to eastern Europe, was relatively tolerant toward the Church, and many Christians held powerful positions. When this Empire collapsed during the 14th century and was followed in part by extremely militant Muslims rulers (Tamerlane!), the Church could not cope. It disappeared in China and Central Asia, and barely survived in Syria and India.
A traditional explanation of the collapse of the Asian Church has been to draw attention to its Nestorianism with the implication that it was weakened by heresy. Moffett explains in detail the historical background for the Nestorianism of the Asian Church, but he concludes that one cannot consider this Church as heretical. On the contrary, all essential elements of the traditional historical Christian faith are found the central
documents of this Church. He is more inclined to view the Church as weakened by persecutions and opposition from the rulers. At the same time, to keep even a minimum of administrative and ecclesiastical unity throughout the immense Asian continent is barely possible in times of peace, and virtually impossible in times of war. In addition, the church in Asia faced strong and self-conscious opposition from Persian Zoroastrianism, Arab Islam and Chinese Confucianism and Buddhism. And even in Asia, the church had to struggle with the problem of internal strife and division. There is, e g., no doubt that both the fights between Jacobite Monophysites and Nestorians in Syria and Persia, and between Nestorians and Roman-Catholic missionaries in Mongol China contributed to the weakening of the church in Asia.
After having worked through Moffett’s book, one is well informed concerning the development of Asian Christianity in its various political environments. One is, however, not as well informed of the inner life of the Church; Moffett gives priority to the problems of (church) politics at the expense of questions related to theology and liturgy. At least this reader would like to be informed on these aspects of the life of the church as well There is no doubt, however, that Moffett has laid an excellent foundation for our knowledge of the Asian Church, upon which future scholars can build.
England’s book gives additional help in this respect. England has worked for a long time in Hong Kong, and has written a short presentation of Asian Christianity which is arranged geographically; he traces the spreading of Christianity through Asia from Persia and Arabia eastward to Korea and Japan. Instead of broad presentation of the development, he gives a short presentation of sources and relevant literature for the various periods and countries. The main value of this book is thus that it gives an overview over the literature, which in this field sometimes is quite hard to get. One may read the book as a summary of Asian church history, it is, however, probably of greater value as a basic orientation for research in this field.
Knut Alfsvag
Kobe Lutheran Theological Seminary
518 Books and Media Resources Received on Missiology
sion in the late nineteenth century among the Hakka of Kwangtung Province in South China, featuring the centrality in evangeliza- tion of eight pioneer Chinese as missionaries.
Massey, James. Down Trodden: The Struggle of India ,'v Dalits for Identity, Solidarity and Liberation. (Risk Book Series, 79). Geneva, Switzerland: WCC Publications, 1997. ix, 82 pp. $6.75, paper. 2825412309. A Dalit Christian uncovers the religious roots of this system of oppression in India, traces its 3,500-year history and the beginnings of the Dalits’ struggle for liberation.
Moffett, Samuel Hugh. A History of Christianity in Asia: Vol. I: Beginnings to 1500. Second revised and corrected edi- tion. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998. xxvi, 560 pp. $25.00, paper. 1570751626. This second edition of Moffett’s history con- tains corrections and additions on the Armenian church.
Yule, Jean. About Face in China: Eight Australians’ Experience of the Chinese Revolution 1945-1951. Melbourne, Australia: The Joint Board of Christian Education, 1995. xviii, 284 pp. $20.00, paper. 1864070404.
Six Australian missionaries tell the story of their work with the Church of Christ in China amidst revolution.
EUROPE
Douma, M., et al. Meisjes van heinde en ver. Contributions by Marianne Douma, et al. (Allerwegen 16). Kampen, The Nether- lands: Uitgeverij Kok, 1994. 83 pp. NP, paper. 9024220874.
Six essays discuss the concerns and programs of Dutch Reformed churches for the human rights and treatment of young girls and women from developing countries who are forced by circumstances of poverty and tradi- tion into local or foreign employment.
Joyce, Timothy J. Celtic Christianity: A Sacred Tradition, a Vision of Hope. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998. xi, 180 pp. $14.00, paper. 1570751765.
A Benedictine monk of Irish descent, and past president of the American Benedictine Academy, recovers the 1,600-year history of Celtic spirituality, monasticism, and mission- ary endeavor.
Wijsen, Frans. Geloven bij het leven: Missionaire presentie in een volkswijk. (UTP-katern, 19). Baarn, The Netherlands: Gooi on Sticht, 1997. 221 pp. NLD 44.81, paper. 9030409274.
The author links the shared elements of glob- al mission theory and practical theology (communication, social analysis, theological reflection, and pastoral planning) to his expe- rience serving the pastoral needs of the indus- trial district of Maastricht, The Netherlands.
OCEANIA
Carey, Hilary M. Believing in Australia: A Cultural History of Religions. (The Australian Experience). St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin, 1996. xviii, 270 pp. $27.95, paper. 1863739505.
A socio-cultural history of religions in Australia, including aboriginal voices, mis- sionary impact, the churches of the migrants, women’s contributions, responses to secular- ization, and the growth of sects.
Dlugosz, Maria. Mae Enga Myths and Christ s Message: Fullness of Life in Mae Enga Mythology and Christ the Life (Jn 10: 10). (Studia Instituti Missiologici Societatis Verbi Divini, 66). Nettetal, Germany: Steyler Verlag, 1998. xii, 302 pp., NR paper. 3805004036.
A detailed comparison of the worldview and myths of the Mae Enga people of Papua New Guinea with that of Christ in the Gospel of John, originally presented as a Ph.D. disserta- tion at the Gregorian University in Rome in 1995.
with an introduction by Benjamin Clark. Notre Dame, IN: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1998. xxi, 253 p. $45.00. 0-268-00928-7.
Louis Massignon, professor of Islamic soci- ology at the College de France, was a “brilliant linguist, prolific author, man of action, ambas- sador-at-large, adventurer, scientist, poet, mys- tic. and radical humanitarian." In 1950 he was ordained a Melkite priest. This study consists of a technical analysis of Islamic mystical vo- cabulary followed by a detailed survey of the lives of the Muslim mystics of the first cen- turies of Islam. Benjamin Clark has edited his translation in the light of Massignon's and oth- er scholars’ additions and corrections.
MATTHEWS, Victor Harold & Ben- jamin, Don C. Old Testament parallels: laws and stories from the ancient Near East. Fully revised and expanded edition. Mah- wah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1997. xiv, 384 p. Pap. $19.95. 0-8091-3731-3.
Victor Matthews teaches OT/Hebrew Bible at Southwest Missouri State University; Don Benjamin is executive director of the Kino In- stitute of Theology in Phoenix. Arizona. This is a collection of stories and laws in English translation from Mesopotamia. Asia Minor, Syria-Palestine, and Egypt. They are arranged in the order of the OT books, together with in- troductions, references to sources, maps, drawings, a bibliography, and an index. New documents in this edition include The Stories of Adapa, the Archives of Ebla, Ishtar and Tammuz. the Nuzi Archives, the teachings of Khety, and the laws of Ur-Nammu.
MENN, Stephen Philip. Descartes and Au- gustine. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998. xvi, 415 p. $59.95. 0-521-41702-3.
Stephen Menn of McGill University notes that in Descartes’ time “there was a hope of constructing out of Augustine a new philoso- phy to replace that of Aristotle.” This book seeks to show how Descartes did this. In Part One Menn shows “how Augustine appropriat- ed and transformed the Plotinian discipline of contemplation, and how he used it to derive intuitions of soul and God and a solution to the problem of the origin of evil.” Part Two shows how Descartes used this Plotinian and Augus- tinian discipline of contemplating the soul and God to found a science for the 17th century.
M ESSO RE Vittorio. Onus Dei: leadership and vision in today’s Catholic Church.
Translated from the Italian by Gerald Mals- bary. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 1997. xvii, 201 p. $27.50. 0-89526-450-1.
Vittorio Messori is an Italian journalist whose interviews with Pope John Paul II formed the basis for the pope’s book Cross- ing the Threshold of Hope. He presents “in the language of a journalist" what he learned "by spending almost a year alongside people in Opus Dei and seeing how they actually live and work." He also comments on the views of supporters and opponents of this secular institute and prelacy which was founded by Blessed Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer y Albas 1 1 902- 1 975).
METZ, Johannes Baptist. A passion for God: the mystical-political dimension of Christianity. By Johann Baptist Metz. Edited and translated with an introduction by J. Matthew Ashley. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1997. iv, 212 p. Pap. $19.95. 0-8091-3755-0.
Father Metz, who teaches at the Universi- ty of Vienna, has been called “the founder of political theology in Europe.” Matthew Ash- ley of the University of Notre Dame has col- lected and translated 10 of Metz’ previously untranslated essays from the 1980s and 1990s and has written an introduction. Fa- ther Metz provides a foreword. The essays treat Metz’s understanding of his own theol- ogy, his appreciation of Karl Rahner, the church after Auschwitz, theology and the university, the role of religion in society, and the role of religious orders in the church.
MISSION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: an evangelical approach. Edited by William J. Larkin, Jr., and Joel F. Williams. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1998. xiii, 266 p. (American Society of Missiology series, n. 27) Pap. $20.00. 1-57075-169-2.
This study of mission in the NT is the work of 1 1 NT scholars associated with Columbia International University. The volume honors the 75th anniversary of that missionary-send- ing institution. After essays on mission in the OT, intertestamental Judaism, the teachings of Jesus, and the early church, nine essays ex- amine mission in individual NT books.
MOFFETT, Samuel Hugh. A history of Christianity' in Asia. Volume I: Beginnings to 1500. Second edition. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. 1998. xxvi, 560 p. Pap. $25.00. 1- 57075-162-5.
<j) /S/W-
)U) ' *■/
378 Heiser
Samuel Moffett is Henry W. Luce Professor of Ecumenics and Mission Emeritus at Prince- ton Theological Seminary. This is a revised and corrected edition of the 1992 edition pub- lished by HarperSanFrancisco. The main addi- tion is a more extensive coverage of the Arme- nian Church. The author begins with early mis- sions to India and an evaluation of the Thomas tradition. Then he treats the early and later Sax- sanid periods in Persia (225-651); Chinese Christianity; Christianity and Islam; and “The Pax Mongolica: From Genghis Khan to Tamerlaine.” Volume II is in preparation,
MORAL MEDICINE: theological per- spectives in medical ethics. Second edition. Edited by Stephen E. Lammers and Allen Verhey. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. xvii, 1004 p. Pap. $49.00. 0-8028-4249-6.
