Mongolia

1 MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES |1
The Secret History of The Mongols

Prof. Sh. Bira
‘The Secret History of the Mongols’ (Mongyol-un ni’uca tobca’an) is

the earliest surviving literary monument of the Mongolian people. Its author is
unknown, and although it is widely thought to have been written in 1240, both its
original title and the exact date of its composition are still matters for debate.
What is beyond doubt is the fact that Tlie Secret History is a historical and
literary document of major importance. Not only does it recount the genealogy
of the early Mongol khans and the life and times of Genghis Khan, founder of a
unified Mongol state, it also paints a vivid and accurate picture of the nomadic
Mongol way of life and provides rich source material for an understanding of
Mongol society in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
Russian Academician Boris Vladimirtsov has described The Secret History
as a “history-chronicle” retold in epic style and “impregnated with the aroma of the
steppe”. A British scholar, David Morgan, has pointed out that whatever hesitations
historians may feel about the work as a strictly accurate record of historical events,
there can be no doubt that it provides a unique and authoritative insight into the
way of life, patterns of thought and beliefs of the thirteenth-century Mongols.
Genghis Khan, the warrior who united the Mongol tribes
The secret History may be divided into three parts: a genealogy of the
ancestors of Genghis Khan, stories about the life of Genghis Khan, and a short
section on his son and successor Ogodei.
The first part records the legendary history of Mongolia as reconstructed
from very ancient oral traditions-myths and legends, stories and accounts of
historical events. It opens with the legend that the forefather of the Mongolian
people was “a bluish wolf which was born having [his] destiny from Heaven
above”, whose “spouse was a fallow doe”1. The image of the wolf appears in the
mythology of many Eurasian peoples, closely connected with ancestor cults of the
tribal chief or the founder of a clan.
The following well-documented genealogy of the Mongol khans exalts the
glory of the “Golden Horde” and is the genealogical basis for studies of the early
history of the Mongolian people.
The main theme is developed in the second part of the epic, in which
legend and myth give way to more reliable historical data. Although the narrative
continues in the epic style, it begins to assume the characteristics of a chronicle.
An ancient Eastern system of chronology, based on a twelve-year animal cycle,
is used to date events in the history of the numerous Mongolian tribes and their
unification into a single state by Genghis Khan, the central figure of the story.
Genghis Khan is portrayed not only as a legendary hero and warrior, the
embodiment of the “steppe aristocracy”, but also as a great political figure and
2| MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES
statesman who decided by his “iron will” to put an end to the discord among the
Mongol tribes, where anarchy prevailed:
The Heaven with stars
Was turning round about.
The many peoples were at strife.
Not entering into their beds,
They were spoiling one another.
The earth with crust
Was turning backward and forward.
The whole nation was at strife.
Although the main hero of the story is Genghis Khan, one of the greatest
conquerors in world history, the author does not seem to attach great significance
to his military campaigns against other countries, as if he had deliberately ignored
that aspect of Genghis’ career. On the other hand, he constantly stresses to
readers and listeners the benefits and privilege: to be enjoyed within a centralized
Mongolian state.
The third, much shorter, part of The Secret History summarizes the reign
of Ogodei (1228-1241), the second great khan of Mongolia. It is thought to be a
later addition to the main text.
The cult of Light
A work of great literary merit, The Secret History is a unique phenomenon
in the history of nomadic peoples. It has been compared to monuments of world
literature such as Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, Alexander Romance literature, the
French Chanson de Roland, and the Russian Lay of lgor’s Campaign.
The Mongolian people lived at a crossroads of world communications
and it would be a mistake to assume that such an epic could have been created
by them in isolation from other civilizations. The script in which it was written
had its origins in Phoenician, Aramaic and Sogdian systems of writing. Close
examination of the text reveals traces of religious and mythological concepts of
ancient Oriental peoples, especially the influence of the Zoroastrian-Manichaean
cult of Light. This cult is reflected in the Mongolian legend of the immaculate
conception of Alan-qua, the foremother of Genghis Khan’s clan, by the “Father-
Light”. Alan-qua recounts her experience in the epic:
Every night, a bright yellow man entered by the light of the hole at the top
or [by that] of the door top of the tent and rubbed my belly. His light was wont to
sink into my belly. Wlien be went out, like a yellow dog he was wont to crawl out
by the beams of the sun or moon.
Scholars have shown that some of the tales in The Secret History are of
very ancient origin and have a close affinity with Central Asian and Eurasian
legends. The following tale of the five arrow-shafts tied into a bundle, for example,
recalls a story that was current among ancient Iranian peoples, -particularly the
Scythians:
One day, in the spring, while boiling the dried [flesh of] a sheep, making
these her five sons... to sit in a row, she gave unto each [of them] a single arrow
shaft, saying “Break [it]!”...each [of them] brake and cast away. Again, she bound
five arrow shafts together in a bundle and gave [them unto them], saying “Break
MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES |3
[them]!” All five, holding every person, the five arrow shafts bound in a bundle,
were in turn not able to break...
She said, “Ye, my five sons, were born of an only belly. If, like the five
arrow shafts of a little while ago, ye be each alone, like those single arrow shafts,
[ye] will each [of you] easily be broken by any one. If together [ye] be of one
purpose like those arrow shafts bound, in a bundle, how will ye easily be [broken]
by any one? “
Plutarch tells how the Scythian king Skilur (second to first century BC)
gathered all his sons around him before his death and asked each of them to break
a bundle of darts. When they refused, the king broke the darts one by one, with the
admonition that, united, his sons would be invincible.
A sourcebook for Oriental historians
Ever since it was written, The Secret History has been known throughout
the Orient, and for 750 years it has been one of the main sources for the history of
other countries of Central Asia as well as Mongolia. It has been used as a source in
fundamental historical works of the Orient such as Jami at-tawarikh, the universal
history compiled by the Persian author Rashid al-Din (1247-1318), and the Yiian
shih (“History of the Yuan Dynasty”), the famous Chinese chronicle of the Mongol
empire in China (thirteenth to fourteenth century).
As a result of Rashid al-Din’s work, most of the contemporary information
recorded in The Secret History has been retold and reinterpreted in many important
historical writings of Central Asian countries, including those of the Mughal
empire in India.
The Akbarnama, the chronicle of the emperor Akbar and his ancestors
written by the great Mughal historian Abu-L-Fazl (1551-1602), gives a detailed
version of the Alan-qua story which compares Alan-qua with the Virgin Mary,
raises her to the rank of Mother of God, and urges: “If you listen to the tale of
Mary, believe the same of Alanguwa (Alan-qua)”.2 Abu-L-Fazl also does his best
to prove that Akbar was descended from the legendary foremother of the Mongols.
The Secret History has also been esteemed in China as a valuable
source for the history of the Mongolian people, and fourteenth-century Chinese
bibliophiles actually helped to preserve the epic for posterity by transcribing
into Chinese characters the original Mongol text, which has not survived, and by
making verbatim and abridged translations. In 1866, a first Russian translation of
The Secret History was made from the abridged Chinese version, and since then
the Mongolian masterpiece has become available to the international academic
community.
Notes :
1 Quotations from The Secret History of the Mongols, vol. I, translated into English
and edited by Francis W. Cleaves. Harvard University Press, 1982. :
2 From The Akbarnama of Abu-1-Fazl, translated into English by H.Beveridge,
Delhi, 1972.
International Association for Mongol Studies

Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
4| MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES 2
The Mongol Empire
Prof. Sh. Bira
The Foundation of The Mongol State By Chinggis Khan

The Campaigns of Conquests
The geographical position of Mongolia in the heartland of Central Asia
was the main environmental factor that determined the specific character of
the historical and cultural development of its inhabitants. The Great Steppe of
Mongolia, which represents a huge grazing land, was most favorable for animal
husbandry.
Animal husbandry required no less knowledge skill and rechnique than
agriculture. A nomad could not survive unless he could adapt to the challenges
of the steppe environment. Hence, a huge amount of knowledge and experience
of animal husbandry, a folk science of the Mongol nomads, was accumulated.
The traditional technology of the making of animal products and the processing
of raw materials, although it was limited and of a home made character, was
well developed and provided the nomads with the necessities of life. By the
beginning of the thirteenth century, the nomadic society of Mongols had reached
a high level in its social and cultural progress. Its traditional social system
underwent drastic transformations. The primitive clan structure bound together
through blood relationships actually came to an end. The social consciousness of
the members of Mongol society was determined more by their common socio-
economic interests and territorial factors and common ethno-cultural bonds
acquired more and more meaning in the relations between tribes and tribal
confederacies.
It was in 1206 after having successfully carried out several decisive
battles against his most powerful rivals that Chinggis Khan (c. 1162-1227)
convened a Quraltai, the assembly of Mongol nobility at the head of the Onon
River. At this Quraltai he was proclaimed ruler of all the Mongols with the rank
of Khan and the title of Chinggis (Secret History of the Mongols Vol. I,p. 141
History of the Mongolian People’s Republic Vol. 1, pp. 170-191) The event
meant in fact the birth of a new state in Mongolia a unified Mongol state.
In 1206-1211 Chinggis khan was busy with the establishment and
reorganization of civil and military administration. Administratively, Mongolia
was divided into three great tumens or ‘myriads’-the left the right and the
central each of them in its turn consisting of tens, hundreds and thousands. One
of the important measures undertaken by Chinggis Khan in the field of civil
administration was the codification of laws, under the title of ‘Yeke Jasa’ (the
Turkic derivative-Yasa) (‘The Great Law’). Although this law has not yet been
found data from various sources prove beyond doubt the existence of the written
version of ‘The Great Jasa’.
In general the Great jasa represented a code of laws which is said to
have been prescribed by Chinggis Khan for the various spheres of social life.
Thus it had laid down the juridical basis for the newly born Mongol state.
Moreover, with the creation of the Mongol Empire, it eventually became the
most authoritative handbook of the Mongol Jurisprudence to be strictly followed
through the expansion of the empire for decades.
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Chinggis Khan that is 1220 the
capital city of Mongolia Qaraqorum was founded in the valley of the Orqon
River (Cleaves, 1952). Shortly after the creation of strong political and military
machinery Chinggis Khan embarked on the path of expanding his power.
In 1219-1224 he had successfully carried out his campaigns of conquest
against Khwarizm Shan Ala’al-Din Muhammad’s empire, which at that time
was on the decline due of internal discords and feuds. As a result all the lands of
this empire with their great cities, Samarkand, Bukhara, Urgench, Utrar (Otrar)
Nishapur, Marw, and so on were occupied by the Mongols. Most of the great
centres of culture were turned into ruins and their population massacred. Cities
like Balkhi and Shahr-i Ghulghula (Bamyan) were completely destroyed by the
invaders.
It is likely that the traditional form of submission typical of all steppe
empires must have corresponded with Chinggis Khan’s general conception.
According to this it was more important to master the people as an ‘appanage’
(ulus) rather than to govern the territories of the conquered countries. With
regard to sedentary societies. Chinggis Khan preferred to ensure economic
exploitation of these countries by tax collection and tribute.
It is true that he was hugely successful in all his enterprises mainly
due to his superiority in military strength. No less a role was played by him
as a military genius and great politician of his time. The light cavalry mounted
on tough, swift footed Mongol horses and equipped with bows was the main
strength of Chinggis Khan and his successors. Besides this the Mongols were
highly innovative in the art of warfare taking over new techniques and improving
them with the help of Chinese and Muslim experts.
The World Empire of the Mongols.
Unlike Alexander, whose empire did not even survive his death,
Chinggis Khan left a great nomadic empire which during the reigns of his
successors became the largest Empire that had existed to that date.
Chinggis Khan’s successors, although declaring their adherence to the
commandments of their great predecessor in fact departed from his fundamental
principle of staying outside ‘civilization’ and not sacrificing the ideals of the
nomads for the sake of others. Ogoday (1229-41) Guyuk (1246-1248) and
Mongke (1251-1259) continued to expand their empire by conquering great
sedentary societies.
The empire of the Mongols can usually be divided into five major
parts, mostly according to geographical principles Mongolia itself as the centre
of the empire beginning with the rise of Chinggis Khan and ending with the
death of Mongke Khan in 1259; the Yuan Empire in China beginning with the
enthronement of Qubilay, the Il Khans in Persia; the Golden Horde in Russia
and the Chaghatai Khanate in Central Asia. Despite the fact that the Mongol
Empire represented a conglomeration of various peoples and countries, cultures
and socio-economic structures it has many common features and important
similarities that made it a coherent entity almost for the whole period of its
existence. On the other hand one cannot deny that there were specific differences
and incompatibilities between the subdivisions of the empire which ultimately
resulted in its disintegration.
Yelu Chucai, the great Khitan adviser of the Mognol Khans is said to
have repeated the old chinese admonition of Ogoday. ‘Although the empire can
be conquered on horseback it cannot be ruled from a horse’ (Kwanten 1979
P.142) There is no doubt that the Mongol Khans realized this when they were
faced with the problem of governing their empire whatever it might be the
successors of Chinggis Khan made a historical attempt to govern the empire by
creating an administrative system that combined traitional nomadic political and
military institutions with the centralized bureaucratic administrative structure of
the Chinese and Persian-Central Asian models.
In the process the traditional institutions of nomadic society had acquired
especial significance, having been in many instances modified to conform with
new historical circumstances. By that period the Quraltai the oldest form of
political institution among the nomads has assumed much more importance than
it had ever had before. It has become a real assembly of elite mongol leaders
princes and nobles acting on the basis of old traditions and customs to handle
most important matters of state, like the acclamation of a Khan, questions of
war, and the establishment of law and policy.
The Mongol Empire was created through military conquest and
the Mongol khans regarded the army as the most basic of all the imperial
institutions. Military organization based on the decimal system had not only
been sustained for generations of Khans but had also served as the model of the
army constructed by later followers and pretenders to the right of the members
of Chinggis Khans family throughout Central Asia. A new important element
of the Mongol army structure during the post Chinggis Khan period was the
institution of the tamma. Tamma forces were originally established by order
of the central imperial government with the purpose of maintaining conquered
territories. Some tamma ultimately became the nuclei of the permanent military
forces of the empire’s subsidiary khanates such as Hulegu’s Il Khanate in Persia.
One of the very first institutions introduced by the Mongols in the
conquered territories was the horse mail service (Mongolian Jam, Turkic yam).
Its beginnings go back to Chinggis Khan himself but as a worldwide network of
communication it acquired its shape in 1234 when Ogoday Khan began setting
up post stations in his own domain.
The structure of the system was based on the erection of a post station
(jam) at stages equivalent to a day’s journey , that is about 25-30 miles. The
stations held stocks of hores and fodder for those who travelled,Normally,
messenger traffic wast about 25 miles a day, but express messengers could go
much faster.
The significance of the expanded communication system for the
development of relations between various countries and peoples is difficult to
overstimate. Along its roads moved not only the couriers of mongol khans
with speedily delivered orders and items of information, but also envoys,
missionaries, merchants and all kinds of adventurers.
The Mongols invented some other original insitutions and offices which
did not only function efficiently in different parts of the empire, but left their
noticeable inprint on the Mongols’ administration on the local level of the
empire was the office of ‘daruyachi’ had been set up in all the Mongolian ruled
regions of Eurasia, Persia, China and Russia. The term ‘daruyachi’ (in Chinese:
ta-lu hua-ch’ih (dala huachi), in Russian: ‘daruga’ or its Turkic equivalent
‘basqaq’, in Persian :(darugha ) was widely known all over the empire.
Mangol khans also introduced various forms of taxation in the regions
of their empire. They had to procure the best way of economic exploitation of
the conquered peoples all over the empire.
The first three successors of Chinggis were staunch adherents of
maintaining Mongolia as the centre of their empire. In this respect the reign
of Mongke was the most important period in the history of the empire. It
was during his reign that the Mongol Empire not only expanded greatly, but
eventually acquired a firm organizational form. Mongke Khan managed to
create an efficient administrative system for ruling the empire from the centre in
Mongolia. He established the supremacy of the Great Khan in Qaraqorum over
any prince, regardless of his lineage, and over any clan or family alliance.
The Great Khan had to preside over a strong bureaucratic structure staffed
by supranational presonnel which included, besides the Mongols themselves,
Uighurs, Khitans, Chinese, Central Asians and Persians.
There is no doubt that the unprecedental upheaval of the Mongol
nomads could not but be accompanied by great changes in their social and
cultural life. Society in Mongolia had been gaining a more feudal-like character.
The primitive clanship structure was no longer characteristic of the Mongol
society. The statehood of the Mongols had acquired its full-fledged form and
functioned efficiently. With the creation of the world empire, the traditional
concept of the Mongols concerning the Khan’s power and its function had
undergone considerable modification under the influence of the political systems
and chancellery practices of sedentary peoples. The empire had been attaining
more and more symbiotic features on the basis of the traditional institutional
structures both of the nomadic and the sedentary societies.
The Mongols awarded great significance to the ideological foundation
of their political supremacy from the view-points of different religions that had
become well known to them.
The Secret History of the Mongols propagated a concept of the heavenly
origin of the ‘golden clan’ of Chinggis Khan. It is said in the very beginning
of the book that Chinggis Khan takes his origin from Borte Chinya who was
born with the destiny from heaven above (SHM,p.2) Another legend referred to
in the same book says that Alan-goa the legendary foremother of the Mongols
was miraculously conceived with light and gave birth to her son Bodonchar the
direct accestor of Chinggis Khan’s clan (SHM,p.4). These legendary accounts
were assigned to develop two important concepts of the origin of Mongol
khanship those of Heaven and Light. Such concepts could have appeared
among the Mongols as a final result of the meeting of different religious and
cultural traditions. It is true that the worship of Heaven (Tengri) was inherent in
shamanism, and it was the bedrock of the old Mongolian khanship conception.
But it does not exclude that the Heaven sanctioned khanship conception of the
Mongols might have in the final phase of its evolution been inspired by the
highly developed political doctrine of the Chinese, the doctrine of the mandate
of Heaven (t’ien-ming or tianming) (de Rachewiltz, de, 1973) Moreover, we
can go still further in order to discover another stratum of influence this time
the influence of a more distant civilization, that is the Iranian or to be more
exact the Zoroastrian Manichaean concept of Light which might have inspired
the Mongols to etaborate their own version of an immaculate conceeption of
Alangoa by means of Light (Bira, 1989).
The sources bear witness to the idea that the celestial mandate and the
extraordinary origin of Chinggis Khan’s clan were eventually developed into the
original imperial concept which inspired the Mongols in their empire building
activities.
The historical conditions that prevailed in Mongolia naturally favoured
its cultural development. Although it is not certain when the Mongols first
became familiar with the Soghdian Uighur script, which in turn goes back to the
Pheonician Aramaic system of writing, it is most probable that the fully fledged
usage of the script had actually begun with the chancellery practice of the
Mongol state in the reign of Chinggis Khan and since that period the tradition
of writing and learning had been uninterruptedly kept among the Mongols.
The earliest known form of Mongol writing was carved in rock the so called
Chinggis inscription dated from c 1225. This was monument erected in honour
of Esunge, Chinggis Khan’s nephew (c. 1190-1270).
As the great literary monument, one has to refer to the Secret History of
the Mongols (Mongol - un Niucha Tobchiyan) supposedly written between 1228
and 1240 on the bank of the river Kerulen. The author of the book is not known.
But this earliest surviving literary monument of the Mongols was a heroic epic
as well as history. It represents the richest treasurehouse of Mongolian folklore.
The book may be divided into three parts - the genealogy of the ancestors of
Chinggis Khan, stories about his life and heroic deeds, and a short section on
Ogoday Khan. The main theme was developed in the second part in which
legendary accounts give way to more reliable historical data.
As known from historical sources, there were some other historical
books, such as the Altan debter (‘Golden Book’) which was widely used by
Persian historian Rashid al-Din.
During the period of the Mongol empire, with the subsequent settling
down of Mongol Khans in China and Iran, The literary activities of the Mongols
shifted from Mongolia to the respective conquered countries, and it was there that
the Mongols entered into direct contact with developed traditions of literature and
learning. Mongol Khans particularly patronized history writing, resorting to the
service of historians from the different countries. Due to the domination of the
Mongols, Mongolian historical trditions gained the leading position throughout
the empire, and the family history of Chinggis Khan and his clan was regarded
as an official history. The legend of Alan-goa, the foremother fo the ‘Golden
clan’, was kept in high respect and enjoyed extraordinary popularity throughout
the empire from Iran to Tibet.
During the period of the Mongol Empire the geographical outlook of
widely separate peoples was broadened as it had never been before. Travellers
and merchants were the main disseminators of first-hand information about
diverse countries and peoples. The Mongols and their Empire had not only
become the focus of world interest, but they themselves had accumulated rich
knowledge about the countries and the people which they had incorporated into
their empire. The Secret History of the Mongols displays not only a remarkably
accurate knowledge of the geography of Mongolia itself but also contains fairly
realistic information on foreign countries, their towns and peoples.
The Europeans who visited Mongolia and China, like the Franciscan
John of Piano Carpini, Friar William of Rubruck, Marco Polo and others,
transmitted a wealth of information on Mongolia and other Asian countries to
their countrymen, while Arab and persian travellers introduced the countries of
Central Asia and the Middle East to the Mongols and the Chinese.
Despite the cruelty that accompanied the conquests, religious fanaticism
was, however, alien to the Mongols. They pursued the policy of religious
tolerance in their multinational empire. And it is difficult to think that this
policy was determined simply by the indifference or ignorance of the Mongols,
as some scholars suppose. Rather, it was a premeditated policy necessitated
by ‘holding the soul’ of their subjugated peoples belonging to different ethnic
groups and beliefs. Almost all the great world religions had become well
known to the Mongols during this period. Under Mongke, the Nestorians held
a privileged position. As witnessed by William of Rubruck, the Mongol Khan’s
official attitude towards different religions was as follows:
10 | MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES
We Mongols believe that there is but one God, by Whom we live and
by Whom we die, and towards Him we have an upright heart. But just as God
gave different fingers to the hand, so has He given different ways to men. (The
mission of Frear William of Rubruck, 1990)
Mongolia had for a while become a meeting place of different peoples,
cultures and religions. Qaraqorum, the capital of the empire, was a cosmopolitan
city, where one could meet Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Chinese,
Hungarians, Russians, Western Europeans, Armenians and others. The city was
linked to all parts of the Empire by the wide network of roads along the horse
relay post stations. Embassies from all over the world, including the European
kingdoms and the papacy, undertook the long voyage to the Mongol court. The
Franciscan Friars John of Piano Carpini and William of Rubruck, who visited
Mongolia during the reigns of the Khans Guyuk and Mongke, left remarkable
accounts of their travels, which are first-hand source material on the history of
the Mongols.
The travel accounts, for instance, give lively descriptions of the artistic
activities within Qaraqorum and the open display of works of art.
Rubruck was greatly impressed by the Khan’s palace and a large tree
at its entrance made of silver by Master William of Paris. He writes that the
Khan’s Palace resembled a church, with a middle nave and two sides beyond
two rows of pillars and three doors on the south side. There were two quarters
in the city; one was for the ‘Saracens’ (Persian), where there were bazaars
and where many traders gathered; the other was the quarter of the ‘Cataians’,
Chinese who were craftsmen. There were also large palaces belonging to the
court secretaries and twelve Buddhist temples, two mosques and one Christian
church (Mission of Friar William of Rubruck, 1990,p. 221). According to
another source, under the reign of Ogoday, a foundation to a Buddhist edifice
was laid, which was completed by Mongke. A great stupa covered with a tall
pavilion constituted rooms around which there were arranged the statues of
various Buddhas, completely in accordance with the indication of the stupas
(Cleaves, 1952).
The city was enclosed by a mud wall and had four gates. At the east
gate, millet and other kinds of grain were sold; at the west gate, sheep and goats
were on sale; at the south gate, cattle and wagons; and at the north gate, horses.
The Mongol Khanates and Their Cultural Exchanges
The Yuan Empire
The Yuan Empire was founded by Qubilay Khan who ruled China from
1260 to 1294. he concentrated his attention on securing Mongol rulership in the
greatest sedentary society. Qubilay Khan unified the northern and southern parts
of China which had for centuries been separated from one another. Although
Mongol rule in china was one of foreign domination in the reign of Qubilay
Khan the situation in the country much improved and by the end of his rule
MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES | 11
China became a unified flourishing and powerful nation developing active
