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

the necessary data. Nowadays, our Europe reaches the Ural Mountains in the north, and ends at
some distance west of the Ural River in the south. In the Middle Ages, Europe was not conceived
as extending so far to the east. On the Catalan Map, the eastern limit of Europe seems to be the
Don (« Tanais »; cf. *Not. et Extr.*, XIV, II, 10), and this is expressly stated in 1404 in the *Libellus
de notitia orbis* (cf. KERN, in *Arch. Fratr. Preadic.*, VIII [1938], 89). But on Fra Mauro's map,
the name « Europa » appears between the Don and the Volga, which marks already an advance
toward the east that has been carried further in modern times.

**227. FACFUR**

*alefur* V *fanfur* R *ffacfur* P
*faefur* F, LT, P, VA, Z *fatfur* FA, FB *fuschur, scufogi* VL
*factur, fucfur* Z *fatur* VB *synifey* G
*fafur* TA¹, TA³

Polo's « facfur » is a very correct transcription of Pers. فغفور *faγfūr*, a common designation
of the Chinese Emperor in Mussulman sources. Etymologically it certainly means « Son of God »,
but the corresponding Skr. *bhagaputra* alleged by VULLERS and HORN (*Grundriss der neupers.
Etymologie*, p. 71) does not exist, not even as a term of lexicographers. An old Iranian *bagapuθra-
is not attested either. But *bγpwhr* (= * *baγpuhr*) occurs in Parthian Pahlavī, with the meaning
of « Son of God », = Jesus (cf. F.W.K. MÜLLER, *Handschriften-Reste in Estrangeloschrift*, 1904,
p. 34), hence Sogdian *baγpūr > βaγpūr, faγpūr; βaγ > faγ, *fwγ* (ف ج *fūγ*) has even passed in
later Sogdian from the sense of « god » to that of « idol » (cf. GAUTHIOT, in *JA*, 1911, I, 53, 58).
The attempt made to derive Sogd. βaγpūr not from Parthian Pahlavī, but from Khotanese (the
so-called « Saka »), cannot be accepted (cf. HENNING, in *BSOS*, x, 94). Sogdian βaγpūr, in its
turn, was arabicized as *baγbūr* and *faγfūr*, and the latter form taken back by the Persians from
Arabic (cf. FERRAND, in *JA*, 1924, I, 243; S. LÉVI, in *JA*, 1934, I, 19). The *baγbūγ* or *baγbūn* of
Idrīšī can be only the result of wrong readings. It may be that *takfūr*, as a designation of the
Byzantine Emperor, which etymologically seems to be connected with Armenian *tavagor*, « king »
(from Pers. *tāγ*[> *tāj*], « crown », + Armenian suffix *a-vor*; cf. HÜBSCHMANN, *Armen. Grammatik*,
I, 153), was modified, as YULE supposes (*Y*, II, 148), as a « jingling match » to *faγfūr*.
If we except the unique example of Parthian Pahlavī *baγpuhr* used in reference to the « Son
of God », i. e. Jesus, *faγfūr*, in all its forms, is the designation of the Chinese Emperor (for this value
of Sogd. βaγpūr, *faγpūr*, in a text which seems to be from the end of the 2nd cent. A. D., cf. my remarks
in *TP*, 1931, 458-459; for a bibliography of the Mussulman texts on *faγfūr*, cf. VAN BERCHEM,
in *TP*, 1911, 724, 725, and *Fe*, Index, 691, 702; add *JA*, 1925, II, 280). So it early occurred to
western scholars that it must be a rendering of the Chinese 天 子 *T'ien-tzŭ*, « Son of Heaven ».
There is, however, a difficulty. *T'ien*, in Chinese, is « heaven » or « Heaven », and sometimes the
Emperor is said to have Heaven as father, and Earth as mother; yet « Heaven » does not simply