Stephen Lammers is the Helen H. P. Man- son Professor of the English Bible at Lafay- ette College, Easton, Pennsylvania. Allen Verhey is the Evert J. and Hattie E. Blekkink Professor of Religion at Hope College, Hol- land. Michigan. The first edition of this an- thology appeared in 1987. This new edition contains 128 selections related to religion and medicine by a wide range of authors, from Genesis, Rauschenbusch and Barth to leading modern authors such as Gustafson Ramsey, Cahill, McCormick, and Hauerwas. This second edition contains 67 new selec- tions, including new developments in health care, the care of patients with AIDS, and the importance of nurses to health care.
MORRIS, Leon. Galatians: Paul's charter of Christian freedom. Downers Grove, IL. InterVarsitv Press, 1996. 191 p. $16.99. 0- 8308-1420-5.
Leon Morris was formerly principal of Ri- dley College in Melbourne. His introduction discusses the date, authorship, destination, and literary genre of Galatians; the nature of Paul's opponents; and the contribution of Galatians to Christian thought Then he comments on the text of Galatians, providing his own trans- lation. On the disputed point of the meaning of "works of the law” he sides with Luther, who held that “works” denotes “a righteousness constructed of good works” and not simply the practices of the Jewish law.
MYSTICISM AND SPIRITUALITY IN MEDIEVAL ENGLAND. Edited by William F. Pollard and Robert Boenig.
Rochester, NY: D. S. Bi \i,er, an imprint of BoydcII & Brewer, 199" xi, 260 p. $63.00. 0-85991-516-6.
These 1 1 essays treat nedieval Latin de- votional literature beque; thed to the English mystics, the way Pseuc >Dionysian ideas came to medieval Engla d; meditation and mysticism in Ancrene W\«e; the Katherine Group and the Wooing Group; Rolle and the “eye of the heart"; contemplation in the works of the Cloud author issues in Julian scholarship; the book of Margery Kempe; Rolle an 1 the Reformers; Medieval English mystical yrics; and the Brigittine Order in England, "here are nine ill, .'(rations.
NATIVE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS IDENTIT'. unforgotten g >ds. Edited by Jace Weave Maryknoll, N5 Orbis Books, 1998. xiii, 2a p. Pap $18 00. -57075-181-1.
The 15 contributors to this volume are all Native Ameri ans. Jace Weaver, a Cherokee, is an attorney who teaches American and reli- gious studies ?t Yale University. The 17 essays, some autobu graphical, others more academic, focus on the oppression of Native Americans, their heroisr in dealing with their harsh cultui al environrr rt, and the religious beliefs which permeate th it lives. Topics treated include bib- lical herme leutics, the Sun Dance, incultura- tion, missic lary history, native theology, wom- en’s libeiat >i; praxis, and HIV prevention.
NETANY iHU, B. (Benzion). Toward the Inquisiuoi : essays on Jewish and Converse) history in .ate medieval Spain. Ithaca, NY. Cornell Univ. Press, 1997. xi, 267 p. $32.50. 0-8014-3410-6.
Benzion Netanyahu is emeritus professor of Judaic studies at Cornell University. These seven essays, published over the last two decades, deal with Jewish and Marrano histo- ry in Spain from the middle of the 14th to the end of the 1 5th century The first three essays deal w ith movements and groups responsible for the creation of the Inquisition, the reli- gious position of the Converso* in 1-180 when the Tribunal of Faith was established, and the birth of the Spanish racist movement. Three essays treat related persons and events, and one evaluates some alleged motives for the establishment of the Inquisition.
NEUSNER, Jacob & Chilton, Bruce D.
God in the world. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. xvi, 175 p. (Chns-
TD book survey 379
Fhies et Histona, vol. XXX, no. 2 (Summer/ Fall 1998): 80-99
t a.
“ GOD AND THE SHAH "
Church ami State in Sasanid Persia
Edwin M. Yamauchi, Miami University (Ohio)
Most of us are familiar with the story of the persecution of Christians by the Roman emperors, of the conversion of Constantine in 312, and of the dramatical- ly changed circumstances both for good and evil which then developed. 1 Quite un- familiar is the fate of Christianity east of the Euphrates River.2 Part of the reason for this was that Eusebius, the earliest church historian, identified Christianity with the Roman Empire after the conversion of Constantine. Sebastian Brock ob- serves:
Eusebius' picture of the history of the Christian church as being inextricably interwoven with the history of the Roman empire has proved to have had a pernicious influence on the writ- ing of almost all subsequent ecclesiastical history down to our present day: one has only to glance at the contents of the standard handbooks in every European language to observe the insidious effect that the father of church history has had; the very existence of this by no means insignificant Christian church in Sasanid Iran is only given token recognition at the very most.3
Furthermore, research in the texts of Eastern Christianity requires a working knowledge of Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic.4 Until recently we did not have an up- to-date history of Eastern Christianity. This lacuna has now been filled by a high- ly readable work by Samuel Hugh Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia I: Beginnings to 1500. 5 'T
'See R, Clouse, R. Pierard, and E. Yamauchi, Two Kingdoms: The Church and Culture through the A^es (Chicago: Moody Press, 1993), 205-13.
SO The massive 1,000-page work by W. H C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), as excellent as it is, almost totally ignores developments in the east.
*S P Brock, "Christians in the Sasanian Empire: A Case of Divided Loyalties," in Religion and National Identity , ed. S. Mews (Oxford. Basil Blackwell, 1982), 2.
^e E Yamauchi, "Aramaic," in The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, eds. E M Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 38—41; E. Yamauchi, "Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic or Syriac? — A Critique of the Claims of G. M. Lamsa," Bibliotheca Sacra 131 (1974): 320-31.
^See E. Yamauchi, review of S. H. Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia l : Beginnings to 1500 (San Francisco: Harper, 1992) in The American Historical Review 99 (1994): 617
"GOD AND THE SHAH"
The Conflict of the Romans and the Persians
After Alexander the Great's conquest of the Persian Empire, his generals became heirs of his fragmented realm. Seleucus obtained the lion's share of the territories, acquiring Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia. Unfortunately the Seleucids tried to govern too large an area by force. Their dynasty was also plagued by internecine violence. About the middle of the third century bc the Seleucid empire was itself divided by uprisings. In 246 bc in the northeast (in the area of modern Afghanis- tan) the independent kingdom of Bactria was established by the descendants of the Macedonian and Greek garrisons.6
More significant was the reign of the Parthians, who were a tribe from south- east of the Caspian Sea, who seized control of Persia about 250 bc and held it for five centuries until ad 224.7 The rulers of this empire are also known as the Arsacids after the founder of the dynasty.8 The Parthians were outstanding horse- men, who could shoot arrows as skillfully as the earlier Scythians.9
About 140 bc the Parthians seized Mesopotamia from the Seleucids and estab- lished their capital at Ctesiphon across the Tigris River from Seleucia. The Parthi- ans were noted for their initial adoption of Hellenistic culture. The strength of this Hellenistic culture dissipated over the years, however, as revealed by their coins. We are unfortunately ill informed about their religious views.10 What we are well intormed about is the constant conflict between the Romans and the Parthians, which was to be continued during the fourth through seventh centuries between the Byzantines and the Sasanids.11 Among the worst defeats ever suffered by any Roman army was the debacle experienced by Crassus at Carrhae (ancient Harran) in 53 bc.12 Casualties were enormous: 20,000 killed and 10,000 captured Crassus' head was used in the performance of Euripides' Bacchae at the Parthian court. Later
hSee E. Yamauchi, "Bactria," in The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, eds. E M. Blaiklock and R. K. Harrison (Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 1983), 87-90.
7For general accounts, see N. C. Debevoise, A Political History ofParthia (Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1969); R. N. Frye, The Heritage of Persia (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1962); M. Colledge, The Parthians (London: Thames and Hudson, 1967).
HA D H. Bivar, "The Political History of Iran under the Arsacids," in Cambridge History of Iran [herafter CHI], III. 1, The Seleucid, ed. E. Yarshater (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), ch. 2.
^See E. Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), E Yamauchi, "The Scythians: Invading Hordes from the Russian Steppes," Biblical Archaeologist 46 (1983): 90-99.
"’See E. Yamauchi, review of CHI III. 1-2 in the American Historical Review 89 (1984): 1055-56. 1 1 An excellent new collection of primary sources translated from Greek, Latin, Arabic, Syriac, Hebrew, Palmyrene, Middle Persian, and Armenian has been compiled by M H. Dodgeon and S. N. C. Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronterand the Persian Wars (AD 226-363), A Documentary History (New York: Routledge, 1991); for extensive bibliographic surveys of the conflicts be- tween the Romans and the Persians, see: J. Wolski, "Iran und Rom," Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt D.9.1 (1979): 195-214; G. Widengren, "Iran, der grosse Gegner Roms," Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt 11.9.1 (1979): 219-306. For a general overview see V. Rosivach, "The Romans' View of the Persians," Classical World 78 (1984): 1-10 12See Bivar, "The Political History of lran,"50-55.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
Antony was to suffer hardship and defeats in his campaigns, in one of which the Parthians killed 10,000 of his soldiers. In the reign of Augustus peace was signed with Phraates, allowing for the return of the legionary standards and of captives lost at Carrhae.
Armenia, which is a mountainous area in eastern Turkey, served as a buffer state between Rome and Parthia. It was linked naturally with the Parthians, but it bordered the Roman controlled areas of eastern Turkey. A notable event was the visit of the Armenian king to Rome during the reign of Nero.13
Peace was broken when during the reign of Trajan (98-117),14 the Parthian king or shah15 replaced the Armenian king without consulting the Romans. Trajan penetrated deep into Mesopotamia, setting up a triumphal arch at Dura Europos. He captured Ctesiphon in 116, and even reached the Persian Gulf. His successor, Hadrian (118-38), wisely withdrew the Roman border to the Euphrates River. This initiated a fifty-year period of peace, which may have facilitated trade and the spread of Christianity eastward.
