Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:07:55.023Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Cultural History of the Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in Early China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2014

Donald Harper 夏德安
Donald Harper 夏德安*
Affiliation:
Dept. of East Asian Languages, and Civilizations, The University of Chicago, Weiboldt 301, 1050 E. 59th St., Chicago, IL 60637, USA, dharper@uchicago.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the 1970s scholars in China have identified mo 貘 as the ancient name for the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). I concur with this identification and I trace the source of the modern misidentification of mo as the Malayan tapir (Tapirus indicus) to the article by Jean Pierre Abel-Rémusat published in 1824. Abel-Rémusat based his identification on woodblock drawings of the mo depicted as the quadripartite animal first described by Bo Juyi in the ninth century: elephant trunk, rhinoceros eyes, cow tail, tiger paws. Xu Shen (ca. 55–ca. 149) in the Shuowen jiezi compared mo to the bear, as did all descriptions of mo before Bo Juyi. Bo Juyi's description reflects new ideas about mo in medieval culture, and cannot be used as evidence of the animal named mo in early China. As a consequence of Abel-Rémusat's mistaken identification – which was immediately accepted in Western zoology – the word mo lost its original meaning and became the word for tapir in modern Chinese and Japanese. Examination of textual and zooarchaeological evidence confirms the giant panda as the original referent of mo. Although the tapir inhabited the region of China in prehistory there is no evidence of the tapir in China in historical times.

自上世紀七十年代起，中國學者證明了 “貘” 為大熊貓 (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) 的古名。本文認爲這是正確的。現代漢語用 “貘” 作馬來 貘 (Tapirus indicus) 的名稱是一種誤解，這種誤解源於 1824 年法國學 者雷慕沙 (Abel-Rémusat) 的研究。雷慕沙的依據是中國的木刻版畫， 而該版畫依據的是九世紀白居易的描寫–––貘有象鼻、犀目、牛尾、虎 足。但是白居易以前的記載，從一世紀許慎《說文解字》開始，都說 貘是類似熊的動物。白居易受了中古文化對貘的新觀念的影響，所以 無法用其描寫來說明古代中國稱爲 “貘” 的動物。由於雷慕沙的誤解被 西方動物學界接受，“貘” 字本義佚失而成爲現代漢語和日語中馬來貘 的名稱。本文考證傳世文獻和動物考古學的資料，確定貘字原來就是 大熊貓的名稱。雖然在史前時代中國地區即有馬來貘，但在歷史時期 中國并沒有馬來貘的痕跡。

Type
Articles
Information
Early China , Volume 35: Dedicated to LI Xueqin on the occasion of his eightieth birthday , 2013 , pp. 185 - 224
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Study of Early China 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注, ed. Yucai, Duan 段玉裁 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji Google Scholar [reproduction of 1872 woodblock ed.]), 98.41b. Old Chinese reconstruction is from Schuessler, Axel, Minimal Old Chinese and Later Han Chinese: A Companion to Grammata Serica Recensa (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

2. Erya yishu 爾雅義疏, ed. Yixing, Hao 郝懿行 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji [reproduction of 1865 woodblock ed.]), 3–6 Google Scholar.5a–b. See Loewe, Michael, Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide (Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China and Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1993), 96 Google Scholar, on the probable third century B.C.E. compilation date for Erya.

3. Shanhai jing 山海經 (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 5.22b.

4. See the reconstruction of Wei Wan's lost Nanzhong bajun zhi 南中八郡志 in Shuwu, Wang 王叔武, Yunnan guyi shuchao 雲南古佚書鈔 (Kunming: Yunnan renmin, 1979), 9–10, for relevant passages.Google Scholar

5. Shuowen, 9B.41b.

6. Yaoting, Gao 高耀亭, “Wo guo guji zhong dui da xiongmao de jizai” 我國古籍中 對大熊貓的記載, Dongwu liyong yu fangzhi 動物利用與防治 1973.4, 31–33 Google Scholar, is the first publication to identify mo with giant panda and to discuss the problem of the modern identification with tapir.

7. Father David examined a giant panda for the first time on March 23, 1869, when hunters brought him a young specimen captured alive but then killed to transport; see David, M. l'Abbé Armand, “Journal d'un voyage dans le centre de la Chine et dans le Thibet oriental,” Bulletin des nouvelles archives du Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Paris, ser. 1, 10 (1874), 17–18 Google Scholar. See nn. 70-72 below on the name da xiongmao.