contacts with many countries of the world.
Qubilay was a great innovator who introduced quite a new type of policy
into the building up of the steppe empire Having inherited a world empire,
Qubilay did not confine himself to relying only on the Chinese administrative
and political practice but was able to take advantage of mobilizing all that he
could find useful in his multi-national empire.
In Principle the Mongols did not change the traditional Chiness system
of bureaucracy and administration much but they had their won concepts and
practice of rule and they innovated some characteristic military and administrative
institutions in China. Qubilay was well familiar with Confucianism and he
was surrounded by Chinese Confucian advisers. Nevertheless in his policy he
preferred Buddhism which unlimately declared the state or imperial religion.
He together with the members of his family converted to Buddhism. Tibetan
sources testify that Qubilay khan established close relations with the Sa Skya
sect. He invited its abbot hPhags pa bla ma bLo gRos rGyal-mTshan (1235-
1280) to his court and placed him at the head of the Buddhist church in his
empire, having granted him the title of Guoshi or ‘Imperial Preceptor’. His
spiritul authority was skifully exploited by Qubilay Khan in his religious
policy. In his numerous works hPhags-pa-bla-ma proclaimed the Mogol Khans
as Chakravartins-’universal emperors’, thus making them equl with the great
ancient Indian Buddhist emperors. Qubilay Khan is said to have founded the
policy of ‘two principles’, which meant a close alliance between the Throne and
the Altar, that is, the khan’s power and doctrine (dharma) (Bira, 1978).
Qubilay Khan’s religious and other policies were more or less continued
by his successors. Buddhism continued to be prestigious at the Mongol court.
As a daring attempt of innovation on the part of Qubilay Khan in the field
of culture, one has to mention his initiative to introduce a new writing system.
In 1269, he issued the decree by which a new script was introduced. The creator
of the script was the above mentioned hPhags-pa-blama, and the script was
meant to be adopted for transcribing all the diverse languages of the Empire’s
people instead of the then existing script-Mongol, Chinese and others. The
script was called ‘hPhags-pa-script’ after the creator’s name, or ‘square script’
beacuse of the square form of its letters, and ‘state script’ (Guozi) according to
its designation. The adoption of the new script by Qubilay Khan was quite in
accord with the cosmopolitan spirit of the age. It was the blend of the different
writing systems that were known then in the Empire. It was mainly constructed
on the basis of the Tibetan letters which, in turn, derived from the Indic script,
but it had to be written in the vertical as the Mongol Uighur script, and its
letters had a square shape as the Chinese characters; lastly, it used a vertical bar
that linked the writing units, something similiar to the linking line of the Nagara
script, although with characterisic differences.
While ruling China, the Mongol khans could not neglect the great
validity of Confucian statecraft. Qubilay and his successors in particular had,
after all, to be guided by the pragmatic ideas of Confucianism. They used
the Chinese people’s own institutions and traditional bureaucracy system to
consolidate their administrative power in China. Qubilay Khan wanted to have
all the prerequisites to be regarded as a ‘Son of Heaven’. In this way the
absolute power of the khan might be guaranteed. He was not only the legitimate
successor of Chinggis khan, but also the ‘Son of Heaven’ in China, and a
‘Chakravartin’ in Tibet.
On the other hand, Qubilay was the Great Khan of the Mongol Empire
as a whole. He enjoyed the support and recognition of the rules of the other
parts of the empire. His policy had, in a wider sense,acquired a much more
cosmopolitan character. The Mongol Khan was surrounded by a great variety of
advisers and defectors, ready to serve at the Mongol court. Qubilay Khan tried
to create a multiracial, supranational administration; this permitted Mongols,
Muslims, Tibetans, Chinese and others to collaborate in the service of the
empire.
It is characteristic that during the reign of the Yuan emperors, relations
by land between East and West reached their highest point of development
hitherto. Overseas trade between China and India. Southeast Asia and Persia
also further developed.
Collaboration between Chinese and Arab-Iranian astronomers in trun
was very close, and most fruitful. In 1267, Qubilay Khan invited the Iranian
astronomer Jamal al-Din to china to transmit his discoveries. In the Yuan shih
(shi), a couple of pages of pages are devoted to plans or models of astronomical
instruments from ‘Western countries’- these were sent by Hulegu Khan of his
successor to Qubilay Khan throught the hands of the above mentioned Jamal
al -Din in person (Needham,1979a). Among these instruments were diagrams
of an armillary sphere, sundials, and a terrestrial globe, and a celestial globe
(Franke,1966).
It was under the Yuan Dynasty that the great Chinese astromomer Guo
Shoujing (1231-1316) who took high at the Mongol court had created one of
the most astronomical observatories of the age at Daidu (Beijing). There, he
and his famous Iranian colleague Jamal al-Din carried on their research works.
The Iranian astronomer offered a new calendar, known in Chinese as Wannian
Li (‘Calendar for Ten Thousand years’), to Qubilay. His Chinese counterpart,
Guo Shoujing, used the Iranian diagrams and calculations to build his own
instruments to devise his own calendar, the Shoushi Li (‘Calendar Delivering the
Season’), which with minor revisions was employed through the Ming Dynasty.
The Calender was based on the most accurate astronomical calculations. It was
reckoned that one year was equal to 365 days 2 hours 42 minutes 5 seconds
(Chiu Shu-Sin,1984) (the real time occupied by the earth in one revolution
round the sun being 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 46 seconds).
Arab-Iranian medician also enjoyed great popularity in China under
Mongol rule. In 1285,1288 and 1290 he dispatched envoys to South India
to seek not only precious goods but also skilled craftsmen and doctors.Two
branches of the Guanhui si (Imperial hospitials), composed primarily of Iranian
and Central Asian doctors, were established in Kaiping and in north China to
treat the Emperor and the Court. Qubilay also sought to obtain medicines from
Korea. Thirty-six- volumes of Arab- Iranian medicinal recipes were placed in
the court library. Qubilay established an imperial academy of medicine (Chinese
Taiyi guan).
The Mongols are known to have used Chinese and Central Asian
experts in the fields of engineering and technology from the beginning of their
conquests. Some Iranian and Central Asian experts were in China. Sayyid Ajall
Sham al Din the Arab engineer, who was the Governor of Yunnan did much
for the irrigation of the Kunming Basin (Needham, 1979b) There was another
great Arab engineer called Shams (1278-1351) He was the author of a treatise
on river conservation, the Hefang tougyi (Comprehensive Explanation of River
Conservation), published in 1321. Apart from hydraulic engineering Shams is
described in his biography as having been an expert in astronomy, geography,
mathematics and musical or rather acoustical theory.
It was during the Yuan period that the Mongols came into direct contact
with a variety of cultures-Chinese, Tibet-Buddhist, Arab-Iranian and Central
Asian. Buddhism’s culture and literature spread widely among the Mongols.
Buddhist literature was translated into Mongolian form different languages,
mostly Tibetan in the first decade of the fourteenth century the great Mongolian
scholar Choyijiodser was actively engaged in translating Buddhist texts into
Mongolian and writing his own works. He translated the famous Buddhist
treatise the Boddhicharyavatara by Shantideva and wrote his won commentary
on it and this commentary was published in 1312 in Uighur-Mongol script in
hundreds of copies. The Mongolian tradition ascribes to him the composition of
the first Mongolian grammar, the Jiruken-u tolta after the model of Sanskrit and
Tibetan grammars. The Buddhist sutra known as Beidou Jjing in Chinese, and
as ‘Doloyan ebugen neretu odun-u sudar’ in Mongolian (‘The Sutra of the Great
Bear) was translated form Chinese into Uighur in 1313 and into Mongolian
in 1328 The Mongolian translation was block-printed in 2000 copies. In the
Yuan period the famous work of Sa-skya Pandita Kun-dGa’ rGyalmTshan, the
‘Subhasitaratnanidhi (Mong. Sayin tigetu erdeni-yin sang) was also translated
into Mongolian and was published in the hPhags-pa script, the four-page fragment
of which were discovered in Turfan (Chinese Turkestan) at the beginning of the
twentieth century. Scholars are of the opinion that Sonomgara’s translation of
the same book as it survived in the Uighur Mongol script also belongs to the
Yuan period.
Not a few Mongols mastered the Chinese language and Chinese writing.
They took and active part in literary and translation activities and some of them
even wrote their works in Chinese. In collaboration with the Mongols worked
the Uighurs, the Tanguts, the Chinese and the Central Asians. The Mongol
Scholar Temurdashi, together with his Chinese Uighur and Tangut colleagues,
worked on a compilation of the histories of the Liao Chin and Yuan dynasties.
Chagan, a native of Khotan known as a polyglot translated into Chinese several
Mongolian books like the ‘Tobchiyan’ a Mongol history mentioned in the Yuan
Shi the history of the campaigns of Chinggis Khan and better known by its
Chinese name ‘Zhenguri qinzheng Lu’ because preserved only in its Chinese
version and others. In 1307 Bolodtemur, then Assistant of the Left in the
Secretarial Council presented to the Khan Qaisan (r. 1307-1311), a Mongolian
version of the famous Confucian book ‘Xiaojing’ in ‘state script’, that is, in
hPhags-pa script. The khan decreed that this work contained the most profound
utterances of Confucius, and that all, from the nobility to ordinary people,
should act accoring to it. He ordered to cut blocks and print it, and copies of
the work were widely distributed. Some scholars consider that Bolodtemur was
the author of the Mongolian version of the Xiaojing in the hPhags-pa script.
Scholars also are of the opinion that there must have existed an earlier version
of the Mongolian translation of this book, because, since 1229, the Xiaojing
has been elucidated for members of the Mongol imperial family. One or more
of these early versions may have served as a basis for the translation in 1307 in
hPhags-pa script, and also for the Mongolian translation of the same book which
has reached us in Uighur Mongol script (de Rachewiltz, 1982)
It is characteristic that some Central Asian works were also translated
into Mongolian. The poems of Muhammad al-Samarqandi were translated
into Arabic, Persian, Uighur, and Mongolian. But only a few strophes of the
Mongolian version have survived representing a unique specimen of early
Mongolian translation.
It is certain that the stories of the famous ‘Romance of Alexander’
were already known to the Mongols in the thirteenth century. Mongke Khan’s
minister Mahmud Yalavach once related to his sovereign a story form the
Muslim version of the Alexander Romance, and the Mongol khan was extremely
pleased with it’(Rashid al-Din 1971). It was a true sensation when, in the 1950s.
scholars discovered and identified the anonymous and fragmentary text of a
Mongolisn version of Alexander Romance (Poppe, 1957; Cleaves, 1959). It is
supposed to have been translated in the early fourteenth century from its Uighur
Turkish version. The Romance of Alexander (in Mong. Sulqarnai, from Persian
Zu-l-Qarnayn, itself from the Arabic Dhu-I- Qarnayn) was widely spread in
Ethiopic, Syriac, Arabic, Persian, and Turkish versions throughout the Near
East and Central Asia since an early date. The Mongolian fragmentary version,
in which the quest of immortality seems to be the predominant theme, consists
of four distinct episodes: (1) the ascent upon Mount Sumer; (2) the descent to
the bottom of the sea; (3) the descent to the land of darkness; and (4) The return
to the city of Misir.
As a result of the literary and translation activities of the Mongols their
written language acquired its classical form which continued to develop, indeed,
well into modern times. The rules of spelling were set and the lexicon of the
language was enriched by new words and expressions including loan words
from different languages, mostly from Sanskrit (in Soghdian-Uighur forms),
Chinese and Tibetan. It was culturally important that the Mongols had mastered
the Chinese technique of block printing. The Mongolian books published by
way of block printing were not only available to more readers and bibliophiles,
but had more chances to be inherited by later generations. Since that period,
block printing practice was continuously preserved among the Mongols until
very recent past and produced a great amount of books.
The reign of the Mongol Khans in China lasted altogether for a century.
Although not a few Mongols among the ruling elite in China were acculturated
and assimilated Chinese Civilization still the Mongol ruling class in its majority
was not assimilated. Scholars have pointed out that the Mongols were remarkably
successful in maintaining many features of their way of life from culinary
and dress customs and language to military organization throughout the whoel
period of their domination in China.
The Il Khanate
With the foundation of the Il Kahnate by Hulegu (1256-1265), Persia and
Iraq, together with much of Anatolia, were brought definitively under Mongol
control. The Il Khanate existed for 70 years. The dynasty of the Il Khans was
subject to the Great Khanate. The prestige of the Great Khans, particularly
that of Qubilay was immense and the connection between China and Persia
remained strong and friendly under Mongol rule. This factor greatly favored the
development of relations between the two great centres of civilization.
Under Mongol rule the Mongol-Chinese impact on Persia and the Middle
east became stronger that ever before . In Persia as in China, the Mongols were
confronted with a flourishing culture. The Mongol conquest particularly at its
initial stage caused great damage to this culture simply because a great number
of intellectuals and artisans were annihilated or forcefully deported to Mongolia
and China.
The Mongols could offer anything culturally superior in exchange for
what they had destroyed. However, what could be regarded as a positive point
in favour of the Mongols was the fact that they played an active intermediary
role in introducing some East Asian elements into the Persian culture and
religion. To take the case of religion ,for example, Islam, hitherto a relatively
homogenous culture, now underwent several drastic changes.
The policy of religious tolerance pursued by the Mongols directly
resulted in the revival of non-Islamic traditions in Persia.While the Mongols
attitude towards religion was undoubtedly driven by political motives, the
role of Kerait princesses, who were Nestorian Christians and married into the
family of the Chinggisids,can not be underestimated .One has to refer to the
achievement of Sorqoqtani,Tolui’s wife,whose three sons Mongke,Qubilay and
Hulegu, became famous sovereigns. She is well known to have been the Kerait
princess, and a practicing Christian. She may have influenced her sons. Hulegu
the founder of the Il-Khanate was also married to a Christian princess from
Kerait, whose name was Doquz Khatun, Hulegu’s son Abaqa who succeeded his
father also had a Christian spouse named Maria.
Nestorian Christians were influential in the Il Khanate. Some served
the Il-Khan’s court as Mongol ambassadors to the countries of Europe for
instance. Rabban Sauma and Mark were two Uighur Nestorians whom Qubilay
and Arghun used as their own envoys to foreign countries.
The most intriguing aspect of religious life under the Il-Khan’s was
the fact that Buddhism enjoyed a brief period of official favour. That was a
distant reflection of the gernral religious policy of the Mongol Empire. Hulegu
displayed sympathy towards Buddhism. He had his appanage in Tibet : the
Phag mo Grupa, one of the great Buddhist centres of Tibet, was under his
jurisdiction. With his successors, especially in the reign of Arghun Buddhism
was increasingly favoured. Through Buddhism some Tibetan religious and
cultural influence reached Persia through the Mongols. Nevertheless material
evidence of Mongol Tibetan Buddhism in Persia is very scant, for Buddhist
monuments were destroyed or converted to Islamic use after the conversion of
the Mongol rulers to Islam only a few Buddhist ruins exist near Maragheh.
Perceptibel East Asian Mongol Buddhist and Chinese influence may
be noticed on examples of Persian painting of the Mongol and post Mongol
periods. For instance, a pair of miniatures in the Miscellany collection H. 2152
of the Topkapi Library made for the Timurid prince Baysunghur and mainly
composed of Il Khanid and Timurid pictorial and calligraphic works apparently
show that the Mongol Buddhist painting style and motifs were so influential that
they were pursued by later generations of artists in the Timurid period (Esin,
1977, Needham, 1979c)
The Il-Khans are known to have patronized and promoted sciences and
scholarship The famous philosopher and astronomer, Nasir al Din al Tusi (1201-
1274) was one of Hulegu Khan’s advisers. Hulegu Khan entrusted him with the
creation of an astronomical observatory at Maragheh in Azerbaijan, south of
Tabriz. The observatory was equipped with the best instruments constructed up
to that time and the library is said to have contained over 400,000 volumes.
The observatory was a meeting place for scientists from different countries The
illustrious Muslim astronomer from Spain Yahya ibn Muhammad ibn Abul-
Shukr al-Maghribi al-Andalusi is known to have work of Rashid al Din (1247-
1318) on medicine. He served the Mongol rulers in Persia as court physician
and occupied the high post of prime minister. About 1313 he prpared an
encyelopedia of Chinese medicine called Tansuq-Nameh-yi Il-Khan dar Funun-i
‘Ulum-i Khita’ i (‘Treasures of the Il Khan on the Sciences of Cathay’). The
work dealt with the various subjects of Chinese medicine, sphygmology (pulse
lore), anatomy, embryology, pharmaceutics and so on.
Historiography enjoyed particular attention and patronage form the Il
Khans who were naturally interested in immortalizing ‘great deeds’, their own
and those of their predecessors For this purpose they recruited the connoisseurs
of old times and historians from different nations and made available their
archives and official chronicles for those who wrote history. As illustrations
one might refer to the two famous Persian works ‘Tarikh-i Jahan-Gusha’ (‘The
History of the World-Conqueror’) by Ata Malik Juwayni (1226-1283) and the
‘Jami’ al-Tawarikh’ (The Compendium of Histories) by Rashid al-Din. Both
authors held high political positions in the Il Khanate, and were eye witnesses
and participants in many important events that took place in these days. Juwayni
began working on his book during his residence in Qariqorum in 1252-1253 at
ehe suggestion of his Mongol friends from the court of Mongke Khan. He must
have completed his work after his return to Iran sometime after 1260.
Rashid al-Din wrote his book in 1300-1311 by order of the Il Khans
Ghazan and Oljeitu. His ‘Compendium of Histories’ was the world’s first real
universal history that is a general history of all the Eurasian peoples with whom
the Mongols had come into contact. Beginning with Adam and the Patriarchs,
the book recounts besides the history of the Mongols, the history of the pre-
Islamic kings of Persia, of Muhammad and the Caliphate down to its extinction
at the hands of the Mongols in 1258; of the post-Islamic dynasties of Persia; of
Oghuz and his descendants, the Turks, the Chinese, and the Jews; of the Franks
and their emperors and popes; and of the Indians with a detailed account of
Buddha and Buddhism (Boyle, 1971).
The last, third volume of the history was a geographical compendium
containing not only a geographical and topographical description of the globe
as it was then known..... but also an account of the system of highways in the
Mongol Empire, with mention of the milestones erected at imperial command,
and a list of postal stays’ (Jahn, 1964).
Rashid al-Din had the unique opportunity of obtaning the assistance of
scholars from different nations resident at the II Khan court. The history of
India was composed with the help of the Kashmiri hermit Kamalashri, and the
history of China with the assistance of Mongol and Chinese connoisseurs of
history like Bolud Chingsiyang who is likely to have been the chief authority on
contemporary China.
The main place in the book was given to the history of the Mongols
which was based almost exclusively on native sources many of which are now
lost. Rashid al-Din had the privilege to avail himself of the assistance and favour
of influential Mongols like Bolud Chingsiyang (Pulad Chinksak) and Ghazan
Khan himself. We have every reason to think that all the materials pertaining to
the Mongols and which Rashid included in detail in his book, must have been
retold or especially prepared for him by his Mongol colleagues form Mongol
sources, as good as the famous Altan debter (Golden Book) which was always
preserved in the treasury of the khans’ court and which was referred to in many
places by the author. Scholars rightly assume that the first draft of the earliest
parts of the Jami ‘al-Tawarikh was not originally written in Persian, and goes
back to a Mongolian version, most probably compiled by Bolud Chingsiyang
and other Mongol genealogists. Consequently, the monumental history became
a multilingual affair which was edited in Persian, Arabic, and perhaps also
in Mongolian and East Turkic (Togan, 1962). While reading the parts of the
Persian historian’s book devoted to the Mongols including the history of the
successors of Chinggis Khan no matter in whatever language in the original
persian or in the modern English or Russian translation, any Mongol can easily
discover for himself the surprisingly traditional Mongol manner and style of
history narration which so greatly contrasts with that of Persian Islamic history
writing.
The Golden Horde and The Chaghatai Khanate
The role of these tow khanates in the cultural life of the empire was not
so great. Unlike the Khanates in China and Iran they actually kept aloof from
the main streams of cultural exchanges representing only peripheral offshoots
of the Empire. The two khanates were nearer to each other and the territories
were mostly populated by different groups of Turkish people who were closer to
the Mongols both ethnoculturally and linguistically and the level of their socio-
cultural development was not higher than that of the Mongols in the steppe
lands of conquered territories the Mongols found favourable conditions for their
nomadic way of life and they easily came into direct contact with their Turkish
counterparts.
Although the khans of the Godlen Horde ruled over Russia they did not
settle in the depths of its territory. When Batu Khan (1236-1255), the founder of
the Godlen Horde, wished to have his residence he preferred to build his capital
Saray in the delta of the lower Volga, not far from Astrakhan. The Dasht-i
Qipchaq with its grazing lands attracted the Mongols more than the great cities
of Russia. The Qipchaq steppe was the core of the Golden Horde that is why
the latter was also known as the Qipchaq Khanate.
As far as Russia is concerned, once it was severely devastated by
invasion, it came under Mongol vassalage. And the indigenous Russian lands
as a matter of fact were not administratively included in the territory proper of
the Mongol horde. The old Russian princely administration system was on the
whole maintained Russia was subject to heavy tribute and taxes.
Chaghatai received from his father Chinggis Khan the lands from the
country of Uighurs in the east to Bukhara and Samarkand in the west. In fact,
the Khanate was created long after the death of Chaghatai Khan died in 1242],
by whose name it has gone down in history. It was Alughu died in 1265/66]
who actually founded an independent Mongol Khanate; he even expanded the
former Chaghatai domains by bringing the whole of Central Asia under his
sway.
The unification of so many different peoples under the strong power
of the Mongols obviously promoted the meeting, and intergration of their
different cultures and traditions. It is noteworthy that the’ specific gravity’ of
non- Islamic, Mongol- Turkish elements increased, greater than ever before , in
the sociopolitical and culture life of the Central Asian peoples. The Mongols
brought their own culture elements- their language and writing, their faith ,
their nomadic mode of life, as well as their khanship tradition and knowledge
of polity and experience. In the Golden Horde, the Mongol language and script
were used in official documents . Some yarlyks [Turkic, in Mongolian, jarlig],
the charters of the Khans, written in the Mongol script , have survived down
to our day, dating from the end of the fourteenth century. To this period also
belong the last coins of the Khan Taktamish , on which the Khan’s name was
recorded in the Mongol script.
On the other hand, Mongol domination in the Khanates enhanced all that
was Turkish, and Turkish elements eventually came uppermost. It should be
pointed out that the Mongols in both Khanates were considerably outnumbered
by the Turks, and these Mongols, after all, had to be assimilated in the local
ethno-cultural milieu where Islam and Islamic culture had prevailed since the
pre- Mongol period. The Mongols were converted to Islam, and such Mongol
clans as the Barlas, Dughlat , Jalayir and others, were Turkicized; but they
continued to play an active role in the history of Central Asia even after the fall
of Mongol rule. They are known to have given rise to some prominent emirs,
like Timur the Lame from the Barlas, who later founded the great empire of the
Timurids , on the model of the Khanates of the Chiggisids in Central Asia.
Scholars may argue whether there was a Pax Mongolica or not, and
whatever the political and military consequences of the conquests may have
been, the fact is that the Mongol empire had brought the great majority of the
lands of Eurasia, with their different peoples and cultures, under one authority.
It was likely the first and the last experience of humankind to have united,
within one set of boundaries, the largest land empire that the world had ever
known; and its cost was steep and could hardly be justified. Nevertheless, one
ought to take into account that under the specific historical conditions of the
age, a worldwide contact of peoples and culture had been developing, and a
fruitful exchange of material the peoples of the world, with considerable after-
effects for the further progress of humankind.
Bibliography :
BIRA, S. 1978. Mongolskya Istoriographya XIII-XVII vekov. [Mongolian Historiography
of the 13th-17th centuries], Moscow, pp. 78-91.
- 1989. The Traditional Historiographical Mutual Relationship between India and
Mongolia. In: BIRA, S. (ed.) Mongolia and India, Ulaanbaatar, pp. 30-33.
BOYLE, J.A. 1971. Introduction to his English translation of Rashid al-Din’s book ‘The
Successors of Chinggis Khan’, New York and London, p. 7.
CHIU SHU-SIN. 1984. Survey on the History of the Yuan Dynasty (Mongolian
translation). Hayilar, Inner Mongolia.
CLEAVES, F.W. 1952. The Sino-Mongolian Inscription of 1346, HJAS.Vol. 15,Nos 1-2.
- 1959. An Early Mongolian Version of the Alexander Romance (translated and
annoted). Harvad Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 22, pp. 2-99.
ESIN, E. 1977. A Pair of Miniatures from the Miscellany Collections of Topkapi.
Central Asiatic Journal, 21 (1), p.15.
FRANKE, H. 1966. Sino-Western Contact under the Mongol Empire. Journal of the
Royal Asiatic Society (Hong Kong Branch), 6, p. 60.
HEYD, W. 1879. Geschichte des Levantechandels im Mittelalter (trans. in 1885-1886.
Histoire du commerce du levant au Moyen Age, 2 vols, ed. F.RAYNAUD, Leipzig.
- 1966. History of the Mongolian People’s Republic (in Mongolian). Ulaanbaatar, Vol.
I, pp. 170-191.
JAHN, K. 1964. The Still Missing Works of Rashid al-Din. CAJ, IX/2, p. 7.
KWANTEN.L. 1979, Imperial Nomads. Leicester, p. 142. The Mission of Friar William
of Rubruck, 1990. (Trans. by JACSON, P. and MORGAN, D.) p. 221. London.
NEEDHAM, J, 1979a. Science and Civilisation of China, Vol. 3 (reprinted in 1979,
Cambridge University Press, London, p.49).
- 1979b. Science and Civilisation of China, Vol. 1, p, 141.
- 1979c. Science and Civilisation of China. Vol. 1, p. 218. POPPE, N. 1957. Eine
Mongolische Fassung der Alexandersage. Zeitschrift, 107, pp. 105-109.
RACHEWILTZ, I. DE, 1971. Papal Envoys to the Great Khans. London, p. 136, cf.
The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck (trans. by JACKSON, P, and MORGAN,
D.) London, 1990, p. 236.
- 1973. Some Remarks on the Ideological Foundation of Chinggis Khan’s Empire.
Paper on Eastern History, No. 7, pp. 21-26.
- 1982. The Preclassical Mongolian Version of the Hsiao-ching. Zentralasiatische
Studien, Vol. 16, p. 18.
RASHID AL-DIN. 1971. The Successors of Chinggis Khan. (Trans. by BOYLE, J.A.).
New York and London, p. 212.
The Secret History of the Mongols, (SHM), 1982. (Trans. and edited by CLEAVES,
F.W.) Cambridge, Mass., and London, Vol,1, pp. 2, 4, 141.
TOGAN, A.Z. V. 1962. The Composition of the History of the Mongols by Rashid
al-Din. CAJ, Vol. VII, No. 1, p.64.
International Association for Mongol Studies
3 MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES | 21
Stone Statues of The Mongols