Another victorious Roman general who reached Ctesiphon was Lucius Verus in 164. Thereafter the border was extended eastward to the line of the Jabal Sinjar of the Chaboras (Khabur). Septimius Severus created the new province of Osrhoene c. 197 around the key city of Edessa. The Parthians were able to halt the invasion of his successor, Caracalla (211-17), and after the latter's murder on the road from Edessa to Carrhae, forced his successor, Macrinus, to pay for peace, just before they themselves were overturned by the Sasanids.
The last Parthian king, Artabanus V, was killed in 224 by a rebel, Ardashir (the Parthian version of Artaxerxes), who came from the area of Istakhr near Persepolis. His dynasty was named after one of his ancestors, Sasan. Ardashir's grandfather and father were priests in charge of the fire temple at Istakhr.16
The Romans faced an even more aggressive Persian foe in the Sasanids. During 231 to 233 the Roman armies advanced into Media, but the Sasanids were victorious in Mesopotamia. In 238-39 the Sasanids under Ardashir overran much of Roman Syria, taking Nisibis and Carrhae. In 240 Shapur I conquered Hatra and registered gains in Upper Mesopotamia and Armenia. Then in 244 Gordian III pen- etrated to Ctesiphon, before dying under mysterious circumstances. His successor Philip the Arab, whom Eusebius regarded as a Christian,17 agreed to peace terms
1 'See E. Yamauchi, The Apocalypse of Adam, Mithraism and Pre-Chnshan Gnosticism," in Etudes Mithnaques. ed. J. Duchesne-Guillemin (Leiden: Bnll, 1978), 555; E. Yamauchi, "The 82 Episode of the Magi," in Chronos, Kairos. Christos, eds. J. Vardaman and E. Yamauchi (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1989), p 18-19; E. Yamauchi, Persia ami the Bible [hereafter PB] (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 509.
l4See F Lepper, Trajan's Parthian Wiir (London: Oxford University Press, 1948); F. Millar, The Roman Near East: 31 BC-AD 337 (Cambndge: Harvard University Press, 1993), 100-101. ,sThe full title is Shahanshah "king of kings" see PB. 89.
,bAt this time the fire temple there was not a Zoroastrian temple, but a temple of the goddess Anahita. See J Duchesne-Guillemin, "Zoroastrian Religion," CHI, III.2, 870.
1 ' J Spencer Tnmingham, Christianity among the Arabs in Pre-Islamic Times (London: Longman, 1979), 58-60; I. Shahid, Rome and the Arabs in the Third Century (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1980); H. A. Pohlsander, "Philip the Arab and Christianity," Histona 29 (1980): 463-73.
"GOD AND THE SHAH"
which yielded Armenia to fhe Sasanids. We have an important trilingual inscrip- tion of Shapur on the so-called Kaaba of Zoroaster at Naqsh-i Rustam. Shapur de- clared: "And Caesar Philip came to sue for peace, and for their lives he paid a ran- som of 500,000 denarii and became tributary to us."18 The king further asserted;
I am the Mazda-worshipping divine Shapur, King of Kings of Aryans (i.e. Iranians) and non- Aryans, of the race of the gods, son of the Mazda-worshipping divine Ardashir, King of Kings of the Aryans, of the race of the gods, grandson of the King Pappak, I am the Lord ot the Aryan (i.e. Iranian) nation.19
The important fort of Dura Europos had been founded on the middle Euphrates by Nicanor about 300 bc. About 140 bc it fell into Parthian hands, but was taken by Trajan's army. It was retaken by the Parthians but was then held by the Romans under Lucius Verus and Septimius Severus. It was finally destroyed by Shapur in 256. This frontier site yielded three important religious buildings, a synagogue, a mithraeum for the followers of the Mithraic mystery religion, and an early church. The church at Dura could have accomodated 65 to 75 persons. As most of the graffiti in the building were Greek rather than Syriac, and since the fragment of Tatian's Diatessaron found at Dura was in Greek, most ot the Christians evidently came from a Hellenistic background.-0
The nadir of Roman fortunes was reached with the capture of the Emperor Valerian by Shapur I near Edessa in 260. A relief at Naqsh-i Rustam below the tomb of Darius depicts Philip (244-49) kneeling before Shapur I, while another relief at Bishapur portrays Shapur trampling on the body of Gordian III, receiving the hom- age of Philip, and clutching the wrist of the wretched Valerian.-1 Lactantius, who regarded Valerian as a persecutor of Christians, describes in detail Valerian's posthumous ignominy:
Afterward, when he had finished that shameful life under so great dishonour, he was flayed, and his skin, stripped from the flesh, was dyed with vermilion, and placed in the temple of the gods of the barbarians, that the remembrance of a triumph so signal might be perpetu- ated, and that this spectacle might always be exhibited to our ambassadors, as an admoni- tion to the Romans, that, beholding the spoils of their captive emperor in a Persian temple, they should not place too great confidence in their own strength.2-
Shapur's forces devastated Syria as well as Cilicia and Cappadocia in eastern Anatolia. The Persians deported and resettled thousands of captives, mam of them Christians, in Mesopotamia and Persia. It remained for Aurelian to regain some honor for the Romans by his defeat of Zenobia and the capture of Palmyra.
18Dodgeon & Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars, 44 l9Ibid„ 34.
20On Dura, see Millar, The Roman Near East, 445-72.
21Dodgeon & Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars. 57. See also J B. Ward- Perkins, The Roman West and the Parthian East (London: Oxford University Press, 1965), 178, R. Ghirshman, Iran: Parthians and Sassamans (London: Thames and Hudson, 1962), 204-205; B. MacDermot, "Roman Emperors in the Sassanian Reliefs," Journal of Roman Studies 44 (1954): 76-80.
22 De Mortibus Persecutorum 5, cited in Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars, 58.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
In 282-83 the Romans once again penetrated to Ctesiphon only to withdraw after the death of the Emperor Cams. In 296 Narses invaded Roman territories and defeated the armies of Diocletian and his Caesar, Galenus.23 In the next year, how- ever, Galerius won a victory in Armenia and even captured members of Narses' family, resulting in the concession in 298 to the Romans of land east of the Tigris River.24 This included control of the area aound Nisibis.
The conversion of Constantine in 312 to Christianity had consequences for Christians living in the Persian territories, who were now regarded by the Sasanids as a potential fifth column. Warfare persisted through the reigns of Constantius II (337-361) and Shapur II (309-379).
In 363 Julian the Apostate met his end in a campaign against the Sasanians. The campaign is described by the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, who was a great admirer of Julian and an eyewitness.25 The territories won by Galerius were ceded back to the Persians, including the key city of Nisibis. A peace treaty was signed between the emperor Theodosius I (379-95) and Varahran IV (388-99) in 389, partitioning Armenia between the two powers. There then followed rela- tive peace except for conflicts in 421-22 and 440-42.
When Hormizd IV died in 590, he was succeeded by Chosroes (or Khusro) II. When the latter was faced by a rebellion from an important general, he appealed for help to the Byzantine emperor Maurice, who aided him in regaining the throne. But then Maurice himself was overthrown and killed by a usurper, Phocas. Chosroes reacted by invading Byzantine territories, capturing Edessa in 609 and then Antioch in 611.
The Persians also captured Damascus, then Jerusalem in 614, removing thou- sands of prisoners and the "True Cross" from the Holy Sepulchre. The Shah pre- sented the latter to his Christian queen, Shirin. The Persians then attacked Egypt in 620 and even made an assault against Constantinople in 626.
Phocas' inability to defend Byzantine territories against the Persians led to his overthrow and replacement by Heraclius in 610. Heraclius initially asked Chosroes for peace. But the latter responded: "I shall not spare you until you have renounced the Crucified one, whom you call God and bow before the Sun."26
Then remarkably Heraclius (610-41) turned the tide and eventually won a de- cisive victory' over the Persians near the ancient city of Nineveh in 627, regaining the True Cross. In 628 he advanced toward the capital, captured Chosroes and had him killed. Heraclius had regained Egypt, Syria, and Palestine from the Persians, and forced the population of these areas to reconvert to Christianity. But by then both sides were fatally weakened and were rendered easy prey for the zealous forces of Islam.
McCullough concludes:
-'Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars, 125-26.
24lbid. 126, Millar, The Roman Near East. 178.
25See Gary A. Crump, Ammianus Marcellinus as a Military Historian (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1975).
:,’The sun was not the representation of the supreme God, Ahura Mazda (Ohrmuzd) but of Mithra (Mihr) according to A. Christensen, L'lran sous les Sassamdes (Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1944), 144-45. On Mithra and later Mithraism, see PB. ch. 14.
GOD AND THE SHAH"
This quarter century of armed conflict, like most of the Byzantine-Persian wars, settl 'd noth- ing, and in addition left both parties in a state of exhaustion. This situation, bad enough at any time, was disastrous in this instance, for seemingly neither the Byzantines nor the Persians had any inkling of what was going on within Arabia, nor any premonition of the nature of the Arab forces that were about to be unleashed against them.27
The Spread of Christianity East of Antioch
At the day of Pentecost some Jewish pilgrims came from areas controlled by the Persians — "Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia" (Acts 2:9). Though some of these no doubt were converted and returned to their homelands, we have no certain historical evidence of early Christianity in these regions. What we do have are legends.
Eusebius recounts the correspondence of Jesus with Abgar V Ukkama "The Black," the ruler of Edessa (modem Urfa), which led to the sending of Jesus' dis- ciple Addai to cure the king of an ailment.28 This account is supplemented by the Syriac document. The Teaching of Addai.29 The Syriac manuscript which preserves this work dates to c. 500 ad.30 Some scholars believe that this legendary account may be based on the conversion of a later king, Abgar VIII. J. Asmussen remarks, "It can only be Abgar VIII the Great (177-212) of the Edessa kings who, probably for political reasons, accepted Christianity and at whose court lived the gnostic Bardaisan."31
Unfortunately for those who wish to extract a historical kernel trom the Teaching of Addai and Eusebius' account of Abgar, Sebastian Brock in a recent crit- ical examination has effectively exposed the weakness of arguments for such a re- habilitation.32 Brock points out that there is no evidence of early Christianity in ei- ther the coins or the mosaics from Edessa. He concludes, "In the light of the evidence set out above there seems to be no choice for the historian but to reject Eusebius' acount of Thaddaeus' mission to Edessa as a legend without historical basis."33
Scholars are in disagreement as to the date and route by which Christianity spread east of Antioch. Though one would think that it would be mos'. logical to
27W. Stewart McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity to the Rise of Islam (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982), 46.
