The Yuezhi/Pazyryk "Problem"-- Perspective & Subjectivity.
Recently, I found this introductory statement to a paper by Pavel Azbelev, a "researcher" attached to the Hermitage. He doesn't mince words:
"Attempts to correlate the Yuezhi of Chinese sources with Pazyryk culture that have been made since the middle of the last century are completely groundless. Detailed examination shows that the material evidences which were used as a proof of this theory and its further development are either anachronistic or reflect connections so broad that separate comparison of single cultures and monuments is meaningless. At the same time, there are reasons to suppose that those who belonged to the Pazyryk culture were a part of the Dingling. In the 6th century their distant descendants accounted for the bulk of the subordinate tribes of ethno-political hierarchy of the First Turkic Khaganate, which explains some similarities between Pazyryk and Old Turkic cultures."
Amazingly, Mr. Azbelev manages to immediately dismiss, if not insult, a number of respected individuals who believe in the Yuezhi-Pazyryk connection. Not a great way of making friends in the academic community. Azbelev comes across as "pan-Turkic," his bias so obvious that no amount of "supposition" can hide it. He simply takes a negative position, perhaps without garnering all the connections.
Certainly, the strongest link between the Yuezhi and Pazyryks comes to the fore during the rise of the Qin Dynasty. We see Qin bordering the Hexi Corridor in Gansu, the immediate western neighbors being the Yuezhi. We have the chieftain Wushi Lau hobnobbing with the emperor himself. We see the Emperor Huangdi's terracotta horses wearing Pazyryk-styled saddles and S-shaped cheek-pieces which are distinctive to Pazyryk, particularly to Berel Kurgan 11 (and the possibility exists that the chieftain buried in K 11 could be Wushi Lau, along with his East Asian wife).
This kind of connection is not groundless or "anachronistic" in any fashion except in Mr. Azbelev's subjective world. He, of course, is referring to the connections raised by Haskins (1956) and Enoki (1994). The Pazyryk-to-Qin link is well established. It stands in front of every occidental tourist who purchases a mausoleum ticket in Xian.
The connection pops up again and again. We hear this from Dr. Christine Hofmann, "C.S. Goodrich (1984: 295) noticed the similarity of the design of some cheek-bars found in China to the design of the same parts found in steppe burials... we see the pieces on a terracotta horse from the tomb of Qin Shihuang; for comparison, a similar model found on several horses from Pazyryk burials can be seen in Figure 3. [she then illustrates a horse from Pazyryk Kurgan 5] The similarity between these artifacts is striking; clearly, this S-shaped design, if nothing else, seems to be a contribution from the steppe people." (see Hofmann, A Study of Central Eurasian Innovations in Warring States China and Their Impact on War and Domination; Master of Arts Thesis, 2012, PDF)
How can Azbelev dismiss this connection, just one of many, and then create a hypothetical supposition that the Pazyryks were not Yuezhi (or even Indo-Iranian) but proto-Turks? In fact, he doesn't seem to be aware that subtribes of the Wusun and Yuezhi entered the Turkic collective before the word "Turkic" was historically defined. (aka the Ashina, and also members of the Touba Wei) There certainly was a Yuezhi-Pazyryk connection to later Turkish tribes, but we cannot dismiss a proven Indo-Iranian link occurring centuries earlier to the Saka.
Other news-- I finally found a reasonably-priced copy of Sergei Rudenko's classic for $65. The dust jacket is in excellent condition, and I was surprised that the book arrived in its original slip-case. I might add that Rudenko believed the Pazyryks and Yuezhi were "identical." (see Kato Kyuzo, Senri Ethological Studies 32, p. 19, 1992)
Recently, I found this introductory statement to a paper by Pavel Azbelev, a "researcher" attached to the Hermitage. He doesn't mince words:
"Attempts to correlate the Yuezhi of Chinese sources with Pazyryk culture that have been made since the middle of the last century are completely groundless. Detailed examination shows that the material evidences which were used as a proof of this theory and its further development are either anachronistic or reflect connections so broad that separate comparison of single cultures and monuments is meaningless. At the same time, there are reasons to suppose that those who belonged to the Pazyryk culture were a part of the Dingling. In the 6th century their distant descendants accounted for the bulk of the subordinate tribes of ethno-political hierarchy of the First Turkic Khaganate, which explains some similarities between Pazyryk and Old Turkic cultures."
Amazingly, Mr. Azbelev manages to immediately dismiss, if not insult, a number of respected individuals who believe in the Yuezhi-Pazyryk connection. Not a great way of making friends in the academic community. Azbelev comes across as "pan-Turkic," his bias so obvious that no amount of "supposition" can hide it. He simply takes a negative position, perhaps without garnering all the connections.
Certainly, the strongest link between the Yuezhi and Pazyryks comes to the fore during the rise of the Qin Dynasty. We see Qin bordering the Hexi Corridor in Gansu, the immediate western neighbors being the Yuezhi. We have the chieftain Wushi Lau hobnobbing with the emperor himself. We see the Emperor Huangdi's terracotta horses wearing Pazyryk-styled saddles and S-shaped cheek-pieces which are distinctive to Pazyryk, particularly to Berel Kurgan 11 (and the possibility exists that the chieftain buried in K 11 could be Wushi Lau, along with his East Asian wife).
This kind of connection is not groundless or "anachronistic" in any fashion except in Mr. Azbelev's subjective world. He, of course, is referring to the connections raised by Haskins (1956) and Enoki (1994). The Pazyryk-to-Qin link is well established. It stands in front of every occidental tourist who purchases a mausoleum ticket in Xian.
The connection pops up again and again. We hear this from Dr. Christine Hofmann, "C.S. Goodrich (1984: 295) noticed the similarity of the design of some cheek-bars found in China to the design of the same parts found in steppe burials... we see the pieces on a terracotta horse from the tomb of Qin Shihuang; for comparison, a similar model found on several horses from Pazyryk burials can be seen in Figure 3. [she then illustrates a horse from Pazyryk Kurgan 5] The similarity between these artifacts is striking; clearly, this S-shaped design, if nothing else, seems to be a contribution from the steppe people." (see Hofmann, A Study of Central Eurasian Innovations in Warring States China and Their Impact on War and Domination; Master of Arts Thesis, 2012, PDF)
How can Azbelev dismiss this connection, just one of many, and then create a hypothetical supposition that the Pazyryks were not Yuezhi (or even Indo-Iranian) but proto-Turks? In fact, he doesn't seem to be aware that subtribes of the Wusun and Yuezhi entered the Turkic collective before the word "Turkic" was historically defined. (aka the Ashina, and also members of the Touba Wei) There certainly was a Yuezhi-Pazyryk connection to later Turkish tribes, but we cannot dismiss a proven Indo-Iranian link occurring centuries earlier to the Saka.
Other news-- I finally found a reasonably-priced copy of Sergei Rudenko's classic for $65. The dust jacket is in excellent condition, and I was surprised that the book arrived in its original slip-case. I might add that Rudenko believed the Pazyryks and Yuezhi were "identical." (see Kato Kyuzo, Senri Ethological Studies 32, p. 19, 1992)
Alan J. Campbell
member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians
Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)
"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians
Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)
"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
