Forum FAQ

Preferences

Watched Topics

Watched Forums

The early Indo-Europeans in today’s western China

Shanghai Expat Forum Index » Community Discussion Forums » News and Opinion

Author

Message

peasant
Reacher
Reacher

Joined: July 24, 2004
Posts: 323

Posted: Mar 07, 2005 - 11:42 AM
Post subject: The early Indo-Europeans in today’s western China

This post is in response to posts by Edgewood and Sino-chino in open-chat. I don’t want to get involved in the flaming war but would like to share what I know on the subject. I understand the subject is boring to most people and my post here could be potentially very long. I will try my best to keep it brief.

The earliest Indo-european stocks in today’s west China were not Aryans. There was an even earlier one and they reached even further eastwards, to the Gansu Corridor (Chinese name 河西走廊), or even further to the east in today’s Shaanxi. They were the Tocharian (Tokharian, Chinese name 吐火罗人).

Tocharians were not closely related to Aryans. Their languages belonged to two different sub-groups of Indo-European language family, Centum and Satem respectively. The Tocharian were in fact more closely related to the proto Indo-Europeans. They left the cradle of primitive Indo-Europeans earlier (somewhere in today’s southern Russia) than Aryans did but Tocharian language bore closer similarities with western European languages such as German and Celtic while Aryan languages were largely corresponding to the languages from India and Iran (the word Iran was from Aryan).

According to famous British anthropologist and linguist W. B. Henning, no later than 3000 BC, the Tocharian migrated eastward, passing through the Near East, west Iran to the central Asia and settled there, extending to Tianshan mountain ranges and Gansu and leaving on their trail the documents in Tocharian that was alive as late as to 8th century AD. (Henning suggested the Tocharian were the Guti/Kuti, Tukri that were mentioned in the ancient Babylonian cuneiform).

The later Aryan Migration happened around 1500 BC, in two directions. The one to the south crossed Indus River (Aryans called it Sindu), conquered the original inhabitants, adopted cast system and brought with them the religion Brahmanism which later developed into Hinduism. This group is Indian Aryan. The other group went to southwest to today’s Iran who later divided into two branches. The western branch later developed into a powerful Persian empire at 6th century BC, with the Zoroastrianism as their religion led by Darius. And the eastern branch never formed a unified empire but rather many small kingdoms such as Khoeozm, Bactoria, Sogdiana etc in the Amu Darya River and Syr Darya River regions in central Asia.

Those migrated Aryans became sedentary. But for those stayed, they still kept their largely nomadic life. They spread in a large area from south Russia to the south Siberia. They were called Scythae by Greeks, and Saka by Persians and Indians. The Chinese called them Sai (塞).

So the earlier comers were the Tocharian who were roaming from Tianshan Mountains to Ordos in Mongolia. West and northwest of them were Scythae people and their Aryan (Iran) relatives from west Tarim basin (塔里木盆地) to Amu and Syr rivers areas (两河流域). The contact between the Chinese and Indo-European stocks started no later than 1000 BC since the inscriptions on turtle shells from Shang Dynasty (17th to 11th century BC) already had description of those tribes that the anthropologists now believe to be the Tocharian. Around 1000 BC, at the upper Yellow River reach, in Gasu, Shaanxi and Ningxia, the Zhi Qiang (氐羌, originated from Sino-t¡betan people) were co-existing with the Tocharian. Together they were called Xi Rong (西戎) by the Hua Xia people (the Chinese at the lower Yellow River). The biggest Tocharian tribe was called Quan Rong (犬戎). Many of these tribes later became part of the Chinese. For example, while the creators of Zhou Dynasty (starting from 1027 BC (周) were largely from Qiang tribes, the Qin (秦), Zhao (赵) people in Spring and Autumn period and Warring States period (770 to 221 BC) had much more Quan Rong blood in them. The Chinese language also has words originated from Tocharian, for example, Kun Lun (昆仑) as in Kunlun Mountains. In Tocharian, it means heaven, sky, similar to the Latin word Caelum. Both Latin and Tocharian are in the same Centum sub-group of the Indo-European language family. Many names in today’s Gansu Province can trace back to Tocharin, such as 敦煌 (Dunhuang), 祁连 (Qilian), to name a few.