2HSee Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 46-51.
3»See G. Howard, trans., The Teaching of Addai (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981).
30J B Segal dates the composition of this work to the early 4th century; W. Witakowski dates it to the end of the 4th century; H. J. W. Dnjvers to the 4th or even 5th century, S. Brock to the first decades of the 5th century.
3,CH/, III. 2, 926. This was a view first propounded by F. C. Burkitt in his work, Early Eastern Christianity (1904). See also McCullough, A Short History of Synac Christianity. 24, Moflett, A History of Christianity in Asia. 57-58; R. E. Waterfield. Christians in Persia (London: Allen k Unwin Ltd., 1973), 17.
33S. Brock, -Eusebius and Syriac Christianity," in Eusebius. Christianity, and /uJuism, eds. H. W Attridge and C. Hata (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992), 212-34 “Ibid., 227. According to Millar, The Roman Near East. 476, "There is thus no good evidence that the kings of Edessa were ever Christian. '
Edwin M. Yamauchi
believe that Christianity reached Edessa first and then N isibis to the east of it, some scholars believe that Chnstianity reached Nisibis, which had a large Jewish com- munity first, and then Edessa later M Edessa, which was founded by Seleucus I Nicator in 302 bc was a key city in the zone between Roman and Persian spheres of influence. Blessed with waters which were reputed to have healing qualities, Edessa was a center of important pagan cults.35 J. B. Segal speculates that Christiantiy came to Edessa both from Nisibis and from Antioch, the former, more Jewish current leading to Nestorian Chrstianity, and the latter, more Greek current, leading to Jacobite Christianity.36 Walter Bauer had argued that the earliest Christianity at Edessa was a heterodox variety, a thesis which has come under
sharp cnticism.37 ,
Many scholars have placed the composition of the Gospel of Thomas at Edessa c. 140.38 M. Des]ardins has recently suggested a setting in Antioch. He re- minds us:
Similarly, we have no information about the nature and importance ot Chnstianity in Edessa before 140 cr. Not onlv that, but all indices point to Chfctianity in that city being either non-existent or merely in an embryonic stage of development throughout the hrst two cen- tunes ce.39
Abercius, a bishop ot Hierapohs in Phrygia traveled in the east. According to his epitaph (c. 192), he reports: "And I saw the land ot Sirin and all its cities— Nisibis J saw when I passed over Euphrates, but everywhere 1 had brethren. This would indicate that there were Christians in the area of Syria— northern Mesopotamia, including Nisibis, by the end of the second century. It may be sig- nificant that he does not explicitly mention Edessa. There is in the Chronicle ot Edessa (dating from the mid-sixth century ) a clear reference to a church, which was damaged by a flood in 201
The earliest historical figure from Edessa is the syncretishc author Bardaisan. Later tradition regarded him as a heretic.40 Bardaisan, who was bom c. 154 at Edessa, adopted a very eclectic form of Christianity. Though he spoke against the
,4See "The Syriac Evidence," in E. Yamauchi, Pre-Christian Giiosl-ciim (hereafter PCG], rev. ed, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983).
‘See J. B. Segal, Edessa " The Blessed City" (London. Oxford University Press, 1970); H J V . Drijvers, Cults and Beliefs at Edessa (Leiden: Brill, 1980).
36J. B. Segal, 'When Did Christianity Come to Edessa?" in Middle E.ist Studies and Libraries, ed. B. C. Bloomfield (London: Mansell, 1980), 179-91.
S6 ''See the criticisms of H. J. W Dn|vers, "Rechtglaubigkeit und Kelzeivi ,m altesten Wnschen Chnstentum," ,n Symposium Syr, arum, 1922 (Rome: Pon, Insirutum ^
ram 1974), 291-310; T. A. Robinson, The Bauer Thesis Examined The Geography of Heresy in the Early Christian Church (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen. 1988); see also E. Yamauchi, Gnosticism and Early Chnstianity." in Hellen, ration Reconsidered: The Role of Judaism ,n
Early Christianity, ed. W. Helleman (Lanham: University Press of Amenca, 1994), Z9-01.
MPCG, 89-91
'■"■Where Was the Gospel of Thomas Wntten?" Toronto Journal of Theology 8 (1992): 127. •“See Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 64-69; H. J W. Dnpers, Bardaisan of E4«»a (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1966); H. J. W Dnjvers, "Bardaisan of Edessa and the Hermetica. Ex Onente Lux 21 (1970): 190-210.
GOD AND THE SHAH"
Marcionites, he himself was tainted with Valentinian Gnosticism according to Eusebius (E.H. 4.30). One of Bardaisan's disciples wrote an important work. The Book of the Laws of the Countries, which provides us with evidence for the distribu- tion of Christians as far east as Bactria around the year 200.
Church and Shah under the Sasanians
We are ill informed about the church-state relationships under the Parthians. According to McCullough, "There is no reliable source for reconstructing the his- tory of the early Church within Parthia."41 The Chronicle of Arbela purportedly of- fers a history of Arbela down to the bishopric of Henana (c. 346), but its credibili- ty is questionable.42 We are better informed about the Jews in the later Parthian era,43 and know that in the third century Mani (216-76), the founder of Mani- chaeism was bom into the Jewish-Christian community of the Elchasaites toward the end of the Parthian era.44 Mani was well received by the first Sasanian king, Shapur, but was later executed by his son, Varahran. The Mamchaeans were enor- mously successful missionaries in the East and also in the West, though they were persecuted in Persia.45
The most important change which affected the status of Christians in the Persian Empire when the Sasanids replaced the Parthians, was the Sasanids' adop- tion of Zoroastrianism as the state religion. According to a sixth-centry Syriac source, Msiha-zkha, "Ardashir, the first (Sasanid) King of the Persians issued an edict that Fire Temples be set up in honour of his gods; and that the Sun, the great god of the whole universe, should be honoured with special veneration."40
Tansar, the first chief priest under the Sasanians, centralized the cult of the fire temples and encouraged adherence to Zoroastrianism. Mary Boyce believes that the Letter of Tansar preserves a genuine tradition about the neglect of Zoroastri- anism under the Parthians.47 His successor, the powerful mobed, i.e. Zoroastrian
■“McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity, 97.
42Ibid„ 98.
43J. Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia I: The Parthian Period (Leiden Brill, 1969). Volumes 11 - V in Neusner's series (1966-70) deal with the Jews in the Sasaruan Period. wThe best treatment is S. N. C. Lieu, Mamchaeism in the Later Roman Empire and Medieval China (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985). G. Widengren s Mani and Manuhaeism (London: VVeidenfeld and Nicolson, 1965) is no longer reliable. Widengren maintained that Mani had ansen out of the Mandaeans. But the Cologne Codex published in 1970 demon- strated that Maru had come out of the Elchasaites. See E. Yamauchi, review ot G Widengren, ed., Der Mandaismus in Journal of the American Oriental Society 105 (1985): 345-46.
45On the relationship between the Manichaeans and the Christians, see M. Hutter, Mani und das Persische Christentum," in Mamchaica Selecta, eds. A. Van Tongerloo and S. Giversen (Louvain: Maruchaean Studies, 1991), 125-35.
•“Cited by Moffett, A History of Chnstianity in Asia, 105. On the controversial issue of Zurvanism, a variant form of Zoroastrianism, which flourished under the Sasanids, see PB, 440-42; R. C. Zaehner, Zurvan : A Zoroastnan Dilemma (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955).
47M. Boyce, ed., Zoroastrianism (Manchester: Manchester University, 1984), 109; cf. M. Boyce, trans.. The Letter of Tansar (Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Mondo ed Estremo Oriente, 1968).
Edwin M. Yamauchi
priest, Kirder (Kartir), served during the reigns of the first seven Sasanian kings.48 He declared in his inscription: 'And 1 made the Mazda-worshipping religion and its good priests esteemed and honoured in the land."49 He persecuted all non- Zoroastrians, including Christians, but especially focused on the Manichaeans He boasted:
In province after province, place after place the worship of Hormuzd (Lord of Light) and of the gods rose supreme. The doctrines of Ahriman (Lord of Evil) and of the demons were dispersed and utterly destroyed. And Jews, shamans, Brahmans, Nazareans, Christians, Maktaks and Manichaeans (Zandiks) have been annihilated in the Empire.50
There is some disagreement about the interpretation of this passage. According to the translation cited by Duchesne-Guillemin, the persecuted groups were: "Jews, Buddhists, Brahmins, Nasoreans (Judeo-Christians?), Christians, Maktaks (Mandeans, Manicheans?) and Zandiks (Mazdean heretics)."51 The text reads 1) yhvvdy, 2) smny, 3) blmny, 4) n'sl'y, 5) klystd'n, 6) mktky, and 7) zndvky. H. Bailey comments that tour of the names are clearly identifiable: 1 ) yahud = Jew, 2) saman = Buddhist, 3) braman = Brahman, and 5) kristiyan = Christian.52 The 4th) could be Nasoray, which was used by the Mandaeans of themselves.53 The bth name is explained by Bailey to represent the Elchasaites, a Jewish-Christian b.ip- tist sect out of which Mani came. The 7th name, Zandiks, were heretics denounced by Zoroastrians.^4 But according to M. Boyce, the proscribed by Kirder included: "Jews and Buddhists and Brahmans and Aramaic and Greek-speaking Christians and Baptizers and Manichaeans."55 Brock has argued that the word nasraye des- ignated native Aramaic-speaking Christians, and that krestyane designated west- ern Greek-speaking Christians.56
Mam, who had enjoyed the favor of the first Sasanid king, was imprisoned
1HFor details of his career and inscriptions, see M . Boyce, Zoroast nanisms: Their Religious Beliefs ami Practices (London: Routledge &t Kegan Paul, 1987), 109-12.