8. Abel-Rémusat, Jean-Pierre, “Sur le tapir de la Chine,” Journal asiatique, ser. 1, 4 (1824), 164 Google Scholar. Abel-Rémusat had already communicated with Georges Cuvier before the 1824 publication of this article.

9. Cuvier, Georges, Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles, où l'on rétablit les caractères de plusieurs animaux dont les révolutions du globe ont détruit les espéces, nouvelle édition (Paris: G. Dufour and E. D'Ocagne, 1822), vol. 2, 144 Google Scholar.

10. See nn. 59–60 below for references to bilingual dictionaries.

11. I thank Jean-Pierre Drège and Marc Kalinowski for information on the name of the national French library during Abel-Rémusat's academic career, as well as on Chinese books available to Abel-Rémusat in Paris (email from Marc Kalinowski, April 15, 2012).

12. Abel-Rémusat, “Sur le tapir de la Chine”; Cuvier, , Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles, vol. 2, 143–44Google Scholar. Abel-Rémusat and de Lasteyrie were founding members of the Société asiatique in Paris in 1822. The Société asiatique published Journal asiatique and scholarly works for which de Lasteyrie provided important financial support. See Société asiatique, Le Livre du centenaire (1822–1922) (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1922), 13–14 Google Scholar.

13. Abel-Rémusat, , “Sur le tapir de la Chine,” 164 Google Scholar.

14. In 1990 I gave lectures on “The Panda and Pandaemonium in the Tang,” in Munich and Heidelberg.

15. As friends and colleagues in the Société asiatique, the two men surely discussed the mo/tapir when de Lasteyrie made his lithograph.

16. Yaoting, Gao, “Woguo guji zhong dui da xiongmao de jizai,” 31–33 Google Scholar. Father David referred to the giant panda as “ours blanc” based on the local name baixiong (see n. 7 above).

17. See Changzhu, Jin 金昌柱 and Jinyi, Liu 劉金毅, eds., Anhui Fanchang Renzidong: Zaoqi renlei huodong yizhi 安徽繁昌人字洞–––早期人類活動遺址 (Beijing: Kexue, 2009), 425 Google Scholar, for a summary of nineteenth and twentieth century classification of tapir fossil bones in China.

18. See Lucas, Spencer, Chinese Fossil Vertebrates (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), 265 Google Scholar, for description of the three zoogeographic regions; and 277–79, on the Southern China region.

19. Chang, Kwang-chih, “China on the Eve of the Historical Period,” in Cambridge History of Ancient China, ed. Loewe, Michael and Shaughnessy, Edward (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 43 Google Scholar. The recent scientific report of excavations at the Pleistocene cave at Renzidong 人字洞 in Fanchang 繁昌, Anhui, includes a useful summary of Ailuropoda and Tapirus in the fossil record; see Changzhu, Jin and Jinyi, Liu, Anhui Fanchang Renzidong, 417 and 425–26Google Scholar.

20. Fiskesjö, Magnus, “Rising from Blood-stained Fields: Royal Hunting and State Formation in Shang China,” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 73 (2001), 88–101 Google Scholar, reviews the history and current state of study of Anyang animal remains.

21. Fiskesjö, , “Rising from Blood-stained Fields,” 99 Google Scholar. It is worth noting two recent reports on animal bones excavated from first millennium B.C.E. sites in Chengdu 成都, Sichuan, where tapir remains were not present (nor were there giant panda remains): Kunyu, He 何錕宇 et al., “Chengdushi Shangyejie chuanguan muzang chutu dongwu guge yanjiu” 成都市商業街船棺墓葬出土動物骨骼研究, Sichuan wenwu 四川文物 2006.6, 42–50 Google Scholar (a Warring States site); and Kunyu, He, “Shierqiao yizhi chutu dongwu guge ji qi xiangguan wenti yanjiu” 十二橋遺址出土動物骨骼及其相關問題研究, Sichuan wenwu 2007.4, 41–46 Google Scholar (a Shang/Zhou site).

