Showing posts sorted by relevance for query yak. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query yak. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Yaks, a Few Useful Bits



Today's blog is dedicated to Master PSz of Thor-bu blog, just because [1] I know he is inordinately fond of the sort of hilariously slaughtered English you find quoted here very soon if you are a fast reader (no, I do not, I repeat, not mean the stuff you are reading right now) and [2] it was his blog that inspired me to start blogging to begin with.

I should say right from the word 'go' that none of the uses of Bos grunniens that I am about to talk about revolve around, or even necessarily involve, the death of the animal. Certainly nobody would be stupid enough to slaughter such a fine and valuable beast as the wild yak (Tibetans call it a drong ['brong]) like the one you see above for the sake of the horn or tail alone. Yes, you're right, there's the musk deer, but that's a different story, so hold off on that for one minute. Yak hair could be woven or felted to make those black tents that many of the nomads of Tibet use as their primary dwellings. Given the present involuntary resettlement policies of the Peoples Republic they may all be gone before you know it. There is, in fact, a black tent belt with its western end touching the Atlantic Ocean in north Africa somewhere in the vicinity of Mauritania stretching all the way east across the Tibetan plateau (in places where no yaks are available, they have to make do with goat hair). I won't say even one more word today about the use of yak flesh as food, or about so-called yak milk, except to say there is no such thing, since the yak [g.yag] is the name only of the male of the species. Yak cheese? Ditto! Yak leather will also be overlooked. I know that talk of such matters is repugnant to the vegetarians among us, and of course the vegans will be disturbed regardless of what use we might make of any animal product. Since animal products are what this post is all about I recommend you vegans find something else to do for entertainment just now, that is, unless you enjoy getting really grossed out. Hey, I'm not asking anybody to buy any of this stuff so ease up, alright? We also won't do more than mention the use of the yak for labor purposes, especially for plowing and long distance shipments. That goes, too, for the use of its sun-dried manure as fuel to heat water for Tibetan tea churned in a wooden churn with salt and butter made from the milk of the yak's wife...

"All men are Greeks," as the syllogistic saying goes,* {*I've just been told this is a corruption of the original figure of speech, which went "All men are jerks" which is itself a free rendering of a maxim of one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece, Bias of Priene, Οἱ πλεῖστοι κακοί, usually translated "All men are wicked"} but not all that many Greeks could ever claim to be Alexandrian Egyptian African Nestorian Christians living in the 6th century of our Common Era. Cosmas Indicopleustes was not only all that, but an early traveler to India as well, as the 'Sailed to India' part of his name clearly indicates. His book
Christian Topography relates his own experiences along with his own hearsay while traveling about the entire length of the coastal regions between Ethiopia and Sri Lanka. These travels took place in or around and about the year 535 CE. Chapter Eleven of Christian Topography has very interesting descriptions of Indian animals (well, in reality, this means animals found anywhere between Ethiopia and Sri Lanka). There, near the beginning of the chapter, just before his account of the unicorn, and immediately after the giraffe, we find two very relevant bits, one after the other, about the agriobous and the moschus:
The Agriobous or Wild Ox.

This wild ox is a large Indian animal, and from it is got what is called the toupha, with which commanders of armies decorate their horses and banners when taking the field. If his tail, it is said, catches in a tree, he does not seek to move off but stands stock-still, having a strong aversion to lose even a single hair of his tail. So the people of the place come and cut off his tail, and then the beast, having lost it all, makes his escape. Such is the nature of this animal.

The Moschus or Musk-deer.

The small animal, again, is the moschus, called in the native tongue Kastouri. Those who hunt it pierce it with arrows, and having tied up the blood collected at the navel they cut it away. For this is the part which has the pleasant fragrance known to us by the name of musk. The men then cast away the rest of the carcase.


I only quoted the part about the musk deer because it helps the argument that his "wild ox" is indeed the yak, even though I don't think doubts are in order, for reasons to be given eventually if you will just try and be more patient. Musk is a very well known Tibetan product, used everywhere in Eurasia by those who could afford it since Roman times or even before. For Tibetans it was always one of their main money-makers. Cosmas isn't on target when it comes to what it is exactly that gets cut off, but otherwise, that hunters do have the habit of removing the musk pouch and leaving the rest as carrion for the birds was and is true... Unfortunately for these gentle and anyway ill-starred creatures! They must be one of the very few beneficiaries of the modern use of synthetic aromatics. Cosmas gives the Sanskrit as well as Hindi name for musk in a perfectly acceptable form, although in strict transliteration it is kastūrī. The Tibetan name is latsi (gla-rtsi). You know what it smells like without the least doubt, so let's get to the yaks, shall we?