• 'Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern F ranter and the Persian Wars, 65; see M Boyce and F. Crenet, A History of Zoroastrianism III : Zoroastrianism under Macedonian and Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 254-55.
5,1Cited by Moffett, A Histon / of Christianity in Asia, 112.
'"CHI, 111.2, 882.
:H Bailey, "Notes on the Religious Sects Mentioned by Kartir (Karder), CHI, 111.2, 907-.3 53This is the interpretation favored by G. Widengren, “The Nestorian Church in Sasanian and Early Post-Sasanian Iran," in Incontrodi Religion in Asia tra il III ell X SecoIod.C. ed. L. Lanaoth (Florence: LeoS. Olschki Editore, 1984), 3, but with less conviction than he had urged 15 years $8 before On the Mandaeans, see E. Yamauchi, "The Present Status of Mandaean Studies,” J.VES 25 (1966): 813-96; E. Yamauchi, Gnostic Ethics and Mandaean Ongins (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970). See also E. Yamauchi, review of R. Macuch, et al., Zur Sprache und Literatur der Mandaer in Journal of the American Oriental Society 100 (1980): 79-82.
^CHI, 111.2, 907-8.
5‘>Boyce, Zoroastrianism, 112.
^Brock, "Christians in the Sasanian Empire," 3. For more detailed studies of the Kirder in- scriptions see: M. Back, Die sassanidischen Slaatsinschnften (Leiden: Brill, 1978); D N. Mackenzie, The Sasanian Rock Reliefs at Naqsh-i Rustam (Berlin: Iranische Denkmaler, 1 ‘ >89); Gignoux, "Middle Persian Inscriptions," CHI, III. 2, 1209-11, Gignoux, Les Quatre Inscriptions du mage Kirdir (Pans. Association pour l'Avancement des Etudes Iraruennes, 1991).
GOD AND THE SHAH'
and crucified. His skin was flayed and stuffed, and then displayed on a gate at Ctesiphon. It is rather ironic that the Manichaeans, who were persecuted in the Persian Empire, were suspected by Diocletian of being Persian agents. Around 302 Diocletian issued a decree against them,57 ordering that the Manichaeans' writings be burned, their goods confiscated, and their leaders severely punished.58
The conversion of Constantine to Christianity in 312 had important implica- tions for Christians beyond the eastern borders of the Roman Empire. Of great sig- nificance was the letter which Constantine wrote to Shapur II, expressing his con- cern for the well-being of Christians in the Sasanid Empire:
By protecting the Divine faith, I am made a partaker of the light of truth: Guided by the light of truth, I advance in the knowledge of the Divine faith. . . . Imagine, then, with what jov I received information so accordant with my desire, that the finest provinces of Persia are filled with those men on whose behalf alone I am at present speaking, I mean the Christians. For abundant blessing will be to you and to them in equal amounts, for you will find the Lord of the whole world is gentle, merciful and beneficent. And now, because your power is great,
I commend these persons to your protection; because your piety is eminent, 1 commit them to your care. Chensh them with your customary humanity and kindness, for by this proot ot faith you will secure an immeasurable benefit both to yourself and us.v*
Though well meant, Constantine's interference had the unintended effect of making the shah suspect the loyalties of the Christians. Indeed, there were some grounds for these suspicions.
Aphrahat, "The Persian Sage," was a leading Syriac-speaking monk, whose 23 essays written between 337 and 345 during the reign of Shapur I, are an im- portant source of information on the situation of Christians under the Persians.*0 Later traditions described him as the head of the monastery of Mar Mattai near Mosul on the Tigris River. Of particular interest is his fifth homily "On Wars, (dated c. 337) which used veiled allusions to Daniel 2:39—41 to prophesy the tri- umph of the Romans over the Persians. He predicted the victory of the fourth beast (= Rome) over the ram (= Persia). Aphrahat declared:
Prosperity has come to the people of God, and success awaits the man through whom the prosperity came (i.e. Constantius). And disaster threatens the forces which have been mar- shalled by the efforts of an evil and arrogant man full of boasting (i.e. Shapur II) and misery is reserved for him through whom disaster is stored up Nevertheless, my beloved, do not complain (in public) of the evil one who has stirred up evil upon many because the times were preordained and the time of their fulfilment has come.bl
Aphrahat maintained that Persia was destined to fall because of its pride, where- as the cause of the Romans was the cause of Jesus.62
Speaking of Syrian Christian writers like Aphrahat and Ephrem, Griffith ob- serves:
57Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars, 135-36.
58See J. Stevenson, ed., A New Eusebius (London: SPCK, 1960), 283.
59Letter preserved in Eusebius, Vita Constantini, IV.9-13.
t>0Scha£f and H. Wace, eds. Gregory the Great, Ephraim Syrus, Aphrahat, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Chnstian Church, 2nd senes, 13 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 352-62 6,Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wars, 162.
62See Frank Gavin, Aphraates and the Jews repr. (1922; New York: AMS Press, 1966), 5.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
The fact that Christians in Persia later neglected the Roman theme, and assured the Persian kings of their loyalty, even reaching a certain accomodation with them, in no way militates against the fact that in the fourth century, and even in the Syriac-speaking world, the idea of a Christian church, living in a Christian Roman empire, awaiting the Second Coming of Christ, was an idea whose time had come.63
Many of Aphrahat's other homilies were against the Jews, who were accused of stirring up Persian enmity against the Christians.64 But Aphrahat also lament- ed the worldliness of the church, and even of leading bishops/15
Just before he died on May 22, 337, Constantine was preparing for renewed warfare against the Persians. Upon his death, the rule of the Roman Empire was shared by his three sons, Constans, Constantine II, and Constantius II. Shapur, who had less respect for these sons than for their father, began aggressive actions against the Romans and unleashed persecutions against the Christians, which were among the most severe in the history of Christianity. Duchesne-Guillemin ob- serves, "From then on, waging war against Rome and persecuting the Christians were to Iran two facets of one struggle, and persecution took place especially in the north-west provinces and the regions bordering on the Roman empire."66 Of this "Great Persecution," Moffett observes:
One estimate is that as many as 190,000 Persian Christians died in the terror.'’7 It was worse than anything suftered in the West under Rome, yet the number of apostasies seemed to be tewer in Persia than in the West, which is a remarkable tribute to the steady courage of Asia's early Christians.'’8
Shapur demanded that Simeon Bar Sabbae, the Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon or catholicos, the head of the Church in Persia, collect double the amount of the poll tax from the Christians. Simeon protested, saying, "I am no tax-collector but a shepherd of the Lord's flock." The shah responded, "Simeon wants to make his followers and his people rebel agaist my kingdom and convert them into servants of Caesar, their coreligionist."69 Simeon was martyred in 341 along with about a hundred other Christians, thus inaugurating years of persecution, which raged es- pecially during the years 340-63 and 379/83? -401. 70
The Acts of the Martyrs71 cites the following royal decree against the Christians:
"'Sidney H. Gnffith, "Ephraem, the Deacon of Edessa, and the Church of the Empire," in Diakonia, eds T. Halton and J. Williman (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America, 1986), 48.
,,4See J Neusner, Aphraates and the Jexos (Leiden: Brill, 1971).
"’See W. G. Young, Patriarch. Shah and Caliph (Rawalpindi; Christian Study Centre, 1974), 23. “CHI. Ill 2, 886.
^Even the lower figure of 16,000 deaths for the fourth century, estimated by Sozomen, are quite impessive See McCullough, A Short History ofSynac Christianity, 118.
^Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 145. See also Millar, The Roman Near East, 486-87. '’''Cited by Brock, "Christians in the Sasaman Empire," 8. See further J Labourt, Le Christianisme dans I'Empire Perse sous la Dynastie Sassamde (224-632) (Paris: Libraine Victor Lecoffre, 1904), 64-65
"^Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 119; Waterfield, Christians in Persia 19.
''On the historical criticism of the numerous Syriac "Acts of the Martyrs," see J. Asmussen,
GOD AND THE SHAH"
The Chnstians destroy our holy teachings, and teach men to serve one G.hJ. and n» >* to 1* «» our the sun or fire. They teach them, too, to defile water by their ablutions, to retrain in -m marriage and the procreation of children, and to refuse to go out to war with the shah .n Shah They have no scruple about the slaughter and eating of animals, they bury the curp.. of men in the earth; and attribute the origin of snakes and creeping things to a good Cod They despise many servants of the King, and teach witchcraft. 3
Marty Christians thereupon fled north to Nisibis. One of the most important Chnstians in this key city was Ephrem the Syrian (c. 306-373), 74 famed as the "Harp of the Spirit," an outstanding Syriac writer who provides us with invalu- able contemporary observations about the situation of Christians in the middle of the Byzantine-Persian conflict.75 Nisibis had come under Roman control in 298 in the reign of Diocletian. Shapur II attacked the city unsuccessfully in 337-38, 346, and 350. The deliverance of the city on these occasions was attributed by the Christians to the piety of their leaders such as bishop Jacob, and the providential intervention of Cod . According to Theodoret, at one point Ephrem prayed for mos- quitoes and gnats which attacked the Persian elephants and horses! n Ephrem cried out, "How, O my Master, can a desolate city, whose king is far off, and her enemy nigh, stand firm without aid of mercy?
When Constantius died in 361, Julian "The Apostate" became emperor. Julian had been raised as a Christian, but because of the massacre of many of his relatives bv the imperial family, he secretly rejected Christianity and embraced Neo- Platonism and paganism.75 His apostasy was not known until his accession As a foil against the Christians, he sought to aid the Jews in their efforts to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, a project which, however, came to nought. 4 According to the Christian historian Sozomen, Julian was not inclined to respond to the pleas o Christians at Nisibis for aid.
When the inhabitants of Nisibis sent to implore h.s aid against the Persians who were on the point of invading the Roman territories, he retused to assist them because they were wholly Christianized, and would neither reopen their temples nor resort to the sacred places.
"Christians in Iran." CHI. Ill 2, 936-37. Brock, "Eusebius and Synac Christianity." 233. dis- misses the Acts of Sharbel and the Acts of Bishop Barsamya as -uTc Vrtessner
of Shmona and Gurya. martyred •.. 297, and of Habb.b, martyred c 309 See also C. W.essner, Zur MarteruberheferunS aus der Chnstenverfolgung Schapurs II (Gottingen. Vandenhoeck Ruprecht, 1967).