According to western historians, during the late 7th century BC, from Mongol plateau to the north of the Black Sea, there was another migration of ethnic groups. The Massagetae people, pressed from the Issedone people from east, defeated Scythae in their west. Scythae in turn drove the Cimmerian further west. But the Issedone moved west because in their east, they were pressed by the Arimaspea. Arimaspea-Issedone-Massagetae-Scythae-Cimmerian from east to west, who were these people? There is no question about the Cimmerian and the Scythae. The Massagetae east of the Scythae whom both Darius from Persia and the Alexander the Great fought with was the mixture of the Saka and the Tocharian and the Issedone were mainly Tocharian tribes, or tribes of both Saka and Tocharian with the latter as a ruling power. As for the Arimaspea, some Chinese scholars think they were the proto-type of later Xiongnu (匈奴), a Hunnic people. But some western scholars think they were what the early Chinese history books referred as 猃狁 (xian yun), a nomadic tribe in the Mongol plateau. In the Chinese records, in the middle of the 7th BC, the Qi state had an expedition into west, drove some Issedone Tocharian tribes westward. In the late 7th century BC, the Qin State ((they themselves had considerable portions of Tocharian blood), conquered eight Xi Rong states. From the records from both China and the West, it appeared at that time there was a westward migration of Indo-European stocks pressed by the Altaic and the Sino-t¡betan people in the East.

But that migration didn’t drive all the Indo-European stocks away. In fact, a powerful Tocharian state rose up in Gansu Corridor, occupying some parts of today’s Shaanxi, Ningxia too. They were called by the Chinese 月氏 (yue zhi, not yue shi). But soon, Xiongnu became powerful and conquered Yuezhi.. Small part of it, called Xiao Yuezhi, moved south and became part of Qiang people. The majority of them, known to the Chinese as Da Yuezhi moved west, overrun Wusun (乌孙) near Ili (伊犁). (Wusun is still a Tocharian but the Chinese documents suggested they were more Caucasian look. Yuezhi people, probably by then had much of Ural, Altaic and Sino-t¡betan blood). Wusun later allied with Xiongnu, defeated Da Yuezhi again and forced them move further west, which started another chain migration of Scythae groups. Both the Greek and the Chinese records showed by about 160 BC, the Tocharian took over Fergana (the Chinese call it 大宛, known to the Chinese for producing great horses) and by 140 BC, Bactria, a Greek kingdom by now.

The interactions between the ancient Chinese and Indo-European stocks didn’t really stop there. For example, another Indo-Scythae empire was emerging in central Asia in the first century AD, Kushana (Chinese name 贵霜). By the second century, some of them traveled by Loulan, Dunhuang and got to Gansu corridor. Some of them even got to Luoyang in Henan province. These people played an important role in spreading Buddhism in China. The later Sui and Tang Dynasties royals had at least 50% Turko (突厥) blood. While the Tunnic people were not considered to be Indo-European people, the ruling Anshina family was thought to be Indo-European stock.

This is getting too long and let me stop here. I didn’t see why we Chinese should feel shamed for this as Edgewood suggested. If anything, these people brought in the new blood to China and made China more dynamic.

A while ago, I posted something about the pre-history human migration research using genetic markers. I have been reading on these subjects trying to reconcile the results with the Chinese history records. Some scholars, for example, the Canadian anthropologist and linguist E. G. Pullyblank (his Chinese name 蒲立本), suggested the linkage between the Chinese and Indo-Europeans were even earlier.

Benoist_Shanghai
Low Seater

Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 3057

Posted: Mar 07, 2005 - 12:22 PM

Wow. Thx.

Am I plain stupid and uneducated if I have to confess that I have never heard of Tocharians? Confused

You will forgive me to avoid mentioning the full range of my ignorance on the above subject... Rolling Eyes

Edgewood
FooSlinger

Joined: Jan 28, 2004
Posts: 3909
Location: Colonial Shanghai

Posted: Mar 07, 2005 - 01:35 PM

Good post. It's something that has long interested me, too (ancient pre-history).

About this:

Quote:

I didn’t see why we Chinese should feel shamed for this as Edgewood suggested. If anything, these people brought in the new blood to China and made China more dynamic.