The 1897 edition of
Christian Topography was translated by McCrindle, who added a few helpful notes. One note explains that the wild ox is the yak known to naturalists as Bos grunniens. The other explains that the toupha is the Turkish name for the horse-tail standard. This tupha (the more common spelling) obviously isn't made from horse tails, but from yak tails. (And McCrindle is not quite correct on this point, as we'll see.)

You would be wrong to be too concerned that Cosmas calls it an "Indian animal," since first of all, although we may associate the yak with the Himalayan plateau, you do find it in areas that were and are part of India, at high altitudes of course, mainly on the southern slopes of the Himalayan mountain chain (but yes, quite far from the coastal areas visited by Cosmas). The idea that the yak, known in Sanskrit as
camara (Tibetan g.yag), is very careful to preserve every last hair on its tail (cāmara, noting the lengthmark: Tibetan rnga-yab) is an Indian poetic conceit. By this I mean to say it is better known to Indian literary works than it is to Tibetans at large, although some may be familiar with it. I remember one learned Tibetan swearing that it's a fact about actual yak behavior, but even with all due respect for the person who said it, I can't say that I'm certain it's true.

One classic Tibetan composition does make use of the poetic image, and it may serve as an example. This is the
Eighty Verses in Praise of Atisha composed by Atisha's disciple Nagtso. It was inscribed in 1054 CE or soon after on the back of a giant tangka painting depicting Atisha that Nagtso had painted for himself by an Indian artist named Krishna. The verse may be translated like this:
When you entered the door of the Shravaka Vehicle
you protected moral disciplines like a yak its tail.
Homage to you, the supreme bhikshu with the splendor of
celibacy, sthavira elder, master of the Vinaya.


{*Shravaka means 'Hearer.' Bhikshu means fully ordained monk. Sthavira means elder, and like Shravaka it is associated with the Lower Vehicle, to which the Mahayana, the 'Great Vehicle' believes itself superior in terms of teachings and practices. Vinaya means the whole body of monastic rules, and not just the texts of the same. Celibacy translates the Tibetan equivalent of Sanskrit brahmacarya. Many may be fooled into thinking the yak tail metaphor is a nice Tibetan touch, but they would be mistaken. The whole verse, including the yak, while composed by a Tibetan, is Indian through and through! That's why I've left the technical terms in their Sanskritic forms, only without the diacritic marks, so you will get this idea... Devious, huh!}


But what about the usage of the yak tail as a banner mentioned by Cosmas? Well, I wish I knew more. The use as a tupha, of Turkic origin, is probably not as well known as the Indian chowry (Sanskrit: cāmara), so let's start with the more familiar. On the whole you could say that the yak-tail fan, or whisk if you prefer, is a symbol of royalty, and with that same meaning it traveled throughout Asia. Its practical usage is the very same thing that made it so useful to the yak to which it was once so well attached: To swish away flies. Anyone who has been to India knows that the flies there are particularly pesky, persistently alighting on your eyelids or trying their best to crawl onto your eardrums and into your nostrils. Well, some Jain monks would use it to sweep away from the path insects in danger of being stepped upon. And of course the royal symbolism could and did become part of religious worship in which the deity is paid royal honors (as a guest who has to receive the very best possible hospitality). That's why there is much use of the yak tail in Indian rituals.

Another not entirely unrelated use of yak tails may not be so well known today, but it was more common knowledge over 50 years ago when the Lhasa government was conducting its own trade relations with foreign countries. In the U.S. at least the main import from Tibet in those days was yak tail hair. Suydam Cutting, a businessman heading a wool company, was certainly one of the persons involved in this trade. The Newark Museum still preserves some of his correspondence with the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. Indeed the Tibetan-language versions of a few of His Holiness' letters to Cutting written in 1931 and 1932 may be found in His Collected Works. As I remember, Cutting sent two pairs of dogs, Dachshunds and Dalmatians, to the Dalai Lama, in return for the pair of Lhasa Apso dogs, named Tsarong and Bidgy, that figure somehow in the bloodlines that rule American dog shows until today. I don't think the Dachshunds and Dalmatians were all that fortunate on the Tibetan plateau. At least one of the dogs soon died, much to the grief of His Holiness. There was something in Cutting's book, which isn't at hand at the moment, about trade in yak tails. I hope you still remember the main character from my last blog, the martyred missionary Maurice Tornay. In his biography by Robert Loup, on p. 202, in the chapter authored by the Library of Congress reference librarian Raphael Brown, is the most interesting passage:

Actually China feared that the [Tibetan Trade] Mission [of 1947-48] was trying to obtain political recognition of Tibet's national independence, and was able to induce governments with which it had friendly relations to ignore or pay a minimum of attention to the Tibetan envoys. Perhaps this was the reason why in the United States the press did not take them very seriously, referring to them semi-humorously as "yak-tail dealers" and playing up the fact that Tibetan "yak tails are used as beards for superduper Santa Claus costumes."



Even more obscure are the sources on the use of yak hair as a battle standard. About all I can say is that certainly the Turks, as well as the Mongols, made use of this symbolic 'banner' which, at least when it came to the Middle East, was more likely made using horse tails. There are two names, tupha and tugh. The tugh (or tug, with the 'g' scarcely pronounced in modern language) is at least Turkish Turkish and Uighur Turkish according to my dictionaries. I could locate only one illustration of what are supposed to be Turkish tugs on the internet. Cosmas uses the more familiar Greek term toupha (τούφα), which is related to the English usages of tuft and toupee. An even more interesting question than the etymologies of the names, for me at least, is How did this war banner get placed on the tops of Tibetan monasteries? In Tibet, it is indeed called a tug (thug). You see in the following pictures that there is a trident at the top, above a cylindrical contraption encasing black yak hairs.

Here is an example from the roof of the Potala. In the foreground on your right you see a 'victory banner' or
gyeltsen (rgyal-mtshan), while further in the distance and to your left you see a 'spire' or ganjira (gan-dzi-ra). Still further on your left you see the tug.



and here is another example, closer up:



One Tibetologist (see Everding's article listed below) says that the thug is a kind of banner used on top of the protector temples called gönkhang (mgon-khang), both symbolizing, and serving as a receptacle for, the presence of the protective deity.

Is it possible that the warlike symbolism of the
tug was known to Tibetans when they borrowed (?) it, and that it might fit naturally with the often militant imagery displayed in the gönkhangs? Is there any historic connection at all between the fly whisk and the military banner? Or do they share nothing more than the tails they are made from?* Well, I was hoping for an answer, but instead I leave you with a number of questions. Which may be just as well. Better this than pre-mature answers.
(*Actually, the preferable color for the yaktail fly-swisher is white. But in the case of the tugh, white would be a sign of surrender, black for the battle charge.)



I'll close with another yak product, this one made not from hair but from horns. I guess it's entirely self-explanatory.







PRODUCT INTRODUCTION

Yak horn com with Magic Cattle brand is a sanitarian comb that made of yak horn of Qingzang plateau. It do not contain any chemical pigment. Its sanitarian and iatrical effect was recorded by BEN CAO GANG MU GEGU LUN long ago:
1. antidote, refrigerant, cool blood
2. calm, help sleeping, lower blood pressure
3. none static. It still can banish fag, increasing cells of brain and make your hair dark and bright.
CHINA TIBET LASSA TECHNICS AND ART FACTORY




Don't stop now. Read and read some more:

Cosmas Indicopleustes,
Christian Topography. Freely available online, just search for it.

Helmut Eimer,
Testimonia for the Bstod-pa brgyad-cu-pa, an Early Hymn Praising Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna (Atiśa), Lumbini International Research Institute (Lumbini 2003), at pp. 18, 33 & 55.

Karl-Heinz Everding, The Mongol States and Their Struggle for Dominance over Tibet in the 13th Century, contained in: Henk Blezer, ed.,
Tibet, Past and Present [Tibetan Studies 1], Brill (Leiden 2002), pp. 109-128, at p. 121.

Thubten Legshay Gyatsho, The Eighteenth Chogay Trichen,
Gateway to the Temple: Manual of Tibetan Monastic Customs, Art, Building and Celebrations, translated by David Paul Jackson, Ratna Pustak Bhandar (Kathmandu 1979). On p. 40 is a brief mention of tug (here spelled thugs) used atop gönkhangs. Also, illustrations 10 & 11, opposite page 48, contain photos showing two examples from temple roofs in Ladakh.