-On Zoroastrian beliefs and ethics, see PB, ch. 12; E. Yamauchi, "ReUgtor* at he BMicA World; Persia," in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia ed. G. W Bom, ley (Gran Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), IV. 123-29.
73Cited by Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 142.
74See Griffith, "Ephraem, the Deacon of Edessa," 22-52.
75See K. McVey, Ephrem the Syrian (New York: Paulist, 1989), 12-28.
7”Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronterand the Persian Wars, 167, cf. 169 "Schaff and H. Wace, Gregory the Great. 172.
78On Julian, see: R. Browning The Emperor Jut, on (London: Weidenfeld and Njcotson 15); C. W. Bowersock. Julian the Apostate (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978), P Atha nassiadi, Julian; An Intellectual Biography (London: Routledge, 1992). r"See B Mazar, The Mountain of the Lord (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 94
Edwin M. Yamauchi
threatened that he wou!d not help them, nor receive their embassy, nor aproach to enter the city before he should hear that they had returned to paganism.80
Julian was killed by a spear thrust in a battle against the Persians. Inasmuch as he had consulted the livers of animals to foresee the future, Christians judged that he had received a fitting punishment in his own liver.81 After the death of Julian in 363, his successor, Jovian, surrendered Nisibis to Shapur.
After the fall of Nisibis, Ephrem left the city with other Christians and spent the last decade of his life in Edessa. His prose refutations were directed against the followers of Marcion, Bardesanes, and Mam.82 Of particular interest for our pur- poses are his Hymns Against Julian, and his Hymns on Nisibis. Ephrem attributed the loss of Nisibis to Julian's apostasy.83
As Moffett perceptively observes, the Barbarian invasions of the Huns and the Goths in the West completely absorbed Roman efforts, and afforded peace on the Persian frontier for 56 years from the reign of Shapur III (383-88) to Varahran V (421— W).84 This respite allowed the Church in Persia the opportunity to organize itself with the aid of some contacts with the West.
Marutha, bishop of Maiperqat (Martyropolis), who knew Greek and Syriac, played a key role in relations between the western and the eastern church. He was sent as an ambassador by Arcadius (395-408) and Theodosius II (408-50) to Yazdagird I (399-421). Possessed of some medical skills, he was of service to the shah, and gained royal favor for the Christians. For this stance of toleration, the shah, however, was branded an apostate by the Zoroastrian Magians.
Much of the history of the Persian Church is known from the Synodicon Orientate, which chronicles the acts of the synods from 410 to 605.85 In 41086 a key convention of 40 bishops, called the Synod of Isaac or the Synod of Seleucia, met at the capital city, and adopted both the Creed and the Canons of the Council of Nicaea (325).87 One important oversight was the lack of a canon stipulating regu- lations for the election of the catholicos. The bishops agreed to the request from the West that the easterners celebrate the key festal days on the same dates. Yazdagird ratified the decisions of this council and even threated to punish those who refused to accept them. He furthermore ordered the rebuilding of churches which had been
Historia Ecclesiastics V.3 & VI. 1 cited in Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern F router and the Persian Wars. 268.
s|See John M. Lawrence, "Hepatoscopy and Extispicy in Graeco-Roman and Early Christian Texts" (Ph.D. diss., Miami University, 1979).
HZOn Ephrem's polemic against Jews and heretics, see R. A. Darling, "The 'Church from the Nations' in the Exegesis of Ephrem," in IV Symposium Syriacum 1984. eds. H. J. W. Dnjvers et al. (Rome: Pont. Institutum Studiorum Onentalum, 1987), 111-21.
H3Hymni contra fuhanum 11.25-26, cited in Dodgeon and Lieu, The Roman Eastern Fronter and the Persian Wiars, 203.
^Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia. 151.
s '’These synods met in 410, 486, 544, 554, 576, 585, 598, 605. See S. Brock, "The Christology of the Church of the East in the Synods of the Fifth to Early Seventh Centuries," in Aksum- Thyateira (London: Thyateira House, 1985), 126-42.
■’"This was coincidentally the year in which Rome was sacked by the Visigoths.
H7See Young, Patriarch, Shah and Caliph, 28-29
GOD AND THE SHAH'
destroyed.88 Christians received the status of a recognized minority called in Persian a melet, that is, a self-governing religious community 89
At the end of Yazdagird's reign90 and the beginning of the reign of his suc- cessor, Varahran V (421-39), persecution of Christians was instigated by the zeal of a Christian in Khuzistan who burnt a fire temple at Hormizd-Ardeshir and re- fused to rebuild it. In 422 at the trial of a wealthy Christian, Peroz, who became a Zoroastrian under torture, but then recanted, Mihrshabur, the high priest, advised the shah:
From this moment on, my lord, all the Chnstians have rebelled against you: they no longer do your will, they despise your orders, they refuse to worship your gods If the shah would hear me, let him give orders that the Christians convert from their religion, for they hold the same faith as the Romans, and they are in entire agreement together: should a war interpose between the two empires these Christians will turn out to be defectors from our side in any fighting, and through their playing false they will bnng down your power.* 1
Though the persecution was relatively brief (three or four years), it was ex- traordinarily cruel, as reported by Theodoret:
It is not easy to describe the new kinds of punishment that the Persians invented to torment the Christians. They flayed the hands of some, and the backs of others. In the case of others again, they stripped the skin of the forehead down to the chin. They tore their bodies with broken reeds, causing them exquisite pain. Having dug great pits, they filled them with rats and mice and then cast the Christians into the pits, first tying their hands and feet so that they could neither chase the animals away or place themselves beyond their reach. The ani- mals themselves having been kept without feed, devoured these Christian confessors in the most cruel way.92
Another sadistic form of torture and execution was called the "nine deaths." It in- volved the successive cutting off of: 1) the fingers, 2) the toes, 3) the wrists, 4) the ankles, 5) the arms, 6) the knees, 7) the ears, 8) the nose, and finally 9) the head.*3
An important western envoy was Acacius, bishop of Amid, who was sent about 420 to the Persian king Yazdagird II by Theodosius II. He participated in a council called by Yahbalaha I. On behalf of the Persians, he negotiated the ransom of 7,000 Persian prisoners. In 424 at a council called by Dadyeshu at Markabta, the synod of six metropolitans and 30 other bishops unilaterally elevated the
rt8I Ortiz de Urbina, "Christen im Perserreich uber die Anbetung des Kaisers," in III Symposium Syriacum 1980 ed. R. Lavenant (Rome: Pont. Institutum Studiorum Onentalium, 1983), 200-201.
89Later called the millet system, which was continued by both the Arabs and the Turks. See Brock, "Christians in the Sasanian Empire," 12.
^The reason for Yazdagird's change in attitude toward the Christians is unknown Widengren suggests that it was the influence of a zealous official, Mihr-Narse Widengren, "The Nestorian Church in Sasanian," 16-27. See also Christensen, L Iran sous les Sassanides.273.
9lCited by Brock, "Christians in the Sasanian Empire," 8.
92Cited by Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 150. For a detailed account of the many ingenious methods of torture and execution devised by the Sasanids, see Christensen, L'lrun sous les Sassamdes, 308-10.
93Labourt, Le Chnstianisme dans VEmpire Perse. 61.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
catholicos to the status of a patriarch, thus declaring their independence from the patriarch of Antioch. As the appointments to the highest positions were subject to the shah's approval, the office unfortunately attracted self-serving rather than saintly men.
Persecutions began anew under Yazdgerd II in 446, when many clergy and other Christians were put to death at Karka (modern Kirkuk). The sources claim that over 150,000 perished, which appears to be a totally incredible figure.44 One of the judges was so touched by the courage of a Christian woman and her two sons, that he too confessed Christ and was himself crucified.95
Complicating the situation of Christians in Persia were the major doctrinal developments which ensued with the condemnation of Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus in 431,96 and the condemnation of Monophysitism at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. 97 The Council of Chalcedon affirmed the two natures of Christ, and confirmed the condemnation of Nestorius. Though the Council's formulation has been widely accepted in the West by major divisions of Christendom such as the Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant Churches, it introduced ma- jor divisions among Christians in the East. Only a minority in Egypt and Syria ac- cepted the Byzantine position; these were called Melchites (from the word for “king"), as they were loyal to the emperor. The Monophysite view was adopted by the Copts in Egypt, the Ethiopians, and the Armenians. The adherence of many in Syria to the Monophysite cause was to introduce a major rift among Eastern Christians in Mesopotamia-Persia, where the majority position was not the Chalcedonian but the Nestorian one.
This new factionalism is illustrated in the career of Rabbula, who was bishop
‘‘McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity, 126. For the struggle between Zoroastri- ans and Christians in Armenia during Yazdgerd II's reign, see S. A. Nigosian, The Zoroastnan Faith (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Pess, 1993), 37-38. Cf J R. Russell, Zoroastrianism m Armenia (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987).
^Waterfield, Christians in Persia, 26, Widengren, "The Nestorian Church in Sasaman," 27-28. ‘"'G. Driver & L. Hodgson, Nestorius: The Bazaar of Heracleides repr. (1925; New York: AMS Press, 1978); C. E. Braaten, "Modem Interpretations of Nestorius," Church History 32 (1963): 251-67; K. A. Greer, "The Use of Scnpture in the Nestorian Controversy," Scottish Journal of Theology 20 (1967): 413-22; L. Abramowski & A. Goodman, A Nestorian Collection of Christo- logical Texts, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972); H. E. W. Turner, Nestorius Reconsidered," Studio Patnstica Kill (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1975), 306-21; Richard Kyle, "Nestorius. The Partial Rehabilitation of a Heretic," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 32 (1989): 73-83.