22. See Weiwu, Chen 陳偉武, “Shuo ‘mo’ ji qi xiangguan zhuzi” 說貘及其相關諸字, Guwenzi yanjiu 古文字研究 25 (2004), 251 Google Scholar. Chen conjectures that mo 貘 first denoted tapir and after the disappearance of the tapir was reassigned to giant panda by the time of the Erya (“Shuo mo,” 254). On animal insignia associated with Shang groups, see Keightley, David, The Ancestral Landscape: Time, Space, and Community in Late Shang China (ca. 1200–1045 B.C.) (Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 2000), 110–11Google Scholar. Fiskesjö, , “Rising from Blood-stained Fields,” 122–28Google Scholar, discusses graphs for animals that were hunted as prey in Shang oracle bone inscriptions.

23. For the sets of related words see Schuessler, Axel, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2007), 390 Google Scholar (entry for “mòn”) and 393 (entry for “mù3”). Weiwu, Chen, “Shuo mo,” 251–52Google Scholar, summarizes the Chu paleo-graphic evidence including graphs for pelt. Cook, Constance, Death in Ancient China: The Tale of One man's Journey (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 235 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, translates anmo 犴貘 (Cook's transcription of the original Chu graphs) as “wild dog and panda-skin,” but mo means “pelt” and the compound should be translated “wild dog pelt.”

24. Fiskesjö, , “Rising from Blood-stained Fields,” 126 Google Scholar.

25. Leopard bones were found at Anyang. See Fiskesjö, , “Rising from Blood-stained Fields,” 93–94 Google Scholar.

26. Watson, William, Ancient Chinese Bronzes (London: Faber and Faber, 1962), pl. 79cGoogle Scholar; Lawton, Thomas, Chinese Art of the Warring States Period (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1982), 77 Google Scholar. Lawton describes the animal as quadruped, but see n. 28 below.

27. Institute of Archaeology of Province, Shanxi, Art of the Houma Foundry (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 364–66Google Scholar.

28. Lawton, , Chinese Art of the Warring States Period, 77–78 Google Scholar, identifies two bronzes belonging to this type as quadruped, but for the second comments that “it is not possible to identify the animal precisely, although it bears a general resemblance to a tapir.” von Erdberg Consten, Eleanor, “The Deer in Early Chinese Art,” Artibus Asiae 26.3–4 (1963), 206 Google Scholar, notes that Watson's 1962 identification of the British Museum bronze as tapir occurred after her article was written. Consten thinks that the British Museum bronze and related bronzes are deer, but identifies another Zhou bronze as tapir (identified by Watson and others as elephant; see n.30 below).

29. Minao, Hayashi, “In Sei-Shū jidai no dōbutsu ishō ni torareta yasei dōbutsu rokushu” 殷西周時代の動物意匠に採られた野生動物六種, in Tembō Ajia no kōkogaku: Higuchi Takayasu kyōju taikan kinen ronshū 展望アジアの考古學: 樋口隆康教授退官記 念論集 (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1983), 549–52Google Scholar. Ji, Sun, “Gu wenwu zhong suojian zhi mo” 古文物中所見之貘, in Ji, Sun and Hong, Yang 楊泓, Wenwu congtan 文物叢談 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1991), 292–98Google Scholar (reprinted from Wenwu tiandi 文物天地 1986.5, 17-18).

30. Hayashi, , “In Sei-Shū jidai no dōbutsu,” 549–51Google Scholar; Ji, Sun, “Gu wenwu zhong suojian zhi mo,” 293 Google Scholar. In 1963 Consten, , “The Deer in Early Chinese Art,” 201 Google Scholar, already described the Oeder bronze as tapir-shaped rather than elephant-shaped, followed by Lawton, Thomas, “A Group of Early Western Chou Period Bronze Vessels,” Ars Orientalis 10 (1975), 115 Google Scholar. Butz, Herbert, “Early Chinese Bronzes in the Collection of the Museum of East Asian Art,” Orientations 31.8 (2000), 73–74 Google Scholar, relates the modern history of the Oeder bronze, which Butz describes as elephant-shaped. Until the beginning of World War II it was displayed in the East Asian Art Collection of the Berlin State Museums. Put into storage with the entire collection, at the end of the war the Oeder bronze was among artifacts taken to the Soviet Union under the supervision of a trophy commission. Information that the Oeder bronze is currently at the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg remains unconfirmed.