Tina Harriss,
On the Tail of the Yak: The Social Geography of Tibetan Trade. The author, a doctoral student at the City University, New York, was awarded a Helen Wallis Fellowship at the British Library (June–August 2006 and again in 2008). I've never seen this thesis, and my sole source of information about it is Tony Campbell, compiler, Chronicle for 2006, Imago Mundi, vol. 59, no. 2 (2007), pp. 251 - 266. Sure sounds interesting, though.

Hermann Kreutzmann, Yak-Keeping in High Asia,
Kailash, vol. 18, nos. 1-2 (1996), pp. 17-38.

Angela Manderscheid, The Black Tent in Its Easternmost Distribution: The Case of the Tibetan Plateau,
Mountain Research and Development, vol. 21, no. 2 (May 2001), pp. 154-160, with illustrations and maps. In Tibetan, the word for 'black tent' is banag (sbra-nag). For an online version, press here.

Stanley J. Olsen, Fossil Ancestry of the Yak, Its Cultural Significance and Domestication in Tibet, Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, vol. 142 (1990), pp. 73-100. This author insists that earlier identification of the yak as Poephagus grunniens (Linnaeus), which recently changed to Bos grunniens ought to be changed back to Poephagus grunniens.  He could be right, but more important for present purposes are his comments on use of yak horns, hair, etc.

E.H. Parker, Horse-tail Standards. A brief note in an issue of
The China Review. I believe it's available online. I guess you can get to it through this page. He suggests an ancient Chinese origin for it.

Marco Polo,
The Travels of Marco Polo: The Complete Yule-Cordier Edition, Dover (New York 1993, reprint edition). The footnotes to this work contains a classic description of the yak, with quotations from early literature on the same; see chapter 57 in vol. 1, pp. 277-9. 

W. Rao, Poetic Conventions in Indian Kāvya Literature,
Adyar Library Bulletin, vol. 50 (1986), pp. 191-7, at p.196, has references to the *Indian* metaphor of the yak who protects every hair on its tail.

Henry Yule and A.C. Burnell,
Hobson-Jobson, the Anglo-Indian Dictionary, Wordsworth Reference (Ware 1996), reprint of the first edition of 1886. The entries for "chowry" on pp. 214-5, and for "yak" on pp. 975-6. If you can't find the book in your library, try the online version here.

Zdzislaw Zygulski Jr.,
Ottoman Art in the Service of Empire, Hagop Kevorkian Series on Near Eastern Art & Civilization, New York University Press (New York 1992). This book is supposed to have a whole chapter about tughs. Although I haven't seen it yet, I hope to.

Seen in Oslo in 2009:
A Norwegian tugh worn with pride


I'd also recommend a delightfully illustrated cross-cultural page on fly whisks by Dr. Gabi Greve of the Daruma San Museum, Japan. Have a
look.

There is a tremendous amount of technical literature about yak husbandry, including some available for free download, but don't say I didn't warn you (well, I most recommend
this one and especially this part). If that doesn't sound like your idea of fun, try schmoogling about the internet for pictures of yaks. In the U.S. at least, it seems that every last farmer who has one has also placed 4H-Fair quality photographs of it on the internet. This is not true of Tibetan nomads, who haven't yet recognized the importance of bragging rights. It's certainly worthwhile visiting the site of the International Yak Association (iYak), which also hosts the American Yak Registry, if only just to see who won this year's coveted Blue Ribbon award for all-round best yak. For you wired Tibetans, too, I'd imagine this would be a worthwhile, or even useful amusement.

Sunday, October 12, 2014

Regalia Untranslatable - Part Two


The Nine Royal Heirlooms, which is to say the Tibetan Imperial Regalia.




















By way of introduction:  In today’s blog, Part Two of a three-part series that began with Part One, I intend to say a little bit about what regalia means, but my main aim is to establish for those who may be in doubt that a number of items imported from distant lands are indeed associated with the Tibetan imperial period. This background will help open the way for the objects that will be the subject of Part Three. Otherwise it is likely the conclusions would be regarded as, quite literally, going too far. Remember that what you have here are rewritten notes for a lecture, and not the lecture itself (I may put a link to an audio version later on), and this blog is bound to undergo revisions in the future. I expect and hope that some knowledgeable readers will offer suggestions for understanding the more obscure Tibetan terms used in the description of Tibetan regalia you see in the slide reproduced above...  Click on any slide if you wish to enlarge it.