,<7On Chalcedon, see: R. V. Sellers, The Council of Chalcedon A Historical and Doctrinal Survey (London: SPCK, 1953); J. Meyendorff, "Chalcedonians and Monophysites after Chalce- don," Greek Orthodox Theological Review 10 (1964-65): 16-30; K. Sarkissian, The Council of Chalcedon and the Armenian Church (London: SPCK, 1965); W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of the Monophysite Movement, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979); Gregorios et al., eds., Does Chalcedon Divide or Unite? (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1981); F. M. Young, From Nicaea to Chalcedon (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983); I. Torrance, Christology after Chalcedon (Norwich: Canterbury, 1988); G. Havrilak, "Chalcedon and Orthodox Christology Today," St. Vladimir's Theology Quarterly 33 (1989): 127-45; M. Slusser, "The Issues in the Definition of the Council of Chalcedon," Toronto Journal of Theology 6 (1990): 63- 69.
GOD AND THE SHAH'
of Edessa from 412 to 435.98 He had at first supported Nestorius, but after a visit to Constantinople in 432, he became a fervent opponent of Nestorius. He even burned the writings of Theodore Mopsuestia, the teacher of Nestorius, and thus alienated many of the Christians at Edessa.99
But Rabbula was succeeded by Ibas or Hiba (435-57), a fervent Nestorian.100 Ibas had translated the works of Diodore of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Nestonus into Syriac. Ibas was deposed from his see by the Robber Council of 449, but was restored at the Council of Chalcedon when he repudiated both Nestorius and Eutyches (an extreme Monophysite). But upon his return to Edessa, the Monophysites demonstrated before the governor shouting:
No one wants an enemy of Chnst! No one wants a corrupter of orthodoxy! to exile with the confidant of Nestorius! . Go and join your companion Nestonus! An orthodox bishop for the church! No one wants the accuser of upnght faith! No one wants the friend of the Jews! No one wants the enemy of God! Rid us of Hiba and deliver the world!101
Barsauma, nicknamed "the wild boar," an extreme partisan of the Nestonans, became bishop of Nisibis. Because of personal amibition and differences of opin- ions over clerical celibacy, Barsauma was opposed to Babowai, a convert from Zoroastrianism, who was the catholicos.102
Babowai wrote a letter to the Roman emperor, Zeno, unwisely referring to the Persian realm as an "accursed kingdom." The letter, however, was intercepted by Barsauma, who handed it over to the shah, Peroz (459-84). Babowai was sus- pended by his ring finger and left to starve to death. According to his Monophysite critics, Bar-Sauma then advised the shah to use force to compel all Christians to ac- cept the Nestorian faith.103 According to the later Monophysite historian, Bar Hebraeus, over 7,700 Monophysites were killed.104
At the council of Beth Lapat called in 484, Barsauma had the marriage ot priests proclaimed as canon law (probably as a concession to Zoroastrianism).10’ Celibacy was repugnant to the Zoroastrians. In times of persecution nuns were of- fered their lives if they consented to marry. More significantly he had the Persian church repudiate both Monophysitism and Chalcedonianism, and officially affirm Nestorianism. As he explained to Peroz, "unless the confession of Chnstians in
98William Wright, A Short History of Syriac Literature repr. (1887; Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1966), 47-48.
•“Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 186-88. On Theodore, see: F Sullivan, The Chnst- ology of Theodore of Mopsuestia (Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1956), R Greer, Theodore of Mopsuestia (London: Faith Press, 1961); R. A. Norris, Manhood and Christ: A Study in the Christology of Theodore of Mopsuestia (Oxford Clarendon Press, 1963); A Voobus, Regarding the Theological Anthropology of Theodore of Mopsuestia," Church History 33 (1964): 15-24; D. Zaharopoulos, Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Bible (New York: Paulist Press, 1989) io°wright, A Short History of Syriac Literature, 49-50. l0,Cited by Segal, Edessa "The Blessed City," 94.
i°2w. Wigram, An Introduction to the History of the Assyrian Church (London: SPCK, 1910), ISO- 55.
l03Labourt, Le Christianisme dans TEmpire Perse, 135; Waterfield, Christians in Persia. 27 104McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity, 131. i°5Widengren, "The Nestorian Church in Sasanian," 16.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
your territory is made different from that in Greek territory, their affection and loy- alty towards you will not be firmly fixed."106
After the death of Ibas the Monophysites were able to have one of their num- ber, Nuna, appointed as bishop of Edessa. But because of the lingering influence of Nestorians there, the Monophysites persuaded the emperor Zeno (474-91) to close the famous School of Edessa. When this occurred in 489, many of the teach- ers and students crossed over into Persian territory. Narsai, who was the director of the School of Persia, from 451 to 471, had been expelled earlier. The school was essentially reconstituted at Nisibis, now in the Persian realm. Students were for- bidden to cross into Byzantine territory. The School of Nisibis was influential in the "Nestorianizing" of the Christians in Persia. By 534 there was but one Monophysite bishop left in Persia.107
Moffett points out how the Persian Church "lived always under the shadow of political suspicion."108 Narsai had criticized a military victory of Kavad over Amida, a remark which was reported to the monarch. This could have brought dis- aster not only to Narsai, but also to the entire Christian community, if Narsai had not been able to produce a poem, in which he had praised the glory of the Persian Empire.109
An outstanding leader of the Persian Church was Mar Aba, the patriarch (540- 52), who spent seven of these years in jail or in exile. A convert from Zoroastri- anism, he was always under pressure from the mobeds. He reorganized the church, reinvigorated theological education, revived spirituality, and reestab- lished communication with the Western Church. At a synod he convened in 544 he affirmed both the tradition of adherence to the Nicene Creed and the teachings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, while recognizing the Council of Chalcedon.
The shah at this period was Chosroesor Khusro I (531-79), the greatest Persian monarch in a millennium. His favorite wife was a Christian, as was his personal physician. Though he respected Mar Aba, he had to take action against him for his attempts at evangelizing Zoroastrians, which had infuriated the mobeds. The shah advised the patriarch, "Stop receiving converts; admit to communion those mar- ried by Magian law (that is, those married to close relatives)110 and allow your peo- ple to eat Magian sacrifices." As Mar Aba refused to yield, he was exiled for sev- en years to Azerbaijan in the northwest. When the Zoroastrians attempted to murder him. Mar Aba returned to the capital, where he was imprisoned. When the shah's Christian son, Anoshaghzad, prematurely sought to seize control upon a false report of his father's death. Mar Aba was accused of conspiring with him. Before he could be executed. Mar Aba was cleared of these charges, but he died soon after in 552. 111
Chosroes and Justinian signed a treaty in regard to the treatment of Chris-
luoCited by Brock. "Christians in the Persian Empire," 9. l07Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asm, 206.
108 Ibid., 202.
IINWidengren, "The Nestorian Church in Sasanian," 17.
lluZoroastrians valued close unions such as with sisters and daughters. See PB, 450-51. mSee Wigram, History of the Assyrian Church, 206-8.
GOD AND THE SHA H"
tiar.s in the Persian Empire and of Zoroastrians in Byzantine areas. This even involved an agreement to rebuild fire temples, probably those which had been de- stroyed in anti-Zoroastrian crusades.112 Furthermore proselytizing was discour- aged.113
Justinian, the great Byzantine emperor (527-65), who first persecuted the Monophysites, whereas his wife Theodora favored them, issued in 543 his con- demnation of the "Three Chapters," condemning Theodore, Ibas, and 1 heodoret of Cyrrus (423-58), all revered authorities among the Nestorians.114 He did this to try to appease the Monophysites, but failed to win their more radical adherents and only succeeded in further alienating the Nestorian Christians in Persia.
The Monophysite cause was advanced by some outstanding individuals Jacob of Serug (d. 521), "the flute of the holy spirit,"115 was a leading Syriac Monophysite. A prolific writer of poems, odes, and hymns, he managed to avoid theological controversy. Another more vocal Monophysite was Philoxenus, who became bishop of Mabug (= Hierapolis), west of the Euphrates, in 485. He helped to convert much of the area from Nestorianism to Monophysitism. But when Jus- tin I became emperor in 518, he deposed Philoxenus and 54 other Monophysite bishops.116
The outstanding Monophysite figure was Jacob Bardaeus (Ya aqub al- Barda'i), so-called because of the ragged, horse-cloth which he wore as a disguise as he moved from place to place just ahead of the agents of Justinian. During the years 542 to 578 he traveled vast distances, ordaining 2 patriarchs, 27 bishops, and allegedly 100,000 priests.117 In recognition of his key role, the Monophysites ot Syria-Mesopotamia became known as Jacobites.
Christians enjoyed tolerance under Hormizd IV (579-89), who was unfortu- nately deposed in a palace revolt. As noted earlier, Chosroes II (589-628) began his reign inauspiciously by having to flee from his enemies to the Byzantine emperor Maurice. With the latter's help, he gained back his throne. Among his many wives and concubines his favorite was a Christian, Shirin. His personal physician was the influential Gabriel, a Christian. But when Gabriel divorced his wife and re- placed her with two pagan women, he was excommunicated by the bishop of Nisibis. Peeved at the rebuke by this Nestorian prelate, Gabriel cast his consider- able influence on the side of the Monophysites. By his treatment, which helped her to conceive a son, Gabriel also converted the queen to this position.11'1 When
112See Boyce and Grenet, A History of Zoroastrianism III, 257.
,,3In 591 Byzantine and Sasanian officials cooperated in issuing an edict of toleration, for bidding all proselytizing. SeeN. Garsoian, "Byzantium and the Sasanians," in CHI, III 1, 586 114Wigram, History of the Assyrian Church, 216-17. See A. C. Outler, '"The Three Chapters A Comment on the Survival of Antiochene Chnstology," in A Tribute to Arthur Vdobus ed. R. H Fischer (Chicago: Lutheran School of Theology, 1977), 357-64 ll5Wright, A Short History of Syriac Literature, 67-69.
,,bSee R. C. Chesnut, Three Monophysite Christologies: Severus of Antioch, Philoxenus of Mabbug and Jacob ofSarug (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976).
ll7McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity, 83; Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 245-46, Wigram, History of the Assyrian Church, 241^12.
U8Young, Patriarch, Shah and Caliph, 74-75.
Edwin M. Yamauchi
Chosroes overran Syria, he replaced the Chalcedonian bishops with Monophys- ite ones.
