Kuwabara's misleading thesis on Bukhara and the family name An.

• Author: Forte, Antonino
• Position: Kuwabara Jitsuzo

When in late 1923 or early 1924 Chen Yuan (1880-1971) sent to Kuwabara Jitsuzo (1870-1931) in Japan a draft of his article "Yuan xiyuren hua-hua kao" The Sinicization of People from Western Regions during the Yuan), he did not imagine that one seemingly obvious remark of his would provoke harsh criticism from his senior colleague. Chen Yuan in his article expressed the opinion that An Shitong (a twelth-century Song figure who embraced Taoism) originally came from Anxi (Parthia):

Why do we suspect that An Shitong was a native from the Anxi country? Among the translators of [Buddhist] texts in the Han period, there was An Shigao, named An Qing, heir-apparent of the king of Anxi. Travellers of the western regions called him "Marquis of An" (...). Adopting as family name the name of one's country is a practice from ancient times (...). An Shitong is an example of this.(1)

Kuwabara received the draft in the spring of 1924, read it carefully, and by the end of August he had written a critical note because he felt "uneasy" about some points in Chen Yuan's paper. He published the note and offered it for the author's attention, adding that he would be happy if Chen Yuan would take it into consideration when publishing his paper.(2) Among the points Kuwabara felt "uneasy" about and strongly criticized was the fact that Chen Yuan considered An Shitong to be originally from Anxi. He argued as follows:

In the Western Regions there was the An country. People from there who established themselves in China during the Tang period or before were referred to by the An family name. In the 4th juan of Lin Bao's Yuanhe xingzuan, on the family name An it is stated: "It derives from the An country (...). From An Nantuo of the Later Wei to his grandson [An] Pansuoluo, for generations they lived at Liang-zhou acting as sabao (...). [Pansuoluo] fathered Xinggui (...) who lathered Heng'an and Shengcheng; [Sheng]cheng fathered Zhongjing (...); Zhongjing lathered Baoyu upon whom was bestowed the surname Li (...)."(3) The same facts appear also in the genealogical table of prime ministers in Xin Tang shu 75B, under the item of the Li family from Wuwei where we read: "The Li family from Wuwei was originally the An family. It derives from the clan name Ji. Huangdi generated Changyi; An, the second son of Changyi, lived in a western region which called itself Anxi guo. At the end of Later Han, [the king] sent the son Shi-gao who entered the court and, consequently, lived in Luoyang (...). Again they moved to Wuwei. During the Later Wei (386-556), there was [An] Nantuo. His grandson [An] Poluo during the Zhou (557-81) and the Sui (581-618) lived at Wuwei in Liangzhou acting as sabao (...). [And then] we arrive at Baoyu, who had the surname Li bestowed upon him."(4) It is not possible to put much reliance on this passage of the Xin Tang shu. That the Arsacids were descendants of Huang Di (the Yellow Emperor) and so on is a farfetched opinion of the first order. Also the assertion that the An family of Wuwei descended directly from Anxi is doubtful. I think that this family is connected with the An country rather than with Anxi. The An country is Bukhara in Central Asia. In Bukhara and Samar-kand up to the Tang period Mazdaism was widespread, as we can see from Hyecho's middle-Tang Account on the Five Indias: "All these six countries (which include Bukhara and Samarkand) follow the fire god and do not recognize the Buddhist Law."(5) Also, in the records of Mohammedan authors it is clearly stated that up to about the 8th century, throughout the whole region of Bukhara and Samarkand the Persian religions were widespread (see Barthold, Zur Geschicht des Christentums in Mittel-Asien). People from Parthia did not believe in Zoroastrianism nor in Manichaeism (sic). Considering that the An from Liangzhou served as sabao (I have omitted Kuwabara's short remarks on the term sabao) in the prefecture, it is evident that they were practitioners of Zoroastrianism. In the whole territory of Liangzhou and its vicinity, up to Tang times there were many practitioners of Zoroastrianism. Thus, I think that rather than connecting the family name An to Parthia, which had no connection whatever with Zoroastrianism, it is necessary to connect it to the An country which had extensive connections with Zoroastrianism. This An family, although it constitutes very important evidence for the history of Zoroastrianism in China, had not been noticed up to now. Both Chen Yuan's "Huoxian jiao ru Zhongguo kao" ("History of Zoroastrianism in China") (Guoxue jikan 1.1 [Jan. 1923]) and Dr. Ishida's "Shina ni okeru Zaratushitorakyo ni tsuite" (On Zoroastrianism in China) (Shigaku zasshi 34.4 [April 1923]) do not mention it. I think that An Shitong was originally from the An country (...).(6)

I do not know if Chen Yuan ever answered Kuwabara's criticism. He published the first part of his paper (chapters 1-4) in the Guoxue jikan 1.4 (October 1923). There is no trace there of Kuwabara's criticism.(7) This is not surprising because at the time the article was published Chen Yuan must still have been unaware of Kuwabara's criticism. It is curious, however, that in the second part, which appeared as late as 1927 in a different journal, no hint is given of Kuwabara's opinions on the subject of Anxi.(8) Yet, Chen Yuan must have known of Kuwabara's note, not only because Kuwabara presumably sent it to him, but also because a Chinese translation of the note appeared in 1925 in another well-known journal, the Beijing daxue yanjiusuo guoxuemen zhoukan (Bulletin de l'Institut de Sinologie de l'Universite Nationale de Pekin) 1.6 (November 1925): 129-34.(9) In addition, Chen's paper was reprinted in book form in two volumes in 1934, but the passage translated earlier remained unmodified except for the concluding phrase, which is less assertive.(10) Finally, there is no trace of the material concerning the An family of Liangzhou in Chen's 1934 revision of his "Essay on the Entry of Zoroastrianism into China,' first published in 1923,(11) although Chen too was convinced that the sabao office was especially established to deal with Zoroastrian affairs.(12) In other words, it would seem that Chen Yuan completely ignored Kuwabara's criticism. This attitude may be interpreted in various ways. Was he embarrassed by the new evidence brought forward by his Japanese colleague? Was he resentful of the way Kuwabara had made public his criticism of an unpublished work sent to him confidentially? Did he consider the arguments of Kuwabara unworthy of attention? Whatever the reason, what is important is that Chen did not change his opinion.

Meanwhile, pursuing his research Kuwabara noticed some very important and authoritative evidence that went against the assumptions he had so unhesitatingly put forward in 1924. I refer to the passage in the Wei shu concerning the ancestor of An Tong (d. 429), where we read:

An Tong was an Iranian (hu often means "Iranian") from Liaodong. His ancestor was Shigao who at the time of the Han had entered Luo[yang] as an "attending son" (shizi) of the King of Anxi [at the court of the Chinese emperor]. Throughout the Wei (220-65) and into the Jin (265-317, 317-420) [the descendants of An Shigao] sought refuge from disorder in Liaodong, and they eventually settled there.(13)

However, instead of critically revising his earlier stance or adopting at least a very cautious attitude, Kuwabara simply rejected the evidence. In his well-known paper of 1926 on people from the Western Regions who went to live in China during the Sui and Tang periods, after quoting the passage in the Wei shu, he commented:

If we base ourselves on the biography of An Tong in the Wei shu, we must recognize that the ancestor of the household of An Tong, who at the time of the foundation of the Later Wei filled various posts and rendered distinguished service to the three emperors Taizu, Taizong, and Shizu, was a person from Anxi who migrated to China during the time of the Eastern Hah. However, since the Chinese...