Hill, Nathan W.

English

Nathan Hill

Crossref

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

Sam Van Schaik: Tibet: A History. xxiii, 324 pp. London and New York: Yale University Press, 2011. £25. ISBN 978 0 300 15404 7.

SOAS Research Online

Golden examines the characteristics of the warband found in Roman, Germanic,Iranian and steppe societies, and looks for signs that the Khazar Qaghans in turnmaintained an identifiable military retinue. The evidence suggests that they did,and that the salaried element was represented by the Ors, Muslims fromKhwārazm who enjoyed various privileges, notably that of furnishing theQaghan’s chief minister and exemption from being deployed against any of theKhazars’ Muslim enemies. The dual sovereignty characteristic of the Khazar statefrom perhaps the early ninth century (whereby the Qaghan fulfilled a purely ceremo-nial and sacralized role and day-to-day government was exercised by a deputy, var-iously called the “Qaghan-Beg” or “Shad”) is investigated in “Irano-Turcica: theKhazar sacral kingship revisited” (X). Golden links this institutional development,not found among the Türks, with Iranian ideas of sacral rulership present in eighth-century Khwārazm under the Afrighid dynasty and mediated through the influenceof the Ors.One feature of the Khazar state that distinguished it from other nomadic polities(not to mention sedentary ones), of course, was the adoption of Judaism as the statereligion, probably in a series of stages spanning the eighth and early ninth centuries.Pointing out in “The conversion of the Khazars to Judaism” (XI) that this was by nomeans as isolated a phenomenon as is often asserted (precedents include the first-century kingdom of Adiabene and the pre-Islamic Himyarite kingdom of theYemen), Golden provides an in-depth survey of the dauntingly prolific literatureon this topic and explores the chronology and possible political–diplomatic motives.The urge to distance the Khazar Qaghanate from Islam, at least, was most conspicu-ously expressed in the coinage of the 830s, bearing the explosive legend in Arabic,Mūsā rasūl Allāh (“Moses is the Emissary of God”). At the risk of striking a cap-tious note, one is tempted to question the assumption repeated here that conversionbegan with the ruler (whether the Qaghan or his deputy, we cannot be certain), sincein other contexts – the Christianization of the tenth-century Rus', for instance, andthe Islamization of the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Mongols – the “top-down”model is increasingly being challenged.Like the author’s other work, this book is a monument of first-rate scholarship. Itdemonstrates an enviable familiarity with the primary sources – whether Muslimgeographers and historians of the ninth–twelfth centuries, Byzantine authors, annalsand other historical works produced in Latin Europe or the problematic KhazarianHebrew correspondence – and a range of secondary literature in not merelyWestern languages but Russian, Hungarian and Turkish. As is clear from thecopious references, a number of Golden’s recent articles have yet to be reprintedin the Variorum format. It is to be hoped that a third volume will follow before long.Peter JacksonSAM VAN SCHAIK:Tibet: A History.xxiii, 324 pp. London and New York: Yale University Press, 2011. £25.ISBN 978 0 300 15404 7.doi:10.1017/S0041977X11001108An up-to-date synoptic history of any nation in a readable narrative style and con-venient length is no easy feat. Sam van Schaik succeeds at writing such a history ofTibet. The book covers its subject at a level of detail appropriate for an190 R E V I E W Sundergraduate survey course, incorporating the latest research and the author’s owninsights at every step. The lack of information on the decline of the Pagmodru or onthe nineteenth century in Central Tibet is disappointing, but warranted by the pau-city of research in these areas. The writing style is lucid and engaging.Many important topics here make their first appearance in a synoptic history orare handled with unprecedented skill. I was particularly struck by the description of“Turkomania” at the Tang court (p. 8), the treatment of Tibet’s invasion of Khotan(p. 18), princess Jincheng’s role in bringing Buddhism to Tibet (pp. 22–3), the suc-cession of Tri Songdetsen (p. 42), Tibetan Buddhists at the Song court (p. 51), andthe conference between Lajan Khan and Desi Sangye Gyatso (p. 133). At times vanSchaik’s original research even corrects the findings of a locus classicus (e.g. p. 235n. 45). However, many intriguing observations lack citation, such as the ceremonialprotocol for the 783 peace treaty (p. 29), the Tang Annals’ aspersions on LangDarma’s character (p. 45 n. 8), and the Tangut ethnicity of the general whoGoden sent to Tibet (p. 75).Writing “though it is sometimes difficult to say whether a famous event reallyhappened as it has been told and retold, that is no reason to dismiss it or consignit to a footnote” (p. xviii), van Schaik errs towards the traditional version ofTibetan history. Thus, despite the dearth of evidence he retains the traditions thatLhasa was the capital of the Tibetan empire (p. 12) and that Songtsen Gampobuilt there his palace on the Marpori (p. 124). In the main text van Schaik tellsthe famous tale of Wencheng’s marriage to Songtsen Gampo (pp. 7–10) and thefootnotes (n. 11) hold the truth of her initial marriage to his son. But, counter to tra-dition, van Schaik makes clear that Wenchen did not bear an heir and did not intro-duce Buddhism to Tibet (p. 11).In some cases van Schaik bends the tale for a better story. In particular, the bel-licose portrait of the Mongols is overdone. The Tibetan ruling classes did notimmediately