A debate was held before Chosroes between spokesmen for the Mono- physites, who were represented by Ahudemmeh, and the Nestorians, who were represented by George the Monk. The shah was so impressed by the Monophysites that he ordered the Nestorians to leave them alone. Gabriel denounced George as an apostate from Zoroastrianism. 1,9 In 6 15 George was then executed by being tied to a cross and shot by archers. 120 Ironically, Ahudemmeh was also imprisoned and died, because he converted a prince in 573.
A further setback to the eastern church occurred over the election of Gregory as patriarch. When the Christians chose a different Gregory from the Gregory fa- vored by Chosroes, he did not depose the man already elected but refused to al- low further elections after Gregory I died in 608. The office was therefore vacant for twenty years.
Though some sources allege that Chosroes II even became a Christian, the fact that he prayed to the martyr St. Sergius indicates no more than that he was very superstitious.121 When Heraclius invaded Persian territories, Chosroes persecut- ed Christians, Monophysites and Nestorians alike.122 In 628 Chosroes was over- thrown through the agency of Shamta, an influential Nestonan at the court, and replaced by Kavad II. Instead of being grateful, Kavad had Shamta crucified be- fore a Nestorian church in the capital.123
During the reign of Queen Boran (629-30), the catholicos Jesusyahb, ventured to Aleppo, where he met Heraclius, and even took communion together with the Byzantine emperor When he returned home, however, he was criticized by fellow Christians for not having defended Nestorianism before the Byzantines.124 The country was thrown into chaos for the next few years, until the reign of the last Sasanian, Yazdagird III (632-51).
To allay the suspicions that Christians in the Persian Empire were potential traitors, many Christians served loyally at the court and also in the army, and the church itself by the mid-sixth century officially supported the shah. Chosroes I was hailed as the second Cyrus, who was preserved by divine grace. The Synod of 576 even decreed:
It is right that in all the churches of this exalted and glorious kingdom that our lord the vic- torious Chosroes, king of kings, be named in the litanies during the liturgy. No metropolitan or bishop has any authonty to waive this canon in any of the churches of his diocese and ju- risdiction.125
M4Widengren, "The Nestorian Church in Sasanian," 28, observes: "Actually, it was legally
forbidden to pass from mazdayasnian to Christian religion and conversion was on principle
punished with captal punishment."
l20Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia. 251.
l21Labourt Le Christianisme dans V Empire Perse, 220.
l22Duchesne-Guillemin, "Zoroastrian Religion," 896.
l23Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, 253.
l24McCullough, A Short History of Syriac Christianity, 163.
125Brock, "Christians in the Sasanian Empire," 11
"GOD AND THE SHAH"
Conclusions
Unlike the s.tuation in the west where the Roman Empire first persecuted Christians, but then became identified with Christianity after Constantine. Christians in Persia remained a tolerated though ofttimes severely persecuted mi- nority. We must express adm, ration for the courage of many who gave their fives as martyrs. As Widengren concludes:
Even so. however, who would refuse his admiration of the Christians of the Nestorian Church who suffered ternble torture and the most hornble methods of execution here had very fine old traditions, inherited from the Ancient Near East.
But the freedom to exist was ach.eved at the pnee of accepting the shah's role in ratifying the chotce of the head of the church. There was no legal freedom to evangelize* Proselytes won from Zoroastrian.sm were often m danger of death. Young concludes:
be Head of the mllat might try to gam the backing of the State authority.
The sufferance of Christians under the millet system has been the status and the
bane of Christianity in the Middle East to the present.
Bv the end of the Sasanian Era the Nestorian Church numbered nine metro- politans. and % bishops. Despite considerable restrictions and severe persecu ions within Persta, the Nestorians became incredibly successful in carry mg Christian y rnto India, Centra, Asia, and China. It was in 635 .ha, Nestorian mtsstonaries first reached the capital of China, but that is another story. -
tri’Widengren, "The Nestonan Church in Sasanian," 29
l27Young, Patriarch, Shah and Caliph, 35. 18-2V Y. Saeki, The Nestorian Monument
,28See Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia. chs. - ' (Tokyo
,T C ipric 1916V Y Saeki, Nestorian Documents and Kelics in ^nma (iu y
,n China (London. ^ m M Neitonan Adventure in China (London
Academy of Onental Culture, 1951), Jf rbrisrianitv in Central Asia," Bulletin
Hutchinson, 1924); A. ^Moule. Christians ,n China before the Year 1551)
of the John Rylands Ubrary 9 (1925). 297 371. A. MO , Thl, china Socety, 1940).
(London: SPCK. 1930); A. Moule, Nestor, an m Chma (Lon^onjhe C ^ ^ Q D L. Outerbridge, The Lost Churches of C tna . > ,n chind during the Tang
Bundy, "Missiological Reflections on es T Hendncks (New York Paragon
Theological Journal 4 (1996): 103-26.
BOOK REVIEWS — ASIA GENERAL
465
of the relationship. She reinforces the general point that emerges from all the volumes and contributors to this series — “Asia” is a complex place and it is important for Australians, be they business people or bureaucrats, to see beyond the stereotypes.
The remaining chapters highlight other cross-cultural issues in other key bilateral relationships. China merits two chapters: Peter Van Ness examines the experience of Australia’s human rights delegation to China in |991; Edmund Fung and Colin Mackerras explore the attitudes of Chinese student residents in Australia, which has for many of them now become their permanent Home. Chung-Sok Suh’s examination of the Korean beef trade is interesting, but might have looked more at home in a political-economy collection. Likewise, Richard Chauvel’s thorough exploration of Australia’s historical relationship with West New Guinea seems rather out of place in a book that is primarily concerned with contemporary relationships in Northeast and Southeast Asia.
Indeed, if there is one major criticism to be made of this volume, it is that the various contributions are a bit too eclectic and somewhat haphazard, and other possibly more important issues might have been considered. Given the activist role of Australian diplomacy in promoting APEC and the intellectual input it has provided to the ASEAN Regional Forum, consideration of these institutions and the potentially contradictory world views they embody might have been useful.
Nevertheless, the material gathered here might prove valuable for teachers seeking to illustrate what can often seem rather abstract issues, or for anyone wishing to gain an insight into the difficulties of conducting complex relationships across cultures.
Mark Beeson Griffith University
A History of Christianity in Asia , volume 1, Beginnings to 1500. By Samuel Hugh Moffett. Second Revised Edition. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1998. xxvi, 560 pp. $25.00.
This remarkable synthesis narrates the geographical expansion, institutional development, and ultimate collapse and downfall of the Church of the East. This church was distinct from Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy politically, culturally, and theologically, and was at times a vital Christian presence in Asia. Moffett’s textured account provides a rich history which should serve as the standard introductory work to the subject. His projected second volume will concentrate on the other Christianities brought to Asia largely by Europeans and Americans, and together the two will fill an unfortunate lacuna in overviews of Christianity in Asia.
In volume 1 , Moffett surveys the Christianity “that grew and spread outside of the Roman Empire in ancient oriental kingdoms east of the Euphrates and stretching along the Old Silk Road from Osrhoene through Persia to China or along the water routes from the Red Sea around Arabia to India” (p. xiv). The history of this church inevitably entails discussions of conquests and empires. Unlike the churches west of the Euphrates which eventually came to be the official religions of the two halves of the Roman Empire, the Church of the East remained the religion of the minority. More particularly it was a minority religion competing with other vigorous religions, many of which were identified with the nation or state: Zoroastrianism, Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Mongol shamanism. Thus, its health depended on the
466 THE JOURNAL OF ASIAN STUDIES
goodwill, caprice, or political necessities of Parthian, Persian, Islamic, Chinese, and Mongol rulers. Moffett combines crisp narratives of individual bishops, monks, and emperors with broad discussions of political and cultural change in order to make the particular political dynamics of this church clear.
Another strength of this volume lies in its theological discussions. In the fifth century, the Church of the East came to define itself as Nestorian in opposition to the “orthodox” churches of Rome and Constantinople. Even today, the technical distinctions between using prosopon (a relatively weak term) and hypostasis (a metaphysically stronger concept) to describe the unity of the divine and human natures in Christ are not always clear. (The Nestorians preferred the former; the churches of the west required the latter.) Moffett’s presentation of these matters is lucid, and nonspecialists will find the theological discussions accessible. Presentations of other religions competing with or persecuting Christianity are understandably brief, but they are certainly more than adequate.
Moffett divides the book into three parts of unequal length. The first of these occupies about one half of the text and covers primarily the church under the Parthians and Persians (until the middle of the seventh century). A few chapters also attempt to describe what can be said about the earliest Christians in India. The second part, roughly one-filth of the whole, describes the initial missions of the Church of the East to China and the changing conditions confronting Christians under different Islamic rulers in Persia. The final portion, “The Pax Mongolica: From Genghis Khan to Tamerlane," completes the story of the Nestorian church in Asia. (It also discusses the first Roman Catholic missions to Asia.) Despite the possibilities for growth and expansion under the relatively tolerant Mongols and their continent-wide trade routes, by the end of the fifteenth century and the beginning of the European expansion across the globe, the Church of the East was all but wiped out.
The possibilities for, as well as the ultimate failure of, this church to survive dominates this book’s narrative in large part because it was a dramatic disintegration of a once-vigorous Christianity. (Sadly, another reason for the book’s focus on the problem of the church’s disintegration is the simple lack of surviving source materials; institutional and doctrinal matters predominate here in part because there are now few records of the social and cultural histories of this church.) Moffett assesses eight factors which circumscribed the Church of the East: “geographical isolation, chronic numerical weakness, persecution, the encounter with formidable Asian religions, ethnic introversion, dependence upon the state, . . . the church's own internal divisions” as well as the ”[m]uch debated and often cited . . . eighth factor, the theological” (p. 503). While he recognizes the devastating role of Tamerlane and other persecutors, Moffett argues that the Church of the East was in large part responsible for its own failure. This church, for example, ultimately neglected the importance of missions for the health of a church; missions, after all, presuppose a recognition of something so wonderful and so compelling that it demands to be communicated.
This text is a_ masterful history and a delight to read. Its synthetic account combined with its rich notes and bibliography make it both an excellent survey text and a good point of departure for subsequent research. Few others have attempted such an ambitious history of Christianity in Asia, and Moffett's second volume should be eagerly expected. David Keck
Ateneo de Manila University