国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

326. SAGAMONI BURCAN

borcain, borcanain, santo bra-
chan, sogomor barchan, so-
gomor barcon VB
borchaym, sergamon borchaym
LT
sagraman barban, santo sogo-
mon, sorgichon borchan V

sargamonyn borcam, sargo-
main borcam (saint) FB
sergamon bortam (saint) FA
sergamoni borcain, serga-
muni, sergomon saint, ser-
gomoni borcan F
sergarmoni borcain L

serghamon borghami TA³
serghamon borghani TA¹
sogomombar can, sogoomon-
barchan R
sogomoni, sogomoni burchan,
sogomoni burghan Z

This form, combined from different Mss., is, in my opinion, the one which Polo must have
used. The original is Śākyamuni burqan, « Buddha Śākyamuni ». Polo mentions this name
twice, once in a speech attributed to Qubilai, the second time in his description of Adam's Peak
in Ceylon. The use of the word burqan (burḫan), special to Turkish and Mongolian, suffices to
show that Polo knew the term before he visited Ceylon on his return journey. Ross (RR, 432)
explains « burkhan » as due to the Sogdians who, when translating Buddhist writings into Chinese,
adopted the pronunciation then in use in Northern Chinese for 佛 Fo, « Buddha », to wit *bur
(< *b'juot), and added to it ḫan, « sovereign ». With unimportant differences, this is the current
view, but the history of Burqan (and of the cognate bursäng, bursöng, « Buddhist monk ») is still
very obscure. Whatever the truth may be, the fact remains that burḫan, burqan, appears in Uighur
at an early date (it is noted as burḫan in Kāšyarī; BROCKELMANN, 44), and also in Mongolian (for
instance in the Secret History of 1240). As to « Sagamoni », Polo must have heard it, in combination
with « burqan », from Mongolian-speaking people (such as Qubilai himself); in « written » Mongolian,
he Mongolian form is Śakyamuni, but popularly Šigämuni; the Kalmuks say Sagǰa-muni (cf.
RAMSTEDT, Kalm. Wörterbuch, 344). The only near-Western writers more or less contemporary
with Polo who use Śākyamuni's name, are, as far as I remember, two Armenians. One is king
Hethum I of Little Armenia, who left Mongka's Court, after a short stay, on November 1, 1254;
the account of his journey, as we have it in the chronicle written by his nephew Kirakos of Ganjak,
Hethum speaks of Buddhism and names Šakmunia (cf. BROSSET, Deux historiens arméniens, 1,
180, 194; Y¹, 1, 164). The other is Vardan, who refers to the images of Šakmonia, in a text closely
connected with that of Kirakos (cf. PATKANOV, Istoriya Mongolov, 1, 22; PATKANOV, Istoriya
Mongolov Magakii, 99, quotes an identical text as being from Stephen Orbelian « p. 307 », but
I do not find it anywhere in BROSSET's translation of Orbelian which is entitled Histoire de la Siounie,
and PATKANOV has perhaps confused Orbelian with Vardan). In 1419-1421, Šāh-Ruḫ's envoys
mention an image of Šākmuni at Turfan (QUATREMÈRE, Not. et Extr. xiv, 310, 389; Y¹, 1, 272);
they saw at Kan-chou a reclining figure (i. e. a nirvāṇa representation) which was called شکمانی فو;
Šakamāni-fu (sic in the text of QUATREMÈRE, 317; not « Schakamouni-fou » as in his translation,
398, and in Y¹, 1, 276). It is also to such figures that the name of Šakmunia refers in the Armenian

14.