So... What does regalia mean? One of its most common usages today is to refer to fancy ethnic clothing.  To give an example, “The local Tibetans showed up in full ethnic regalia.”* Often, even more jokingly, people speak of ‘academic regalia.’ Here we mean by it something more technical and more technically correct. Regalia are heirlooms strictly for royalty, passed down via the royal succession, perhaps also handed over (or made use of) as part of a coronation rite. They stand for royal power. That is about as succinct and generally applicable definition as I can come up with for regalia, so I will leave it with that.
(*More frequent are references to ethnic clothing of Native Americans or to the ritual accoutrements of Masonic orders.)


Referring back to the frontispiece, we will not get much further than discussing no. 1 on the list (to be discussed more in Part Three)... which is unfortunate because... well, some things in it are so far simply unintelligible. For myself, at the moment, the most problematic bits are in nos. 2 and 6-9, and I would love to hear your ideas about them!  No. 5 is quite clearly a silver ladle (or serving spoon) with stag [heads] decorating it. It is the one thing most often mentioned in the sources. No. 2 looks like an object called gud-sa that has ivory [or tusks] (following a parallel text reading ba-so instead of bang-so), but what is the gud-sa?  Is it Sanskrit gutsa? At the moment, my best guess is that it's the chowrie (yak-hair fly whisk) used as royal insignia in the Indian subcontinent, and elsewhere.  Loma-gutsa would be the more complete Sanskrit for a hair whisk (gutsa alone means a bunched-up bundle of any kind of thing). And the fact is that many chowries do have handles made of ivory, so this, too, seems to fit. Perhaps we've found the answer to this one?  No. 3  — since gold image having water design doesn't seem to fit the context or even make very good sense — I'm thinking may require a minimal emendation so as to read gser-skud chu-ris-can, with the meaning gold thread[ed brocade robe] having water design.




Guntram Hazod, in his short essay, studies several sources for the lists (including the one in our frontispiece), but never ventures to translate or discuss in any detail possible meanings of the members of those lists. Given the difficulties, there is no wondering why. But note that translations for the less difficult items (in a much later list that is parallel to ours, but with a lot of variants) are indeed found in the main body of the book (in the translation of the 15th-century work itself, at pp. 27-28).  To quote from this section, minus the footnotes:
"...banner with a golden legend of the Ratnakūṭa-sūtra (dkon mchog brtsegs pa gser gyi ba dan can), a smooth-polished golden throne (gser khri phyi dar can) and an ivory bsdus pa ba so can.  As adornment of their body they gave [the parents] a coat [called] gsol ber byi skad can and a necklace of turquoise, whose stones had a spiral pattern (mgul g.yu 'khor mig can), as gifts of weaponry they gave them a hand-spear with magic eyes (phyag mdung 'phrul mig can) and a [stick called] rno bal chod can.  It is said these two were the hand-spear and the stick of the [royal] ancestor Mes-ag-tshom.  [Finally] they gave them a golden scoop with the image of a stag (gser skyog sha ba can) and a silvery scoop adorned with [the image of] the gna' wild sheep (dngul skyog sna ba [=gna' ba?] can)."


Rhyton from the Cleveland Museum.

I just want to emphasize here that some objects associated with Tibets imperial lineage are indeed foreign luxury items, like this rhyton, of Greek conception and possibly manufactured somewhere in between (Sogdian? Persian? Scythian?). The associated cup has an inscription that reads phan shing gong skyes kyi sug byang. I believe this indicates a "finger certificate" of a person with the proper name Phan-shing Gong-skyes, since there are typical elements of an Old Tibetan name. The last two syllables may be correctly read as sug byad, but in any case it appears to mean something like sug rgya, the ‘finger seals’ used in lieu of signatures in the Dunhuang documents. (The inscription has three circles with a set of three vertical lines next to them, probably together indicating the amount of metal it contains. For more discussion see Amy Heller's article of 2013...) These observations help verify its status as a valuable object that existed in the Imperial Period, even if it was owned by a some unknown person.


By now, what we see in this next slide has to be regarded as the most amazing and celebrated such foreign luxury object to survive from the period of empire. Moreover, it is associated with one of the most famous emperors in all of Tibetan history, Songtsen the Wise.


Emperor Songtsen's Beer Dispenser.