31. Hayashi, , “In Sei-Shū jidai no dōbutsu,” 551–52Google Scholar; Ji, Sun, “Gu wenwu zhong suojian zhi mo,” 293 Google Scholar. For the excavation report see Liancheng, Lu 盧連成 and Zhisheng, Hu 胡智生, Baoji Yuguo mudi 寶鷄鷺國墓地 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1988), 270 Google Scholar (information on Rujiazhuang tomb 2) and 372 (information on the vessel). The preliminary report in Xi-Zhou, Baoji Rujiazhuang mu fajue dui, “Shaanxi sheng Baoji shi Rujiazhuang Xi-Zhou mu fajue jianbao” 陝西省寶鷄市茹家莊西周墓發掘簡報, Wenwu 文物 1976.4, 42 Google Scholar, gives the height measurement of the vessel as 20.1 cm.

32. Ji, Sun, “Gu wenwu zhong suojian zhi mo,” 296–98Google Scholar. According to Sun Ji the tapir is depicted in other pre-Han, Han, and post-Han artifacts, but the argument is faulty for its reliance on a long snout as proof of tapir (depending on the artifact sheep, pig, deer, and bear are all possible as is elephant).

33. Rawson, Jessica, Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes from the Arthur M. Sackler Collections (Washington, D.C., and Cambridge: Arthur M. Sackler Foundation and Arthur M. Sackler Museum, 1990), vol. 2B, 708–11Google Scholar.

34. An excavation report for Hengshui tomb 2158 is not yet published. yanjiusuo, Shanxi sheng kaogu 山西省考古研究所, “Shanxi Jiangxian Hengshui Xi-Zhou mu fajue jianbao” 山西絳縣橫水西周墓發掘簡報, Wenwu 2006.8, 4–18 Google Scholar, is the preliminary report on earlier excavations at the Peng state cemetery. The Hengshui tomb 2158 vessels were exhibited at the Shanxi Museum in 2007 and published in the catalogue of the exhibition, where they are identified as mo “tapir” vessels. I thank Edward Shaughnessy for bringing the Hengshui vessels to my attention.

35. Art of the Houma Foundry, 73 (Robert Bagley introduction), gives examples of Houma bronzes that revive Shang elements and concludes that artisans had access to Shang bronzes. Consten, , “The Deer in Early Chinese Art,” 206 Google Scholar, argues that the difference in snout distinguishes the later animal bronzes (which she identifies as deer) from the Oeder bronze (which she identifies as tapir). Writing in the 1960s Consten did not know the Rujiazhuang and Hengshui vessels, which are evidence of the connection between the Houma foundry animal bronzes and the Oeder bronze.

36. Chengxiu, Bian 邊成修, “Shanxi Changzhi Fenshuiling 126 hao mu fajue jianbao” 山西長治分水嶺 126 號墓發掘簡報, Wenwu 1972.4, 39 Google Scholar and pl. 1.

37. For discussion of common features in animal designs see Rawson, , Western Zhou Ritual Bronzes, 709–10Google Scholar; and Libi, Chen 陳麗碧, “Dongwu xing qingtong qi yu Xi-Zhou shehui wenhua yiyi: cong Baoji Rujiazhuang chutu ‘yucui’ shuoqi” 動物形青銅器與西 周社會文化意義: 從寶鷄茹家莊出土盂鏙說起, Zhou Qin wenming luncong (dier ji) 周 秦文明論叢 (第二輯), ed. bowuguan, Baoji shi qingtong qi (Xi'an: San Qin, 2009), 159–62Google Scholar.

38. The most recent study to examine cultural interaction between China and Inner Asia in the first millenium B.C.E. is Jessica Rawson, “Carnelian beads, animal figures and exotic vessels: traces of contact between the Chinese States and Inner Asia, ca. 1000–650 BC,” in Bridging Eurasia, ed. Mayke Wagner and Wang Wei (Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 2010), 1–42; see 22–24 on connections between the state of Yu in Shaanxi and the peoples of Inner Asia as demonstrated by the Rujiazhuang tomb 2 artifacts.

39. For the saiga depicted in Inner Asian artifacts, see Rudenko, Sergei, Frozen Tombs of Siberia: The Pazyryk Burials of Iron-Age Horsemen (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970), 59, 155, 170, 253 Google Scholar; and pls. 103, 115 (a-b), 140 (a), 157 (c), 164 (c). For zoological information and historical distribution, see Sokolov, Vladimir, “Saiga tatarica,” Mammalian Species 38 (05 1974), 1–4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Jia-yan, Wu, “The Ungulates of Northern China,” Rangifer 14.2 (1994), 57–64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40. Yingyai shenglan jiaozhu 瀛涯勝覽校注, ed. Chengjun, Feng 馮承鈞 (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1935), 18 Google Scholar; Ma Huan Ying-yai sheng-lan ‘The Overall Survey of the Ocean's Shores’ (1433), trans. Mills, J.V.G. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 101 Google Scholar. Ma Huan was probably in Palembang with Zheng He's 鄭和 expedition in 1407.