(13th -14th Centuries)
D. Bayar
Some of the most interesting and significant remains created by the

nomadic peoples of the Eurasian Steppes are the anthropomorphic stone figures
spread over the vast territories of Eurasian Steppe lands. Territory of Mongolia is
one of the most wealthy regions in the Eurasia for the spreading of stone statues.
According to the list of ancient remains in Mongolia, there are over 500 well-
known statues made by nomads from the Middle Ages. Among these kind of
monuments is a distinctive group of stone statues, mainly spread in the eastern
regions of Mongolia. 69 unique stone statues have been found and studied.
History of the research
East Mongolian stone statues were first discovered near Dariganga (a region
in southeast Mongolia, Sukhbaatar aimag) by the Russian scholar V.A. Kazakevich
in 1927, who studied and described 17 of these monuments. His work in the topic,
including photographs of statues, was published in Leningrad.1 Furthermore, in 1927
L. Amsterdamskaya published a description of a similar stone statue located near the
Undurkhan, the center of Khentei aimag.
Later some examples of those statues were studied again by the Mongolian
researcher N. Ser-odjav, who studied monuments in the territory of Sukhbaatar and
Dornod (Eastern) aimags in 1961 and 1962.2 From 1967-1969 Russian ethnologist
L.L. Viktorova carried out a study of the stone monuments in Dornod and Khentei
aimags.3
In 1979 Russian turkologist S.G. Kliashtorny found similar statues in
the territory of Dundgobi (Middle-Gobi) and Dornogobi (East Gobi) aimags.4
The statue near Undurkhan was studied again by the Hungarian archaeologist I.
Erdely.5
Beginning in 1981 the present author undertook archaeological expeditions
in the Dariganga area (Sukhbaatar aimag) and studied 54 statues, about 30 of which
had been previously unknown.6 Several specimens of these statues were also found
in the other aimags, in the central and as well as in the western parts of the country.
Judging from these results, it can be concluded that monuments of this type are
fairly widespread in the southeastern regions of Mongolia.
In more recent times, Korean scholars have also joined the study of the
monuments in the eastern part of the country and have proposed a comparative
study with the stone statues of Cheju Island in South Korea. As a result, research
reports have been published by Korean professors Kang, Yong-bong7 Chu, Chae-
hyok,8 Cho Oh Soon and others9. In addition, a monograph by the present author
on the stone statues of Eastern Mongolia, translated by professor Pak Won Gil,
was published in Seoul.10
All of these efforts have contributed significantly to our knowledge of
these monuments.
Location
Stone statues of this type are mainly located in the Eastern regions of
Mongolia, such as Sukhbaatar, Dornod, Khentei, Dornogobi, Dundgobi aimags,
although the same type of statue is occasionally found in the Central (Central
and Uburkhangai aimags) and Western (Gobi-Altai aimag) parts of the country.
Recently, similar monuments were discovered in the territory of Shilingol Seim
near the Shantu city, the upper capital of Yuan Empire in Inner Mongolia.11
The Eastern Mongolian sculptures are usually installed in the southeastern
side of round stone mounds, ranging about 3 to 12 m in diameter and from 0,4
to 1 m in height. There are no auxiliary structures in the vicinity to suggest their
belonging to Ancient Turkic memorial complexes (such as small rectangular
slab fences, steles with a runic inscriptions, figures of different animals, walls
surrounding the entire complexes, and balbals- long rows of stones directed to the
southeast). It is not only the external appearance of these complexes that differs
markedly from those of the Ancient Turks, but the stone statues themselves differ
from the aforementioned in the manner of execution, clothes and attributes.
The first results of excavations carried out on the mounds, associated with
these statues show that these were not places of burial, but sacrificial buildings
of a memorial character, where ceremonies took place to honor ancestors and to
worship them by way of sacrifices.
Iconographical and stylistic features
Investigation of the stone statues over the course of many years has shown
that the custom of sculpting anthropomorphic monuments is deeply rooted in the
material and spiritual culture of the early nomads of Eurasia. We find a general
type of statue, the warrior-ancestor in its most basic form, symbolically taking part
in a ceremony performed in his honor. The basic form of the statue is the figure of
a man holding a vessel in either one or two hands, with weapons or other items in
his belt, wearing clothing typical of his time and ethnic background.
Some iconographic and stylistic distinctions are always found among
monuments of different territorial and chronological groups. The predominant
characteristic of ancient Turkic stone statues is the image of the warrior with a
vessel in his bent right hand and a saber, sword or dagger drawn in his left hand.12
The predominant characteristic of statues from the Cuman period was a man or
woman holding a vessel pressed to his or her abdomen with both hands.13 Although
the differences within a group are unimportant, the above characteristics show that
the statues from each period and culture have attributes that clearly express the
character and spirit of the particular period and the culture.
The Eastern Mongolian stone statues under review differ essentially in
their manner of imitative canon from similar monuments of the Ancient Turkic
and other periods. The overwhelming majority of them were executed in human
form, seated in an armchair; where as the majority of ancient Turkic statues were
executed in the shape of a standing person. The portrayed figure is usually holding
a vessel in the right hand, similar to the Turkic statues; however, all other attributes
such as clothing, headdress, belts, and boots are quite different.
In addition, the statues were constructed with marked distinctions revealing
the sex of the figure. The breasts of the female are emphasized, and the design of
the clothes and headdress are different in the male and female statues.
One of the characteristics of these monuments is that while many of the
statues are depicted wearing clothing, many figures are deliberately depicted
without any clothing at all. It is interesting that on such figures, headgear, footwear
and a belt with bags are often found despite the absence of clothes.
Another feature peculiar to East Mongolian statues is the absence of a
mustache or beard on male features, which is a typical attribute of the Turkic
statues, as exemplifying the masculinity of the warrior.
Finally, it should be noted that there are several specimens of statues
extremely rich in ornamentation and detail. There are four different kinds common
to most East Mongolian statues. These are floral, zoomorphic, geometric and
landscape decorations, which are typical Mongolian national ornaments.
Thus the analysis of iconographical features of East Mongolian statues
shows that they are considerably different from other groups of stone statues in
Eurasia.14
Attributes Depicted on The Statues
Mongolian statues are highly artistic and realistic in their design, and are
comparatively well preserved. These two factors give enough information to fix
the time of their creation, and their cultural and ethnic origin by comparative visual
analysis. Clothes, hairstyle and other attributes depicted on the monuments do not
have as much variation as ancient Turkic statues, but are typically the same from
statue to statue.
Hairstyle. The most notable feature is the hairstyle, which is characterized by two
tails bound behind the ears and a small lock at the front which is brushed onto
the forehead. This type of hairstyle coincides with the detailed descriptions of the
accounts made by medieval travelers who visited Mongolia in the 13th century.15
It is also consistent with the hairstyles depicted on portraits of the Yuan Emperors
of the 13th to 14th centuries. One can observe exactly the same hairstyle on the
portraits of the emperors from the Yuan dynasty court, as well as on the Persian
miniatures of the XIY c., where in the Mongols are portrayed.
In this connection, an archeological expedition conducted by the
ethnological branch of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences found a skeleton
buried in Khentei aimag in 1986. The completely preserved skeleton has a hairstyle
identical to the one described above.16
Headdress. The typical type of headdress is a hat with a round top and a wide
edge, an extended brim that hangs down in the back to cover the area of the neck.
Also, there is a long ribbon hanging down the back, which is a style that still
persists today in traditional ethnic dress. It should be noted that a similar type of
headdress was found in an ancient Mongolian burial in South Gobi. According to
radiocarbon dating performed in Germany, it was determined that the artifact dates
from the 14th century.17
Other indisputable evidence of these statues belonging to the medieval
Mongols is the lady’s tall headdress, called “bogtag”, with diamond-shaped
decorations fixed to it, the analogue of which is found in the portraits of the Yuan
empresses. This also shows that stone statues were erected not only to honor the
memory of warriors, but also to provide similar respect to some women of noble
origin.
Clothing. The sculptures of people wear caftans (gowns) with long narrow
sleeves and a diagonal fastening from left to right. These clothes are identical in
proportion to the modern Mongolian gowns known as “ deels”. Similar gowns are
also depicted on the portraits of medieval Mongolian emperors and on the Persian
miniatures that show various aspects of the life of Mongolian nobility in the 14th
centuries.
While the Turkic stone statues have fastenings predominantly on the left
side, Mongolian statues traditionally have fastenings running from left to right.
W. Rubruc, a traveller in the 13th century, mentioned this distinction between
Mongols and Turks at the time.18
In some of the sculptures, the upper parts of the clothes are decorated with
various traditional Mongolian ornaments and enhancing art forms. Examples are
the dragon, clouds and the so-called “ hamar ugalz “ (ox-nose).
Belts. The sculptures are completed with wide belts with plaques in the shape
of six- or eight-petalled rosettes or with a crescent ornaments. There are several
occurrences of leather belts with precious metal ornaments depicted on such
statues. Historical sources mention that such belts are representative of the upper
social strata, and that the khan’s family wore gold belts. Such belts have been
excavated from a number of archaeological sites. Another point of consideration
is that in ancient times women did not wear belts, a custom which is also shown
by these sculptures.
Footwear. As distinct from Turkic sculptures in which feet are rarely depicted, the
East Mongolian statues give a realistic portrayal of feet in boots. The boots have
fairly thick soles and slightly tapering, not upturned toes. Such a boots have been
found during archaeological excavations of the 13th – 14th century Mongolian
graves. These types of boots are still in common use among some Mongolian
ethnic groups, for instance the Uzumchins and the Buryats.
Cups. The statues of the Eastern Mongolian type portray for the most part a man
sitting in an armchair and holding a goblet-like cup with a long stem. An identical
cup made of silver was found in the Chasovennogorskaya grave dating to the 13th-
14th centuries in Russian Altai.
Many scholars have theorized that these monuments represent a deceased
hero who, by holding a cup in his hand, symbolically participates in his own feast of
honor, such as the living tribesman participated in reality. Another theory explains
the same feature of the cup as an offering ritual, which corresponds to Shamanistic
beliefs.
Bag or purse. On both sides the sculptures usually have small rectangular bags
with rounded corners executed in a highly realistic and expressive manner; it is
obvious that they were leather bags with metal adornments. Apparently, together
with the bags, there are representations of straight or slightly crooked stick-like
objects which could be used as everyday tools. According to the data, available
bags to us, similar to those depicted on the statues have been used until recently
among members of Borjigon clan. The Borjigon clan is considered to be the clan
of Chingis khan’s descendants.
Ritual adornments and objects. Some of the statues have necklaces hanging from
underneath the hat and below the chin, as well as earrings. A necklace hanging
from underneath the hat can also be seen in the portraits of Emperors of the Yuan
Dynasty.
In addition, some of the statues have representational engravings of beads
in their left hands, it matching the existing evidence and written sources describing
the spread of Buddhism among the Mongolian nobles as early as the 13th – 14th
centuries.
Seats. One of the most interesting attributes of the statues is the armchair on
which the figure is seated. Seats have not found in the other types of stone statues
on the Eurasian steppe lands. Several different kinds of seats can be found on the
Eastern Mongolian monuments. The most interesting of these is a cross-legged
armchair with bent arms. Apparently the legs of this armchair were fastened on
hinges. According to written sources, the Chinese adopted the same seats in the
3rd to 4th centuries.19 The Chinese name for these chairs is “ hu ch’uang “ or “
barbarian beds”. Researchers have noted the similarity between these chairs and
folding chairs from the Roman Empire and have concluded that the “barbarian
beds” penetrated into China from the western territories that were acquainted with
Greek and Roman culture.
However, in traditional Chinese language, the term “hu” was used to refer
to the nomads living on the steppes of Central Asia, north of the Great China
Wall, beginning with the Hsun nu and continuing up to Mongols of the late middle
Ages. The possibility of quickly dismantling and transporting these chairs, as
well as their similarity in construction to some household items used in Mongolia
today, suggests that these seats were used by nomadic peoples. In addition, the
great Mongolian Khans used this type of seats in the 13th century, as shown by the
Persian miniatures of the 14th century and by the account of Chao Hung, a Chinese
traveler who visited the home of Mugali, the Mongolian Vice-Regent of Northern
China in 1221.20 Chao Hung called the seats used by Mugali and the Mongolian
emperors “ hu ch’uang”, although by this time the seats were known as “ Chao Yi”
in China.
Chronology
The idea was long prevalent among Mongolian archeologists that all stone
statues in the territory of Mongolia were associated only with the Ancient Turkic
period. Such a theory was supported by the fact that from the very beginnings of
archaeological research in Mongolia, the grandiose monuments of Ancient Turkic
culture were discovered in the Orkhon river valley, which attracted the great
attention of turkologists all over the world.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the first researcher of the East Mongolian
statues, V.A.Kazakevitch originally attempted to date them as belonging to the
Turkic period. Later he raised the alternative hypothesis that these monuments
originated in Khitan dynasty of the 10th –12th centuries.21
The Mongolian researcher N.Ser-Odjav, who studied the same monuments
in the 1960s, considers these statues to be more recent than the Ancient Turkic
period, but he has not suggested an exact date.22 Another theory proposed by the
Mongolian historian G.Sukhbaatar is that this type of statue could be related to
the Toba culture of the 4th-6th centuries.23 S.G. Kliashtorny and Ye. I. Lubo-
Lesnichenko believe that the statues found in the Gobi region relate to the earlier
times of the Turkic kaganate.
With the result of the research
work covering 69 statues of this type, the
author of this work has considered that these
monuments were created by the Mongols of
13th-14th centuries. The Russian researcher
L.L.Victorova reached similar conclusions.
It should be noted that Hungarian scholar
I. Erdelyi concluded that these monuments
belong to later periods, such as the 15th to 16th
centuries.24
The fact that the clothing, footwear,
hairstyles, objects of household use and
adornments represented in the stone statues
of Eastern mongolian type, on the one hand,
differ so radically from those of the Ancient
Turks and, on the other possess, such great
similarity with those of the ancient Mongols,
prompts the conclusion that the monuments
portray representatives of the upper strata of
13th-14th century Mongolian society.
Stone figure from Lamt in
Sukhbaatar aimag
References :
1 Kazakevitch V.A. Namogil’nie statui v Darigange. Materiali komissi po
issledovaniju Mongol’skoi I Tannu-Tuvinskoi narodnih respublic i Buriat-
Mongol’skoi ASSR. Vup 5, Leningrad 1930.
2 Ser-Odjav N. Ertnii Tureguud. Studia archeologica. Instituti Historiae Academiae
Scientiarum Republicae Populi Mongoli, t.V.f.2, Ulaanbaatar 1970.
3 Victorova L.L. Mongoi. Proishozdenie naroda i istoki kulturi. Moscva 1980, 37-39.
4 Kliashtorny S.G. Epigraphicheskie raboti v Mongoli. AO 1979 goda. M.,1980.
sor. 486-487
5 Erdelyi Istvan, Fejes Imre. Recently discovered ancient relics in Mongolia. Acta
orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. T. XLI(1), 1987.82.
6 Bayar D. Kamennie izvayanija iz Sukhe-Batorskogo aimaka.(Vostochnaya
Mongolia). Drevnie culturi Mongolii. Novosibirsk 1985, 148-159.
7 Kang, Yong-bong. Mongoliin hun chuluu ba Chejudogiin Tulharubangni tuuhen
zam (Olon taamaglal toruulsen aylal). “Zam” setguul. Hanjin compani. 1991,
November-December, pp. 38-43 (in korean)
8 Chu, Chae-hyok. Darigangiin hun chuluu ba Chejudogiin Tulharubangni tuhai.
Tuuh sudlaachdiin holboo. 1992, N.2, pp. 122-144 (in korean)
9 Cho Oh Soon. A Comparative Study on the Costumes of Korean-Mongolian
Stone Statues (II) Mongolian Studies. 1993, pp.86-130; Bayar D. A Comparative
Study of Mongolian Stone Statues and the Tolharubang of Cheju Island, Korea.
A collection of theses on Korean studies. Korea Foundation6 Seoul, 1995,
pp.163-190
10 Bayar D. Mong-gol Seog-in-san-i Yeon-guu. Translated by Park Von gil . Seoul
1994.
11 Dugar B. Uzumchnii tuuhiin barimt bichguud. Shiliin gol aimgiin soninii
horoonii hevleh uildver hevlev 1985 on. 237-251; Tsagaan D. Chuluun soyol.
Ovor Mongoliin Soyoliin Hevleliin Horoo. Khailaar 1993. 168-176.
12 Evtiukhova L.A Kamennie izvayanija Yujnoi Sibiri i Mongolii. Materiali i
issledovanija po archaelogii. N24, Moskva 1952, 72-100.
13 Pletneva S.A. Polovetskie kamennie izvayanija. Svod archaelogiceskich
istochnikov. Vyp. E4-2, Moscva 1974.
14 Bayar D. Mongolchuudiin chuluun horog. Ulaanbaatar 1995.
15 Si Iju Tsi ili opisanie puteshestvija na zapad. Trudi clenov Rossiskoi Dukhovnoi
missii v Pekine. T.IV, St. Petersburg.
16 Menes. G. Otcet o rabote etnograficheskoi ekspeditsii Instituta istorii v Khenteiskom
aimake v 1986 godu. Arkhiv rukopisei Instituta istorii AN Mongolii.
17 Bayar D. Erdenebat U. Mongoliin ezent gurenii ued holbogdoh negen hovor
dursgal. Studia Archeologica T. 20, f.8 100-129. Ulaanbaatar 2000.
18 Puteshestvie v vostochnie strain Plano Karpini i Rubruka. Predislovie i
kommentarii N.P. Shastinoi. Moskva 1957.
19 Kriukov M.V. , Malijavin V.V. , Sofronov M.V. Kitaiskii etnos na poroge
srednich vekov. Moskva 1979.
20 Men Da Bei Lu (Polnoe opisanie Mongolo-Tatar). Vvedenie, kommentarii I
prilozenija N.Ts. Munkueva, Moskva 1975.
21 Kazakevitch V.A. Nekotorie voprosi istorii Mongolii v svete archaelogii.
Sovremennaya Mongolia. 1934. N4. Str. 5.
22 Ser-Odjav N. Ertnii Tureguud. Studia archeologica. Instituti Historiae Academiae
Scientiarum Republicae Populi Mongoli, t.V.f.2, Ulaanbaatar 1970.
23 Sukhbaatar G. Sianbi. Ulaanbaatar 1971.
24 Erdelyi Istvan, Fejes Imre. Recently discovered ancient relics in Mongolia. Acta
orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. T. XLI(1), 1987.82.
Institute of History, Mongolian Academy of Sciences

30 | MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES 4
The View of Chingis about Religion or
‘Under The Power of The Blue Sky’
Doctor Ph. S. Otgonjargal
I, the author of this article, am grateful that together with the professors
of the History Department of the National University of Mongolia honored to
contribute to a book which is to be published in India. I have chosen the above
title after remembering the wise words of J. Nehru that if you want to be close with
an Indian you would better talk the language of religion. But as far as the Indian
people know well the Chingis Khan who had been recognized as the greatest man
of the world, I thought that it might be interesting to know the view of Chingis
about religion and about the role of religion in his conquest. I would like to mention
here that in my article I did not follow the aim of praising religion but only tried to
tell about what religion meant to Chingis, how he used religion and how he gained
success. The only purpose of studying the history is not to revive it but to create
new awareness, new impulse and new values.
There were reasons behind why the 13th century was written down in the
world history as the Century of the Mongolians and the Century of Chingis. The
conquest of the Mongolians shook the world and the view that there is “the only sun
in the sky and the only khan on the ground” linked the East and the West and made
the world people aware of the fact that humankind is the ONE WHOLE which
cannot be separated. The secret of the Chingis Khan’s great success is hidden in his
view about state, about .friends, about women and generally speaking in his view
about the universe. From among all this we would like to loot at Chingis’s view
about religion and at what was the role of religion in his conquests.
In 1206 or in the Year of the Tiger, the Ikh Khuraldai (Parliament) was
held on the banks of Onon River proclaiming the foundation of the Mongol State
with Temuujin at its head as the Chingis Khan and thus Mongolia was immortalized
in the world history as Blue Mongolia. The Mongolians who worship the eternal
blue sky and who are distinguished by their blue spot, think it deeply meaningful
that the state was founded in the blue year (1206 was the blue year) and thus
Mongolia became to be known as Blue Mongolia. After the foundation of the state
the Chingis Khan esteemed religion high in strictly following the policy of the cult
of his personality. Since the very first days of the Ikh Khuraldai the biggest
representative of shamanism, an influential shaman Hohchu Zaarin was drumming
and loudly announcing that “the name Chingis means “Envoy of the sky”, “the
great emperor sent from the eternal blue sky”. From the very birth Temuujin
showed himself to be an unusual person. From father sky Temuujin was given the
name “Chingis”, and love and worship Chingis. (1.55.56.) That was a big
demonstration of Chingis’s view about religion. Mongolians’ cult of the spirits of
the sky has a long tradition and since the Hun times “shaniyu” (Khan)rwas called
“the son of the sky”. Furthermore the shamanistic traditions had been used in
diplomatic practice and Modun Shaniyu (Great Khan of the Huns) in his letter to a
Chinese khan mentioned the phrase like “great shaniyu empowered from the sky”
etc. Thus all this proves that tengerism (cult of the spirits of the sky) was the world
outlook-of the developed shamanism of the Huns. Truly, back in the 13th century
Chingis wit.h his mind saw the only possibility of gaining power over the people
with the help of thier traditional religion. His view that to cut the animal body
joints need to be found, to gain power over the people soul is needed and religion
is needed to conquer the world is left mentioned in the historical sources that
reached us. Persian historian Rashid ad din wrote surprising about the Mongolians
of the 13th century that they from 5 year olds to 80’year olds know their family
tree (history) by heart. Like this the Chingis Khan knew the past and the traditions
too well and while using Tengerism (cult of the spirits of the sky) as a tradition he
skilfully fit it to a new era and new circumstances. Like famous western philosophers
Friedrich Niezsehe, Martin Heidegger and Oswald Spengler put the freedom of
spirit high in the 20th century the Chingis Khan back in the 13th century was too
free in thinking and while seeking NOTHING (originate from a Greek word nihil
and from this word forms nihilism) of uniting the world, of which none of the
nomadic herders could not even think about and while putting the spiritual war at
the world level without being restricted to the region only, he could see the way of
conquering the world by playing with religion, which masters human mind.
Although Chingis was a believer he was not a blind believer but while using
religion he could stay out of religion and it was one of the prerequisites of his
success. For instance Chingis “highly trusted in shaman Hohchu (Tiv Tenger) by
allowing him to communicate directly with the sky above, inform the khan
personally about people’s hidden thoughts and empowered him to be generally in
charge of the religious matters of the state” (1.58) but “soon the unlimmited
religious rights seemed so small to shaman Hohchu and secretly from the khan he
began to attract the people to himself seeking to become influential in state affairs.
Chingis discovered this action of shaman Hohchu and ordered to kill him by
breaking his back. (3.232). It is interesting that he considered if the state had 2
heads that could mean the death of the state and came to ar interesting solution why
Chingis cannot substitute Tiv Tenger. Whether there was any brave man in the
13th century other than Chingis to kill the big shaman who linked the sky and the
ground. Indeed only the Chingis Khan who enjoyed the freedom of mind keeping
his mind and spirit free from religion could kill the live god, the son of the sky
shaman Hohchu. Thus while saving the state by killing shaman Hochuhe made the
peope to believe that the Eternal Blue Sky decreed that Chingis must be the one to
link the sky and the ground. This way he could make the people trust in him like in
the live god and that seems to be one of the wonders of Chingis. As Friedrich
Hegel said “mind must reign in the state but the man must be a great artist” mind
reigned in the Chingis state and Chingis could be a great artist indeed. Thus Chingis
made the first step to play with religion and with that the eyes of his mind to
conquer the world onened. While conquering the state of Khar Khyatan the Chingis
Khan issued a decree saying that religion would not be abondened and the people
might have the religious freedoms as they like and it was welcomed by the people.
(4.141) As messengers and tourists noted the Mongol Empire had state offices in
charge of kunz, buddhist, moslem, Christian religions, ludei and mani magic were
also allowed. However the most respected in the khan’s palace was the Mongolian
national religion-shamanism and that was followed by tantric agic which came
from Tibet and Kashmir. (5.191) Except shamans there were Buddhist monasteries,
two moslem temples and one Christian monastery in the Mongolian capital
Kharakhorum. (5.191) 12 monasteries of other countries, two Islamr monasteries
and one Christian monastery were at the end of one street. (5.191) However the
Chingis Khan did not specially distinguished any from among different religions
but believed in shamanism only preserving the old tradition of his people. (5.191)
About respecting different religions prominent Mongolian philosopher Ch. Jugder
wrote “the Chingis Khan did not prohibit different religions of other peoples but
allowed them to have their own religion and with this, he was loved by the people
of that time”. (5.190) French scholar D’Osson wrote in his work “the Chingis
Khan said that the sky empowered me to keep power over all the people”. That was
the world outlook of Chingis and the demonstration of his seeking for NOTHING.
It is obvious that religion was main in reaching th’s purpose of him. Thus in using
different religions in his state policy the Chingis Knan placed shamanism high and
used its endless resources in spiritual war of making cult of him. As a result of this
surprising far-sighted policy the military campaigns that took place after the death
of Chingis was written down in the world history under the name of Chingis.
Indeed, nowadays the people of not only in many other countries of the world but
also the people of his homeland Mongolia keep the imagination that Chingis was
a conqueror of the world or he lived 200 years. The reason behind becoming this
imagination real lies in the view of Chingis about state and about religion.
Shamanism played a considerable role in making Chingis the tutelary genius and
live god who saves people from troubles” and grieves. (5.189) As the Mongolians
ot.ongly believed that the Chingis Khan became the tutelary genius they initiated
special ritual of bringing sacrifices to the standard of Ihe Chingis Khan. Thus the
standard of Chingis became to be worshipped as a tutelary genius and people
began-to believe that the spirit of Chingis protects them (5.189) and as a result, the
military campaigns of Chingis seemed to continue “200” years. The Chingis Khan
worshipped the eternal blue sky and considered himself an envoy of the sky and it
was the demonstration of his view about shamanism. Shamans considered
themselves the mediators of the shamanistic spirits and they made people believe
in the existence of saviours of humans and nature. In this sense everyone who
believes shamanism without doubt trusts that the sky is the highest saviour from
among all the saviours. Mongolian khans esteemed, the cult of the spirits of the sky
and think that they are the special people honored to communicate with the sky
above. Therefore they used to say a great shaniyu empowered from the sky and the
great khan with the power of the blue sky. At the Hun times there existed the
phrase “empowered under the patronage of the sky” “the son of the sky” Chingis
used this tradition as a new impulse and new value under new circumstances.
Unlike previous khans the Chingis Khan did not restrict the notion “eternal blue
sky” only to the cult of his own personality but brought the notion to uniting the
world and thus he developed the traditional notion at the world level. Why namely
blue? I mentioned above shortly about what blue meant for the Mongolians. It is
specififc that the cult of the spirits of the sky is the inner essence of Mongolian
shamanism. It is connected with the fact that in the ancient Mongolian symbolics
of directions and in the Mongolian astrology blue symbolized east, white stood for
west and furthermore white symbolized tranquility and blue symbolized power
and prosperity. The Chingis Khan considered the sky he saw as the “Eternal Sky”
(6.78) and the father sky made him the powerful khan of the “Eternal Blue Sky”.
The sky a person sees always accompanies him, influences on the fulfilment of his
accomplishments and foresees his future and “foresees the secret, guesses what is
unclear”. (6.100) While worshipping the “Eternal Blue Sky Chingis gave preference
to the blue color which symbolized power and prosperity. In developing the policy
of expanding his territory the Chingis Khan had the supreme goal of having the
world with one khan and one home. It is clear from him saying “the sky granted
me the right to rule all the nations”. Such is the meaning of the Chingis’s cult of the
power of the Eternal blue sky.
The military campaigns of the Mongolians and Chingis, as western
historians write, seized the people not by aggression and killing only but won them
by religion firmly sat in human spirit and by diplomacy, and for centuries could
keep them under their control and that was the wonder of Chingis. The Chingis’s
view about religion was recognized by many nations of the world and developed
completely new view of gaining people through religion which masters their spirit.
However while having different religious monosteries and centers operating in
Mongolia with a small population, the Chingis Khan carried out the’state secret
policy and could foresee and drive away the threat of subjecting the Mongolians
to the influence of different religions and destroying the country. The Chingis
Khan believed in shamanism and specified shamanism as the state religion in the
IKH ZASAG (Great power) law and issued his decrees with the heading like by
the decree of the father sky thus linking it with the basic form of shamahism and it
had a great influence on the Mongolians. The uncommon belief of the Mongolians
that the spirit of Chingis protects them created the spiritual environment of the
cult of shamahism. The past history always reminds us that If the belief in one
religion was not developed in Mongolia few Mongolians could not maintain
their state and the hearth till the present. When shamanism stopped meeting the
spirtual requirements of the Mongolians they replaced shamanism with Buddhist
religion and entered the 19-20th century with one religion. It was the result of the
state policy of Chingis who strove to keep the people with one religion. Thus the
Chingis Khan skilfully used religion in his military campaign of uniting the world
and developed a new view about religion and new values in the history of humam
kind.
References :
1. Ch. Dalai. Great Mongol Empire. Ulaanbaatar. 1994.
2. G. Sukhbaatar. Ancient historical studies of Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar. 2000.
3. L. N. Gumilyev. Searches of imaginative kingdom. Moscow. 1994.
4. A. Amar. Brief history of Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar. 1989
5. Ch. Jugder. Social, political and philosophical thinking at the times of
development of feudalism in Mongolia. Ulaanbaatar. 1987.
6. 0. Purev. Mongolian shamanism. Ulaanbaatar. 1999.
Professor
National University of Mongolia
Ulaanbaatar
Buddhism and Religious Diversity

