Sino-Persian chimera
« previous post | next post »
We've been on the trail of the griffin for some time: "Griffins: the implications of art history for language spread" (8/9/24), "Idle thoughts upon the Ides of March: the feathered man" (3/11/23) — very important (not so idle) observations about griffins in the pre-Classical West by Adrienne Mayor, with illuminating illustrations. Following the leads in these and other posts, I think we're getting closer to the smoking gryphon (in some traditions, e.g., Egyptian sfr/srf, it is thought to be fiery).
One name from the Middle East rings a bell with a well-known fabulous monster from classical China. That is
…the Armenian term Paskuč (Armenian: պասկուչ) that had been used to translate Greek gryp 'griffin' in the Septuagint, which H. P. Schmidt characterized as the counterpart of the simurgh. However, the cognate term Baškuč (glossed as 'griffin') also occurs in Middle Persian, attested in the Zoroastrian cosmological text Bundahishn XXIV (supposedly distinguishable from Sēnmurw which also appears in the same text). Middle Persian Paškuč is also attested in Manichaean magical texts (Manichaean Middle Persian: pškwc), and this must have meant a "griffin or a monster like a griffin" according to W. B. Henning.
That reminds me of the 辟邪. In Mandarin, it is pronounced bìxié. I'm not confident we can say for sure it is a griffin per se, though it is a chimera of some sort. More feline than avian, I believe, though at least it has wings, and if we look at images of the bìxié 辟邪 and compare them to the Paškuč / Baškuč, we will find that there are quite a few resemblances, though, again, I'm not making a case that the bìxié 辟邪 is equal to the griffin. It would be unlikely for an imaginary, fabulous beast to retain iconographical fidelity across thousands of miles and hundreds of years. Indeed, even within a single tradition, the details of an imaginary beast vary wildly through time and space (e.g., the bìxié 辟邪 itself has many different competing versions).
As Wiktionary tells us, bìxié 辟邪 is "a chimaera-like figure common in Chinese and Persian art". ***** Reading that sentence was electrifying. So far as I know, no one has made a philological identification of the bìxié 辟邪 and the Paškuč / Baškuč. Rather, the statement that the two fabulous creatures, the Persian and the Sinitic, are related — "a chimaera-like figure common in Chinese and Persian art" — was likely to have been made by art historians based on a commonality of iconographical features and alleged traits.
zdic, the online Classical Chinese dictionary, defines bìxié 辟邪 as "to ward off evil spirits; mythical lion-like animal that wards off evil". In my estimation, this sort of definition may be styled as wàngwénshēngyì 望文生義 ("forced, superficial translation of a transcription"). My dissatisfaction with "to ward off evil spirits" is underscored by the fact that there is a completely different transcription, for which see below.
First, though, let us examine the historical phonology of bìxié 辟邪:
The Middle Sinitic reconstruction (ca. 600 AD) of the first character is bjiek; the Old Sinitic reconstruction (ca. 600 BC) of the first character is /*peɡ/ or /*beɡ/
The Middle Sinitic reconstruction (ca. 600 AD) of the second character is zjae; the Old Sinitic reconstruction (ca. 600 BC) of the second character is /*ljaː/
Hence, /*peɡ/ /*ljaː/ or /*beɡ/ /*ljaː/.
Now it gets very interesting, because there is an alternative orthography for the name of this fabulous creature, and that is píxiū 貔貅.
Middle Sinitic bjij xjuw
Old Sinitic /*bi qʰu/
This mythological animal is deeply embedded enough in Chinese lore and legend that it is even to be found in classical texts from around the time of the Han Dynasty (202 BC-9 AD' 25-220 AD).
Earliest extant attestations are in the Book of Rites and Lost Book of Zhou:
前有摯獸，則載貔貅。
When there is a ferocious beast (of prey) in front, the flag with a pixiu / leopard('s skin) on it should be displayed.
山之深也，虎豹貔貅何為可服？
The mountains being thus deep, how can tigers, leopards, and pixiu be tamed?