41. I suspect that “spirit deer” was a Chinese calque of the tapir's local name.

42. The Ming foot (chi 尺) was 32 cm.; see Guangming, Qiu 丘光明 et al., Zhongguo kexue jishu shi: duliangheng juan 中國科學技術史: 度量衡卷 (Beijing: Kexue, 2001), 407 Google Scholar. The measurement is accurate for the mature tapir, which averages one meter in height and two meters in length.

43. The tapir's rear hoofs have three toes, but the front hoofs have four toes.

44. Quan Tangwen 全唐文, ed. Hao, Dong 董浩 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1983), 677 Google Scholar.5b.

45. Bo Juyi was referring to Guo Pu's commentary to the Shanhai jing, not the main text of the classic (see n.3 above).

46. See n.2 above for Guo Pu's Erya commentary. The Tang ruler was Taizong 太宗 (r. 627–649); see Jiu Tang shu 舊唐書 (Beijing: Zhonghua), 69.2518Google Scholar.

47. Chapter three of my book in preparation, “Occult Texts and Everyday Knowledge in China in the Age of Manuscripts, Fourth Century B.C. to Tenth Century A.D.,” studies the medieval image of the mo/panda in popular culture; see also n.52 below.

48. Chengshi, Duan, Youyang zazu (Congshu jicheng 叢書集成 ed.), 16.134 Google Scholar.

49. I disagree with Imamura Yoshio 今村与志雄, trans., Yūyō zasso 酉陽雜俎 (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1980), v. 3, 169–70, who interprets ze 澤 in moze as a noun meaning “fat” without explanation. The immediately preceding entry in Youyang zazu states that the lang 狼 “wolf” is as large as the dog, indicating that in terms of meaning and syntax moze is a compound naming the animal mo/panda followed by the predicate; the moze's fat (gao 膏) is described in the next sentence.

50. For bear fat as ingredient in medieval Chinese cosmetics, see Despeux, Catherine, ed., Médicine, religion et société dans la Chine médiévale: Étude de manuscrits chinois de Dunhuang et de Turfan (Paris: Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises, 2010), vol. 1, 395–96 and 555 Google Scholar.

51. Middle Chinese reconstruction is from Schuessler, Minimal Old Chinese.

52. Baize in Tang popular culture is discussed in my “Occult Texts and Everyday Knowledge,” chapter three, which includes a study of the Dunhuang 敦煌 manuscript, Baize jingguai tu 白澤精怪圖 (P2682), the only extant example of the Baize tu.

53. On Vināyaka in medieval China, see Strickmann, Michel, Chinese Magical Medicine (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), 253–56Google Scholar; and Strickmann, Michel, Mantras et mandarins: Le bouddhisme tantrique en Chine (Paris: Gallimard, 1996), 247–66Google Scholar.

54. For reproduction and identification, see Seikai tōji zenshū 世界陶瓷全集, vol. 11 (Tokyo: Shogakukan, 1976), 232 (pl. 198) and 319 Google Scholar.

55. Identification of the Dunhuang painting (SP157) is made in my “Occult Texts and Everyday Knowledge,” chapter three.

56. Su Song's Tujing bencao 圖經本草 is lost but the information on mo/panda is quoted in Chongxiu zhenghe jingshi zhenglei beiyong bencao 重修政和經史證類備用本草 (Beijing: Renmin weisheng, 1957), 17.387Google Scholar.

57. For instance, Lu Dian 陸佃 (1042–1102), Piya 埤雅 (Congshu jicheng ed.), 4.100, described the mo/panda as “resembling the bear with elephant trunk, rhinoceros eyes, lion head, dhole fur.”

