National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books

> > > >
Color New!IIIF Color HighRes Gray HighRes PDF   Japanese English
0365 Sino-Iranica : vol.1
Sino-Iranica : vol.1 / Page 365 (Color Image)

New!Citation Information

doi: 10.20676/00000248
Citation Format: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR Text

 

IRANO-SINICA-SILK, PEACH AND APRICOT   539

not believe, either, that Russian .olk (" silk"), as is usually stated (even by Dal'), is derived from Mongol .§irgek: first of all, the alleged phonetic coincidence is conspicuous by its absence; and, secondly, an ancient Russian word cannot be directly associated with Mongol; it would be necessary to trace the same or a similar word in Turkish, but there it does not exist; "silk" in Turkish is ipcik, torgu, torka, etc. It is more probable that the Russian word (Old Slavic .elk, Lithuanian szilka ), in the same manner as our silk, is traceable to sericum. There is no reason to assume that the Greek words ser, Sera, Seres, etc., have their origin in Chinese. This series was first propagated by Iranians, and, in my opinion, is of Iranian origin (cf. New Persian sarah, "silk "; hence Arabic sarak) .

  • Persian kimxâw or kamxâb, kamxd, kimxd (Arabic kimxâw, Hindustani kamxâb), designating a "gold brocade," as I formerly ex-

plained,' may be derived from Chinese la   kin-hwa, *kim-xwa.

3-4. Of fruits, the West is chiefly indebted to China for the peach (Amygdalus persica) and the apricot (Prunus armeniaca) . It is not impossible that these two gifts were transmitted by the silk-dealers, first to Iran (in the second or first century B.c.), and thence to Armenia, Greece, and Rome (in the first century A.D.) . In Rome the two trees appear as late as the first century of the Imperium, being mentioned as Persica and Armeniaca arbor by Pliny' and Columella. Neither tree is mentioned by Theophrastus, which is to say that they were not noted in Asia by the staff of Alexander's expedition.' DE CANDOLLE has ably pleaded for China as the home of the peach and apricot, and ENGLER4 holds the same opinion. The zone of the wild apricot may well extend from Russian Turkistan to Sungaria, south-eastern Mongolia, and the Himalaya; but the historical fact remains that the Chinese have been the first to cultivate this fruit from ancient times. Previous authors have justly connected the westward migration of peach and apricot with the lively intercourse of China and western Asia following Can K`ien's mission.' Persian has only descriptive names for these fruits, the peach being termed .af t-âlu ("large plum"), the apricot zard-âlu

1 T`oung Pao, 1916, p. 477; YULE, Hobson-Jobson, p. 484.

2 XV, II, 13.

DE CANDOLLE (Origin of Cultivated Plants, p. 222) is mistaken in crediting Theophrastus with the knowledge of the peach. JORET (Plantes dans l'antiquité, p. 79) has already pointed out this error, and it is here restated for the benefit of those botanists who still depend on de Candolle's book.

9 In Hehn, Kulturpflanzen, p. 433.

5 JORET, Op. Cit., p. 81; SCHRADER in Hehn, p. 434.