There's even a whole Wikipedia article on the píxiū 貔貅. Don't pay too much attention to the fantastic iconographical details, because — when it comes to strange / legendary / mythological creatures — the Chinese just love to pile on the weirdness.
The fact that this same creature has alternative near-homophonic orthographical forms is highly significant. It is a principle of my Sinological philology that such disyllabic terms with orthographical variants are usually an indication that they are transcriptional and borrowed from a non-Sinitic source.
If the bìxié 辟邪 / píxiū 貔貅 is related to the baškuč / paškuč, as we have been told, it is likely to have been brought by East Iranian speakers. In a detailed philological study of baškuč / paškuč, David Buyaner, concludes:
Bearing in mind the role played by the speakers of various Eastern-Iranian dialects[19] settled on the Great Silk Road in the transmission of folklore narratives of eastern origin to the West, we can conclude with a good deal of likelihood that the bird name *pasku(n)č was borrowed from some Eastern-Iranian source (probably Khotanese) into Parthian and that from there it penetrated Persian and the non-Iranian languages of the Caucasus and Mesopotamia.
[19]Mostly Sogdians, but not only.
See Buyaner's "On the Etymology of Middle Persian baškuč (Winged Monster)," Studia Iranica, 34 (2005), 19-30, available here and here.
A similar vector may have been operative in the transmission of the baškuč / paškuč eastward.
Selected readings
- "What is the difference between a dragon and a /lʊŋ³⁵/?" (2/10/24)
- "A (troop / troupe of) dragon(s) tromping / flying" (12/4/23)
- "'Lord of Heaven' in ancient Sino-Iranian" (5/28/24)
- “Zoroastrianism between Iranic and Sinitic” (11/18/22)
- "So spoke Zoroaster: camels and ancient Sinitic reconstructions" (1/13/21)
- "Zoroastrianism and Mazdaism: Evidence from Sogdian and Pahlavi" (1/15/21)
- "Indo-European religion, Scythian philosophy, and the date of Zoroaster: a linguistic quibble" (10/9/20) — with an extensive bibliography
[Thanks to Martin Schwartz]
Chris Button said,
August 20, 2024 @ 8:41 pm
邪 would regularly derive from ɣ- my reconstruction (l- is possible but unlikely given the phonetic)
貅 would derive from x-
An alternation of ɣ- with x- makes a lot more sense here.
Hwz said,
August 20, 2024 @ 9:15 pm
Any connections possible with another mythical creature 檮杌?
Martin Schwartz said,
August 20, 2024 @ 10:59 pm
I know Egyptian s r r f from the Leiden (Leyden) Magical Papyrus
(which, contra Wiki, is in Demotic Egyptian, not Greek!); one can see its representation if one slogs thru the text which is online. It is its
origin, Heb. seraph (the Wiki Seaph is good) since itis from Heb. root 'to burn'. The Wiki's "gryp" in the quotation should be gryps (singular). Rather than mess with the Wiki, one would do well to go to the great (and alas late) Hanns-Peter Schmidt's article "SIMORG" in Encyclopedia Iranica (online),
where paskuč etc. is well discussed. The Armenian word could be from Parthian as also the Aramaic cited by Buyaner, tho Middle Persian is possible. At least for Middle Sinitic, one should keep in mind that
Sogdian could have had something like *pišku(n)č , with reduction of
/a/ and fronting by š, but I leave the rest to the Sinologists.
Martin Schwartz
martin schwartz said,
August 20, 2024 @ 11:02 pm
I meant that it is the Hebrew etymon of the Eg. word which is
involved with burning.
martin schwartz said,
August 21, 2024 @ 1:59 am
A griffin named sfr occurs in a Beni Hasan tomb of Egypt's Middle
Kingdom. It seems Egyptian also has srf 'to be hot' vel sim.
I'm now beginning to incline myself to think that Heb. śārāph "seraph'
is of Egyptian origin; cf. Egyptian-format seals from the Holy Land with griffins. The 2nd or 3rd cent. CE London-Leiden Papyrus' s r r f 'griffin'
may however be of Hebrew origin; Abraham is mentioned in the text.