Tibetans nowadays seem to know this as Chang-snod Rta-mgo-can (beer vessel having horse head; notice how remarkably close this is in syntactical/metrical structure to most of the names of the nine regalia listed in our frontispiece), although its very clearly a camel head, and camel headed vessels are associated with Emperor Songtsen the Wise in the Kathang De Nga (Roberto Vitali is said to be the ultimate source of this reference, however I've managed to locate another reference in Eric Haarh, Yar-luṅ Dynasty, G.E.C. Gad's Forlag [Copenhagen 1969], p. 354:  dkor-cha rin-po-che dngul-gyi bum-pa rta'i-mgo-can gsum. Here it says the three horse-headed vessels of silver were among a large number of items placed in a tomb mound.  Haarh even makes a drawing showing their placement on his p. 355!)





Closeup of one side of Emperor Songtsen's Beer Dispenser
(click for an even closer look).

A bearded old man is rather tipsy, unable to stand on his own feet, after a night of serious drinking, so two young men are helping him find his way home.

I’ve been wondering about the material substance of this vessel, which appears to be silver with parcel-gilt figures.  As Amy Heller points out, the figures were cast separately before being attached to the silver vase. So perhaps these figures are made of electrum, a naturally occurring combination of silver and gold? And is electrum the thing Tibetans called phra-men, a term that causes translators a lot of headaches? (See this recent discussion. Manganese is another suggestion.) Im as of now unsure whether parcel-gilt silver or electrum would be the true meaning of phra-men, but I do think it was one or the other or (less likely) both. One strong argument in favor of electrum is that it would fit into a list otherwise composed entirely of distinct metals (as we find in the list of official ranks in the Old Tibetan empire). Depicted below is an amazing early Greek-made electrum vase. I’m not sure if you will agree, but I see some remarkable similarity in the figure of the drunken old man and the figure you see here of a man stringing his bow. I can’t quite put my finger on it. It may be an illusion.

Kurgan means a burial mound, one for a Scythian king and his queen.
Although believed to be of Greek manufacture,  it depicts Scythian warriors, as well as an ancient dentist treating a patient for toothache, and one of a man helping another man tie up his boots. What you see here is an archer stringing (or “bracing”) his bow.


I’ll close this blog with few more words about regalia worldwide: The Yoruba in Africa have a myth of royal descent in which particular objects descend with Oduduwa from the sky (but here the objects perform a role in the very creation of the world). Myths of royal descent from the sky occur here and there in Eurasia, perhaps most remarkably in Japan. In Indian Buddhism we have an account of a set of five objects, royal insignia that represented the kingship of Prasenajit, namely his crown, parasol, sword, yak-tail fan and embroidered shoes (and similar or identical lists of "five insignia of royalty" may appear in some accounts of the Buddha's life). When he lost them he lost his kingship to his son. It may indeed pay to compare power symbolism (regalia?) seen on coins of Roman Emperors Caesar and Nero that might include jug, staff (lituus), cup (culullus), sprinkler (aspergillum), ladle (simpulum), tripod and libation bowl (patera), as well as such weapons as the knife and axe.  Some of these items were originally associated with various priesthoods. We should also note the nine regalia, known in quite ancient Chinese history, in the form of nine cooking tripods used for offerings to heaven. These nine Ding are sometimes said to be able to cook by themselves without the help of any fire. This is often true of other regalia in other cultures, that they are regarded as capable of performing their functions on their own (in fact, one list of Tibetan regalia is almost entirely made up of such self-acting objects), as if automated — they may in fact deserve a place in the history of automation. It’s interesting, too, to see that some of these power symbols are connected with the kitchen and with food serving, like the ladles (Tibetan, Roman) and tripods (Chinese, Roman). According to the list of the Nine Can, the first king while still in the sky inherited from his mother a ladle, a copper vessel and another obscure item. Not explicit but implied: these objects must have come down together with him. Let’s leave it at that for now.




For a small essay on Caesar's use of power objects, look here.




(continued here)


For more on foreign luxury goods — primarily of silver and of Greek/Iranian or Hellenistic origins — that are associated with the Tibetan imperial period:

Martha L. Carter, “An Indo-Iranian Silver Rhyton in the Cleveland Museum,” Artibus Asiae, vol. 41 (1979), pp. 309-325.  —— Three Silver Vessels from Tibet's Earliest Historical Era: A Preliminary Study, Cleveland Studies in the History of Art, vol. 3 (1998), pp. 22-47. 