in Mongolia
(Mongolian Buddhism in the 21st Century)
Demberel Sukhbaatar
Abstract:
This article describes the revival of Buddhist practices and religious
pluralism in the Mongolian society in the age of globalization. As result of
Mongolia’s democratic revolution in 1990, although the country legalized and
endorsed religious freedom, the Mongolians encountered ideological, spiritual
and economic uncertainties during the democratic transition. People expected
that Buddhist belief and practices would help alleviate those uncertainties and
insecurities during the social transformation. After the disintegration of socialism,
Buddhism became the status quo religion in Mongolia while other religions and
beliefs also spread in the country. The movement of religious syncretization,
sacralization and secularization is thriving in the spiritual society of the country.
Religious diversity increased after the end of the socialist system. In the last two
decades, Mongolia’s religious organizations have been playing an important role in
preaching morality, justifying social order, preserving and protecting tangible and
intangible cultural heritage. However, some minor tension and misunderstanding
exist between diverse religious communities over the misuse of religious beliefs,
practices and symbols. This misapprehension is leading to distorting the image of
religions in the Mongolian secular society. In this situation, the model of religious
pluralism, which is at an advanced stage in democratic societies, should be adapted
in the country. Religious pluralism can then function as a supporting mechanism to
ease tensions between adherents of different religions and beliefs, and promote co-
existence and co-operation between them. Religious pluralism can be supported
in the society but what is impending would be an active involvement of academic
communities, non-governmental organizations and religious institutions in the
country.
Key words: Buddhism, Mongolia, state, religious diversity, pluralism,
constitution, society, freedom, post-socialism, globalization.
Civil society and the legal right to religious freedom
The Preamble of the 1992 democratic Constitution begins by saying that
“We, the people of Mongolia … shall aspire to the supreme goal of building and
developing a humane, civic and democratic society in our motherland, and since,
many social transformations have been made and movements had been launched
in the country. Democracy will not continue to exist without the involvement and
participation of public and civil societies. The structural and functional definition
of a civil society has many forms, and is described as follows:
• Complex of non-governmental organizations,
• Correlation between NGO’s in society,
• Correspondence of free citizens.
In this context, religious organizations constitute a part of the non-
governmental organizations (NGOs).
Following the collapse of the communist regime, a multi-party political
system, a free market economy and a free-market religion were introduced in the
country. The democratic transformation introduced new thinking about the role of
religion in society as well.
The Marxist paradigm of the sociology of religion in the socialist regime
needs to change into a new paradigm of the sociology of religion suited to democratic
transition. The old paradigm considered religion as ‘false and harmful’, while the
new paradigm sees it as physically, mentally, and socially beneficial (Stark, R and
Finke, R 2000).
Article 18 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims
that“Everyone has the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this
right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone
or in community with others and in public and private, to manifest his religion
or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.” This provision from
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has found its due reflection in the
Mongolian legislation of religious institutions, including the Constitution and the
Law on State and Religious Institutions.
People expected that Buddhist practices would help them resolve the
uncertainties and insecurities they encountered during the social transformation.
In March 1990, the “Association of Mongolian Lay Buddhists” was established,
which demanded religious freedom from the then communist government. Their
struggle for religious freedom did not go in vain when the deputies of the Great
People’s Khural – the National Assembly, acknowledged religious freedom as
fundamental human rights and freedom, incorporating it in the new democratic
Constitution as follows:
• No person shall be discriminated against on the basis of ethnic origin,
language, race, age, sex [gender], social origin and status, property
and assets, employment occupation and official position, religion and
conscience, conviction and opinion, and education. Every human being
shall be a legal person. (Article 14.2, Constitution of Mongolia).
• Article 16.15 of the Constitution proclaims “The citizens of Mongolia shall
be guaranteed to exercise the following rights and freedoms: Freedom of
conscience and religion.
• Furthermore, the Constitution Article 9 clarifies the relationship between
the state and religion as follows, underlining the separation of state and
church:
1. The State shall respect the religion, whereas the religion shall honor the
State in Mongolia.
2. The organs of State shall not engage in religious activities, and the religious
organizations or monasteries shall not conduct political activities.
3. The relationship between the State and religious organizations or
monasteries shall be regulated by law.
• The previous two articles prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion
and belief, and endorses the right to freedom of conscience and religion.
The last article in the Constitution signifies that Mongolia is a secular
state, and no religion has been declared as the state religion.
The population and housing census carried in 2010 shows how Mongolia
is becoming a religiously diverse country.
Table 1. Religions in Mongolia (Population aged 15 and above)
Share Female Male
Religion Population
(%) (%) (%)
Non-religious (atheist) 735,283 38.6 42.9 34.4
Religious 1,170,283 61.4 57.1 65.6
Buddhism 1,009,357 53.0 49.4 56.4
Islam 57,702 3.0 3.1 3.0
Shamanism 55,174 2.9 2.7 3.1
Christianity 41,117 2.1 1.6 2.7
Other religions 6,933 0.4 0.4 0.4
Graph 1. Religious affiliation of people aged 15 and above, 2010
Buddhism Islam Shamanism Christianity Others
86% 5% 5% 3% 1%
The census survey shows that Buddhism is the status quo religion
in the country. However, it indicates 6 religious traditions, which include 20
denominations and more than 800 temples, monasteries, churches and religious
groups.
As Jean Bauberot has written, it is impossible to govern religious and
cultural pluralism without deciding to remain within the three sides of the triangle
representing the values of freedom, equality and separation, respectively.
Followers of Buddhism status quo religion in the country tend to practice
pluralism only with respect to freedom in this triangle.
Followers of Christianity, Islam, Shamanism and New religious
movements, minority religion in the country tend to practice pluralism only with
respect to equality, they are always critical of the status quo religion.
Agnostics, atheists, non-religious humanists, on the other hand, tend
to concentrate only on the side of separation which quite rightly separates the
Church and the State, but which does not separate the State from the society in
which the religious choices of individuals and groups are made, that is to say, the
public dimension of these choices, which is not the same as the State.
Classification of Religion and Changes of Religious belief among Mongolians
According to the religious diversity survey of Pew Research Center,
Mongolia became a religiously diverse country in the region after the democratic
revolution1 Since many religions are being practiced in the Mongolian society such
as Shamanism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, local researchers classify them as
traditional and nontraditional religions.(Samdan Tsedendamba, 2014). Due
to their strong ties with the local culture and tradition, Shamanism, Buddhism
and Islam are considered as the traditional religions in the society. Christianity
(Catholic church, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant denominations) and other new
religious movements are deemed as non-traditional religions, because of their
recent inception in the country. In the Mongolian context, researchers can also
apply classification of religions categorized by Bruce Lincoln’s (2003) and by
Catherine L. Albanese (2013) into religions in the society.
The religions classified above have started to establish their influence
in the Mongolian society, and the religious beliefs of people have dramatically
changed over the last 25 odd years.
The following changes in religious beliefs of the public had had an impact
on the social and spiritual life of the Mongolians. First, the reductionist approach
and ideology of the most of the Mongolians’ on religion has changed from
reductionist into a positive and idealist viewpoint. They see in religion the only
path to resolve their problems of uncertainty in the profane world. Second, division
on religious beliefs and groups has gained in scale and scope in the society. Third,
denominations have broken out from the mainstream religion. Fourth, diversity
of feature (based on age, race, tradition, social value, ideology etc.) is increasing
within religion.
Religions in the Mongolian society
Shamanism has been the native religion of Mongolians throughout their
history. 2.9% of all Mongolian individuals aged 15 and above were adherents
of Shamanism according to a population census conducted in 2010. Mongolians
believe that shamanism is the only alternative to maintaining the nomadic lifestyle,
preserving the identity of Mongolians in this era of modernization and globalization.
Shamanism has left an indelible mark on Mongolian religious culture, and it
continues to be practiced even today. Shamanism is practiced individually and
within family circles. The process of institutionalizing shamanism in the country
is extremely slow because its worshiping object is related a particular individual.
Mongolian Shamanism is divided into two shamanistic practices. First,
there is the so-called black or cursor shamans related with 44 black spirits, which
reside in the western heavenly realm. They perform curse rituals against others
on behalf of their adherents, thus removing obstacles their adherents may be
encountering. Second, the white or the saviour shamans related with 55 white
spirits of ancestors, which inhabit in the eastern heavenly realm, performing rituals
for removing curses and defilement of the followers.
Shamanism is playing certain positive role in the Mongolian society,
such as preserving and disseminating culture, encouraging people to protect
Mother Nature, dealing with social insecurities and uncertainties (Manduhai
Buyandelgeryin 2007), and guiding principles of moral. However, the media has
been reporting of negative influence of shamanism on the society, especially at
the early stage of its revival after the democratic transition in the country. For
example, the number of imposter shamans multiplied who were bent on using
shamanism as a tool for making money, and they also carried out rituals harmful to
the physical and mental health of the people, and these shamans were accused of
lacking morality2 and misbehaviour.
Buddhism is the dominant religion in Mongolia. According to the 2010
National Census, among religious affiliated individual Mongolians aged 15 and
above, 53% were Buddhists. There are four main Tibetan Buddhist denominations
existing in the country, such as the Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu and Gelug. Among
them Gelug pa is the most influential denomination in Mongolia. However, in the
recent decade, followers of the Gelug school have been divided and are grappled in
the Dorje Shudgen controversy. The diversity of Mongolian Buddhism is thriving
into conservative Buddhist group and progressive one.
After 1990, new monasteries and temples were re-built in the cities and
rural areas of the country, but the former monastic structure and functionality have
changed. Given the fact there was a lengthy interruption of old Buddhist monastic
education, actions are being taken to train lamas of all ages: monasteries in the
country are training novices, and monks are being sent to Buddhist monasteries in
India for higher level Buddhist education. Increasing spiritual demand and need
of the people is underestimating the spiritual role of the Buddhist monks, because
people expect higher spiritual guidance and satisfaction from the monks. A public
survey conducted by Mongolian researchers in 2013 shows that 62.3% of the
participants did not have faith in the monks, and 37.7% of respondents said they
had trust in the monks3.
Scepticism of Buddhism is gaining ground in the society because Buddhist
practises are mainly based on rituals and idol worship, almost all Buddhist texts
and prayers are in Tibetan, there is a lack of interpretation of Buddhist teachings,
the slack involvement of Buddhist monks in humanitarian activities and the slack
practice of moral precepts by the monks themselves. The confidence of a majority
of young generation in Buddhist monks is waning and some of them have even
established new lay Buddhist movements and organizations. The new lay Buddhist
organizations, adapting the method of humanitarian activities of Christians, are
carrying out humanitarian projects in the society. Buddhist monks, acknowledging
public criticism levelled against then are beginning to support and engage with the
new lay Buddhist organizations in providing services to the local communities.
The latest trend in Mongolian Buddhism is the revival of the tradition of
reincarnating the Khuvilgaan Khutagts (Living Buddhas). Current study shows
that some 20 of Mongolian Khuvilgaans have been reincarnated; they have been
celebrated among the local population. These reincarnated Living Buddhas will
be the future leaders of Mongolian Buddhism. They have been trained in India
in higher Buddhist education. However, this practice has its fallacy too. Some
researchers said that sending young Mongolian for Buddhist training in India at an
early age could alienate them from Mongolian culture and traditions.
Following are some challenges and risks for Buddhism in modern
Mongolia society in this era of globalization.
• Distortion of the image and reputation of Buddhism by political and
Christian propaganda over the last 90 years;
• Competition with other religions in the religious market;
• Engaging in social activities;
• Low engagement in religious dialogue with other religious communities;
• The decline of its status quo;
• Absence of a central religious authority over the Buddhist communities;
• The ongoing struggle to win the interest of young people, and its adherents
are aging;
• There is no legal framework for reincarnating High Lamas, who are the
spiritual leaders of people;
• If Xth Bogdo Jebtsundamba Khutukhtu reincarnated, there is no
establishment of his institute
• The declining number of the monk community;
• Deserting of Buddhist temples in the rural countryside;
• Buddhist pilgrimage network and its infrastructure have not developed
over the years since the beginning of the transition, and,
• Free market economy’s contribution to the loss of invaluable Buddhist art
pieces.
Christianity is the fastest spreading religion and is posing challenge to
Buddhism. According to the 2010 National Census, among religious affiliated
Mongolian individuals aged 15 and above, 2.1 % were Christians. The number of
adherents of Christianity in Mongolia will increase gradually, since the majority of
Christian followers are adolescents and young people. The Christian community
in the country is becoming increasingly diverse based on their denominations. The
main three denominations of Christianity have established their own churches in
the country after 1990.
A survey conducted by a Christian organization states that the number of
Christian population is growing in Mongolia. According to a Christian missionary
group the Barnabas Fund, the number of Christians has multiplied from just four
in 1989 to around 40,000 as of 2008. As of 2003, there were some 1000 Catholics,
and their number gradually growing because of the active engagement of Catholics
in humanitarian and social activities.
There is one Russian Orthodox Church in Mongolia’s capital city of
Ulaanbaatar. Most of church goers are Russian settlers in the country. A few
Mongolians, who were educated in Russia have been converted into Russian
Orthodox church.
The Protestant community is the largest group in the Mongolian Christian
society. Many protestant denominations and sects (such as Baptist, Methodist,
Presbyterian, Lutheran) have all established their own churches. Protestants
have become the most influential religious group within the Mongolian Christian
community.
In May 2013, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS), also
known as the Mormons, held a cultural program to celebrate 20 years of LDS
Church in Mongolia, with 10,900 members, and 6 church buildings in the capital
city. The humanitarian aid of Christian churches is highly appreciated by the
public, but their exclusive view of winning new adherents is creating friction and
tension between other Christian denominations as well and other religions. The
exclusive view of Christian churches is distorting the image of other religions in a
civil society.
The Kazakhs ethnic group, living in the western part of the country, some
Mongolians and other Turkic peoples/Khoton/ in the country traditionally adhere
to Islam. According to the 2010 National Census, among religious affiliated
Mongolian individuals aged 15 and above, 3% were Muslims. According to data
from the centre of statistics of the state in 2014 there 4 mosques were operating in
the city and around 404 mosques in the country. Some source mentioned there are
150 000 Muslims, most of them living in Bayan-Ulgii province 28 worship places
in the country.
Islam is synonymous to the identity of the Kazakhs in Mongolia.
Mongolian Muslims primarily belong to the Sunni denomination of Islam. The
age of Muslims in Mongolia is becoming younger. Young Kazakhs being sent
to Egypt, Kazakhstan, and primarily Turkey for gaining Islamic education. The
revival of Islam in the country promoted with financial help from Kazakhstan,
Turkey and other Islamic countries. Muslim Kazakhs are casting as bridge between
the Islamic culture and the nomadic culture.
Islam is playing the following role in among the Kazakh society. First,
Islam is a means to protect, preserve and disseminate the culture of the Kazakhs
(language, literature, art). Second, Islam is a bond uniting the Kazakh community
and it engages the followers in social activities. Third, Islam is a guiding principle
of moral and morality. Fourth, Dealing with uncertainty.
New religious movements grown in the fertile environment of free spiritual
market, globalization, transition period of social change, social and economic
uncertainty, use of information technology in last 2 decades in the country. The
survey shows there are around 50 new religious movement organizations are
legally and illegally /бүртгэлтэй бүртгэлгүй/ operating in the country, primarily
in the UB city. Social media, an anti-cultist activist have raised public awareness of
some negative features of new religious movement such as Moonies, New heaven
and earth (Shincheonji) and Jehovah’s witnesses. The New religious movements
have disseminated in the country originated in Korea and USA.
Religions in Mongolia have their own doctrines, rituals and practices, but
they are all based on one common value of kindness and morality. If religious
pluralism is endorsed in the religious community of the country, the benefit from
it will be reaped by the civil and democratic society.
Religious tolerance
Religious tolerance is weaved into the fabric of the Mongolian society, the
source of which can be traced back to the times of Chinggis Khan, the founder of
the Great Mongol Emperor. The very fact that the Constitution of Mongolia does
not declare any one religion as a state religion is a striking evidence of religious
tolerance, a guarantee of the freedom of conscience and religion.
Societal respect for religious freedom varies, but on the whole, it is
on the positive although there are reports of discrimination and at times, even
harassment. However, “Christian leaders reported the public viewed Christians
in an increasingly positive light as their social and charitable works became more
widely recognized. Some local authorities even sought out the services of Christian
groups” according to the 2015 Mongolia Religion Report of the United States
Department of State.
As part of status quo religion in Mongolia, some Buddhist monasteries
such as Zuun Khuree Dashichoiling monastery actively involved with other
religious communities in religious pluralism events of World Religion day, World
Peace day celebration and interfaith dialogues.
Conclusion
• Since Buddhism is status quo religion in Mongolia, it is impending on it
to play an active role in spreading the message of religious pluralism in
the society.
• This article provides understanding of Religion and Society in Mongolia’s
post-socialist era. Mongolia became a highly religious diverse country
after the collapse of communism. The thought of Religious pluralism,
tolerance, interfaith dialogue should spread in various adherent levels in
the religious community, and not only among the religious leaders. In
summary, I would like to suggest the following to iron out minor tensions
between various religious communities.
• Since Mongolians are fostering a civil democratic society, religious
pluralistic idea should be encouraged within diverse religious communities
to resolve abuse of religious belief systems.
• However Mongolians believe different religious faiths, all Mongolians
should unite under united spirit of Mongolian identity. State should
promote religious pluralism and interfaith dilalogue.
• The Law of the Relationship between the Church and the State” must
reflect ideology of religious pluralism for building a benevolent society.
Bibliography:
• Dagvadorj.D, Gantuya.M, Jambal.A, Study of Religion (Textbook for university and
college students), Ulaanbaatar, 2001,
• Altaibaatar, J Journal of Philosophy and Legislation, Vol XXVII, Ulaanbaatar,
Mongolia, 2012
• Catherine L. Albanese America: Religions and Religion, pp5, University of California,
Santa Barbara, USA, 2013
• Gary E Kessler, Fifty Key Thinkers on Religion, Pp 190. Routledge, New York, 2012.
• Manduhai Buyandelgeriyn Dealing with uncertainty: Shamans, marginal capitalism,
and the remaking of history in post-socialist Mongolia, AMERICAN ETHNOLOGIST,
2007. Vol.34, pp 127-147
• Michael Stausberg, Contemporary Theories of Religion a critical companion, pp 84-
85, Routledge, New York, USA, 2009
• Tsedendamba Samdan, Religion and Civil society, the development of Mongolian
civil society, Ulaanbaatar Mongolia. 2014
References:
1. http://www.pewforum.org/files/2014/04/Religious-Diversity-appendix-1.pdf
2. http://www.mongolianshaman.com/node/877
3. Survey of Sociology of Religion in Mongolia, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology,
Ulaanbaatar, 2013
4. According to researcher Sahim Zanuzah’s survey, /PhD candidate in Dept of
Philosophy, Religious studies, National University of Mongolia/
Used electronic materials and websites:
• https://religionmongolia.wordpress.com
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Mongolia#Christianity
• https://www.dalailama.com/
• https://mongolia.usembassy.gov/irfr-2015.html
• http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-statistics/country/mongolia
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Mongolia
• http://www.globalreligiousfutures.org/countries/mongolia#/?affiliations_religion_
id=0&affiliations_year=2010&region_name=All%20Countries&restrictions_year=2014
Lecturer
Dept. of Philosophy and Religious Studies
Ulaanbaatar
The Foreign Policy ‘Altan Argamj’*
of Chingis Khagan - Embassy Relations
(1206 - 1227)
Prof. D. Khuukhenbaatar
The brand new diplomatic thing that Chingis Khagan introduced into the
history of the international relations is this “State Golden argamj”1 that he called
his foreign policy or embassy relations.
His State Golden Argamj policy aimed at to realise his foreign policy
that his state independence be recognised by other neighbouring countries, and to
develop wide range of multi-sided relations.
Large part of historians considered Chingis Khagan that he carried out
his foreign policy only through his forces of arms and wars. That was alien to
historical truth.
In the second half of the XII century, Chingis Khagan sent his representatives
and missions, in some cases he himself, sought to establish contacts and good-
neighbourly relations with other khanates in order to unite the Mongol tribes and
Khanates, using ancient traditions for it. After the unification of the Mongolian
empire, the foreign relations of Chingis Khagan were deepened and widened.
That was connected with his interests that his state be recognised by his
neighbouring countries on one part and on the other part they became increasingly
interested in the powerful Mongolia.
Such country as Khwarezm was requested to establish good neighbourly
relations and Mongolia was directly at war with the Golden State of Zurchid. The
war with the Golden State of Zurchid was a fight to get rid of its control. At this
time, Chingis Khagan sent a message to Ala Ad Din Muhammed of Khwarezm
“My urgent will is that I want to be friendly with you. Our country is ...mine of
money, I don’t need to raid into other’s territory”2 and he proposed to help each
other, to develop trades between them.
According to chronicle “Mongolian Ambassadors from ancient time
followed the customs to say ironical verses by heart”3 This mainly belonged to
the pre-great empire period, the principle was that “the message is in the mouth of
the ambassador if he doesn’t betray, the secret is kept.” But during great empire
period, official messages and notes were widely used.
Envoys were divided into many ranks: Ambassadors, envoys,
representatives, messengers, trade missions. They are generally failed “Zarlig’iin
Elch” (Envoys of decree). They were given gold, silver, bronze and wooden
plates according to their ranks. Golden Plates were given to the Ambassadors,
extraordinary and plenipotentiary and so on.
* Golden argamj argamj means a rope that holds a horse on grass when it feeds.
The part of “Zarligiin Elch” in “Complete notebook of Mongol tatars”
Written by South Sum. Ambassador Zao Yuan said the customs of receptions and
their journeys through the country, of respects for envoys giving them good drinks
and food, and welcoming them with playing musical Instruments and holding flags.
This was the confirmations that embassy relations were put at the State
level strengthening its foreign relations, demanding its state recognition and
broadening its multi-sided relations.
Since 1206, Chingis Khagan regarded h:i s diplomatic relations in the vital
interests of his state and for its realisations he resorted to any measures.
The ways and methods of Embassy relations by Chingis Khagan later on
were constantly specified and developed.
At that time, Chingis Khagan was the only first, emperor to realise the
diplomatic relations in foreign policy no less than using his armed forces and he
skilfully used them to implement his foreign policy.
The leaders of the Mongolian neighbouring countries couldn’t realise
their foreign relations at their state level, thinking them as temporary measures of
relations. That was why, there uere many cases they lost their independence.
Chingis Khagan sent his envoys at the proper times, evaluating the
circumstances precisely.
The following reviews can be made:
1. The envoys consisting of few people were sent to give messages (“Duu
bariulaj”)-to establish contacts
2. Knowing that the most useful method of understanding each other more
closer was economic and trade relations, he sent envoys with trade caravans
or dispatched traders as missions.
3. Foreign people who knew foreign languages, cultures, customs, laws,
regulations and countries were broadly employed.
Envoys were also sent with large troops guarding them. Because the
neighbouring countries of that time sometimes didn’t know the establishment of
embassy relations, therefore, envoys could be detained,or suspected or could be
put into prisons or killed. So considerable amount of troops had to be sent with
them.
Chingis Khagan sent Zev.Subeedei and Toguchir with 10.000 troops each,
to the western countries to open windows in the west and to establish contacts with
them arid gave strict orders not to break their laws and customs of the countries
they had to pass through.
Toguchir who disobeyed the order was heavily punished after-wards. Rut
most of the historians consider it the beginning of the Chingis Khagan’s campaigns
to the west.
However, as Mongolian empire gained its strength, it increasingly used
its force of arms and cavalry as it also did blackmails and dictates in its embassy
relations.
Embassy relations in the Chingis Khan’s foreign policy could be
generalised during the first period (1206-1227) of the establishment of the Great
Mongolian Empire in the following:
1. In 1207 and 1209 Kirghiz and Uighur States came under the control of the
Great Empire, promising them empire protection arid using their conflicts
without resorting to the force of arms and soldiers.
2. Chingis Khan used diplomatic policy, force of arms and soldiers as well
as friendship contacts in order to get rid of Control of Altari Ulus (Golden
State). He also established relations of alliance with Sung state to weaken
the strength of Altan Ulus and later (in 1234) Ogodei Khagan completely
defeated it.
3. In 1214, a mission led by Jubukhan was sent to the South Yung state for
the first time arid in 1221, Anti-Altan State alliance was established by
Sung Ambassador Zao Yuan and Minister Mukhulai.
During that time, Chingis Khan wanted to isolate Altan Ulus when he
had relations with South Sung state and Khwarezm. And he reached what
he wanted. Mongolian friendly relations with Sung state lasted until the
second half of the XIII century.
4. The relations with Tangut people were both histories of war, and friendly
ones. Chingis Khagan forced them to pay tributes at last made friendly
relations, but when Chingis went on central Asian campaign, Tangut
broke the treaty. Under that pretext, he occupied Tangut by force in 1227.
5. The relations were also directed to encourage trading with the people
of Khwarezm and other countries. Tn 1215, missionary traders from
khwarezm were given a warm welcome to and established trade contracts.
The ambassadors and trade envoys of both countries evidently spied
their internal situations and the army strength. They both had concealed
conflicts to be the boss of the great road of the East and West trading and
the china market.
The pretext of the military campaign against Khwarezm was that 450
traders sent by Chingis Khagan, and later the envoy Ibn Kerej Bagro
(Buguur) were killed by the people of Khwarezm. Chingis Khagan
conquered Khwarezm by a large army, using its domestic conflicts and
drawing some highborn to his side.
6. In 1218, Mongol troops penetrated Korea and during the reign of
Chingis Khagan, Korea became dependent, paying tributes to Mongolia.
Mongolian envoys always remained there later on during the reign of
Ogoodei in 1231, it completely subjected to the Mongolian Empire.
7. Mongolia tribes had relations with black Khitans since the XII century
but when they received Khuchulygs of Naiman, they became enemies.
Chingis Khagan, using their internal conflicts and fights and accusing the
repression of religions by them declared all religions free gnd occupied it
in 1218.
8. Chingis Khagan, at the beginning of the establishment of the Great
Mongolian Empire, was interested in to open relations with the West. So
he sent military envoys commanded by Zev and Subedei. They passed
the Northern Iran, the Caucasus countries and reached to Kipchak and
Southern Russia. When the princes of the Southern Russia gathered in
Kiev, the envoys sent by Zev and Subedei came to them and declared them
“We don’t invade Russian land, towns and villages, but make peace with
us! . We are chasing Polovtsy (or Cumans)”. But they killed the envoys.
There was a great battle between Mongolian troops and Russian princes
and the Mongols defeated them. That was the historic fact that Rvissian
and Mongolian relations began in the life-time of Chingis Khagan.
In conclusion, mention should be made that Diplomacy was carried out
parallel with the armed intervention, sometimes even prevailed the latter in the
establishment of the Great Mongolian Empire.
Chingis Khagan was true to his diplomatic accords except in cases of their
violations and betrayals by the others. Embassy relations, it must be said, were one
of his methods to gain delicate control over the other.
It is also historical truth that Chingis Khagan had to resort to force of
violence in his foreign policy if his country’s independence had not been recognised
and peaceful coexistence opposed.
References :
1. “Mongolun Nuuts Tobchoo” @254. @256.
2. D.Osson “Istoria Mongolov ot Chingis Khana do Tamirlana” T.-l. Irkutsk. 1937.
ctr.127-128.
3. Rashid Ad-Din “Sbornik letonisei” T-l.KN.II.1952.Moskva.
Ex. Prof., Dept.of History

Ulaanbaatar
Some Religio-Political Aspects of
Chinghis Khan and His Successors
Dr. M.A. Lari ‘Azad’
Chinghis Khan has been accepted as the symbol of Mongolian national

consciousness. The revival of Mongolian national consciousness was the start of
Mongolian national movement and Chinghis Khan’s Anniversaries are the public
acknowledgment of the true historical role of Chinghis as a true national hero.1
The charismatic Chinghis Khan has become father of Mongolian nationhood.
But Chinghis broke down national boundaries and created an international
empire. He became the ‘World Emperor’ of the largest empire of the world
history in one boundary and how he and his successors ruled their cosmoplitan
public with their enormous diversities.
You know religion has played an important part in the development of
history in its various aspects both a negative and positive.When it influenced
politics, it created a religio-political set up and when it became victim of politics
it has created a tragic and shameful event of history.2 If we try to examine the
religio-political aspect of Chinghis and his successors, we come across the fact
at first sight that the vast Mongolian empire was ruled by their tolerant religious
policy.
Mongolian traditional political thought from the early time of Hsuing-
Nus prescribed their rulers a heavenly origin and a heavenly sanction and this
divine right ideology prevailed up to the Chinggisids.3 The doctrine of divine
origin of Mongol Khanship established that Chinggis Khan was born from
the ‘Sons of Heaven’ and so the legitimacy of his political power isjustified.
The Shamani concept ofTenggri/heaven/worship served as a fundamental prop
for the political philosophy of the Mongol Khans. According to their official
ideology a Khan was the absolute embodiment of the supreme power / Tengri
i.e. God on the earth and only through him Almighty regulates everything in
this world. The Khan was chosen representative of God, preordained to act
on behalf of him. They declared, ‘this is the order of the everlasting God. In
heaven there is only one eternal God, on earth there is only one lord, Chinggis
Khan. This is the word of the son of the God which is addressed to you.’4 This
concept was the main spiritual force that guided the Mongols in their political
activities. All the official documents of Mongol Khans contain. ‘Mongke
Tenggri-yin Kucundur,\qagan-u\suu jali-yin iheel (ibegel)-dur’ (i.e. ‘By the
power of Everlasting Heaven by the protection of Charisma of (qagan).’5 It
meant that God protects and sanctifies the Khan to act on his behalf as Chinggis
decreed,’ Mongke tenggeride ihe ekdeju kereyit irge doraida ulju undur un
oron-tur gurba-je’ (i.e) being protected by everlasting Heaven bringing down
the Kereyid people, (I) have attained unto the throne of height.’)6 Chinggis
Khan himself was a devoted Shaman, exploited deliberately the authority and
ideology of Shamans in executing his policies. Chinghis and his successors
propagated the doctrine of their celestial mandate and the might of Everlasting
Heaven on every occasion. The Heavenly origin of Mongol Khanship was the
ultimate result of the meeting of different religious traditions, i.e. Chinese and
Zoroastrian-Manichaean (Iranian). This celestial mandate of Chinggis Khan’s
clan developed into imperial concept to inspire their empire-building activities.
The Mongol Khans were never religious fanatics. Religiously they were
tolerant in their multinational empire. They followed a premeditated policy
necessitated by’holding the soul’ of subjugated public belonging to different
ethnic faiths, Chinghis invited Daoist Changchun but for only to use his political
authority and to draw him to his side.7
Mongke Khan created an efficient administrative system for ruling
the empire regardless of any lineage or clan. As his predecessors, Mongke
Khan was tolerant enough to let activists of different religions attend his court,
proposing their services, and was even ready to accept their expert advices. He
expressed the official attitude towards other religions as, ‘We Mongols believe
that there is but one God, by Whom we live and by Whom we die, and towards
Him we have an upright heart...But just as God gave different fingers to the
hand, so has He given different ways to men.’8
The Mongol Khans had truly pluralistic policy as regards religions.
Mongolia had become a meeting point of different religions. KharaKhorum
became a cosmopolitan where Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Chinese,
Russians, Armenians, Hungarians, Alans, Georgians, Central Asians, Europeans
and others were meeting. There were twelve Buddhist temples, two mosques
and one church.9 Uighur, Persian and Central Asians occupied high posts in the
Mongol bureaucracy. The Nestorians held a privileged position under Mongke
Khan.
Khubilai Khan never hesitated in mobilizing all that he could find useful
in his multi-national empire. He was surrounded by Confucian advisers. He
preferred Buddhism and invited hPhags-pa bla-ma bLo gRos rGyal-mTshan and
made him the head of Buddhism in the empire and granted the title of Guoshi,
i.e. ‘Imperial Preceptor’. Khubilai exploited his spiritual authority skillfully
in his religious policy. hPhags-pa bLa-ma proclaimed the Mongol Khans as
Chakravartins, i.e. ‘Universal emperors’ and made them equal to great Buddhist
emperors of India. Khubilai founded the policy of close alliance between the
Throne and the Altar, i.e. the Khan’s power and ‘dharma’ (i.e. doctrine).
Khubilai was in accord with the cosmopolitan spirit of his age. His religious
policy was followed by his successors and they retained the prestige of Buddhism
at the Mongol court. The Mongol Khans couldn’t neglect the Confucian
statecraft and were guided by the pragmatic doctrines of Confucianism. Khubilai
wanted to have all the prerequisites to be venerated as a ‘Son of Heaven’, and
so his absolute power might be guaranteed. He tried to create a multiracial,
supranational administration, which permitted Muslims, Chinese, Tibetans and
others to collaborate in the service of the Mongol empire. During the Yuan
period, Mongols came into contact with Chinese, Tibetan-Buddhists, Arabs,
Iranians and Central Asian Muslims.
Khubilai Khan was the greatest cosmopolitan ruler of world history. He
was surrounded by the teachers like Chinese Confucians, Tibetan Buddhists,
Central Asian Muslims and Nestorian Christians. Knowing the influential
role of Confucianism in Chinese politics, he used it as a spiritual tool for
his rule. He pursued the policy of securing Mongol Khanship by balancing
different political and religious factors. He organized several debates between
Taoists and Buddhists who were contending for the patronage of the court.
Tibetan Tantric Buddhism was appealing with Bon-Shamanistic supernatural
and magical elements to the Shaman Mongols. Tibetan lamas were politically
enough active in seeking collaboration with secular authorities, even with the
Mongol Khans for their own interests. Khubilai Khan wanted to avoid the
possibility of religious predominance of the conquered people, realized the
political value of Tibetan Buddhism as a useful vehicle for consolidating his
power. He attributed great significance to the mastering of the soul of his
cosmopolitan public. Phags-pa bLa-ma was the most trusted adviser of the
Khan and he enjoyed great authority. He ideologically justified the domination
of the Mongol Khans and for this purpose he wrote numerous books dedicated
to his Master and his clan.10 He skillfully composed verses glorifying Khubilai
as Dharmaraja (Chos kyi rgyal po) i.e the ruler of religion and declared that
he is ruling according to the preachings of Lord Buddha. He defined the ‘Two
Orders’- the secular and the religious: the first as prescription for the Khan’s
power and rule. He called Khubilai ‘Dharmaraja, defending the spiritual power
of Almighty Buddha.’ He appealed to Khubilai to become a true Bodhisattva-
Khan to successfully rule the empire. Phags-pa bLa-ma was the first to initiate
the political theology of the relationship of the State and Religion in the Tibeto-
Mongolian Buddhist world. The ‘White History’ (author anonymous) mentions,
The cornerstone of sacred religion is the Lama, the Lord of Doctrine, the head
of power is the Khan, the Sovereign of terrestrial power. The teachings of the
true doctrine like the silken knot, can not be loosened, the laws of the powerful
Khan, like the golden yoke, cannot be crushed down.11 Thus Khubilai decreed
Phags-pa bla-ma to the Imperial Preceptor and, in turn being sanctioned as the
patron of religion, realized the theory of ‘Two Orders’, State and Religion, and
their relations essentially, signified the ‘alliance between the Throne and the
Altar.’12
Khubilai Khan patronized Muslim Astronomers, Doctors and engineers
to a great extent. Ai-hsieh, a Nestorian Christian became the court astronomer.
The Muslim engineer Sayyid Ajall Shams al Din became the Governor of Yuunan.
The Nestorian Christians were very influential in the Il Khanate, and served the
Il Khan’s court as Mongol ambassadors to the European countries, i.e. Uighur
Rabban Sauma and Mark to Jerusalem. They were also used by Khubilai and
Arghun. During the reign of the Il- Khans an alien faith like Buddhism enjoyed
official favor. Hulegu displayed sympathy towards Buddhism and his successors
like Arghun tolerated Buddhism and allowed Buddhist monuments to be built in
Persia, but later on the Mongol rulers converted to Islam, the religion of the bulk
population to foster their assimilation and so remained there forever. Muslim
astronomer Nasir al-Din al-Tusi became Hulegu’s adviser. Historian Ata Malik
Juvaini and Rashid al-Din held high political positions in the Il Khanate and
immortalized the ‘great deeds’ of their patrons.13 Rashid al Dineven occupied
the post of prime minister. Juvaini had become a famous Islamic apologist of the
universal policy of Mongol Khans. Although the Mongol conquest was mainly
political, but their world wide expansionism had also far-reaching consequences
in the spheres of religion.
Mongolian nationalist historians have tried to glorify the history of
Khans by means of Buddhism. Lubsandanjin in ‘Altan, Tobci’ substantiated the
sacred origin of Mongol Khans from Mahasammata and elevated Chinghis Khan
to the rank of true Buddhist Chakravartin kings, whose advent was foretold by
Lord Buddha himself.
The Mongols never hesitated in improving their warfare with the help of
Muslims and Chinese. Besides Mongolia in the Yuan Empire in China, in the Il
Khanate in Persia, in the Golden Horde in Russia, and in the Chaghatai Khanate
in Central Asia, the Mongol Empire represented a conglomeration of various
religions. The successors of Chinghis Khan attempted to create a political system
combined with the Chinese and Persian-Central Asian models. They awarded
great significance to the ideological basics of their political supremacy from the
view-points of different religions. They established the supremacy of the Great
Khans over any prince i.e. of Uighurs, Khitans, Chinese, Central Asians and
Persians.
The Mongolian policy of religious tolerance culminated in the revival of
non-Islamic traditions in Persia. The Mongolian attitude towards religion was
directly driven by political motives. The Nestorian Christian Kerait princess
Sorqoqtani played a prominent role in influencing her sons like Mongke,
Khubilai and Hulegu Khans. The founder of Il Khanate, Hulegu was married
again to a Kerait Christian princess Doquz Khatoon and his successor Abaqa
was also married to a Christian Maria.
The non-Islamic, Mongol-Turkish elements increased in the political
and social life of Central Asia, but the Mongols ultimately assimilated in the
local ethno-cultural milieu where Islam was prevailing for a long time. For
the first time in history, conquerors accepted the religion of conquered people,
i.e. Islam and the Mongol clans like Barlas, Dughlat, Julayir and others were
Turkicized. The later Timurids were also called Chinghisides in Central Asia
and they were followers of Chaghtai Tora, as I the violation of its sanctity was
never allowed even in the prolonged reign of Chaghtai Mughals in India.’14
The Muslims played a useful part in the service of the Mongol Khans and
this was stimulated by the policy of religious tolerance. The Khans paid attention
to the spiritual factors in their policy of the subjugation of different peoples. They
followed the policy of ‘having seized the body, hold the soul. If the soul is held,
the body will not go anywhere’,15 of course this policy of religious tolerance was
influenced by their nomadic predecessors, i.e. Uighurs and Khitans Shamanistic,
Buddhist, Islamic, Nestorian Christian and Confucian cultures met with each
Other and produced the common values of the Central Asians.
The Heaven concept of Chinghis and his power was widely used by
Chinghis himself and his successors for the ideological justification of their
policy and their great exploits. Chinghis Khan has been made a cult of the
nation and the worship of the Mongolians. Chinghis was worshipped as a great
ancestral spirit as the Shamani traditions.16 He was deified as a protective spirit of
all descendants of the Borjigites, the Chinghisides. He was ceremonially prayed
in Mongolia. Four Shrines in his memory were erected in the Mongol Empire.
Still today prayers are recited in one of his Ordus Shrine (Ejen-Khoro). He is
also venerated as a Holy Lord (Chingis Boyda) in folklores. The ‘White History’
declared Temujin as an incarnation of Vajrapani.17 Buddhist chroniclers have
linked his genealogy to the mythical universal king of India-Mahasammati. They
searched him even in Buddhist sutras. Lubsandanzin declared him incarnation
of Indra (i.e. Esrun Tngri) to suppress the twelve evil khans who made suffer
all beings in the Jambudvipa. Thus,Shamans propagated the Chinghis Khan’s
cult. History witnessed the invitation of the Third Dalai Lama to Mongolia by
Altan Khan in the late 16th century, to set upon alliance with him and again to
occupy the ‘Two Orders’, theory in the political and theological ideology of the
Mongols. Even in the early 20th century, Boydo-gegen, the religious head of
Mongolia was declared the Mongol Khan ‘holding the reigns of Religion and
State’; i.e. ‘Two Orders’ embodied in one person-Boydo-gegen as an absolute
King.
Thus I humbly submit that the careful postmortem of the great exploits
of Chinghis Khan and his successors, and a deep analysis of the sources reflects
us, as everywhere in the World, in every period of history, the great Mongol
Khans and their successors in all their Khanates, i.e. Mongolia, China, Persia,
Russia and Central Asia, even in Chaghtai Mughal India exploited religion to
justify their political ends. The historical sources certify that religion did not
guide the policies of the Great Mongol State; in fact, religion was too often
used by the Mongol Sovereigns of early medieval Mongolia as a double edged
sword.18
References :
1. Boldbaatar, J., ‘The Eight Hundredth Anniversary of Chinggis Khan’. The Revival
and Suppression of Mongolian National Consciousness’ (Mongolia in the Twentieth
Century, Ed: Kotkin & Elleman, M. E. Sharpe, London) pp. 237-245.
2. Lari Azad, M. A., ‘Religion and Politics in India during the 17th Century’ (Criterion
Publications, Delhi, 1990) p1.
3. Goden, P.W., ‘An Introduction to the History of the Turkish peoples’, (Otto
Harrassowitz-Wiesbaden, 1992)pp.64-65.
4. A Letter of Mongke Khan to King Louis of France (The Mission of Friar William of
Rubruck’, Tr. ; Jackson, P., The Hukluyt Society, London, 1990.) p.248.
5. Poppe, N., ‘The Mongolian Monuments in hPags pa script (Tr&Ed.: Krueger, J.R.,)
Wiesbaden 1957
6. ‘The Secret History of the Mongols’ (Tr.: Cleaves, F.W., Cambridge, London, 1982)
Vol.1, p. 115.
7. The Central Archives of the MPRP, Fond of inside work, t-d, h-1, hn-4-12.
8. ‘The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck’, p.236; also Rachewiltz, ID., ‘Papal
Envoys to the Great Khans’(London, 1971) p. 136
9. ‘The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck’, p.221.
10. Bira, Sh., ‘Khubilai Khan and Phags-pa/bla-ma’ (SOAS, London 1991) ILC A A,
Tokyo, 1994,p.402.
11. Cayan Teuke’(MSS.) State Library, Ulaanbaatar;.
12 Bira, op.cit, p.405.
13. ‘Jami-al-Tawarikh’ and ‘Tarikh-i-JahanGusha’
14. Lari Azad, op.cit. p.89.
15. Lubsan-Danzan, ‘Altan Tobci’(Ed.: Ulaanbaatar, 1937) p.46 attributes it to Chinghis
Khan and ‘Najma al-ajaib’(album in the Istanbul University Museum attributes it to
Khubilai Khan (Ligete, L. Ed.: ‘Monuments en ecriture ‘Phags-pa; Budapest, 1972)
p. 123. (‘ta uru ut minu mona goyina / ulus irgeni guriyabasu gesu / beyeyi anu
quriyatala / setgili anu quriyabasu setgili anu / guriyaca beyas anu qa’aeutqun’.)
16. Heissig, W., ‘The religions of Mongolia.’(Tr: Samuel, G., London & Henley, 1980)
p.61, ‘Heaven- born Chinggis Khan, / Born from the decision of Sublime Heaven,
/ Your, body provided with heavenly rank and name, / You who took over lordship
over the world’s peoples./ Fortunately-born sovereign, / Whose origin is from the
fortunate, Tengri, / Great in good fortune and majesty, / You who have wisdom
without instruction, / You who rule without error.’
17. Ed.: Liujinsu (The printing house of Inner Mongolia, 1981), p.75.
18. Lari Azad, M.A., International Conference Commemorating 840th Anniversary of
Chinggis Khan, National University of Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, 24 May, 2002; also
‘Proceedings of Indian History Congress, 64th Session, Mysore, 2003’pp. 1231-
1237; ‘Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences’, Aligarh, 2014,Vol. XV, PP-7-13
Head, Dept. of History