58. Wang Qi, Sancai tuhui (reprint of 1607 woodblock ed.; Taibei: Chengwen, 1970), 2242 (“Niaoshou” 鳥獸, 4.5b). Details of the de Lasteyrie lithograph show the further influence of the mo illustration in Terajima Ryōan's 寺島良安 Wa-Kan sansai zue 倭漢 三才圖會 (reprint of 1713 woodblock ed.; Tokyo: Nihon zuihitsu taisei, 1929), vol. 1, 438, which copied the Sancai tuhui illustration. When Abel-Rémusat wrote about mo/tapir in 1824 he gave no indication that he knew of the Erya yintu illustration. However, he later referred to the illustrations of wild beasts in the 1801 Erya yintu in a paper presented in 1828, “Observations sur l'état des sciences naturelles chez les peuples de l'Asie orientale,” and published in Mémoires de l'Institut royal de France, Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 10 (1833), 153 Google Scholar. He must have consulted one of the three copies in the Bibliothèque royale; see Courant, Maurice, Catalogue des livres chinois, coréens, japonais, etc. (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1901), 285 Google Scholar.

59. Morrison, Robert, A Dictionary of the Chinese Language (Macao: East India Company Press, 1819), vol. 1, part 2, 588 Google Scholar.

60. Medhurst, Walter, Chinese and English Dictionary, Containing all the Words in the Chinese Imperial Dictionary, Arranged According to the Radicals (Batavia: 1842–1843), 1085 Google Scholar. Williams, S. Wells, A Syllabic Dictionary of the Chinese Language, Arranged According to the Wu-Fang Yüan Yin (Shanghai: American Presbyterian Mission Press, 1889 Google Scholar; preface dated June 1874), 583, begins with identification of mo as “the Malacca tapir (Tapirus malayanus).”

61. Tomotarō, Iwakawa and Chūjirō, Sasaki, Dōbutsu tsūkai (Tokyo: Monbushō henshūkyoku, 1885), 146–48Google Scholar; compare Nicholson, Henry, A Manual of Zoology for the Use of Students with a General Introduction on the Principles of Zoology, second ed. (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1872), 554–55Google Scholar.

62. Ciyuan (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1915)Google Scholar, you 酉, 82 (description of the tapir followed the identification).

63. Yaquan, Du 杜亞泉, Dongwu xue da cidian 動物學大辭典 (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1922), 2281–83Google Scholar.

64. Megumi, Eri, Dōbutsugaku seigi (Tokyo: Meguro, 1925–1927), vol. 3, 473–74Google Scholar. Eri gave English and Latin: “Parti-coloured Bear (Aeluropus melanyleucus)”; he did not use the name giant panda. Wilson, Ernest, A Naturalist in Western China, with Vasculum, Camera, and Gun: Being Some Account of Eleven Years' Travel, Exploration, and Observation in the More Remote Parts of the Flowery Kingdom (New York: Doubleday, Page, and Company, 1913), vol. 2, 182–84Google Scholar, described in sequence the panda (Ailurus fulgens) and the giant panda (Ailuropus melanoleucus). “Parti-coloured bear” translated the Chinese name huaxiong 花熊, a local Sichuan name for giant panda (see Yaoting, Gao, “Wo guo guji zhong dui da xiongmao de jizai,” 33 Google Scholar, and n.16 above). I thank Bettina Gramlich-Oka in Tokyo for sending me the pages from Eri's book, which is unavailable in North American libraries.

65. “Xi Kang Sichuan de niaoshou” 西康四川的鳥獸, trans. Kaishi, Li 李慨士, in Zhongguo xibu dongwu zhi 中國西部動物誌, ed. Kaishi, Li (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1934), 71–72 Google Scholar (first published in 1929 in the journal Ziran jie 自然界). According to Wilson baixiong (“Peh Hsiung” in his romanization) was the giant panda's local name (see Yaoting, Gao, “Wo guo guji zhong dui da xiongmao de jizai,” 33 Google Scholar, and n.16 above); pi was used in literature. Wilson did not provide the Chinese graph 羆 for pi, which first occurred in Li Kaishi's translation. Pi 羆 was listed in Erya, 3-6.10a, and described as “like the bear with yellow and white patterning.” It is not clear who informed Wilson that pi was the name for the giant panda used in literature, nor did Li Kaishi explain his choice of graph (see nn. 82–83 below for a different word pi 貔, which some recent scholars argue was an ancient name for the giant panda).

66. Dongwu xue jingyi 動物學精義, trans. Yaquan, Du et al. (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1939), vol. 3, 1784–85Google Scholar.

67. Megumi, Eri, Dōbutsugaku seigi, vol. 3, 692 Google Scholar, refers to the use of baku to “eat dreams” (eliminate the harm of nightmares), a Japanese practice connected to apotropaic uses of the mo/panda in medieval China.

