As formerly Prof. Egami published an article titled "On the beverages and foods of the Hsiungnu (匈奴), Mr. Hotta recently dealt with the same problem in detail also (vide "The Shigaku", Vol.27, No.4, a journal of the Keio University). But owing to the anbiguousness of the Mongolian language and the inaccuracy of the Chinese documents, we are not yet able to understand exactly the substances and their Mongolian names. So some questions remain uncertain still. Accordingly the present author aimed to explain the real meanings of such Mongolian words as "airan", airaq, araxi, esug, cigen, kumys etc., and the identity with the Chinese characters denoting the above mentioned beverages, 酪 lo, 馬酪 ma-lo, 賣 su, 阿児赤 arci, 哈刺赤 haraci, 馬〓子 ma-nai-tzu, 醍醐 ti-hu etc., principally from the philological points of view. The results led us to the correction of the opinions of Mr. Hotta, late Prof. Ramstedt, and Prof. Karlgren. Moreover the author explained the Mongolian words, 'sarχud', 'bisilarγ' and 'bor'.

抄録全体を表示

Various travelling records reveal that the Mongolian nomads worship a kind of construction called "oboga". This construction consists of (1) an accumulated stone or earth mound base, (2) a bundle of willow boughs sticked in the base mound and (3) a flag pole. In an ordinary case, oboga is built up in a tableland that has a fine view. The sites of oboga may be briefly classified into such three types as (1) the sacred place, (2) the compound of temple, and (3) the ordinary pasture. Those obogas which are built up in the pasture are recognized as the objects of worship of the nomads, as a rule. Those obogas that are in the pasture are classified as the oboga of hosigu (旗), of somo (佐), and of ail (a family), and each has its festival in early summer every year. The festival consists of such divine services in narrow meaning as the sutra chanting, the offering of sacrifice, and the worship, and such festivities as the wrestling, the horse-race and the feast. Observing the construction of oboga and the form of the festival, we can say that it is clear that this is an old traditional custom of the nomads. On the other hand, however, such old customs as blood sacrifice, Cumys ceremony etc. that are recognized as the form of worship peculiar to shamanism are not seen among the nomads in view. The most important difference between the customs of shamanists and those of the Mongolian nomads is found in the sorts of gods that they deify. While shamanists, as historical records tell, deified those gods in the Heaven, the Earth and those in the Kingdom of Spirits, the Mongolian nomads are worshipping the oboga as a land-god or a dragon-god. The faith in the dragon-god, being not proper to the Mongols, is seen, as an example, in the case of Kou-lung (句竜), the sub-god of the shrine in ancient China. This dragon-god was believed as a god of fertility among the people who were under the agricultural culture. The faith in dragon-god might have been introduced to the nomads by the good offices of the horse the horse which has played an important role in the religious life of nomadic people from the ancient days. At the same time, it may be recognized that the dragon-god has become the land-god of the nomads through the fusion between the dragon-god and the land-owner-god, the worship of which once widely spread among the peoples of the North-east Asia. Land-owner-gods worship was borme down among historical peoples by that of the gods of shamanism, because they were originally non-shamanic ones. On the other hand, the word "oboga" is hardly found in the literature before the Hua-I-I-Yu (華夷訳語) compiled by Huo-Yuan-Chieh (火原潔) in Ming Dynasty. Even in that book, the author translated "oboga" simply as " " (mound) not giving any religious meaning. Among the present Mongolian nomads, however, oboga is no other than the object of religious service and first of all it puts one in mind of a stone mount instead of a mud one. Such difference between the ideas as mentioned above, together with the custom of worship of the land-god, may tell the fact that the time of formation of oboga as one of the object of worship was in the age after the spread of Lamaism in the Ming Dynasty. It will be also mentionable that the oboga construction is believed as the sign of an occupation by a group of people as the god of "place", and the festival plays an important role in strengthening the co-operative spirit among the community. A rich family whose mode of living may be rather frugal, consumes a great deal of goods in the time of festival. This means to keep up appearance and to gain reputation among the members of community. From such custom we may understand the type of their economy of consumption. For the nomads, the festival is a year end of the calendar of their economic and working life, too. tival is a year end of the calendar of their economic life and productive labours.

抄録全体を表示

The author introduces the protestation made by modern Soviet scholars against the inadequacy of Shirokogoroff's theory of southern origin of the Tungus. Okladnikov, a leading Soviet anthropologist and ethnologist completely criticized Shirokogoroff and Koppers of Wien catholic school who supported his opinion, in the magazine "Sovetskaja Etnografija", No.2-1950. Okladnikoy concludes the Tungus appear as one of the aboriginal races of Pribajkal'e in Siberia. His arguement consists of followings : 1) So-called "dress-coat of the Tungus" connot be considered as a sign of southern origin of this race as Shirokogoroff supposed, but it is a clear reflection of their hunting life in 'tajga' of Siberia since the prehistoric age. 2) The simple and non-reflecting type of bow of the Tungus does not belong to the southern type of bows as Shirokogoroff considered, but it shows only a primitive step of its technology, because simple ones were always discovered accompanied by more advanced complex bows, which are considered as products of some professional bow makers of the race. The simple one must be roughly made by hands of ordinary hunters in their personal need. 3) So-called "snow-glasses" of the Tungus cannot serve as ethnological evidence to show the southern origin of this race, too, as Shirokogoroff believed, because most of the Palaeoasiatic races in North Siberia also have and use it just like as the Tungus. 4) Koppers' opinion which concludes the relativity of the Tungus to the Miao tribe of South China, supporting Shirokogoroff's theory, is quite wrong, because it is apparent that the Miao tribe belongs to the equatorial variation of mankind but the Tungus does to the East-Asiatic group of Mongoloid. 5) The "Glazkovo man", which is a neolithic people of Pribajkal'e, may be seen as one of the proto-Tungus, and this was proved by Soviet scholars analyzing anthropological and archaeological characteristics of its skeletons and burial matters. The recent investigations of Soviet scholars on ornamental things of Glazkovo man and other ancient branches of the "Evenk" from the number of tumulus proved their direct relation to the modern Tungus culture. The author also introduces the detailed description of Tungus costume of Georgi, a writer of 18th century, according to his book, "Opisanije vsekh, obitajushchikh v rossijskom gosudarstve, narodov (The Specification of All Races, Living in the Russian State), 1799". And he concludes that this early description of Georgi also supports a series of conclusions of Okladnikov and Soviet scholars concerring origin of the Tungus (Evenk).

抄録全体を表示