NREC College, Khurja (U.P.) India
(&) Former Visiting Fellow
The Mongolian National Liberation Revolution -
the Rebirth of Mongolian Nationalism
(1911-1915)
Dr. Khereid J.Urangua
By the end of the 16th century and the beginning of the 17th century the
Jurchens became call themselves as Manchus and got a power and established their
state named “Late Jin” (“Golden” in Mongolian trnaslation). The Late Jin realized
active foreign policy towards their neighbors. The Manchus with their rose start
to get ally against the Ming China expansion. So they chose Mongolia for that
purpose and be patient and loyal to it. With the success of its foreign policy the
Manchus renamed their state to “ Qing “. So it is well known in the world history
as the Manchu Qing Dynasty.
The most southern section of mongols-the Inner Mongolia became in 1636
the subject of the Manchu Qing dynasty, the Khalkha Mongol in 1691 and latter
in 1756 the western Mongolia also annexed to the Manchu Empire and whole
Mongolia lost its independence. The Manchus broke the Mongolian previous
administrative units into smaller ones and each unit led by the Manchu origin
jiangjun ( a high military rank similar to the general ), minister, lawyer-officer etc.
At the same time they tried to keep Mongolia isolated from main China influence.
The isolation of Mongolia from outside China was broken in the middle of the 19th
century due to the changes in the Manchu Qing Empire’s internal and external
affairs. The foreign developing countries, namely the United Kingdom, USA,
France and Japan from the early beginning of the 19th century entered to the Qing
Empire to open her market of their trade and to establish their own settlements
and to get free entry and free moving in the whole territory of the Empire. For
that purposes they sent their missions to Qing with request to open their trade
representatives in the main ports of China, also if possible to open their embassies,
consulate offices in the capital of the Empire. Initially the Qing Empire always
gave negative replies but with the beginning of war firstly with the UK, later with
the USA and France the Qing Empire under the pressure of outside made several
compromises, later as a result of those, were signed several agreements firstly
with the UK, USA, France, sooner with Germany, Austria, Russia and Japan.
Aftermath the Qing and the whole China was opened for foreign trade 15 ports
and whole territory of the Empire, foreigners opened their settlements in the port
cities, reduced taxation of trade and established their embassies and consulates
and received the concessions for the building up the railways in key routes of the
Empire.
During such changes some Chinese progressive thinkers pushed the
Manchu court to do some westernization-reforms in the Empire. Under that
pressure the Qing Court started to change internal policy in whole, particularly its
policy towards Mongolia and to realize so-called a “ new policy”, which gave a
permission to the Chinese free entry to Mongolia, free trade and freedom for using
the land, do agriculture on it and free using of its natural resources, also since that
time (1906) was cancelled the taboo to have mixed marriage with the Mongols for
Chinese people. So any previous Manchu Qing restrictions in Mongolia related
with China or Chinese expansion in the mongols’ everyday life were permitted.
The realization of that “New Policy” in Mongolia evoke the mongols’
resistance. So Bogdo Jibzungdamba, who was a spiritual leader of Mongolia
made an order to the nation to fight against that policy and restore “own national
interests.” The order of Bogdo was encouraged by the mongols definetely. At the
same time nationalism evoke in China itself as well. Revolutionaries of liberal
movements established their own organizations such as “Tongmenghui” which
began popularizing their ideology and spread it throughout the whole China. In
their political platform there have been announced two things such as “liberation of
China from the foreign domination” and “equalizing common rights to the land.”
The last point was understood by the mongol patriots as a “dividing Mongolia
by the Chinese”. It drove the mongols to the straight fight against the Manchu-
Chinese expansion and restoration Mongolia’s national independence. So it was a
prelude to the Mongolian national revolution.
The mongols starting from early invasion of the Manchus over Mongolia
our people continuously fought against their domination and as a result of hundred
years of struggle uprising led to the National Revolution in 1911 and restored its
national independence and proclaimed as sovereign statehood.
The Living Buddha, Bogdo Jibzongdamba became a monarch of the
Mongolian Theocratic State on the 29th of December, 1911 with the monarch
inauguration, Mongolia announced itself as independent country officially.
Restoration of the Mongolian sovereignty as theocratic monarchy was a
win of the national independence and revolution.
Establishment of monarchy with Bogdo Khan was supported by all
Mongols so why it was named “ Olanaa urgugdsen Monggol ulus”, which means
“Mongolia supported by all Mongols”.
On the same day with the order theocratic monarchy, the Mongolian
Government was established and it consisted from five ministries and those who
were at the top of the struggles were appointed to the posts of ministers and also
were promoted their noble titles and all ministers made an oath.
In such way the national liberation revolution was won in Ikh Khuree and
proclaimed its independence and next step was the liberation of whole Mongolia.
The Manchu Qing in its last days of existence, later newly established the
Republic of China has been known about the proclamation of national independence
of Mongolia, but they did recognize that fact as “ few reactionary nobles led by
Bogdo Khan under the Tsar of Russia’s instigation did that step” and black marked
the mongol nobles as “ traitors”. In reality the mongol nobles used the Russian
involvement to expand their influence in Mongolia to get support from Russia
on their proclamation of independence. Russia did not have a real plan to support
and protect Mongolia’s independence, which was shown by Russians on latter
occasions or events. Restoration of national independence was the willing of the
mongol nation rather than “ influence or instigation from Russia”. That mentality
of China was existed till 1945. By the Russia and China’s agreement of October,
1912 the Mongolian Government was recognized by both as a “ Government of
Autonomy ”.
The first national revolution of Mongolia commonly divided by the
scholars to the following periods. For instance,
1) The embryonic stage of the national liberation movement: 1900-till
November, 1911
2) The culmination of the Revolution: Victory of the movement-November,
1911-Liberation of all territories under the newly established state till 1913.
3) The end of the Mongolian national liberation movement-1914-1915.
Mongolia from the first day of proclamation of its independence started
to provide her foreign policy towards her recognition in the international arena.
However, the Mongolian first revolution of 1911 restored its national independence,
and did not receive the recognition of foreign countries, at last under the pressure
of neighboring big countries lost its independence, but the movement itself became
a lesson for the Mongolian future struggle.
The domestic policy was originated by the needs of the country and for a
nation without any foreign interference it was definitely progressive.
Mongolia of that time needed to do some reform for strengthening her
establishment. So the progressive innovators of Mongolia stood for reducing
taxation from the herdsmen encouraging the citizens’ economic enthusiasm,
promoting the gifted ordinary people to the high rank of governing institutions,
setting up own police department and military, opening civil education network
and making reforms in cultural structure. Atmosphere of reforms attracted many
people of society and many of those people promoted the reforms as an instrument
of strengthening the state.
Political reforms were defined by making effective governance in center
as well as in local administrative units and modernizing the legislative organs
(prosecution and court), the army, the law drafting, and building up own foreign
policy doctrine. Also in the frame of political reforming was established the State
Khural (Parliament), which was a step ahead in creating the swoop between the
monarchy and legislative organs. The State Khural presented the face of the society
and indeed was comprised mostly promoters of reform and did some efforts in
development of the national democratic ideology.
However the existence of the Mongolian theocratic monarchy was short,
during that time Mongolia had been changed socio-economically impressively.
For the purpose of increasing the income to the budget were done some
changes in agriculture, mining industry, and postal communication. Due to the
lack of financing to the above-mentioned branches economy made their reforms
incomplete and the state could not increase the income. For getting the necessary
financing Mongolia asked a loan donation from the Tsarist Russia. Each time after
receiving loan Mongolia did some compromises to Russia, which helped them to
make steps towards economic expansion of the country.
Economic reforms made some new changes for example, the small
economy enterprises became familiar to the commodity-money relations.
During that time domestic small economy enterprises connected with
the world capitalist enterprises and feudal relationship on the Mongolian society
slowly start to collapse.
With the development of the commodity-money relations and small
enterprises, existence of feudal and foreign traders exploitation drove the local
economy to the disintegration and among the population increased the social
difference in terms of poverty. Those who lost their cattle in the countryside
moved to the cities and increased the urban population and work for hire. Also
in same time grown the middle class in Mongolia. The middle class people stood
for reforms of society. Most of that people less suffered by taxes and duties, and
freely moved in the country doing business of raw materials like leather, wool and
cashmere, merchandize business, and as well as were owners of post relay stations,
caravan transportation, money lenders, and were also mediators between domestic
and international trade. Among them Dorji Meiren (local officer), Yongdongjamts
Lama, Tsedevsuren and Minbuu were famous.
In that period the urban population was increased and cities became an
important center of domestic and foreign trade, transportation, as well as political
and religious.
Sometimes the mongols paid more attention to the Western education,
gave importance to the Western model of development and adopting the foreign
experience of training. Such thinking made some positive changes in education.
In that time several schools were opened and newspapers being published which
assisted in developing the mongols’ mentality and educated the mongols by
modern way and popularizing the progressive democratic thinking.
To sum up, the reforms of beginning of the 20th century during the
Mongolian theocratic monarchy were positive and effective in whole society and
were driven by the needs of the country and time. Whatever most of the reforms
were incomplete and quasi, in general, it assisted to remove conservatism in
thinking in a positive way. Except the financial difficulties, the upper class internal
struggle namely fight between the reformers and oppositionists ( mostly lamas )
influenced badly to the process of reforming. That was internal factor.
The Khyagta tripartite agreement stopped the Mongolian Revolution
of 1911 recognized by many scholars as the starting point of the Mongolian
nationalism rebirth.
Bibliography :
1. National Archive of History, F-1,2,3,.9.
2. Dendev L, “Concise History of Mongolia” (in Mongolian), UB, 1934
3. Grumm E, “Sbornik dogovorov i drugih dokumentov po istorii mezdunarodnyih
otnoshenii na Dalinem Vostoke (1842-1925) “(in Russian), M,1927
4. Puntsagnorov Ts, “History of Mongolian Autonomy” (in Mongolian), UB, 1955
5. “ History of the MPR “(in Mongolian), First Edition, UB, 1955
6. “ History of the MPR “(in Mongolian), Second Edition, UB, 1966
7. Jamsran Khereid. L, “Selected Works on Mongolian History” (in Mongolian),
UB, 2000
8. “History of the MPR” (in Mongolian), Third Edition, UB, 1984
9. Choibalsan Kh, Losol.D, Demid.G, “Short History of the Mongolian People’s
Revolution” ( in Mongolian), UB, 1979
10. Magsarjab.N, “New History of Mongolia” (in Mongolian), UB, 1994
11. Urangua J, “Reforms of the beginning of the 20th Century in Outer Mongolia”
(in Mongolian), UB, 1997
Professor of History
Ulaanbaatar
Some Distinctive Features of the Phonetics in Traditional
Indian Tibetan and Mongolian Linguistic
Sh. Choima
India has wonderful tradition of ancient linguistics. Modern linguistics

claim that linguistics was born in ancient India1 at least 2500 years ago2. This birth
of linguistics was to meet the need to eclucidate some words and idioms of vedic
literature which was the volumed works of hindu hymns and philosophic concepts
on the organic and in organic worlds. They were written long time ago somewhere
between 2000 and 1000 BC3.
There are and four vedas; Rigveda, Yajur veda, Sama-veda and Atharva veda.
Except of these, there are six books which are called as Vedanga included in
1. Shigsha ciksa (Phonetics)
2. Chandas chandas (Versification and Rhythmics)
3. Vyakara vyakarana (Grammar)
4. Niruga nirukta (Etymology)
5. jyotisa jyotisa (Astrology)
6. Galba kalpa (The ritual)
Shigsha vedanga4 is, may be, the first book of linguistics noted on the
phonetics and correct pronunciation. It is considered that this book was YIII-Y
century BC. This book noted the following constituents such as varna (unit of
sound), svara (intonation), matra (rhymn) and so on. They are phonetic concepts.
Ancient Indian linguistics (Vedic linguistics) came from the need to
study the contrast between parakrit (spoken language) and vedic language (written
language). It is said that they have achieved a great success in noting phonetics,
lexilogy and etymology.
The most famous grammarian of ancient India is Panini. He was living at the
period of the 4th century B.C3. He composed a grammar (A shtadhyoyi in Sanskrit) and
it became the most significant grammar at that period and example for the linguistic
study to the succeeding generations. Tibetan and mongolian grammarians acquinted
with the famous works of Panini and other grammarians of ancient India and took
as examples to study their native languages. The history of linguistics of any nation
is closely linked with the invention of national alphabet and its record of the annals of
the society and translation.
From this point of view it is possible to say that the history of tibetan grammar
is a tradition of almost 1300 years.
In the 7th Century A.D there lived a man called Tommi Sambota, a high
official at the court of the Tibetan king Srong-btson-Sgam-pa.
He visited India and esteemed Indian savants and their eruditions and arrived
to the highest attainment. Then he returned to his native land, Tibet and invented
tibetan alphabet and composed volumes of Tibetan grammar under the strict influence
of Panini grammar. At present only two books, passed down to us. They are “basic
thirties to show citation”, “basic signs to show citaion”. There are great influences
from ancient Indian grammar in the monumental works of the tibetan grammar.
According to the sources known to us, it is possible to say that Sakya
pandit Gungaajaltsan and Choiji odser, men of great attainments, composed “first
essential tibetan grammar used to study the translation of indian grammar in
Sanskrit.
It was great attainment of the mongolians when they translated Tanjur,
the commentaries on the discourses of the Lord Buddha into Mongolian. They
included in the works of the ancient Indian savants and some tibetan classic works
on the various disciplines of omni science on the ocassion of translation. There
are many works of ancient indian grammar the mongolian Danjur. They gave an
impetus to the development of the philosophic aspects of the mongolian grammar.
I want dwell on clearifications of some characteristics of sound formation and
their classifisations.
1. Sound formation.
Ancient indian grammar book wrote down Sanskrit phonetics. It was
divided into sthana articulate position of sound and karana (operative organ). They
were detailed. For example. There is a sutra on the Sanskrit alphabet composed by
grammarian Zandragomi who was living in the 7th or 8th century A.D. This sutra
says that :
The pitch of voice is produced in the month cavity with the air and articulate
organs can be represented as letters as presentation of reality. There are eight organs to
articulate the sound. They are breast, larynx, head, back of tongue, teeth, nose, lips
and palate. Presentation of reality can be understood as two parts as internal and external.
Internal can be narrow and wide, touch and slight touch. In such manner phonemes were
articulated in a detail.
This passage of Zandragomi on sound formation is very useful for the present
day researchers in phonetics.
Agvaandandar Lharamba (famous Mongol scholar) lived at the end of the
18th and at the beginning of the 19’ century composed of tibetan grammar which
was called “a doctrine on letters and oral ambellishment of savants”. He said that
where the sound in produced; ( ) And its loale is mouth, articulation( ) air
( ) exact analysis ( ) sound perception. They are four organs. What is The
motive? According to this, there is locale of articulation. If we employ a simile, it
is like. Bell and its clapper. The air is the cause of articulation. Then articulation
is like hand to ring bell. Exact analysts is the cause of action. This is like a persion
rings bell. Articulation organs are eight. They are the cavity of month ( ) larynx
( ), palate ( ), tongue ( ), nose ( ), alveoles ( ), teeth ( ) lips ( ).
The organs of speech is divided into narraw and wide, due to the pitch of voice
producing. The narrow organs are larynx, palate, nose cavity.
The wide organs are chest cavity, palate, tongue, teeth and lips. Then
tongue and palate are considered important in articulation. According to getting
in touch with, the function of speech organs are divided into 6 parts. They are to
touch and slightly touch, to close and open, narrow and widen. Effort consists
of air perception. The glossasary which was composed before the translation of
Tanjuur was a section of ancient linguists. This section says that the motive to have
a letter is ebilliance and air, locale and articulation and effort. These bring us to
the following conclusion. The formation of phonetics, realistic form of language
has biological and social functions which are harmomonus in relationship. The
traditional lingustic works. of Indian, Tibetan and Mongolian grammarians had
been studying the phonetics from the biological functions on a broad scale, In
another word, phonetic of the articulation was developed very well.
Second. The influence of ancient indian philosophy upon the classification
of phonetics.
The doctrine of Arga and Bilig (upaya prajna) is widespread in the
philosophy of oriental countries including ancient India. The doctrine of upaya-
prajna defines that phenomena is cohesion in which there are opposites.
The concept of upaya-prajna6 among the Mongols developed very early.
To illustrate this, ancient Mongolian original sources in history and literature
mention the sky as “father sky” and the world as “mother earth”. In other words, the
Mongols regarded the sky as upaya and as the earth as prajna. And so the doctrine
of upaya and prajna was widely applied not only in ancient oriental philosophy, but
also in medical science, astrology, language and literature.
The doctrine of upaya-prajna is likewise used in phonetics. Ancient
philologists of India, Tibet and Mongolia interpreted the classification of speech
sound into vowels and consonants through this doctrine.
A sutra “The meaning of E-vam and brief explanation of the Soyombo”7,
written by brush in Mongolian on mao-t’ou paper reads as follows: “Indian Pandit
Chandra Arithi in commentary to tantras wrote: The shrine and basis of all the
books are these two letters. It is, by way of Mustiation, the same as saying that a
son would be born of father and mother. This is because the letter E like mother
symbolizes 16 vowels. The letter Va, like father, symbolizes 34 consonants. The
OM letter is a symbol of the mutual consent of vowels and consonants. This
is based on the Sanskrit language and if applied to the Mongolian language, it
symbolizes 7 vowels and 17 consonants in Mongolian. Mother becomes the simple
cause for the birth of a son, and father the main reason. The close integration of
the two gives birth to the son. Similarly, vowel is the simple cause of a word, the
consonant is the main reason, and their equal mutual harmony form a morpheme,
which becomes a word, then a collection of words, and then verses and poems and
gradually chapter and book. This is the law of stylistics in sastra”. Here the vowel
is denominated as upaya and the consonant as prajna.
One unique but common feature in ancient Indian, Tibetan and Mongolian
grammar books is that speech sounds were classified according to elements8.
According to the doctrine of elements in ancient Indian philosophy, worldly objects
were initially very fine dust (Samghara parama), which gradually accumulated to
become physical objects. Scholars of ancient India, from the innumerable qualities
of an object, have chosen the following four: solid and humid, warm and light
qualities were considered as primordial representation as earth-, water, fire and air.
The fifth element of space was a latter-day addition.
In oriental doctrine there are two aspects of these five elements, earth,
water, fire, air and space, which according to Chinese astrology are wood, fire,
earth, metal, water.
The doctrine of astrology is widespread in India, Tibet and Mongolia. In
order to discover the basic features of the five elements, we may refer to the book on
astrology “White Vaidurya” by Desried Sanjaajamtsh, a Tibetan scholar of the 16th
century A.D. In this book, the earth element is described as hard, solid and heavy,
and perfect in the five qualities of shape, sound, smell, taste and feeling. It is the
base, and possesses the properties of stabilizing and adding weight. The element
of water is described as having damp, moist and watery features. It is perfect in
the quailities of shape, sound, taste and feeling and is capable of multiplying and
dampening objects. The element of fire is not by it’s nature and is perfect in the
three qualities of shape, sound and feeling. It can process, melt and burn. The
element of air is unsteady and light. It is perfect in the two quailities of sound
and feeling and is capable of making object light, mobile and disseminable. The
element of space is empty and void, and is perfect merely in sound. It is capable
of multiplying a substance, and creating or filling in a gap or space. The following
charts show in brief the application of the five elements of atrology and Chinese
astrology in the science of medicine.
The application of the five elements of astrology in medical science.
Five Six internal Five organs of Five Five
Five viscera
elements organs senses feelings senses
Earth Spleen Stomach Nose Smell Smelling
Water Kidneys Bladder Scratum Tongue Taste Tasting

(integrity
of five
Fire Liver Bile elements) Eye Image Seeing
Air Lungs Colon Skin Sense Sensing
Space Heart Abdomen Ear Sound Hearing