68. Saint-Hilaire, Étienne Geoffroy and Cuvier, Frédéric, Histoire naturelle des mammifères, avec des figures originales, coloriées, dessinées d'après des animaux vivans, vol. 3 (Paris: A. Belin, 1825)Google Scholar, “Panda” (unpaginated).

69. Tate, G.H.H., Mammals of Eastern Asia (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1947), 164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70. Zhonghua da zidian (Shanghai: Zhonghua, 1915), 934 Google Scholar (si 巳, 24).

71. See nn. 64–65 above.

72. Cihai (Shanghai: Zhonghua, 1936)Google Scholar, siji 巳集, 215.

73. Guoyu cidian (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1937), 2553 Google Scholar. I have not been able to consult the 1947 four-volume revised edition, but rather the abbreviated 1957 edition based on it: Hanyu cidian 漢語辭典 (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1957), 712 Google Scholar.

74. I thank Hou Jiang 侯江 of the Chongqing Museum of Natural History for providing me with many printed materials from this period. The museum was established in 1944 as the Zhongguo Xibu Bowuguan 中國西部博物館, and one of the original permanent exhibitions recreated the natural habitat of the baixiong “white bear” (giant panda).

75. Erya, 3–6.6a.

76. In two medieval occurrences han and shu form a pair, evidently because they occur in sequence in the Erya. See Si, Zuo 左思, “Wudu fu” 吳都賦, Wenxuan 文選 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1986), 5.224 Google Scholar, “violate the han and shu (虣甝虪; note the choice of graph bao 虣 “violate” to match the composition of the two animal names); and Zhang Xie 張協, “Qiming” 七命, Wenxuan, 35.1604, “yank the han and shu” (拉甝虪).

77. Erya, 3–6.5a–b.

78. The Shizi quotation is found in Yin Jingshun's ) 殷敬順 (ninth century) shiwen 釋 文 to Liezi. For the Liezi text with Yin Jingshun's shiwen quotation of Shizi, Shen Gua's commentary, and reference to the Zhuangzi parallel, see Liezi jishi 列子集釋, ed. Bojun, Yang 楊伯峻 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1979), 1.17 Google Scholar (“Tianrui” 天瑞).

79. Yi Zhou shu huijiao jizhu 逸周書彙校集注, ed. Huaixin, Huang 黃懷信 et al. (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2007)Google Scholar, 7.878–79 (“Wanghui”). Mo is written 模 in the edition cited, but collation notes indicate other editions that write 獏.

80. Pan, Chen 陳槃, “Chunqiu shidai zhi moguo” 春秋時代之貊國, in Shou Luo Xianglin jiaoshou lunwen ji 壽羅香林教授論文集 (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University, Department of Chinese, 1970), 33–36 Google Scholar. Mo was more commonly written 貉 in Han texts.

81. The connotation “auspicious” for “white” is clear in the Song shu 宋書 treatise on furui 符瑞). The treatise lists auspicious signs by date and location observed, and is notable for long sections on sightings of white creatures; see Songshu (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1974)Google Scholar, 28.802–12 and 29.837–47.

82. Erya, 3–6.18b–19a.

83. Shuowen, 9B.41a.

84. Shijing zhushu 詩經注疏 (Shisan jing zhushu 十三經注疏, reprint of 1815 woodblock ed.; Taibei: Yiwen), 18D.10b (“Hanyi”; Mao 261).

85. Shangshu zhushu 尚書注疏 (Shisan jing zhushu ed.), 11.18a.

86. For the four examples given see Rongsheng, Wen 文榕生, Zhongguo zhenxi yesheng dongwu fenbu bianqian 中國珍稀野生動物分佈變遷 (Jinan: Shandong kexue jishu, 2009), 224–25 and 235 Google Scholar. They are selected from the presentation of the historical distribution of the giant panda by modern province down to the mid-twentieth century based on references in texts, including local gazetteers and documents (222–35); the current distribution of the giant panda based on scientific observation follows (235–42). There are problems with the use made of historical textual materials. First, the connection between lists of animal names in texts and the actual presence of zoologically identifiable animals at specific times and places is impossible to demonstrate (lists often reduplicate older lists without regard to the actual situation). Second, the relationship between names in texts and animals in nature is frequently unclear. Third, changes in animal names over time are difficult to ascertain (we must avoid the assumption that an animal name occurring in an early text such as the Shijing or Shujing had a precise and unchanging zoological referent throughout historical times). Finally, treating the texts as quasi-zoological data ignores historical and cultural elements that constitute premodern knowledge of wildlife.