An interesting problem!
Martin Schwartz
Yves Rehbein said,
August 22, 2024 @ 12:28 pm
Does bízi 鼻子 anywhere mean beak, as of a bird like chimera? I know it can mean "trunk", but the elephant is not itsy bitsy by any means. @ Martin Schwartz I note that the dental coda of /*m-bi[t]-s/ is remotely in line with śārāph,
> … For example, in standard Mandarin, the word is pronounced bí (implying an old entering tone) instead of bì (the expected reflex from the departing tone in Middle Chinese). This is due to a phonological phenomenon in the northwest, either an early loss of *-s in the *-ts cluster before regular final cluster simplification occurred (Baxter, 1992), or a dialectal change from *-s to *-t (Pulleybank, 1998).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%BC%BB#Chinese
I do not quite see how both bí 鼻 and zì 自 "self" reflect the same word, much less if the root is Proto-Sino-Tibetan *bi "nose". In addition, Proto-Japonic *pana > hana 鼻 is a bit too much coincidence.
To answer my own question, tongue firmly in cheek, see the Gulf Arabic translation of būz "nose"
> From Classical Persian پوز (pōz, “the lip, mouth, and environs; the beak of a bird, the snout of a quadruped; the space between the nose and lip; the trunk of a tree”)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/بوز#Gulf_Arabic
> (This etymology is missing or incomplete. Please add to it, or discuss it at the Etymology scriptorium.)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%BE%D9%88%D8%B2#Persian
sounds like "trunk" doesn't it?
Martin Schwartz said,
August 22, 2024 @ 8:20 pm
@Yves Rehbein: you've lost me with the comparison of the dental coda of */m-bi-[t-s/ and that of śārāph. My discussion of the latter word has NOTHING to do with whether West Middle Iranian p/bas/šku(n)č
is reflected in Sinitic. Btw, I'd say (but not insist) that Gulf Arabic būz is from Modern Persian pūz and not from ts Classical Persian antecedent pōz.
Martin Schwartz
Yves Rehbein said,
August 23, 2024 @ 2:37 am
@ Martin Schwartz
Reek, German Rauch "smoke" and riechen "to smell" as in Riechkolben "nose" gets close enough to "burn", so it is not actually meaningless to compare Egyptian srf "to burn", as you suggest, and Old Chinese /*m-bi[t]-s/ "nose".
Moreover, I have argued previously that Rex as a dog name related to reek, as if "snoopy", "Schnauzer", remember? The word is indeed Germanic but its etymology is not about smell nor king, if you want to do this by the book (Old English ræċċ, .Old Norse rakki, Swedish byracka). Besides, Old English has bicce /ˈbit.t͡ʃe/, German Petze, "bitch, female dog". So to me it would make sense to compare śārāph with other ś-initials following my argument about basilisk in translation of Hebrew tsepha`. Right now I can only think of z'év "wolf", since you have asked …
> A number of Old World languages of different groups show a word for 'dog' or a doglike beast of the type affricate/sibilant plus /a/ (plus vowel) plus l/r.:
Dogged by an etymological shape: https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=60673
… and I fnd that rather impressive. I notice too late that ṣade /t͡s/ is not ś – śamek I believe, phonology difficult, biblical /ɬ/ compare Χ "chi", X "iks".
> Note: the fricatives *s, *z, *ṣ, *ś, *ṣ́, and *ṱ may also be interpreted as affricates (/t͡s/, /d͡z/, /t͡sʼ/, /t͡ɬ/, /t͡ɬʼ/, and /t͡θʼ/).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_languages#Phonology
there we see that it generally corresponds to Akkadian and Ugaritic š and was spelled with what might be called shin, not samek. Phoenician samek in turn is /t͡s/. It's confusing is what I'm trying to say.