The application of the five elements in Chinese astrology in medical science.
Elments Special Viscera Internal Seasons Directions Colour
qualities organs
Wood Raise Liver Bile Spring East Blue
increase
Fire Beat Heart Abdomen Summer South Red
Earh Join, mix Spleen Stomach Four Four Yellow

intervals azimuths
of centre
Metal Differentiate Lungs Colon Autumn West White
Water Wet Kidneys Bladder Winter North Black
The five elements used in medical science have been employed also in
classifying speech sounds in linguistics.
The famous Mongolian grammar book written in the 18th sentury by
Danzandagva “Ziruken tolta-yin tailburi ogtorgu-mani” has classified speech
sounds in the Mongolian language using both the astrological and Chinese
astrological methods. According to the latter method, speech is classified not only
in close interrelationship with the vocal organs but also with the five visceras.
In ancient Indian linguistics, speech sounds in Sanskrit were divided
according to the five great elements ( ), and five small elements
( ) One classification according to the five great elements implied the
involvement of the vocal organs, while the classifications according to the five
small elements was based on the thrust of sound and the amplitude of the sound.
Tibetan linguistics used the following terms of the five small elements: masculine,
neutral, feminine, very feminine and sub-feminine. Mongolian linguists led by
Danzandagva classified speech sounds according to the five large elements, which
was akin to their Indian counterparts. A point that needs emphasis is that Tibetan
linguists, while classifying speech sounds as masculine ( ), neutral ( ), feminine
( ), very-feminine ( , sub-feminane ( ) clearly relied on the Intensity,
non-intensity, and amplitude of the vocal organs. Mongolian linguists Choiji-Odser
and others, in their grammar books, in common with their Tibetan counterparts used
the terminology-male, female and neutral in classifying Mongolian speech sounds.
In other words, Choiji-Odser has defined the harmony of sounds in Mongolian
language on the intensity non-intensity of the vocal organs.
To quate the eminent Danish scholar B.Thomson, by way of conclusion
“It is indeed amazing that India reached the zenith in linguistics and although the
Europeans learnt a lot from India, it nevertheless failed to reach this height even in
the 19th century.” Mongolian linguists have been, since early times, learning from
this “peak” in Indian linguistics, which, undoubtedly helped them understand the
intricate inner rules governing their mother-tongue.
References:
1 B.N.Golovin. Vvedenie v yazykoznanie. Moskva. 1983.
2 V.Loya. Istoriya linguisticheskikh usheniy. Moskva. 1968 V.Loya. Istoriya
linguisticheskikh usheniy. Moskva. 1968.
3 S.Dulam. Ertniy dorno dahiny uran zohiolyn toim. Ulaanbaatar. 1976.
4 Kul’tura drevney Indii. M., 1975. page 373
5 V.A. Zvegintsev. Istoriya yazykoznaniya. 19-20 vekov v ocherkakh
izvlecheniyakh, chast 1. m., 1964
6 upaya-prajna = in tib. and
7 from the Mongolian State Public Library.
8 Element according to Sanskrit is Maha-Bhuta. Maha meaning great and Bhuta
mean eng. element, thing, object
Bibliography :
1. Mongol Danjur. Vol 204
2. ngag-dbang-bstan-dar yi-ge’i bshad-pa mkhas pa’i-kha-rgyan
3. Karma si-tu Sum-rtags ‘drel-chen mkhas-pa’i mgul-rgyan mutig phreng-mdses
4. dag-yig mkhas-pa’i ‘byung-gnas zhes-bya-ba-las sgra-rig-gi skor bzhugs-so
5. Mongvol kelen-u sinjilel-un durasqal bičig. öber mong yol-un arad-un keblel-un
qoriy-a. 1983.
6. Toytaqutörü. Blama ügülekü-yin arslan manjusri egesig-tu eke-dur mörgüjü
mongvol-un jayun qorin yurban čayan toluyai üsüg-i tuyurbivsan oyun bilig-
un soyorqal kemegči orusibai.Ts.Dorj. “Tovd hel bichigt suraltsah devter” UB.,
1961.
7. Sh.Luvsanvandan. “Ertnii mongol khelnii phonemiyn sistem ni” Mongoliin
sudlal. Y boti. UB., 1965
8. B.A.Kochergina. “Sanskritsko-russkii slovari” M., 1987
9. Buddiin philosophiyn tuukhees. UB., 1987
10. U.N.Rerikh. Tibetsko-russko-angliiskii slovari s sanskritskimi parallelyami.
On Brief History of Amarbayasgalant Lamasery
and Its Current State
Dorjsuren Burnee
Today in Mongolia are functioning about 150 Buddhist lamaseries. If in

the beginning of 1990’s number of lamaseries reached about 200, in the middle
of 1995’s this number was decreased. The most of heads of lamaseries were old
people. Some of them were died, some of them were unable to hold activity of
lamaseries. So after going away of old lamas some lamaseries were closed.
Mongolian and Czech research team under the guidance of Doctor Lubos
Belka in the autumn of 2000 went to the Amarbayasgalant and met with authorities
and lamas. They took interview from some lamas and saw the lamasery restoration.
On the bases of interview and archive materials,’ books2 we had possibility to
consider the restoration of this lamasery. At first we consider brief history of this
lamasery.
This lamasery as one of the valued monuments of Mongolian ancient
history and culture was built in 1727-1736 in the south side of mountain Burenkhan,
Selenge aimag. It was founded by the decree of Manchu emperor Yongzheng in
honour of Mongolian First Bogdo Jabtsandamba Khutugtu Zanabazar (1635-1723).
The First Bogdo Jabtsandamba was famous religious and state figure, enlightener,
who played an important part in spreading of Buddhism in Mongolia. In the half
past of 19th century, when Buddhism was spreading in Mongolia Russian famous
traveller A. M. Pozdneev during 1892-1893 travelled in Mongolia and on the basis
of his notes wrote his book called “Mongolia and Mongols”. There is a note in
this book about Amarbayasgalant, which he wrote from 2nd to 6th July of 1892.3
From these notes we can know appearence of former Amarbayasgalant lamasery.
In that time Amarbayasgalant consisted of eight datsans and six aimags. Only in
Zoogai and Choinkhorlin aimags were 500-600 lamas and other aimags had 250-
300 lamas, altogether this lamasery had over 2000 lamas. There were datsans in
that time, such as:
1. The Dashchoimbel datsan, 2. The Gungaachoilin datsan, 3. The Tantric datsan,
4. The Medical datsan, 5. The Astrological datsan, 6. The Yoga datsan, 7. The
Lamrim or Path to Enligtenment datsan
The six aimags, which were in that time are as follows :
1. The aimag of Shuteen, 2. The aimag of Dejidlin, 3. The aimag of Sangai,
4. The aimag of Zoogai, 5. The aimag of Puntsoglin
Buddhist service was held not only in tsogchin temple but there were other
places of worship such as Nugnee, Tunellkha, Zagdsambhara, Kalachakra, Gurem,
Gurvan Zuu, Ayush, Mania, Maitreya and Narkhajid. The Russian traveller wrote
that near Amarbayasgalant lamasery were settled many people and that it reminded
full town.
The Amarbayasgalant was flourished until 1940’s and number of lamas
during this period reached 2084. This number of lamas in datsans was as follows:
The Tsanid datsan - 779 The Tantric datsan - 70 The Maitreya datsan -
50 The Medical datsan - 18 The Astrology datsan - 5 The Yoga datsan - 12 The
Lamrim datsan - 11 The Gunrig khural - 8 The Nugnee khural - 5
Number of lamas in aimags are:
The Shuteen - 134, The Sangai - 99, The Dejid - 52, The Zoogai - 52, The
Puntsoglin- 171, The Choinkhorlin - 204
If list whole of lamas or 779 lamas, which had Buddhist service in Tsogchin
temple by ages it will look as follows:
Lamas until 18 age - 115, From 18-25 ages-85; 25-35 ages-127;35-45 ages- 100;
above 45 ages - 352
From all of lamas 18 lamas were registered that knew Mongolian script,
120 lamas were noted as had been studying. The lamas of this lamasery had
appointments such as follows:
1. The Khamba lama or the head of lamasery;
2. The Ded khamba or vice khamba lama;
3. The Tsorj (Tib. chos rje, Dharma Lord) lama or foremost in dharma; the holy
spiritual master;
4. The Lovon (Tib. slob dpon) lama or master, teacher; title of high lama;
5. The Chovombo (Tib. mchod pa po) - lama in charge of sacrificial offerings;
6. The Gesgui (Tib. dge bskos) - a monk disciplinarian; disciplinarian of a
monastery; the monk in charge of enforcing the monastic rules and regulations;
7. The Unzad (Tib. dbu mdzad) - precentor or director of services in a lamasery;
8. The Shanzodba (Tib. pyag mdzod) - the administrator of an ecclesiastical
estate or shavi;
9. The Gonner (Tib. dgon gnyer) - attendant on a high lama;
10. The Soivon - senior attendant on a high lama;
11. The Tahilch - lama in charge of sacrificial offerings;
12. The Duganch - caretaker in a lamasery;
13. The Shunlaiv - title of the head or director of studies of certain of the Urga colleges;
14. The Daa lama - head lama, next below the Shanzav of Urga, two in number;
15. The Zaisan - title of an official in the administration of a lamasery or an
ecclesiastical estate;
16. The Demch - an official, a clerk;
17. The Daamal - a revisor-controller;
18. The Nirav (Tib. gnyer pa) - bursar of a lamasery treasury;
19. The Jam (Tib.ja ma) - cook in a lamasery.
It was also registered lamas with title or degree. For example in
Amarbayasgalant were registered next number of lamas with such degree as:
The Agramba (Tib. sngags rams pa) - a lama versed in spells - 84; The
Gavj (Tib. dka’ bcu) - a Buddhist clerical degree, above that of gevsh -164; The
Gebsh (Tib. dge bshes) - a spiritual master; a spiritual friend; a religious teacher;
The Rabjamba (Tib. rab ‘byams pa) - a lamaist doctor of theology - 2 ;
The Ziirembe (Tib. rtsis rams pa) - title of a Buddhist degree in astrology - 1
Number of jas or property was registered twenty. Moreover there were 465
of ordinary lamas, two traders, 162 livestock workers, 160 workers for wages, nine
workers in enterprise or co-operative, nine craftsmen, nine makers of Buddhist
images, nine astrologer-lamas without an official post, two fortune-tellers.4 This
number of lamas show that Amarbayasgalant was a big centre of Buddhism in that
time. As life of Mongolian other lamaseries in 1930’s Amarbayasgalant was closed
in 1938. All woships including Buddhist books were destroyed.
Amarbayasgalant lamasery consisted of over forty temples. Only 28
temples now remain and they have been under state protection since 1944.5 In
1970 began restoration work of Amarbayasgalant, which was founded on the
base of 6th paragraph of Mongolian People’s Republic Law on Protection Cultural
Monument, issued and published in 1970. At this time were arriving workers
from Historic Monument Restoration Office and Japanese building specialists,
Vietnamese carpenters. Also in 1979-1982 arrived experts from UNESCO. It was
restored partially only tsogchin temple’s wall and temples in inner wall, but they
were looked like empty containers. In 1988-1989 carpenters-artists from capital
city headed by master Jamba restored the Maharaja.6 So the restoration work began
but it did not continue entirely.
Under influence of democratic changes which was developed in Mongolia
in 1990, communist ideology predominating about seventy years had collapsed
and began new period of reviving Mongolian national consiousness, culture and
religion. Thanks to the new time in 1989, 1990 was laid a base of policy for spreading
traditional Buddhist religion. So was developed a movement on beginning Buddhist
service in Erdene Zuu, Amarbayasgalant, Right Urga or Dashchoilin and building
lamaseries in countryside step by step. In this way by the resolution number 10, from
22nd February 1990 of the Presidium of the Great People’s Khural, Amarbayasgalant
lamasery’s Buddhist activity began again after being closed in 1938.7 In summer of
1990, old people headed by T. Jamyandagba held Buddhist service. The khamba
lama T. Jamyandagba, lama T. Davaakhuu, Sundui being young were pupils in
Amarbayasgalant lamasery and after the lamasery had closed some lamas were
engaged in labour. These lamas all have being believered in Buddha and all
took part earnestly in restoration of Amarbayasgalant. The Mongolian Buddhist
centre the Gandantegchinlin lamasery and public organisations in countryside and
masses have been supporting the restoration of Amarbayasgalant lamasery. The
Gandantegchinlin lamasery spent 28 mln. tugrigs for restoration countryside’s
lamasery and especially for Amarbayasgalant it sent 2 mln. tugrigs. Also it is worth
to mention such organiza-tions as executive authority of Selenge aimag, Central
Council of Trade Unions, Tsagaan Tolgoi State Farm, Erdenet Carpet Factory,
Erdenet Mining Concentration Plant, Moriton and Hilganat companies of Selengge
aimag and Mongolian masses, also have been making contribution. From people
supported restoration of this lamasery Gurdeva Rinpoche must be mentioned firstly.
Rinpoche devoted to the restoration of Mongolian Buddhist lamaseries, especially
to Amarbayasgalant all his property, knowledge and force. So it is difficult to say
something about restoration of Amarbayasgalant without saying about Rinpoche’s
activity in Mongolia. By ethnic origin Gurdeva is khorchin Mongol. He was born
in 1910 in the aristocratic family in Inner Mongolia. As elder of three sons in
childhood he became a pupil of Pandit Darmajaltsan-Osor and later he went to
Amdo, Tashilhunpo, Jabugumen lamaseries in Tibet to continue his studies. In
1946 he went to Dorjijigjee temple, in Nepal to meditate. In 1953 he built the
Gandanchoinbolin temple in Nepal. Until 1970 he lived in Nepal and then he
went to Dharamsala and Varanasi’s lamaseries on pilgrimage. In 1972 he founded
the Dashlhumbo temple in South India. In 1970 by the invitation of the Gandan
lamasery’s head Khamba lama S. Gombojav, Rinpoche arrived in Mongolia for the
first time and took part in the World Buddhist Conference for Peace, which held in
Ulaanbaatar. Being in Mongolia he thought to built a lamasery in Mongolia. But
he understood that this time was not suitable for fulfilling his dream, so he decided
to wait. When he arrived in Mongolia in 1991, situation in the country life was
deeply changed. He met with leaders of the government and said them his thought
about restoration of Buddhist lamasery. Ex-First deputy Mr. D. Ganbold received
him and said he would give him permission on building lamasery. Thus he arrived
in Mongolia next year and began his restoration activity of Amarbayasgalant in
1992. The Amarbayasgalant lamasery’s external appearance is looked safe but
its roofs and walls were damaged. So Rinpoche began his restoration activity
from external side. Then he began collection of internal means of lamasery such
as worships, offering, musical instruments, books ans scriptures. To be brief he
prepared all needs for holding Buddhist service. The Rinpoche is paying attention
on publishing works of Mongolian famous scholars such as Zava Damdin (1867-
1937), consisting of 17 volumes; collected works of Damtsagdorj (1781-1848).
Nowadays restoration of Amarbayasgalant is continueing, but the main work is
done. Recently remained to restore two white temples. Rinpoche also is paying
attention not only on education of young lamas but on supplying them by foods.
Gurdeva by his wish became Mongolian citizen. On 24th April 1992 Gurdeva was
given title of Darkhan Lama or sacred Khamba lama.
Today in Amarbayasgalant are holding Buddhist service about thirty
lamas. The lamasery’s Buddhist service are holding Darkhan khamba, Khamba
lama, Tsorj, Lovon, Daa lama, Darkhan Unzad, Soivon, Gesgui, Golch (assistant to
a precentor), Duganch (caretaker in a lamasery). In lamasery’s jas or property work
such laymen as bursar (of a lamasery treasury), an accountant, revisor-controller. If
list lamas by age it will look as follows:
Lamas from age 8-13: 15; 14-17:8; above age 15: 6; old lamas: 3
The lamas follow traditional lamasery rule of Sera.8 Some of the young
lamas study in Buddhist Ravdan Choilin lamasery in Geneva, Switzerland. The
Ravdan Choilin lamasery was built by the initiative of Ravdan Rinpoche in the
middle of 1970. He arrived from Dharamsala into Switzerland in 1970’s and had
founded the lamasery Tharva Choilin, which was renamed after Ravdan Choilin.
He devoted all his knowledge and forces for spreading Buddhism in Western
countries. After his death the main student of Rinpoche named Gonsar Rinpoche
nowadays carries on activity of lamasery. Gonsar Rinpoche had been lived with
his teacher Ravdan Rinpoche 33 years until his death from his five years old, he
worked as an English translator of his teacher. Today Gonsar Rinpoche is the head
not only of Ravdan lamasery, he also the head of Dash Ravdan and Deleg Ravdan
lamaseries in Austria and Puntsog Ravdan lamasery in Munich, Germany. Also he
is the head of Ravdan Treasure House.9
Two young lamas from Amarbayasgalant had studied four years in Ravdan
Choilin, near the Gonsar Rinpoche and other two lamas are studying now there.
Gonsar Rinpoche pays all expences of Mongolian lamas. It consists of teaching,
accommodation and food. The lamasery head gives special attention to the lamas
teaching. The Mongolian Buddhist centre Gandantegchinlin’s master-lama
Danzan and other scholar lamas, including Tibetan lama Tuvden from Switzerland,
who teach Buddhist philosophy and Tibetan language, taught Buddhist literature.
The main teacher-lamas are Tsorj and Lovon lamas. The Tsorj Luvsandarjaa was
studied Buddhist philosophy at Ravdan Choilin lamasery, Switzerland. Except his
teaching activity Lama Luvsandarjaa had translated Tibetan books into Mongolian
and is preparing Tibetan textbook. In the future the lamasery authority are going to
teach English and mathematics, to open Buddhist College.
Today lamas are engaged in teaching by two groups: the group of young
lamas and the group of old lamas. Amarbayasgalant lamasery has opened its
educational and international centre called “Peace Path” in Ulaanbaatar, on 25th
May 2001. It is said in programme that main goal of centre is interpretation of
Buddhist teaching among public, broadening international relation of lamasery,
raising educational level of lamas, development of Buddhist research work, doing
virtuous acts among poor people. So if at the beginning of 1990 Amarbayasgalant
lamasery had Buddhist service with about ten lamas, today the lamasery has service
with about thirty lamas and opened its centre in Ulaanbaatar.
References:
1. Ulsiin Tagnuuliin tub arkhiiv, Fond’l—3-4.1937 onii 6 sariin 14-ii udriin selenge
aimag Baruun Buren sum dekh Undur Gegeenii khemeekh Amarbayasgalant
khiidiin baidliig todorkhoilson burtgel.
2. S. Erdene, Amarbayasgalant khiidiin tuukh amarjuulakhiin chimeg, Ulaanbaatar
1996; D. Migmar - D. Yondonsuren, Arigun nom un oron Amarbayaskhulang
khiid un tsadig orushibai. 1-18 khuudas, Ulaanbaatar 1993; Khargana J. Ulzii,
Mongoliin tuukhiin dursgalt Kara Korum, Erdene zuu, Amarbayasgalantiin
tuukh, Ulaanbaatar 1999; Ogtorguin chimeg Amarbayasgalant khiidiin tuukhen
shastir orshvoi, Ulaanbaatar 2001; Bokhoogui zul (Amarbayasgalant khiid
sergesen on,jiliin bichig orshvoi), Ulaanbaatar 2000.
3. A. M. Pozdneev, Mongol ba Mongolcuud, Ubur Mongul un keblel un khoriy-a.
1995,1-r boti, p. 54.
4. Ulsiin Tagnuuliin tub arkhiiv, Fond’l—3-4.1937 onii 6 sariin 14-ii udriin Selenge
aimag Baruun Buren sum dekh Undur gegeenii khemeekh Amarbayasgalant
khiidiin baidliig todorkhoilson burtgel.
5. Mongolia’s tentative list of cultural and natural heritage. Unesco Beijing Office,
Ministry of Enlightenment Mongolia, p.20.
6. Maharaja (Tib. rgyal chen bshi) - four Great Guardian kings of Quarters acting
as guardians of a lamasery and often depicted at the end of xylograph.
7. The Decree of Presidium of Great Khural of Mongolian People’s Republic, 22nd
February 1990: About problems connected with the restoration and protection
of some monasteries. Taking into account the believers desire Presidium
of Great Khural establishes: To agree to use Buddhist lamaseries such as
Amarbayasgalant in the territory of Baruunburen sumun, Selengge aimag and
Erdene Zuu lamasery in the territory of Khar Khorin sumun, Uburkhangai aimag
for religious service. To advice to Assembly of People’s Deputes of Selengge
and Ubrkhangai aimags to extend required help for carry out regular religious
service and rite. Chairman of the Presidium of the Great People’s Khural of the
MPR J. Batmunkh; Secretary of the Presidium of the Great People’s Khural of
the MPR Ts. Gotov.
8. Sera (Tib. se ra) - place of wild rose or brier; name of a large monastery near
Lhasa, built in 1419.
9. Geshe Rabten, The Life of a Tibetan Monk, 2000.

Ulaanbaatar
The End of World War II and Strengthening of the
Mongolian People’s Republic
Dr. L. Chuluunbaatar
50 years ago in Asia the World War was put to its end in the result of
collective struggle of nations. The victory in the world war was the great deed of
rescuing of the mankind from the fascist slavery and this victory was achieved at
great costs. The lesson of the victory achieved at the costs of lives and bloodshed
of fearlees warriors and fighters of many nations at costs of tears and sweat and
material losses of peoples of many countries was that division and redivision of the
world among imperialistic powers was and will be impossible.
The last years of the World War II saw the intensification of the diplomatic
activities which were particulary abundant between the countries of the anti Hitler
coalition stimulating the courageous struggle of millions of fighters of different
countries and strenthening their solidarity. In particular the Potsdam and Yalta
conferences of the three powers of the anti fascist coalition USA, USSR and Great
Britain of 1945 must be mentioned here.
Also, the national liberation and patriotic movements and national liberation
fronts of peoples of Asia paid a great contribution to the victory. The warriors of
the People’s Liberation Armies of China and Korea rendered a big support to the
offensive of the Soviet and Mongolian Armies in the Just War against the Militarist
forces of Japan. This collective struggle was a just and fair deed contributed to the
United Nations.
In the Resolution of the State Minor Hural (the Chamber of Parliament)
and Government of the Mongolian People’s Republic of 10th August 1945, our
country declared war against the Japanese militarists in support of democracy and
freedom- loving nations to contribute in establishing peace and to the deeds of the
United Nations.
The troops of 80 thousand warriors and officers, 4 mounted divisions,
mechanized armoured brigades, tank and artillery regiments, signals regiment,
air division and other sub units of the Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Army
headed by Marshal of the MPR KH. Choibalsan, Lieutenant General Yu. Tsedenbal
and Lieutenant General J. Lhagvasuren advanced in the directions of Dolonnuur,
Zhe He and Kalgan covering 1000 km across the Gobi. The Mongolian troops
fought in hard and difficult climatic conditions against the Japanese army and 2000
fearless Mongolian warriors and officers lost their lives on the fields of battles.
These days of the Anniversary of the Great Victory the Mongolian people
worship to the memory of their courageous heroes.
Entry of Mongolia in to the war against the Japanese militarist was not an
intricate political machination of the Kremlin1 as is sometimes suspected.
The Entry of Mongolia in to the war was connected with the Yalta
Conference of February, 1945 where the entry of the Soviet Union into the war
against Japan was conditioned by recognition of the independent status-quo of
Mongolia by the Allies. This is proved by the following arguments:
1. In connection with the USA policy:
O.Lattimore, who visited Mongolia during the US Vice-President
H.Wallace’s visit, wrote in his report:
“In fact, outer Mongolia has been independent for a long time and after the
war the Chinese will not be able to annex Mongolia and it is an important reality
for us to consider. We have to be careful.”2
Furthermore,the report of the US Ambassador to the Soviet Union
Harrilean sent to the U.S. President F.Roosevelt in 15 december,1944,said:
“Last night during the talk with Stalin I said to him that you{Roosevelt}
would like to know which of the political issues mentioned by him{Stalin} in
October would serve as the conditions for entry of Russia into the war against
Japan. Stalin said that the only item not mentioned in Tehran was the recognition
of the status-quo of the Republic of outer Mongolia as independent. This was not
a surprise for me because I had believed by my long observation their interest of
security of their long boundary in South Siberia.’’3
The report of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow of September, 1945 to “Outer
Mongolia will make no changes in her internal regime but will make it impossible
to join her to China in the future. Furthermore, Outer Mongolia may become a
Spring-board for expansion of Soviet influence in adjoining territories’4
Considering all these evidences, we can conclude that the United States
observed Mongolia for a long time and abstained from rejecting of the Soviet
proposal. Even more, they sent the Vice-President to Mongolia on official visit for
closer acquaintance with the foreign policy attitudes of the MPR. Thus, the USA
recognized and acknowleged the status quo of Outer Mongolia.
2. The reason of the proposal of Soviet Union on recognition of the
independence status quo of Outer Mongolia by the Allies was the Soviet-Mongolian
agreements of 1921 and 1936 on friendship, mutual aid and collaboration and also
the firm anti-fascist and anti-militarist attitude of the Mongolian people’s Republic
held from the very beginning of the World War II, her Victory in Halhin-gol war,
and the direct and great is material and moral aids from the Mongolian people to
the Soviet people and the Soviet Army during the Great Patriotic War against the
fascist invaders.
3. Mongolia’s south neighbour China had sharp and fierce internal political fights
and had not yet recognised the independence of Mongolia. In August of 1945,
the Supreme Council of National Defence of China and the Central Executive
Committee of Guo Min Dan (Revolutionary Party) resolved:
“ The People of Outer Mongolia proclaimed their independence in 1922
when the Peking Government was being established and 25 years have already
passed since then. Hence, following our revolutionary principles and standing
policy of Guo Min Dan we must resolutely and legally recognize and acknowledge
the independence of Outer Mongolia and establish friendly relations.”5
In addition, in any case the Chinese side had to respect and follow the
conditions of Yalta Conference. In addition the promise of China of 14 August, 1945
that the Chinese government would recognize and acknowledge the independence of
Outer Mongolia (Mongolian People’s Republic) with her present boundary provided
that the Mongolian people vote for independence. It was groundlessly described by
the Chinese side that “Outer Mongolia proclaimed the independence in 1922 when
the Peking goverment was being established.”
The Mongols overthrew the Manchu rule in 1911-1912 and again
proclaimed the independence after the National Democratic Revolution of 1921.
Based on the above arguments we can make the following conclusion(s):
Declaring War against militarist Japan, the Mongolian People’s
Republic had the purpose of strengthening her own security and independence,
implementation of her duty according to the Soviet-Mongolian Agreement on
Friendship, Mutual Aid and Collaboration, liberation of other peoples of Asia, and
contribution to the deed of establishment of peace in the Far East. The purpose of
Mongolia fully resounds with the Potsdam Declaration of 26 of July of 1945:
“As we unflaggingly believe that until the immoral militarism is cleaned
away from the world, peace, security and justice cannot be established, hence the
power and influence of those who mislead the Japanese people, push them in to the
way of war for occupation of the whole world must be crushed down”6
On Mongolia’s participation in the war in the Far East the American
Mongolist O.Lattimore wrote:
“This occasion showed that the Mongolian troops were armed and trained
better than the Japanese and Chinese....”7
The Japanese had invaded in to Mongolia before, and due to the
participation in the War, the authority of Mongolia among the Inner Mongols and
Chinese has significantly risen.”8
The Mongolian academician B.Lhamsuren9 in general agreed with this
statement. On 21 September, 1945, the Presidium of the State Minor Hural appointed
the national plebiscite on independence to be held on 20 October, 1945.
Preceding the plebiscite, people’s meetings were held throughout the
country where the citizens spoke in support of independence. 98.4% of the citizens
of voting age participated in the plebescite held on 20 October, 1945. All of them
voted for independence. The results of the plebiscite were sent to the Goverment
of China on 1945, and China officially recognized our independence on 5 January,
1946. After the People’s Republic Revolution in China in 1949, Mongolia and the
People’s Republic of China established dipomatic relationship founding the basis
for friendly political, economic and cultural relations.
The years preceding the World War II and the years after the war were
full of contradictions in international policy, the struggle among powers for
influence on world’s policy grew fiercer. Therefore, only a few people could hope
the world peace and security be established. The war between the coalitions of
great powers had killed millions of lives and national economies had fallen in to
depressions. Almost there was no understanding between two blocs and vengeance
and revanchism prevailed in the atmosphere of international policy. Furthermore,
nuclear weapon had been tested over peaceful population by the end of the World
War II.
The 40 years after the World War II are called the Epoch of Cold War.
While the years passed, the world developed resulting considerable changes in
culture, education, thought and attitudes of nations.
As for our opinions the lessons of the World War II must never be forgotten
and they have to be always on mind for generations.
The lesson of the World War II proved that no power is able to influence the
world’s policy and establish its rule over the world utilizing forces and weapons.
The only future of the world and mankind is peace, progress and happiness.

Explanation:
1.
2. Lattimore O. Solution in Asia.Boston 1945. pp.177-178

3. Foreign relations of the US Diplomatic Papers. The Conference at
Malta and Yalta 1945 Washington. 1955.p.379
4. //Pacific Affairs. vol XXII. No.1 1955.pp.71-72
5. Friters G.M.Outer Mongolia and its international Position. Balti
more. 1949. p.211
6.
7.
8. Western Political Quarterly.March 1956.p.41

9.