87. Names for giant panda as enumerated in Wen Rongsheng, Zhongguo zhenxi yesheng dongwu, 222–35, are mentioned uncritically in many modern historical studies of the giant panda.

88. Shanhai jing, 2.4b.

89. See n. 45 above.

90. Hao Yixing's 郝懿行 (1757–1825) commentary in Erya, 3–6.5b, proposes that meng 猛 and mo 貘 were interchangeable sounds, hence mengbao 猛豹 in the Shanhai jing stood for mobao 貘豹. I do not accept this conjecture as explanation of the original form of the compound mengbao; it does suggest one rationalization for the medieval reading of the Shanhai jing compound.

91 . Han shu 漢書 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1962)Google Scholar, 57A.2556; Wenxuan, 8.366. Knechtges, David, Wen xuan or Selection of Refined Literature, vol. 1 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 89 Google Scholar, translates mo as “tapir.”

92. Xueli, Wang 王學理 “Han ‘Nanling’ da xiongmao he xiniu tanyuan” 漢南陵大 熊貓和犀牛探源, Kaogu yu wenwu 考古與文物 1983.1, 89–91 Google Scholar.

93. Wang Xueli, “Han ‘Nanling’ da xiongmao,” 91-92, discusses Han evidence for keeping wild animals in captivity.

94. Xiong, Yang, “Shu du fu” 蜀都賦, in Quan shanggu sandai Qin Han sanguo liuchao wen 全上古三代秦漢三國六朝文, comp. Kejun, Yan 嚴可均 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1958)Google Scholar, “Quan Han wen” 全漢文, 51.1b. The passage with mo is in the Guwen yuan 古文苑 text of Yang Xiong's “Shu du fu,” but does not occur in the Yiwen leiju 藝文類聚 quotation of it.

95. Zuo Si, “Wu du fu” 吳都賦, Wenxuan, 5.225. Knechtges, , Wen xuan, 413 Google Scholar, translates mo as “tapir.” On chai 豺 “dhole,” see Schafer, Edward H., “Brief Note: The Chinese Dhole,” Asia Major, ser. 3, 4.1 (1991), 5 Google Scholar.

96. Si, Zuo, “Shu du fu” 蜀都賦, Wenxuan, 4.188 Google Scholar.

97. Liu Kui's source was Wei Wan's Nanzhong bajun zhi (see n.4 above).

98. There are no texts that attest to a date earlier than the third century for the metal-eating motif, but it was unlikely to have appeared suddenly. Reference in modern secondary literature to the occurrence of the phrase, “the running mo/panda favors iron” (走貊美鐡) in the Xinlun 新論 is not the work bearing this title by Huan Tan 桓 譚 (ca. 43 B.C.E.–28 C.E.), but a medieval book most often attributed to Liu Xie 劉勰 (ca. 462–522) or Liu Zhou 劉晝 (514–565) and called Liuzi 劉子. See Liuzi, DZ 1030 (DZ refers to the number assigned to the text in Kristofer Schipper, Concordance du Tao-tsang: Titres des ouvrages [Paris: École française d'Extrême-Orient, 1975]), 8.4b. See also, Schipper, Kristofer and Verellen, Franciscus, eds., The Taoist Canon: A Historical Companion to the Daozang (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 305–6Google Scholar.

99. Guoliang, Wang 王國良, Shenyi jing yanjiu 神異經研究 (Taibei: Wenshi zhe, 1985), 109 Google Scholar.

100. Guoliang, Wang, Shenyi jing yanjiu, 9–10 Google Scholar.

101. Taiping yulan 太平御覽 (Taibei: Taiwan shangwu, 1967)Google Scholar, 908.5a.

102. Franke, Herbert, “Indogermanische Mythenparallelen zu einem Chinesischen Text der Han-Zeit,” in Märchen, Mythos, Dichtung: Festschrift zum 90. Geburtstag Friedrich von der Leyens am 19. August 1963, ed. Kuhn, Hugo and Schier, Kurt (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1963), 248–49Google Scholar, provides a comparative perspective on the Chinese metal eating motif in connection with the Shenyi jing “iron-chewer.”