Stanislaw J. Czuma, “Some Tibetan and Tibet-Related Acquisitions of the Cleveland Museum of Art,” Oriental Art, vol. 38, no. 4 (1993), pp. 231-248.  —— Tibetan Silver Vessels (Beaker, Rhyton & Vase), Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, vol. 80, no. 4 (1993), pp. 131-135.

Phillip Denwood, “A Greek Bowl from Tibet,” Iran, vol. 11 (1973), pp. 121-127. Denwood here describes a "libation bowl" acquired from an aristocratic family from Lhasa by Snellgrove, that may very well be identified as one of the patera mentioned above (this idea merits close examination, I would say, especially since Denwood mentions the Greek name for the same object, phiale).

Assadullah Souren Melikian-Chirvani, “Iran to Tibet,” contained in: Anna Akasoy, Charles Burnett & Ronit Yoeli-Tlalim, eds., Islam and Tibet: Interactions along the Musk Routes, Ashgate (Farnham 2011), pp. 89-115 and plates 4.1 to 4.17.

Dorothy G. Shepherd, “Two Silver Rhyta,” Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, vol. 53 (1966), pp. 289-311.

There is something very interesting about these items in a book edited by Dorothea Arnold entitled Ancient Art from the Shumei Family Collection.  Perhaps you can get to the page by clicking here.

I much recommend another very recent article by Amy Heller: “Tibetan Inscriptions on Ancient Silver and Gold Vessels and Artefacts,” published in the maiden issue of Journal of the International Association for Bon Research, vol. 1 (2013), pp. 259-91.  A PDF can be directly downloaded at this link. Here you will also see amazing photographs of a number of these objects.

- - -

On Japanese ideas about the Three Regalia (mirror, sword and jewel), as well as the Ten Sacred Treasures, there is a remarkable new essay by Kadoya Atsushi, "Myths, Rites and Icons," contained in: Bernard Scheid & Mark Teeuwen, eds., The Culture of Secrecy in Japanese Religion, Routledge (London 2006), pp. 269-283.

On Chinese ideas about regalia (but not on the nine tripods we have mentioned here), see the chapter ‘Ritual Robes and Regalia’ in William Edward Soothill, The Hall of Light: A Study of Early Chinese Kingship, Lutterworth Press (London 1951), pp. 194-204.

On two of the Roman power objects, see Roberta Stewart, “The Jug and Lituus on Roman Republican Coin Types: Ritual Symbols and Political Power,” Phoenix, vol. 51, no. 2 (Summer 1997), pp. 170-189. These may have been meant to serve as regalia in some sense, yet in their origins they were objects associated with various priesthoods. When compared with the nine regalia of Tibetan lore, the Roman set lacks precisely the objects from the father — the court-display objects of seating and attire — although otherwise the objects from the mother and brother are remarkably comparable.

A "water design" in a Chinese robe, called chu-ris in Tibetan;
the motif is common in Tibetan art, too.
_______________________

Added comments:

  1. In 2015, Joachim Karsten posted an article at academia.edu and opened it for discussion. Just for the record, I put up the title here: “A Notice on an Alleged ‘Silver Seal’ of the Srong-btsan sgam-po Emperor of Tibet.” He prefers to call the jug a carafe, and promises yet another article on the subject. We'll be on the lookout for it. May peace increase!

  2. Just now in Japan and in coming days in Thailand, royal coronations are taking place, so the press has been paying some attention to the 3 Japanese regalia that came down from the sky, as well as Thai regalia that in fact closely correspond to the regalia of Prasenajit, as mentioned in this blog. For the Thai regalia, look at this BBC story:
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47931922

  3. PS: But surely the BBC story is in error when it says that the crown was a European concept introduced in recent times. Really? They have no idea about the use of crowns and diadems in India in the distant past? A little imperial ethno-narrowness on display here, you think?

  4. Now, in 2019, a series of investiture and enthronement ceremonies are taking place for the new Emperor of Japan Naruhito. You can see a fascinating video lecture (part of a series of Evans-Wentz lectures) by Helen Hardacre on the history of Japanese enthronement rites and their changes through history here:

    https://youtu.be/ZuTLG7sC8W4

    You can see in a video within the Hardacre video of the May 1, 2019 presentation of the regalia: a boxed sword, a set of jewels in a square box, and also two velvet bags containing official seals.

 
Follow me on Academia.edu