Ulaanbaatar
History of Mongolian Cities
Dr. ULZIIDOLGOR Darisuren
Mongols having moved and lived for thousands of years in the vast
territory of Central Asia left great monuments of history and culture. One of these
monuments is a history of cities and state palaces. There is a prevailing belief in
the world that Mongols lead a nomadic life. However, reliable sources show that
there are many ruins of settlements, cities dating from the foundation of the first
state in Mongolia.
Mongols are thought to be a nomadic people who are engaged in livestock
breeding. It is noted in the works by Chinese scholars. For example, historian
Xy Ma-tsyan wrote in Shi-Chji (historical notes) that Mongols had no settlements
because they moved around looking for better pastures and near water for their
herds. American scholar R.C.Andrews who led an expedition in Mongolia wrote
that Mongols, having moved in wild uninhabited lands, had never had culture, art
and architecture. [1.708]
It is historically true that Mongols lived a nomadic life and had hardships
being engaged in livestock breeding. Although it was common to look after herds
there were a small number of those who established cities and lived there.
Even before our era, Mongols knew how to build towns and lead town
life. From historical documents it is obvious that there were cities with palaces
of the Xiongnu empire, e.g. Luntan (Dragon’s stop) city of Shanyu palace, Lun-
chen (Dragon city) and Lun-tsy (Dragon temple). The Chinese books mentioned
the existence of state and military towns of the Xiongnu Empire. In the 120’s
AD, Shanyu of the Xiongnu state defeated the Chinese army, chose commander
Jao-Sin as his advisor and built a town. That town was probably located near the
Hangai Mountains. A town had administrative, military, commercial, farming and
craft making centers. The existence of town administration was determined in the
comparative study by late historian H. Perlee. [2.24]
Ruins of the Xiongnu period cities and settlements have been discovered
during the archeological investigation. There are many ruins such as Ivolgyn
fortification of the Selenge, ruins of a big building with numerous columns in
Tsagaan Aral of the Herlen, “Hasar balgas” of the Terelj, Bayanbulag balgas in
Nomgon sum of Umnu Gobi aimag, the Tsenher gol fortress of Hentei aimag, of
the Shuvuut gol in Bureg Hangai sum of Bulgan aimag.
Mongols’ state, army, administration, worship cities to build methods
skills have been developed traditionally. In their works historians marked building
of state palaces and cities by native Mongols like Xiongnu’s successors Sumbe and
Ih Hirun. Ts. Handsuren discovered that capital city Mume of Nirun was located
to north west of Har hurem near Meem hill in the basin of the South Tamir River.
L.I.Gumilev wrote that Ih Nirun han’s palace was near Hangai Mountain. [3.12]
G.E.Grumm-Grjimailo came to conclusion that “Tobas learnt how to construct
stone buildings.” [4.468] N.K.Bichurin wrote the history of Mongols who had been
building cities after constructing Lun-chen city around 341 of Muyun Hoi, temples
and palaces dedicated to their ancestors. [5.154, 166, 168, 170]
There are many historical documents about city and settlement construction
of the ancient states of Tureg, Uighur and Kidan that were prospering in the
Mongolian lands. Tureg Han’s palace was erected in the 5th century facing the
direction of the sunrise, near Altai Mountain. In 572, Turkic Han (Toba) ordered
to build a Buddhist temple and books were brought from China. [5/80] So-called
Mogilyan, Bilge Han’s palace, was 70 metres northwest away from Har Horium
city. [6.326] As N.K.Bichurin wrote, Mergen minister did not surround his city by
fortress by Toniyukuk’s advice. Since the 80s of the 6th century Turkics had rebelled
against the Tan state. Rebellion leader Kutulug stationed and built a settlement in
the present chuulalat door, the place called Har els near Huh Hot. Mongolian writer
Galdan in his book “Erdeniin erh” wrote that the settlement of Har els was built
and named Huh Hot by Altan Han in the second half of the 16th century. [7.63]
Har balgas, a capital to be of Uighur Empire, is believed to be founded by
Peilo Han around 715. This city was located 25 kilometres north from Erdene zuu.
Archeologists have proved that in the period of Peilo’s successor Moyunchur Han
[8.12]
this city served as a big center of trade and handicraft industries along with the
Han’s palace and temples.[2.51] This city called Hanbalyk Balyklik (Har balgas) was
destroyed by Kirgizs of Enisei in 840. The Uigur state is considered to have big
and small cities built besides their capital city. One of them is the city of Baibalyk
(Biibulag-Bayanbalgas) on the bank of the Selenge River. In this city, as Ramsteg
stressed, along with traders there were Sogod teachers who translated religious
books into the Uighur language. The city of Har Horium was probably founded in
the period of the Uighur Empire. It is said to be built in the period Uighur Buhu
Han’s ruling. Elui Chju said that Har Horium was an old place (city) of Uighur.
[6.380]
Marco Polo believed that Har Horium was built on the foundation of the well-
known city of Uighur’s Kara Korum. [14.273] There are also facts it was occupied by
Chinggis’s army in June 1205. If to compare numerous facts that it had been the
capital and the hans’ palace since 1220 until the 15th century, it is obvious that the
city existed before the 13th century. [15.294] M.V.Kiselev wrote that Uigurs built cities
with fortresses during Kidan’s invasion. [9.14]
Kidan emerging after a collapse of the Uighur state was a highly developed
state having many cities and towns built over 200 years. The evidences are available
to us that Kidans mastered the skills of building cities, big temples, high stupas,
stone and wood bridges. Here are some of them. 25 km from Hentei aimag
there existed the city of Zuun herem and not far from it the city of Baruun herem.
Archeologists made conclusion after having dug the two cities that Baruun herem
served as an assistant city to Zuun xerem. Bars city and its stupas are located in
Bulgan sum of Dornod aimag. For the sake of his research H.Perlee named ruins
of a tall stupa “The 1st Bars city”, of the one that located 7 km away “the 2nd
Bars city” and the one 15 km to the east “The 3rd Bars city” respectively. Patterns,
ornaments and forms of the ruins of Bars city are similar to the ones of Mongols.
This confirms Rashid-ad-Din’s comment that there is almost no difference in forms
and customs of Mongols and Kidans. [10.103]
In Dashinchilen sum of Bulgan aimag there are ruins of a city called Chin
tolgoin balgas. The tale says that Hatan hot or so called Chjen Chjou city was built
on the request of Kidan Han’s tatvar (presented as award) hatan in 994. It is clear
that the great ruins of Chin tolgoi are of Chjen-chjou city. [11.67] Hadaasan or Har
buh bagas is located 20 km from Chin tolgoi balgas. This city was in the form of
square with four gates, narrow paths coming out of the main street and dwellings.
There are traces of canals to water and garden the city. [12.59] By the 1049 census
there were 5 capital cities and 150 fortressed cities in Kidan. [13.154]
The urbanization history of the ancient states that existed in the
Mongolian lands is an irreplaceable value presenting the society, politics,
economics and culture of that time. If we look at this history several features are
observed as follows.
1. Nomadic Mongols had built cities and palaces in honour of their emperor.
2. A city brought peculiar features of city life and developed into a complex
center of economic and cultural activities.
3. City planning expressed specific features of architecture. For example, it
is without any doubt that the historical studies of the Mongolian civilization
have begun since the Xiongnu Empire period. The common feature of
architecture of that period lied in worshipping the direction of the sunrise,
and the use of mud and stone. And in its development process there emerged
specific issues of arranging and gardening streets and squares, decorations
and heating system. The wonder of Mongols’ economic culture is mastering
by Mongols of preparing building materials, technology and methods on the
basis of the Asian architecture of that time.
The beginning of the 12th century or collapse of the Kidan Empire was the
end to succeeding and prospering ancient states in the Mongolian lands and start
of a history with new characteristics. Mongolian aimags of the early 11-13th
centuries traditionally developed urban culture. If we look at some facts, Mongols
of Onon and Herlen set up Haiduu Han’s palace in the valley of the Onon River.
The Yuan state documents mentioned that building of a palace near the Barga gol
and a bridge by Haiduu Han contributed to mutual communication. There are a lot
of materials written about 27 fortresses off the Altan state, settlements of Hereid
Han, Har Horium, Tenduk, Tatar herem, etc.
A new period of urbanization has begun since the early 13th century
when for the first time in the Mongolian history a central state uniting all Mongol
aimags was established. Chinggis and his successors preferred life centralized in
settlements. Since Temuujin formed a unified Mongol state in 1206 and became a
Han Mongolian hans began to possess many nomadic and urban palaces. Chinggis
Han had four palaces as follows.
• Ih ord was located between Doloon boldog and Shirgenchen of Herlen. In
Chinese sources note Han’s great palace on the “Lu Tszui” river. Lu Tszui
means the Herlen River.
• The second palace was named “Hamutuin palace of Sain valley” by Japanese
historian Yanai Vatari. There is an assumption that was pastures along the
Selenge and Hanui rivers and Saihan huljjin valley.
• The Secret History of Mongols says there was a palace in Har tune of the
Tuul River. That seemed to be the third palace of Chinggis. Geographically,
Har-Tune is around current Ulaanbaatar behind Bogd Mountain. From the
12th century it was Hereid Van Han’s palace. Van Han and Esuhei were told
to become ands (friends) there.
• A palace was in the lands of Naiman’s Tayan Han, i.e. the beginning of the
Selenge River and near the Ider River.
Although Chinggis Han in 1220 proclaimed Har Horium the capital, it is not
certain that he seated there. This might be connected with Chinggis’s wars.
One of the hans Ugedei takes a central place in the history of Mongolian
cities. Ugedei Han who ruled In 1228-1241, first of all, built Har Horium as a
complex. He brought craftsmen from the occupied lands and they made the capital
city famous in the world. [15.227] The Mongol state of Ugedei Han’s ruling was a
vast empire stretching from the Adriatic Sea, Anraga River to India. In 1234 Har
Horium was proclaimed the capital of the empire by Chinggis’s order. Built by
foreign and domestic craftsmen this city was distinguished by its face and beauty
among other cities of the 13th century.
The brief history of this city is the following. The construction work of
the Mongolian capital Har Horium started from 1220 on the foundation of an old
city of Tureg and Uighur. It turned into a big city in 1230-1240. The major part of
the city was surrounded by 25 km long mud fortress. The han’s palace was in the
southwestern corner of the city. As the scholars noted it was 255 m long, 220-225
m wide, and its major part had 2-3 stores. The han seated in the major part, Tumen
Amgalant palace, while his queens and sons in the eastern part, and his intimates
in the western part respectively. The palace had 64 strong beautiful columns of the
best Asian and oriental design.
One of the historical monuments in this city was a silver tree at the door of
the han’s palace. Craftsman Wilghelm from Paris created that tree. On each of the
four sides of the tree there was a silver lion. Wine was fountaining from the first
lion, mare’s milk from the second lion, honey drink from the third lion, and beer
from the fourth lion. An angel with a trumpet symbolizing a messenger was placed
on the top of the silver. The tree had a sophisticated mechanism where the drinks
came out by the sound of the trumpet.
Ugudei Han founded many of such beautiful cities: the city called Suurin
near Doityn Tsagaan nuur 40 km north from present day Erdene zuu, a palace
named Gegeen tsagaan, Tosoh called city (1238), a palace of Tumen amgalant,
and other cities with palaces of Urmugt or Shar ord, Huh nuur ord and Ongiin
ord.
Scholar O. Namnandorj determined that Munh Han’s palace ruins were
behind Altan Gadas Mountain, on the north bank of the Delger River in Arbulag
sum of Hubsugul aimag. These ruins show base of several buildings with walls and
fortresses. Munh Han’s monument was also there. The monument script in modern
Mongolian will be: Long live Munh Han in kinship from generation to generation.
Now this monument is displayed at the National History Museum.
One of the cities in Hubilai Han’s period was Hugshin Teel balgas – a
military city named Suriig badruulagch. This city was founded during Hubilai
and Arigbuh’s rivalry for the throne (1260-1264). In 1264 Hubilai threw Arigbuh
but he didn’t seat in Har Horium. From 1267 a new city was built in Beijing and
from 1271 he moved there and called the city Hanbilig (han’s city) or Daidu (great
capital). He also turned Kaipin into Shaidu or a sub capital city. Though Hubilai
Han built his palace and city in an alien country, it could be considered a Mongol
city as the architecture reflected Mongol’s brilliance, artistic and interests. Scholar
N.M.Prejevalskii of Central Asia considered Hubilai Han’s military city men’s
white ruins and cities like Arlyn balgas were equivalent to Hanbilig. [16.148]
The ruins of the capital Dadu of the Yuan state city served to be the basis
for Yuandadu park (garden) in Beijing. In this park there is monument dedicated
to Hubilai Han. The 4 metres high monument depicts pictures of Hubilai and other
hans.
The above historical documents show that in the 13-14th centuries
the architecture had diverse (mosaic) features as the Mongolian cities were
constructed with efforts of captivated warriors and craftsmen.
Due to internal fights among Mongols, the number of settled cities was
small at that time. But there are ever-memorable names of the cities such as
Tsagaan baishin set up by Tsogt taij and his mother Chin Taihu Taigal in the basin
of the Tuul River and Huh Hot by Altan Han. A growing number of temples and
monasteries with the spread of Lamaism is a reform of a period in traditions of
a Mongolian urbanisation. Abtai Han of Halha founded the first monastery of
Erdene zuu in 1586. Great leading palace of Lamaism named Ribogeja Gandan-
Shadublin was constructed in Hentei Mountain in 1654-1686. It was in the
same place in mid 18th century as today. Lamaism became an idol of the state,
family and individual and building of temples became a common cause. Thus
their number reached over 700. Monasteries are different from cities which
originate from military fortification. It has a specific kind of architecture. A
Mongolian temple being a kind of Asian architecture has Indian and Tibetan
traditions. Mongolian major monasteries and temples became a center of wide
scope religious, political, economic and cultural activities. The story of the state
capital (current Ulaanbaatar) begins from the 17th century. As major monasteries
like Gandan hiid, Choijin lamyn sum and Dambadarjaa hiid were located there it
was named Urguu in 1639-1706, Ih huree in1706-1778, and Da huree in 1778-
1911. From the second half of the 19th century Ih huree became a commercial
junction city [17.30] and consisted of several parts of Zuun huree, Gandan, Baruun,
Zuun damnuurchin, horoo hartsuul, Konsulyn denj, Naimaa hot and others.
From 1860 Russian commercial offices opened in the capital, from 1861 Russian
Consulate set up, thus a district of Konsulyn denj was formed. In this district the
first European style two-storied stone house was built, in 1863-1865 storied
buildings were constructed in the Chinese street. Since this period storied houses
have been built. In Da huree many companies and firms from capitalist countries
like China, Russia, England, the U.S.A., Germany, Japan opened and trade, service
and manufacture buildings were constructed. [18.191]
In 1911 Mongols officially proclaimed Ih huree the capital of Bogd Han’s
Mongolian state after overthrowing the Manchu dynasty. The first national ih
hural (October 29,1924) legalized the capital of the Mongolian People’s Republic
and named it Ulaanbaatar. [19.67] The current buildings of the capital have been
built since the 1940s. The Government house was built in 1945, National Opera
in 1947, Mongolian State University in 1943, State Department Store in 1961,
Exhibition Hall in 1961, Ulaanbaatar Hotel and others. All these beautiful
buildings changed the face of our city that became famous as a white princess of
Asia. Since this period Mongolian urban planning and development were enriched
with European architecture. It was a start of a new stage of urbanization that
included architecture, design, control and planning. It made a big change in city
location and development. Since the 1960s new industrial cities emerged, such
modern cities as Darhan, Erdenet, and Baga nuur. The city location began to be
based on the natural and raw material resources.
In the last 40 years development of Mongolian urbanization many new
approaches emerged.
• Many storied buildings prevailed in the city centers. The first 4-storeyed
building of School 1 was constructed in 1946. These buildings represent
face of a modern city.
• Another specific feature of city planning is construction of apartment
buildings and enterprises.
• Mongolian city planning has a design of European architecture.
• The number of residents is a criterion to determine urbanization. By
international standards, a town with the population of more than 500,000 is
a major city. The capital of our country is included in cities.
In brief, the location and development of a Mongolian city: in the
process of hundreds of years of traditions, reforms, reconstruction it as
become an administrative, economic and cultural center of Mongolia.
A part of Ulaanbaatar, the capital of Mongolia
Mongolian’s Living Mode and Specific Features
Prof. (Dr.) Shuluunbaatar L. (&) Master Batbaatar, B.
Mongolians are the ancient inhabitant in the vast steppe of Asia and
specific civilization’s founders. The learning Mongolians history, economical
cultural attainment and understanding folk rich knowledge from nomads in the
Central Asia are the integral significance in the real condition of true imagination
in the near future of humanity development because Mongolians have specific
features and living mode, they were overcome a difficulty. Therefore Mongolians
living specific peculiarity experience and moral are based on the folk cultural
legacy and we would like to take task briefly. Mongolians believe in their future
and work during the market condition very handly owing to kind helpful livestock.
Mongolians were born in the herdsman Mongolian nomad’s and they usually think
about virgin land like native land. Let your eyes are clearly and tiptoe is solidly, please.
Mongolia is located in the high part of Asia separating from the oceans
and surrounding by high mountain chains that block the wet winds Mongolia
has extreme continental climate. There are 4 seasons winter, spring, summer and
autumn. Mongolia is a country of many mountains and only a small part consists
of plateau and hilly land. Most of the major mountain chains are in the west. They
are called Altai Khangai, and Khentii mountain chains. Mongolia has 33 famous
Gobi and it is rich in ancient fossils our wide motherland has the wild animals:
steppe fox hare marmet gopher, wild goat, wild horse, wild camel, gazelle bear,
wild bear, elx and five major kinds of livestock. The water fowls go to Orkhon,
Selenge, Onon, Kherlen and Tuul rivers.
Many people still follow a nomodic lifestyle. They live as herders driving
their animals across Mongolia’s vast grasslands.
Since most people live as herders horses play an important role in
Mongolian life. Mongolians learn to ride when they are very young often before
they aren’t even five years old. In Mongolia the most powerful piece in the game
of chess is the horse not the queen.
Nomads of Mongolia live in gers. These are large circular felt tents that
are easy to raise, dismantle and move. The Mongolian ger is ideally suited to
the country’s extremes of climate and the people’s nomadic way of life. It is a
multipurpose dwelling that can be easily collapsed, transported to another place
and put up again fully preserving its original shape being constantly on the move
with herds of animals or being on military campaigns compelled Mongols to build
gers on carts.
Old books contain pictures of such gers temporary abodes in which
families of three or four could spend the night or find shelter. After some time the
use of carts stopped because they were clumsy and the gers couldn’t be hauled over
long distances as there was the danger of getting stuck in the mud somewhere or
tipping over.
The ger has two key components the wooden homework and the felt
cover. The wooden parts are the walls, the long poles, the wind smoke escape
and its supports. One wall consists of 10-15 wooden poles, each about 1.5 high,
bound together in a way making it possible to fold it for transportation and then
unfold like an accordion. The unfolded walls are connected to form a circle.
The long poles are fastened to the upper part of the walls, with the other end
passed through the round support at the top of the ger, the only window and
smoke escape in the ger. Two posts prop up the round support all this forms the
wooden homework of the ger, which resembles an open umbrella. Two layers
of the felt are then laid on the roof and on the walls and tied down with hair
rope. The top of the ger has a felt flap that can be drawn over the roof when the
weather is bad.
Inside the ger, felt is laid either on a wooden floor or straight on the
ground. The door of the ger always faces south towards the sun. The number of
walls and poles determines the size of the ger. Most herders’ gers have five walls.
larger gers can have up to 12 walls. in the centre of the ger is the hearth, which has
a special meaning for the Mongols. Apart from its utilitarian purpose, the hearth
symbolies this with ancestors, There are several customs associated with hearth.
Desecration of the hearth is a sun and an insult to the master of the house. The
hearth is mounted on three stones, which symbolize the host, the hostess and the
daughter-in-law. The hearth is the center of the ger and divides the ger space into
three conventional areas- the male and female quarters and the Khoimor, The ger
round and squat, can withstand harsh winds while the quick drying felt is good
protection against the rain and snow. In the towns and urban-type settlements, gers
are being ousted by modern well- built housing. Young Mongols prefer to live in
comfortable flats.
The Mongols don’t like to talk about unpleasant things. it’s believed that
such talk may invoke trouble. It’s even more impermissible to say bad things about
friends and acquaintances. If at times something unpleasant has to be said, people try
to do it as tactfully and inoffensively as possible. On the other hand, expression of
good will and praise are widespread. Praise of their mother country the beauty of the
natural scenery , the hospitality of the host, etc, presents or special form of folklore.
Foreign guests remark on Mongolian friends- lines. The hard conditions
of life, far from embittering them, gave rise to the long- standing traditions of
friendliness and hospitality. The host is well aware that the wayfarer entering his
ger is tired and may still have a long way to go. Such specific features as Mongolia’s
vast sparsely populated area, its rigorous climate and nomadic economy could not
fail to make their imprint on the people’s bahaviour and the manner in which they
express their thoughts and sentiments. Over the centuries the people of the steppe
have developed their own ethics of social conduct.
There are many types of greeting in the Mongolian language that are used
depending on the situation and the time .
In Mongolia it’s not accepted to knock at the door of a ger or say, “Can I
come in?” The guest as he approaches the ger is supposed to shout loudly, : Hold
the Dog!” even if there is no dog, for what he actually means is to let the host know
that he is coming.
The host and hostess emerge from the ger wearing their hats and buttoned-
up dels. As for the hats, if in Europe men take off their hats when greeting each
other in Mongolia the rules of good behavior demand that they wear their hats in
such cases. The host helps the guest dismount form his horse and takes him into
the ger.
To begin with the man exchange snuff bottles never mind if you don’t have
one. You should accept the host’s snuff bottle. take some snuff and return it. The
Bottle should never be returned with the lid tightly on. Then the hostess begins to
serve tea often made in the guest’s presence.
It’s not acceptable to ask the guest out right where he comes turn and for
what purpose. He should say this himself at some point during the conversation of
other asking the traditional questions about the weather the cattle, etc.
The hostess serves tea in a small bowl holding it with both hands stretched
out towards the guest or with the right hand supporting the elbow with the left
arm. The guest is supposed to accept the cup in the same fashion. It would be
very proper to let down the sleeves supposedly, the vest was changed in design
to an openfronted vest after a woman was found to have taken part in the event
and won! Now a days Mongolians respect their customs and traditions very well.
Mongolians are the people who are from their pacture to the borderland. The
novel was written 648500 people were lived in Mongolia at the beginning of XX
century, the industries were developed: science, culture, education and health were
lated and backward. But Mongolians remarkable achieved success in the social
progress deeds owing to national democratic revolution in 1921. It’s possibility
for any foreigners who came to Mongolia. All people’s struggle was developed for
founding socialism about 70 years to 1990s in Mongolia. In that period Mongolians
have own script and 75% of the population are from 0 to 35 years educational
young people. Many people live in the city and work in the different places. For
instead one of them was worked in Duvna, Russia as a scientist, two of them were
worked in the expedition of learning Antarctic region and J.Gurragchaa was sent
to the World by the Soviet- 39 as an explorer. Many wrestlers are wrestling in
Japan very well. Today two million four hundred people work very hardly in our
country. Mongolians are very friendly, kind and hospitable and this cahractar is
liked too many foreigners. Mongolians were preferred in the cattle breeding from
the XIII century to XIX century. Mongolians have the right to belive in religion
and the constitution of Mongolia proved about it. Our religion was established in
India and Tibet. Haan of Mongolia Chinggiss said “when use the soldiers, they
will need good arrows and bows. When do the good arrows and bows they will
need good hands. When it was established good governments, they will need
good kings. People established the world in the horse but people didn’t eliminate
deficiencies in the horse”. B. Tortoxtomor ban made the doctrine about the true
living in 1852 and all Mongolians followed it. To. ban said, “when you work in the
official organizations, you will work for yourself. When you graze, you will pick
in the firewood. The theft is the shame.”
Women of Mongolia : Past and Present
Enkhtsetseg Dugarsuren
There are many prominent men famous by their heroic deeds who
contributed much to the historical development of Mongolia. But also there are
many women were born in our country who had played not less role. The great
deeds and efforts of numerous beautiful women whose names been engraved in
the history of Mongolia still been remembered till our days. Historical chronicles
mentioned that they were patriotic and smart, humane and honest as well as full of
respect of the wisdom and teaching of elders.
For Mongolians with nature wide as steppe and with genuine aspiration
to the freedom, social status of women was quite high. Although the women in
nomadic society were outside of the political system and their influence on decision
making was limited only to the household level, there was ancient tradition to take
into consideration the opinions of some wise queens.
There are many chronicles mentioned that ancient queens were influential
partners of their aristocratic husbands and this fact had strong impact on concept
of women’s role in Mongolian society at the later periods of the history.
According to the ancient tradition, the eldest queen of the previous khagan
was given the full power of the Empire and ruled for certain period before the
new khagan was enthroned. First Queen who ruled the Mongolian Empire was
Durgunu and she fiercely struggled to overcome the internal confrontation among
the noblemen of the Golden Kin while the Queen of Tului khagan, Sorkhogtani
has been invited to assemblies and gatherings of noblemen and was one of the
high influential and most reputable figures among the Golden Kin. French envoy
Guillame Rubrouck wrote: “Among Queens of Tatars most famous is the Khagan’s
mother - Queen Sorkhogtani” while Rashid Ad Din mentioned that “Sorkhogtani
was the best among women of the whole world by her genuine talents and abilities”.
By the recommendation and advice of the wise Minister Chingai, the Queen of
Guyug khagan - Ogul Haimish - was in charge of the state power for certain period
and became very famous for her deeds. Another prominent Queens such as Burte,
and Khubilai’s Queen Wise Chimbai were trustful supporters of great khagans in
ruling over the huge Empire.
The eldest Queen of Dayan khagan - Mandukhai - was a very famous
figure in the Mongolian history as a safeguard of the state governance and unity of
Mongolians, who overcame the mutual fight among local feudals and ensured the
continuation of the Golden Dynasty.
Beautiful Mongolian mothers not only delivered and bred up the brave,
strong and smart warriors, but as history evidences, they also directly been involved
in state and military affairs. Rashid Ad Din proudly mentioned in this “Annals”
about the daughter of Khaidu - “Khotol tsagaan princess” Ayurug who became
well known for her heroism and active participation of military campaigns.
The Chinese envoy Man Hun wrote in his “Complete annals of the Mongol
Tatars” about the Chinggis Khagan’s daughter Alaha begi who had the title of the
“princess governing the state”: “ Every day Alaha begi was reading the books, she
was surrounded with several thousand women; in case of any war and struggle she
solves the problem by herself”. This is evidence that she was as well educated as
skilled in military art.
Another prominent lady - Mandukhai Queen was fighting to the
strengthening the unity of Mongolia being “well armed, combed up her hairs and
taking with herself the good Dayan khagan in the coach”. The history does not
forget that Any Queen was beside the Galdan boshigtu and sacrificed her life
fighting against the foreign invaders for the independence of Mongolians.
All these show that queens and other distinguished ladies of Mongolia
have created the background for the success of men in a field of state or military
affairs. It is not mere a chance that “Secret history of Mongols” underlined the link
between the support of women and the success of men:
“When, oh, my Great Lord,
You were unifying the country
With strong effort and struggle
Your beloved mother-queen
Was suffering as you do”.
Therefore, the role and efforts of these ladies were highly appreciated and
distinguished by such a titles as “state queen”, “eldest queen”, “mother of the
khagan”, “good queen”, “wise queen”, “smart queen”, “taikhu”, “beiji”, “Begi”
(the heads of tribes also were called begi).
Since the beginning of 20th century, the political status of Mongolian
women was cardinally changed and their dependence from men became to an end.
The first Constitution of Mongolia adopted in 1924 proclaimed that: “All citizens
of the country, without distinction as man or woman, shall enjoy the equal rights”.
Since 1926 the legal environment for reinforcing the political rights of women as
well as their right to work was set up.
Since 1921, the Government pursued the policy of active participation
of women in political affairs and set up the goal to increase the share of women
Parliament Members up to 25 per cent. In a result of this policy, according to the
data of 1931, 30 per cent of members of the local administration were women. This
is the highest indicator and since that time women started to be elected in “State
Baga Khural”- Parliament of that time. The share of women working in such high
positions as Ministers, Heads of Departments in various Government institutions
as well as within political or non-governmental organizations has been increased
continuously.
In 1990-ies, when democratization process had started, the most Mongolian
women, despite of their high educational attainment, remained as “passive” group
with regard to the development of the state policy, being burdened by double or
sometimes even triple responsibilities. Although, women actively been involved in
the process of reformation and became “the most active and dynamic force” of the
civil society. The representation of women in political or decision-making bodies
has been increasing constantly.
Today, the goal to enhance the women representation in legislative bodies
up to 30 per cent, was set up at the international level. In the beginning of 1990-
ies the participation of women in Mongolian Parliament was 23 per cent, and this
indicator declined in 1992 to 3.9 percent. Today this share is about 10 per cent.
- Though the share of women in high Government positions is quite low, it
is remarkable success that the number of women in middle administrative
level has been increasing.
- As for the juridical bodies, it is a good indicator that 70 per cent of local
and 50 per cent of city judges are women.
- Today the non-government organizations (NGO-s) have been playing
an important role in protecting the rights and expressing the views and
opinions of women, in enhancing their participation in social and political
life of the country. There are more than 10 women NGO-s have been
working in Mongolia.
All above mentioned show, that there is still needed to increase the
leadership of women and their representation at political decision making level.
The social status of Mongolian women has undergone the evolution over
the various periods of the history.
In comparison with neighboring countries, the image of Mongolian
women mainly was expressed not as being humble and passive, but as “enlightened
khutugtu”. But, we should say, that within patriarchal society as Mongolia, except
the distinguished qufiens, princesses and other high position ladies, other women
did not been allowed to participate in decision making at the macro level. Life of
ordinary women was devoted to the family and relatives, and their most important
social role was the to give the birth to the children and bred them up. From another
side, role of women in herdsmen’s family, evaluation of their role as mother from
the whole society was quite high in comparison with other Asian countries.
As in all other countries the main traditional role of women in Mongolia
was delivering the children, teaching them and breeding up as great khagans,
warriors, scholars, government officials and just ordinary citizens.
As ancient legend says, the wise teaching of Alun Goa queen, who stressed
the importance of unity and the negative effect of disorder and intestine, was very
popular among the Mongols during their long historical path. The “Secret history
of Mongols” proudly mentioned that the sons of Esukhei Baatar, bred up by their
mother - Oelun mother - became the great heroes and warriors:
“... Sons bred up by fair mother Oelun
Grew up as the state ministers
Sons bred up by beautiful mother Oelun
Grew up as prominent ministers
Sons bred up by mother Oelun
Grew up as brave ministers and
Reached the perfect power”.
The Queen of Tului khagan - mother of three Mongolian khagans
(Munkhe, Khubilai and Hulagu) Sorkhogtani was often been mentioned in various
historical chronicles and she founded in Bukhara the school for 1000 pupils named
as “Centre of knowledge”. Later this school was called as “Queen’s school”. Other
distinguished lady- the mother of Khalkha’s Tsogtu Taiji - the queen Chintaikhal
- also established the school in her palace to “teach the boys and girls”. All these
and many other facts evidenced that women played an important role in teaching
and educating the people, in spreading the knowledge among the population.
Since ancient time till the present days Mongolian women were and are
the “enlightening force” in the society. If famous Alun Goa queen left for us her
teaching on importance of unity and brotherhood, the Chinggis khagan’s daughter
Alaha Begi was well educated enough to read every day and was as well skilled
in war arts while the Sorkhogtani queen respected all religions and favored as
Muslim so other religions and have been admired by her vassals.
Beautiful and thoughtful Chimbai queen considered that Buddhist religion
and teaching of Kon Fu Tsi will be very useful for great khagans in their future
deeds to rule over the country and played an important role in intellectual life of
the Mongols.
Queen Chintaikhal together with his son established big educational
and cultural center in their residence and run there such activities as teaching,
translating, studying, writing and printing the religious books. The Mother Queen
of the Nation - Dondogdulam- had collected many incredible cultural and art works
in her palace. We could conclude here, that many queens and other prominent
ladies were envoys of the cultural revival of Mongols.
Other important role of Mongolian women was the participation in creating
the material wealth. The main legal act of the Mongolian Empire: “Ikh Zasag” says:
“When men will fight, women took the field together with them, are obliged to do
all the work which usually done by men”. This is the evidence that women were
responsible for all work in their household during the absence of husbands. The
Chinggis khagans “Bileg” also set the social and family responsibilities of women,
saying that: “the man is not the sun which show up here and there. When husband
goes out for hunting or fighting, the wife should keep order in her household and
show the comfort of her home to guests ... if she will follow this rule, the authority
of her husband will be high, his deeds will succeed and he will be respected among
the people. The husband will be judged by the appearance of his home...” This
actually means that behind the successful man usually stands the faithful women,
supporter of her husband.
It is very interesting that, in spite of fact that, the rights of women in
ancient Mongolian society were quite limited, some legal acts contain provisions
protecting these rights. For example, “Ich zasag” has such provisions as:
- “If women shall visit the noblemen and ask to extricate her or her relatives
from punishment for certain criminal affairs, she should be respected and
some minor punishments are ceased”.
Insulting of women should be punished.
- Then woman is sitting on the mattress in her designated place to the left
from the fireplace, nobody has the right to touch that woman etc.
The “Law of Altan khan” (1540-1580) has number of provisions such as: -
if somebody will touch the married woman and torn out her clothes, guilty person
should be fined by horse, cow - if parents will marry their daughter in improper
ways, they should be fined by nine nines
- raping the virgins should be punished - actions entailed the abortion of
pregnant woman should be fined by nines taking into account the months
of the lost baby. These provisions demonstrate that Mongolians have a
good tradition of protecting the women from violence and inhuman
treatment.
In the beginning of 20th century Mongolia has followed the USSR and
choose the path of the socialism. Since that time from underdeveloped nomadic
country Mongolia has developed into urbanized and industrialized modern country
with planned economy system. A lot of political, economic and social changes
have been made during these years. In a result of such reforms, the role of women
in social and economic life of the country was fundamentally changed too.
The national democratic revolution of 1921 and the Constitution of
1924 proclaimed the equal rights for women, since the 1925 the engagement
was officially prohibited and since the 1923 the civil rights of women to work,
learn and participate in political activities were enhanced. These measures were
important steps towards overcoming the old rigid traditions and rules and giving
the full rights to women.
During the socialist time the Government pursued the policy of encouraging
the birth, considering the population growth as an important matter of the national
security. All expenses for the health and education sector, in particular for child
care facilities were born by the state budget. This facilitated the burden of women
and their role in the society has been increased considerably. Though from some
point of view it was a progress, the number of responsibilities on the shoulders
of women such as working as breadwinners, taking care for children and doing
household works were burdening them.
Since the 1990-ies much attention has been paid to address such issues as
policy toward the women, their rights and freedom, employment, eliminating the
discriminative provisions from the legislation, gender equality etc. The tendency of
studying in educational institutions of middle or higher level and being employed
in almost all sectors of the economy, which was typical for the women during the
socialist period, is still been observed nowadays.
It is considered that the equal rights in the employment have been provided
if share of women is 45-55 per cent in whole employment of the population. As
for the Mongolian women, this level has not been reached yet, due to increase of
unemployment during the transition to the market economy system. Recently, the
employment of women started to increase. Women still play dominant role in such
occupations as teachers, doctors and employees of service sectors. Certainly, this
is one of the prominent achievements of our women. We could also mentioned
here many and many women working in a fields of arts and culture, those names
are well known to the public.
The educational level of women is continuously increasing, and the
enrollment of girls in secondary schools enhanced from 80.9 per cent in 1998 up
to 95 per cent in year 2002. As for the girls studying in universities and institutes,
their share increased in 2002 up to 70 per cent while in 1998 it was 62.3 per cent.
There are signs that this tendency shall be maintained in near future.
75 per cent of the population with secondary education are women. At the
end of 1990-ies 43 per cent of doctors of science, 31 per cent of economists, 80 per
cent of doctors, 70 per cent of lawyers were women. These figures are very high
indicators.
Mongolia today has a completely different picture in comparison with old
times, we could say that our society “breaths with women”.
References:
1. “Secret History of Mongols”. Ulaanbaatar, 1990.
2. Rashid Ad Din “Annals”. Moscow 1990. t. II-2
3. Plano Karpini “ History of Mongols”. Ulaanbaatar, 1998.
4. Marco Polo.” Wonders of the World”. Ulaanbaatar,
5. Menda Bet Lu., Moscow. 1985.
6. “Mongolian women”(UN bulletin) 2000.
7. National Statistics Bulletin. (1998-2002)
8. J.Urangua & D.Enkhtsetseg “Mongolian princesses” Ulaanbaatar 2000.
The Mongolian National University