I didn't suggest anyone should feel shame. It is what got this place rolling, so to speak. These people were some of the cultural ancestors of todays Chinese. I know most people here might choose to deny it or feel less Chinese because of it, but I didn't say it should be a source of shame. Personally, I think it should be a source of wonder, that such ancient Europeans (and other groups of people elsewhere) were so advanced in so many ways.

A good post mate.

_________________
Conlige suspectos semper habitos

Kiwi

Post Boaster

Joined: May 07, 2003
Posts: 4847

Status: Offline

Posted: Mar 08, 2005 - 11:00 AM

Thanks for the post Peasant. It would be nice if more of the locals could contribute good stuff like this to the debates here.

This whole area is not something I know much about.

However, I do agree with Edgewood that the assumption that the early Europeans (or indeed any early peoples) were somehow 'backwards' is wrong.

It has become a sort of cliche that the Europeans were 'living in caves' at at time when China had a great civilization. Or that the celts were 'savages', and the Romans came and 'civilized' them. You see it in British history textbooks that begin only with the Roman invasion.

While the celts had little in the way of written language, they clearly did have a highly advanced culture. Accounts from the Romans who dealt with them also show a great deal of respect (for example the Romans remarked on how the Germanic celts had a mania for cleanliness and bathed every morning - something the Roman soldiers obviously didn't do).

Surprising evidence is always being found about the extent of trade and migration in the ancient world. So there seems to be nothing implausable about the idea that some of the roots of Chinese culture extend to areas beyond China's present borders.

I am curious as to whether Chinese archeologists have seriously tried to cover up evidence of these cultural influences from outside. Scholarship in China is very political sometimes. I know Chinese archeologists tend to use the evidence to 'stretch' Chinese history, "Dream of the Red Chamber" is analyzed in the Mainland in a Marxist context (as a 'feudal' novel), etc.

_________________
Putting the cock back in cocktail. . .

peasant
Reacher
Reacher

Joined: July 24, 2004
Posts: 323

Posted: Mar 13, 2005 - 10:40 AM

Ben, you can talk a million things and I have no clue at all about them. I just happen to have this peculiar interest on this subject. In addition, the rediscovery of the Tocharian language being an Indo-European language was relatively new, I think it was in the early of last century.

Edgewood, the interactions between different peoples appear dating further back than most of us think. According to some archeologists, the proto-Chinese ceramics unearthed at Qi Jia Ping (齐家坪) in Gansu bore the influence of those potteries developed at the close of the Neolithic period from the southern and central Russia. Others suggested the fine potteries decorated with painted spiral bands from Yang Shao (仰韶) Village in Henan that belonged to 1700 BC had close relations with those developed near Kiev, Ukraine at the dawn of the second millennium BC. Having said that, in my humble opinion, the Yangtse and Yellow River Basins is (or are here?) still the cradle of one of the earliest civilizations. It later produced a lot of quite sophisticated philosophers and politicians too. One of the golden ages to me was that the Spring and Autumn period and the following Warring States period when they truly had “hundred of schools of thought” (诸子百家) contending with each other (百家争鸣). The Legalist Han Fei Zi (韩非子) you mentioned in another thread at the close of this period (he died at 233 BC) was just one of them. The sophistications of those great thinkers about 2,500 years ago never failed to amaze my simple mind. When I have a bad day, reading an ancient prose or reciting a poem can still help to soothe me. But while I was impressed by their works, I never thought that other peoples were “living in caves” as Kiwi has observed. As a matter of fact, I am also impressed by the civilizations and achievements in some other cultures and from other places.

Regarding Kiwi’s observation about politicizing academic researches in China, especially in social sciences and humanities studies, I think that is a problem ever since CCP was in power. It still is but I have to say that the things are getting better. As for any covering up about the findings that would point to the cultural influences from outside, I don’t know any as far as I am concerned. But I am not the one in the circle so you can’t take my answer too seriously. My own feeling is, if you have some findings or some viewpoints that don’t match the party lines too well, you can still publish your findings in academic journals and on your website. Seldom will you be in trouble for the research nowadays but your research won’t get much publicity and you probably will have hard time to get further funding from the government. But on the other hand, if your results serve the party lines, or for example, if your archeological finding can prove the Chinese is the first one doing this or that, the finding will easily make to the headlines. You probably get more publicity and further funding for your research too.