accept Mongol rule upon receiving Sakya Paṇḍita’s letter (p. 77).Hulegu did not refuse to surrender his appanage to Kubilai (p. 78); he was neverasked to. The ebbing interest of the Ilkhanate in Tibet had as much to do with con-version to Islam as with “coercion, poisoning, and finally a terrifying invasion byKubilai’s troops” (p. 85). No doubt the Mongols’ “characteristic ferocity”(p. 134) adds excitement to many history books and will continue to do so whetherfairly or not.The book does contain a few claims which are just plain wrong. The view that theclans which initially formed the Tibetan ethnicity “were nomads who had migratedfrom Central Asian planes” (p. 3) appears to be a novel opinion and one unsup-ported by linguistic geography. The Tanguts come not from the North, but fromthe South (where their relatives the Munya remain), and they did not escape theexpanding Tibetan empire, but rather this expansion is what drove them north(p. 75). The Rockefeller foundation funded not only the monks who came toEngland in 1960, but also the Sakyas in Seattle, Namkhai Norbu (who came firstto Rome not Naples), and Jampa Panglung in Munich, whom van Schaik fails tomention (p. 252). The melting of the Himalayan glaciers, although bad, will notgenerally endanger Asia’s water supply (p. 264), because the contribution of glaciermelt to overall run-off of most of the large Asian rivers is marginal compared to thecontribution of the annual monsoon.Some mistakes have political implications. The Tibetan title btsan-po means“emperor” not “king” (p. 2). Qianlong stipulated that the golden urn ceremony beheld in the Potala palace and not in the Jokhang (p. 159). Holding the ceremonyin the Jokhang in 1995 was a break with tradition. The term 少数民族 shǎoshùmínzú means “minor nationality”, reflecting the internationalist background ofR E V I E W S 191PRC policy; translating “national minority” (p. 218) is incorrect and endorses thePRC’s efforts to shed this background and the autonomy for the non-Chinese itimplies. The meaningless claim that the Gesar epic is “the longest epic poem in theworld” (p. 161) is better suited to propoganda pamphlets than academic history.Finally, the remark that “Yonten Gyatso . . . remains the only non-Tibetan to haveheld the role of Dalai Lama” (p. 177) presents a Monpa (sixth Dalai lama), and aMonguor (fourteenth Dalai Lama) as Tibetan although neither spoke Tibetan natively.The bibliography cites mostly works in English (some in French). While under-standable given the intended audience, this restriction leads to odd results such asciting Hubert Decleer rather than Helmut Eimer for the life of Atiśa (p. 57 n. 30and 31) or Ruth Dunnell rather than Evgenij Kychanov or Tatusuo Nishida onthe Tanguts (p. 75 n. 18). Brian Cuevas’ book on the “Tibetan Book of theDead” is in the bibliography but not cited in text. Lhalungpa (1977) is cited inthe text (p. 70 n. 14) but omitted from the bibliography. Finally, there are thetiny mistakes: “tendings” for “teachings” (p. 55), “between” for “among” (p. 76),“Beijing” for “present-day Beijing” (p. 78), 王 wáng is normally translated“king” not “prince” (p. 143 n. 44), a note 19 is numbered 17 (p. 218). That isevery last thing there is to criticize – the book is superb.Nathan HillXINRU LIU:The Silk Road in World History.(The New Oxford World History.) 154 pp. Oxford and New York:Oxford University Press, 2010. £47.50. ISBN 978 019 516174 8.doi:10.1017/S0041977X1100111XThe Silk Road in World History is a monograph in the New Oxford World Historyseries. The series aims to move away from more traditional historiographies that pri-vilege histories of the West or the achievements of “great civilizations”, and bringthe “new world history” to a wider and more general audience. The series has alsopublished works entitled China in World History and Central Asia in World History(reviewed above). In this book on the Silk Road and world history, Xinru Liu pro-vides a concise introduction to a subject that is notoriously complex on account ofits geographical breadth and the range of cultures, religions and languages involved.Much detail of the trade, cultural exchange, political institutions and religions on theSilk Road can be learnt from this slim volume. The book joins a growing list of titleson the Silk Road for the general reader, following works by Luce Boulnois,Jonathan Tucker, Susan Whitfield and Frances Wood, to name just a few.The first chapter concentrates on China’s relations with its Central Asian neigh-bours during the Han Dynasty (206BC–AD220) as the start of the Silk Road. Thisaccount focuses too heavily on China, however, and relies on Chinese official historyfor knowledge of China’s early interaction with other peoples. Chapter 2 focuses onRome’s relations with peoples to the east: it describes Petra and the rise of Palmyra,and the competition that ensued between the Roman and Parthian empires.In chapter 3 Liu does justice in a short amount of space to the variety of languagesand scripts, and archaeological sites and finds along the Silk Road, while also provid-ing a good introduction to the Kushan Empire. At the end of the chapter Liu traces thespread of Buddhism to Central Asia, and describes finds in the Kharosthi script inthe Tarim Basin. Chapter 4 begins by describing Buddhist cave complexes and the192 R E V I E W S

Review of Sam van Schaik. Tibet: A History. London and New York: Yale University Press, 2011.

https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/file/330128/1/Hill_rv_2012_van_Schaik_review.pdf

Review of Sam van Schaik. Tibet: A History. London and New York: Yale University Press, 2011.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

SOAS Research Online