In view of the aforesaid and seeing Japanese 猟犬 ryōken "hound", perhaps reflecting "れふけん (refuken)?" …
> From Middle Chinese compound 獵犬／猎犬 (liᴇp̚ kʰwenX, literally “hunt + dog”). Compare modern Mandarin reading lièquǎn.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%8C%9F%E7%8A%AC#Japanese
… and the origins of tsade …
> The origin of ṣade is unclear. It may have come from a Proto-Sinaitic script based on a pictogram of a plant, perhaps a papyrus plant, or a fish hook (in Modern Hebrew, צד tsad means "[he] hunt[ed]", and in Arabic صاد ṣād means "[he] hunted").
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsade
… it almost makes sense. However, that wasn't what I was trying to say with reference to the pronoun zì "self", I think. Actually, I mementarily forgot. Help, I'm lost! :D
Chris Button said,
August 23, 2024 @ 3:19 pm
I don't think they do, do they?
Yves Rehbein said,
August 24, 2024 @ 7:33 am
@ Chris Button, I don't know that.
Chris Button said,
August 24, 2024 @ 8:15 am
@ Yves Rehbein
自 did originally depict a nose. It is used in the oracle bones to mean "from"
Looking a little further into this, it seems some scholars have tried to connect the pronunciation of 鼻 "nose" with it for that reason. But there seems little phonological justification.
martin schwartz said,
August 24, 2024 @ 8:30 pm
@Yves Rehbein: I made no such comparison.
MS
Yves Rehbein said,
August 25, 2024 @ 7:37 pm
@ Martin Schwartz, I'm sorry I worded that badly.
You talked about
* Egy. srrf "griffin", √srf "to be warm", sfr "griffin" https://thesaurus-linguae-aegyptiae.de/lemma/d5406?lang=en
* Hebrew seraph "to burn" as the source of the Egyptian, and śārāph as a likely doublet borrowed in its turn from Egyptian.
I found Leitz et al. 2002:301f. have sfr "Greif", viz. griffin (Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen. 4.) with reference to Morenz & Schorch, "Seraph in der Bibel und in Altägypten" (Orientalia revista 66. 1997). Didn't find much on the pLeiden, perhaps Tazawa 2009, "Syro-Palestinian deities in New Kingdom Egypt". Incidently, sꜥnꜥwꜥnj σαναυανϊ (TLA) from a different magical text looks quite reminiscent of the "SIMORḠ (Persian), Sēnmurw (Pahlavi), Sīna-Mrū (Pāzand), a fabulous, mythical bird." (Schmidt op.cit.). https://thesaurus-linguae-aegyptiae.de/lemma/dm3701?lang=en
* Armenian paskuč:
> In Armenia and the Caucasus the Simorḡ has a counterpart in Paskuč (and related forms of the name). https://iranicaonline.org/articles/simorg
I in turn wanted to talk about bízi easy peasy and have noted that its *[t]s cluster, origin obscure to me, would be remotely in line with the sibilant onset s/ś – implying further comparison to píxīu, bìxíe and Paskuč, Baškuč may be possible. If this is not even remotely what you are trying to say, I suppose you are not either entertaining a comparison to cherub, origin unknown, etymon of gryps?!? In that case I do not know what you are trying to say because I do not see how it connects to the topic at hand.
Next, I supported my argument with your and my completely separate, tentative conjectures about cynonyms in a cross linguistic comparison, for which we have no general comparative framework to rely on, safe for the historical method. For e.g PIIr. *mrgw- is most likely of substrate origin so the claim that Simurğ is a native compound and specifically a bird is suspicious to begin with.
Now imagine my surprise when H. P. Schmidt in the linked reference elaborates on asterisms: "The dog component could be interpreted by the Sēnmurw’s close relationship to the “Dog star” Sirius, i.e., Tištar, the brightest star of the constellation Canis Major, assuming that the Latin name was known."
As for Buyaner, to say that "A series of quasi homonymous roots existed in Indo-European، each of which could theoretically have provided a source for the bird name" (2005:23) is a gross understatement.
I wonder if it could be related to Armenian Hayk, *póti-, confere Armen Petrosyan, "Forefather Hayk in the Light of comparative Mythology", the dog-slayer, compare Lithuanian pàts "self".