Ulaanbaatar
Current Mongolian Cultural Problems:
Internal and External
Mashbat O. Sarlagtay
Philosophy is universal, but the main problems of current philosophy are

always different from one region to another. The main problem of Hellenic or
ancient Greek philosophy was the source of the universe: material or intellect.
Because their question was the source of the universe, they easily accepted
Christianity. However, in Eastern philosophy, matter was the status of man in the
universal world, including Heaven and Hell.
The basic problem of ancient Mongolian philosophy, caused by Mongolia’s
nomadic lifestyle, was how to adopt into the natural environment and how to
organize people to survive through natural harshness1. Because of that, the first.
Mongolians became the most opportunistic people in the world, and their ability
to adapt is amazing. Second, the political heritage of Mongolian statehood has
had a rich and distinguished adaptive experience. Mongolian culture and customs
became very specific.
Mongolian Khans ruled their people two ways: one by “rule by moral
force” and other by “rule by law”. Chingis Khan successfully used those two ways.
He delivered the “Great Yasa,” implementing the rule of law and “Bileg Surgaali,”
a book introducing moral principles. The “Great Yasa” is very familiar in foreign
countries that were under the rule of the Great Empire. “Bileg Surgaali” became
the book that one who is willing to become an intelligent man traditionally had to
study at first; it is still popular among Mongolian Diasporas today.
There is a supporting idea of this tradition in modern state theory. Modern
state theory cites that state power has two aspects, authority and legitimacy2.
Authority of the state requires an understanding of legal enforcement. But
legitimacy of state power relies on the belief of citizens in the current state and
usually is provided by the national ideology or what we call “nationalism”.
During the Communist era, Mongolian state ideology was Marxism-
Leninism and proletarian solidarity. However, traditional pride of Mongolians was
suppressed, most of population really believed in establishing paradise on earth for
the poor and slaves, and their moral value became Communist. Mongolians were
proud of their social lower-class origins, worker class status and even poor living
conditions.
The ideology was so strong that people destroyed Buddhist temples, key
to their traditional religion, executed thousands of lamas and abandoned much
of traditional statehood heritage. More than 90000 people, from high officials to
ordinary herders and lamas, were executed in the repretion during 1930’s. Endeed.
it was 20% of the adult population comparing to 700 thousands of whole population
of the days . Mr. Elbegdorj. one of the democratic leaders, has mentioned in his
3
briefing in 1993 that the one sixth of whole population of Mongolia had been
executed during the communist regime4. From 900 of monastries those existed
before5 the people’s revolution, only one has remained and practiced under the
strict control of the MPRP, during the communist regime.
Later, in place of such cruel bloody acts, Mongolia introduced Western
culture and joined the global world6. At the very beginning of the revolution,
people’s government introduced modern but socialast type of financial and
commercial services, industury and transportation based on state property with
soviet aid and the worker class, a compeltely new social phenomenon of the days,
was born. In the result of this development it had been laid down the roots of the
light industry. Leaders of the government have concluded in 1961 that Mongolia
has stepped to agricultural-industrial country from agricultural. The XV party
congress held in 1961 has adopted the 4th program of the MPRP, and stated that
“The main economic challenge of this stage is completion of laying down material
and technical base of socialism in the most effective way such as industralization,
mechanization of the agriculture, improvement of technical supply of every
branches of people’s economy. In the near term, the party goals to change the
People’s Republic of Mongolia to industrial and agricultural country which
economic structure has balanced between main branches of socialist economy,
including raw materials and final product industries.”7
One of the main part of the gaol was russification of mongolians. The
report of Yu.Tsedenbal on the second Plenary session of the Central Committee of
the MPRP, held in 1972, pushed idea of that every mongolians must speak russian.
In 1979, it was launched “wide use of progressive soviet expierences to establish
socialism in Mongolia completely”8, indeed, it was russification policy under logo
of “socialist lifestyle”. According to these acts all high educational establishments
tought on russian, and Soviet Union became an exapmle of highest development, a
dream of Mongolians. Imitation of russians began to spread all over society, and in
fact Mongolia became the sixteenth republic of Soviet Union in terms of culture.
Mentality of imitation is still kept in the mind of the mass.
The goal of laying down material and technical base of socialism had
been continued until collapse of communist regime in Mongolia. In late of 1980’s,
economy began to exhaust its resources, living condition began to diminish, and
it became visible that communism has no future. Besides, governers were refused
to follow the Soviet’s perestroika in terms of politics, and people were in shocke
because of sudden refusal of their previous imitating habits of Russians.
The Democratic Revolution in the 1990’s led to not only to a change of
political and economic systems, but also intellectual change. The end of the Cold
War and fall of the Communist regime gave Mongolians private property, the right
to feed themselves, political freedom, and the right to choose those who govern.
However, democracy didn’t tell people how to behave.
In the beginning, the change in the social system caused a sudden rise in
national feeling, which had been suppressed in the past. The people, who had been
drawn away from tradition and grew up without almost any knowledge of tradition,
emotionally began to imitate their ancestors, even inventing primitive traditions
without consciousness and hate all heritages from Communism, including the
positive and global ones. Elder generation, imitating old mongolians, began to
have long hair, to wear long red debel (traditional mongolian cloth). But they
inconsciousnessly changed or reenvented old mongolian restriction of drinking
alcohol during traditional fest of new yaer to drinking it three times in everywhere
it have been invited which is bad habit of Russian communism.
Simultaneously, calling them “hoary nationalists” those with opposite
opinions arose and began to dispute that nomadic people usually live in primitive
habits and don’t have any cultural heritage. They, the modernists, ignored not only
all Mongolian traditions, but also Eastern civilization and assumed it had barbarian
habits. They created “the union of protection of Damdinsuren’s script” or mongolian
version of russian cyrellics, protesting nationalist attempt of declaring thousand
yaers old traditional mongolian script as an official script of Mongolia. Modernist
also ignored Chingis Khan’s role in the history, judging him as an agressor, killer
and violent barbarian leader.
Today it seems that “hoary nationalism” was an attempt of inconsciousnessly
imitating of ancestors, while modernist ideology was an inertia of satilate mentality
that saw the Mongolian history and culture from Russian point of view9. Both
of those extreme opinions had their positives. Nationalists tried to reanimate all
traditions, most of which are positive, including traditional script and statehood
philosophy. Their opposition tried to maintain all successes that were earned
during the Communist period, worrying that nationalists could destroy them.
With the market economy and liberal ideology of newly born private
entrepreneurs, or “noveau riche,” and small business owners, a cosmopolitan
ideology gained and nationalism began to diminish. Democracy and economic
liberalization has significantly promoted spread of liberal cosmopolitism.
Besides the ideology of emerging entrepreneurs, two main factors are
playing the most important role in wide spread of liberal cosmopolitism. They are;
urbanization and demographic specifics of Mongolia.
Currently, Mongolian society composed from two different cultures:
nomadic and urban10. More than two third of the population is settled in urban
area11, but animal husbandry is still strong in its economic structure. Government
policy to develop industry, in order to provide solid base for economic growth,
was directly influenced in increasing of urban population and meantime it drove
to emergence of new lifestyle, the urban one. For 70 years of communist regime,
diversity between urban and rural population has not been widened because of
centralized planning economy, but for last decades, the diversity is quickly widened
in terms of social benefits, business opportunities, living standards and especially,
cultural mentalities.12
Urban lifestyle has been emerged under Soviet and East European
influence. That is why Mongolian urban population determines that they have more
European lifestyle than Asian. For last decade, the urban mentality was affected
by strong oriental cultural influences, including Korean, Japanese and Chinese.
Composition of urban population has also a significant portion of immigrants,
recently settled from rural areas. With these reasons, current Mongolian urban
mentality is very complicated. In spite of these facts native urban citizens, whose
pioneers were under East European influences, maintain their majority in both
terms of composition and mentality. It has also promoted to spread of liberal
cosmopolitism.
Also demographic factors play the important role in wide spreading of
liberal cosmopolitism. Mongolia is one of the world’s youthful countries. Over
70% of the population is under age of 35 and 45% is children under age of 1513. It is
in youth culture that changes are most pronounced. There is a funny phenomenon
in politics that political parties are usually facing difficulties to nomenee candidate
in presidential election, who must be not younger than 45 years old. Even 70
years old MPRP fases the same problem finding a person who does not have a
communist image and is eligible in fixed age by the constitution. In effect of global
information flow, especially urban young generation, called MTV generation,
began to be driven from traditional nomadic values away.
Excessive liberal cosmopolitism is the current face of Mongolia. It has
had negative results in Mongolian society today, which diminish national feeling
and ignore patriotism among the population. If rising liberalism might be example
of the opportunistic and adaptive ability of Mongolians, but it is harmful for
Mongolia’s existence as a nation.
Current Mongolian society is imitating America, and political leaders
are encouraging it. For young generation, america is a perfect example of high
development, which was Soviet Union for their parents (see above). Imitation of
someone, rather than to be in youself, is the consequence of diminishing patriotic
nationalism and inertia of satilate mentality.
It is obvious that there is an absence of government regulations or what
called “rule by morality.” Fear from state ideology, caused by Communism, makes
leaders unable to deal with this kind of matter. If the Mongolian Government
will not deal with this problem further, state authority will lose its legitimacy and
national security will face threats.
Culturally, Mongolia is a unique country. Samuel Huntington, author of the
book “The Clash of Civilization” and one of founders of the theory of civilization,
has classified Mongolia to Buddhist civilization14, remarking its Lamaist variant of
Mahayana Buddhism. But he has completely ignored Mongolian nomadic lifestyle.
Mongolia used to belong to the “East European countries plus Mongolia”
camp, as we call. It was not only because of its Soviet-oriented political regime
and close sociopolitical ties with European socialist countries, but also in terms of
“new socialist lifestyle”, one of the communist Utopias. But after the fall of the
Communist block, it faced the problem of re-determining its position in terms of
culture and civilazation.
Eastern European countries had had the experience of capitalism and
common culture based on Christianity; for them, Communism was a terrible
thing that could destroy society, but they were forced to accept it. However,
for Mongolians, Communism was not only an opportunity to reestablish their
independence, but also a bridge to reach a common cultural heritage. Mongolia
accepted Communism by force too, but perceived it as payment for modernization.
Former socialist European countries always were part of Western Civilization, and
western influences essentially contributed to their transition not only in political
and economic fields, but also to intellectual ones. In contrast, Mongolia is almost
in a helpless situation between Russia, where social uncertainty is still continuing,
and China, where the Communist regime is still stable.
Mongolia is located on the junction of three main civilization areas
represented by the three major religions, Christianity (Northern neighbor),
Confucianism (Southern neighbor), and Islam (Kazakhstan is a culturally direct
bordering neighbor; also Mongolia has Kazakh diasporas), but is itself a Buddhist
country. Even Mongolian Lamaism derived from Tibet and has its origins in
Mahayana Buddhism, different from the Hinayana Buddhism that spread in
Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and other Asian countries.
Mongolia has a nomadic culture, but comparing to other nomadic people
such as Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, it also has Buddhism.
Mongolia doesn’t accept Chinese culture. Traditionally, Mongolia was in
the “Inner Asian Zone” in terms of Chinese security15. Thus obviously it has had
some influences, but not much. Taoism and Confucianism were not popular, there
was no soil to grow their seeds, because of different lifestyle. Mongolian cultural
heritage, especially for the last three centuries, was similar to Tibetan, but Tibet is
now under the authority of the PRC. There are certain possiblities to use Lamaism
with purpose of creating Dalai Lama’s anti china institution in Mongolia, which is
not desirable for us.
Some researchers from former soviet countries launched an idea of
“Eurasian culture and civilization”, remarking the Mongolian contribution to
establish it. Great Empire of Mongolia was the third Eurasian Empire in the edge
of second millennium and had played significant role in forming new states in
wild steppe of Eurasia16 for next millennium. From Lithuania to Kyrgyzstan it had
great influence, and countries those arisen after the Mongolian Empire, including
Russians, inherited Mongolian statehood philosophy.
One of the problems that face Mongolia is the absence of active political
and economic integration in its vicinity. In the North, Russia is still in crisis and
exhibits no positive sign of standing on its feet in the near future. In the West,
the situation in Kazakhstan is almost the same as in Russia. China, our Southern
neighbor, has a very high growth of economic development but it still has a strong
Communist regime, and there are certain possibilities of conflict in its political
regime and economic system. In the East, there is a divided Korea, “the last piece
of ice of the Cold War.” Thanks to the two Korean leaders, their recent acts bring
us hope that the ice is beginning to melt.
In conclusion, since the end of the Cold War, Mongolia is facing a problem
of national ideology and identity in internal affairs and is seeking integration not
only in political and economic fields, but also culturally, in external environments.
There is no way to live alone or outside of global integration. Mongolia has to
develop a conservative state ideology to maintain its national identity and an active
policy to join an Asian and global world.
The camp of “East Europeans, plus Mongolia” is a matter of past.
Mongolia has to determine itself as an Asian country on both geographical and
cultural bases. In so doing, Mongolia is seeking to join ASEAN, which is an Asian
type of integration model. Also Mongolia strives to contribute to the Tumen River
economic free zone project and join to the pipeline project from Siberia to Japan,
hoping to lay the base of Northeast Asian integration. Unfortunately, political
power to make decision is not under authority of Mongolia, but major powers in
Northeast Asia.
In the early 1990’s Mongolia was “an island of democracy in the heart of
a continent” surrounded by the USSR and PRC. Now, Mongolia doesn’t want to
remain an isolated island in the heart of a continent surrounded by globalization.
References :
1. D.Dash purev. “Etapi Modernizatsii Mongoliskogo Obszestva (ModernizationStages
of the Mongolian society)” in Russian. UlanBator. 1995, pp 43-44.
2. Donald M.Snow. “National Interest”.N.Y.1987 p7
3. D.Dashpurev. “Etapi Modernizatsii Mongoliskogo Obszestva (Modernization Stages of
the Mongolian society)” in Russian. UlanBator. 1995, pp 101-102.
4. Ts. Elbegdorj. “Mongolia who found its identities”. Briefing in the ceremony of “Young
Leader” foundation, after his receiving of honour “the young politician of the year 1992”.
UlanBator. 1993.
5. D.Dashpurev. “Etapi Modernizatsii Mongoliskogo Obszestva (ModernizationStages of
the Mongolian society)” in Russian. UlanBator. 1995, p 103.
6. S.Soyombobaatar. “Onuugiin Mongoliin niigem dehi unet zuiliin zarim asuudal” (Some
axiological problems of current Mongolian society). Diploma thesis. NUM. 1997. pp 14
15.
7. B.Shirendev.” Kapitalizmiig algassan ni (jamp over capitalism )”. UlanBator. 1968, p127
8. D.Dashpurev. “Etapi Modernizatsii Mongoliskogo Obszestva (Modernization Stages of
the Mongolian society)” in Russian. UlanBator. 1995, pp 146-151
9. I.V. Orlova. “Evraziiskaya Tsivilizatsiya (Eurasian Civilization)”. (Moscow, 1998),
p 55. I.V. Orlova criticises normanist way of examplanation of Russian history and
corresponding conclusions about Mongolian rule over Russia. No nation, but Russians
always blame Mongolian rule for its violence and brutality, Which is not much credible,
while nations like Chaina and others of Middle and East Asia, those were also under
Mongolian rule, see the matter in different way. Normanism of Russian history is
dedicated to show that Russia belongs to European civilization, therefore, it proves
that origin of Russian statehood derived from Scandinavia, but Mongolians had drawn
Russians away from their European core of civilization and blames for it.
10. Alicia J.Campi. “Moving Mongolian nomadism into the 21st century: Cultural and
ecological preservation coupled with economic vitality and national security”. Research
thesis. (Washington. 1997) p 7.
11. “Human development report Mongolia 1997”. (Ulan Bator.1997) .p3
12. Alicia J.Campi.” Moving Mongolian Nomadism into the 21st cuntury: Cultural
and ecological preservation coupled with economic vitality and national security”.
Research thesis. (Washington.1997) .pp 7-9.
13. “Mongolian economy; yesterday, today and tomorrow” (Ulan Bator.1999) .p15.
14. Samuel P.Huntington. “The Clash of Civilization” (N.Y.1987). p48
15. Samuel P.Huntington. “The Clash of Civilization” (N.Y.1987). p 168
16. I.B.Orlova. “Evraziiskaya tsivilizatsiya”( Eurasian civilization), (Moscow, 1998) .p107.
Researcher
The Institute for Strategic Studies
Mongols and Dogs
Lonjid Zorigt
Mongolians consider their dogs as one of the family member. However,

ethnological researchers about many different customs related to dog are very rare.
So I have prepared some of my research materials about dog-related Mongolian
traditional customs that I have collected since 1966 from over 600 people.
1. Choosing a puppy
It is important to choose a very healthy and strong pup if a man wants to
have a good dog. There are some ways to find a good pup. First, the eldest female
pup bitch that is giving its second birth is healthy and strong and it can learn
everything that an owner teaches. Second, if you don’t know which puppy was
born first, you should take a female puppy with still closed eyes, which was born
3 or 4 days ago, and hold in the middle of its tail and raise it up its head down. If
the puppy yelps and can turn its head up, so it is the best puppy. However, some
Mongolian ethic group people consider a puppy that doesn’t yelp in this situation
is the best one.
2. Casting a puppy aside
It has two main reasons for casting a puppy aside. First, no one needs a
sick puppy. Second, to prevent the increase of stray dogs.
Not chosen puppies that are unnecessary or with some disabilities are
casted away in its 3rd or 4th days. The puppy is left far from then residential places,
in a place where there are many preys of birds such as eagles and vultures, at the
time when it gets dark and the first star shines in the sky. When a man leaves a
puppy, he says in its ear “ It’s hard to find a place even for myself, not just you. Be
born as a man in the next life.”
No one can ever kill puppies; because it’s said that killing a puppy is the
same as killing a baby.
3. Names for dogs
According to the Mongolian tradition, only a host of a family – a man, or a
male shaman, or the youngest son who is older than 8 years old, of a family getting
a dog, or a hunter can give a name to a dog. A woman or a lama (religious man)
cannot give a name to a dog.
There are many different names for a dog. 1. Dogs are given these names
symbolizing their body and appearance; they are as Banhar (power), Huder
(big), Hurd (speed) and Sonor (hearing). 2. Dogs are given names symbolizing
a strong and powerful animal; they are as Arslan (lion), Bars (tiger), Baavgai
(bear), Hartsaga (hawk), Burged (eagle), Shonhor (falcon) and Hoilog (snow
cock). 3.Names connected to the household works that dogs are used for, they
are as: Anch (hunting), Hotoch (household), Honich (sherherd). 4. The words that
express color of dogs in Tibetan are used as the names for the dogs, for example as:
Nyungar (white-heart), Chinag (black dog), Chirganjav (lower creatures) etc. 5. If
a dog of a family always dies or escapes, the family name their dog by a foreign as
Chinese, Russian or Kazakh word. 6. Names can express the age, gender or breed
of a dog, as for example: gulug (puppy), jinger (female), hav (a dog breed), and
taiga (a dog breed) etc.
4. Color of dogs
Mongolians divide color of dogs into 2 groups: the best or normal color
and wrong or unfamiliar color. Four-eyed brownish-reddish dog would have the
best color of a dog. This kind of dogs has 2 yellow spots over its eyes and its legs
and muzzle have orange stripes and its body is black.
A black dog with a white blaze over its heart is considered as a normal
color dog. Yellow, white and light-colored dogs are wrong color dogs. It’s also
considered a very bad sign of a disaster and a drought if number of multicolored
dogs and puppies are getting bigger. Although a white dog is a wrong color dog, it’s
considered better than a yellow or a multicolored one. Also, a dog with a white tip
to its tail was not admitted as it has some characters to call evil spirits. Therefore,
if a white hair was ever seen on the tail of a puppy, the hair was cut off.
5. Keeping and feeding dogs and puppies
Puppies will be healthy and big if young puppies suck their mothers’ breast
for the first 5 or 7 days. Twenty-one days old young puppies may be feed by grain
mixed with meat, gristle or the five organs (liver, heart, lung, spleen and kidneys)
of the livestock. If a puppy, younger than 6 months, is fed on meals - rich in milk,
meat-dish and too much fat, the puppy’s lungs pulse would become thin and the
puppy would become sleepy and slow.
Also, there are several things that dogs are never fed on. They are:
livestock’s testicle, especially a stallion’s and a camel’s testicles. If dogs eat them,
it would bring a bad luck.
It’s said that if dogs were trained to eat much in the morning, less in the
afternoon and the least in the evening, they would become more alert.
Hunting dogs are fed a piece of meat (600-700 gr.) once a week and the rest
of the time they are fed little by little on wild animal’s boiled lungs, kidneys, and
spleen mixed with dung ashes. Also it’s prohibited to feed dogs on wild animal’s
testicle and brain.
6. Dressing dog’s fur
When puppy was 4-5 months old, resin of the coniferous tree was boiled
in copper ladle and this substance were applied at the end of two ears, beginning,
middle and end parts of the tale of the dog, thus firing the skin little bit. After that
the disheveled hair of that part never will molt, but two bulky parts of hair will lie
down from the ear up to the knees of the front legs, the hair of the tale will look
shaggy making the dog big in shape. Such dogs used to be called as “asar basar” as
lion with voluminous tale.
7. Expressing man’s characters in comparison with dogs
From the ancient time Mongolians express the nature to be honest and
reliable comparing to dogs and horses. Chinggis Khan called his four generals
Zeb, Hubilai, Zelme and Subeedei as “my four dogs”. In the ancient Mongolian
historical books the following expressions as “It’s hard to find an honest friend
like a dog”, “If a dog is kept by a poor man, it wouldn’t follow a rich man; if a dog
is kept by a serf, it wouldn’t follow a king” are used quite often. These proverbs
are still valuable nowadays. Moreover, people called a profligate and a lewd man
as “Nokhoi niguurtan” (dog faced), and a man who committed adultery with his
female relative was called “A fool dog, doesn’t recognize the relatives”. In other
words, many different characters of human beings are expressed in comparison
with dogs.
8. What are dogs used for?
Mongolians have been keeping and using dogs for protecting the livestock
and family, for hunting, for transportation and for accumulating merit. Mongolians
never kill dogs intentionally, so dog’s meat isn’t used for food.
Seven hundred years ago when Hubilai Khan was in power (1260-1294),
he ordered to use dogs and asses for the relay in some states of Great Yuan Dynasty
(now it’s Northern China) and dog-sleds started to be used for the relay system.
However, it is not clear when it was stopped.
Epilogue
I have told very briefly about some Mongolian traditional customs related
to a dog. However, quite a lot of questions weren’t mentioned, such as How
Mongolians make their dogs’ voice more deep and Why to do so; How to train
dogs in different habits (hunting etc); What is told about dogs in folk stories and
oral literatures (tales, riddles, proverbs and songs); What places, plants and animals
were named after dogs and the reason for it etc.
Dept. of History
Ulaanbaatar
Versions of ‘Kalachacra’ Astrology in Central Asia
Dr. Urianhan Lhsaran-no Terbishi
“Kalachacra” belongs to a componant part of the tantraism in Mahayana

Buddhism. The main componant part of “Kalachacra tantraraja” is included in the first
volume of “Tantara” in “Ganjur”.
It is furtherly called as “Tantararaja” in short. “Tantararaja” has legendary tale
and our lord Buddha preached it for the first time for the khans led by Davaasambuu of
Shambal Land. When Davaasambuu khan returned to his country, he composed the
fundaments of it, set up Mandala of Dus’khor and wrote its commentary called “sixty
thousand verses”.
Since that time, seven khans, Lhavan at their head, took the crowns of shambal,
and out of 25 khans, the first khan Jambaldagva created “the brief fundaments” in
wood monkey year. His son Badamgarav wrote the Great Commentaries of the
fundamentals of the “Tantararaja”. In the wood monkey year (in 624) at the time when the
Tenth khan Jamtsonamjil succeeded to the crown, the Muslim Branzylodoi (Mohamed)
preached his Muslim’s astrological fundamentals in Maha Land. This is called the origin
of fire, space and ocean that is the ironic name of the figure 403. Later years, Indian Wise
Pandida Jiluba (X century) went to Shambal Land, crossed the ocean with a treasure-
seeking merchant following the then routine in a desert. While traveling, he heard the
astrological doctrine of the khans such as Jamiyan, Janraiseg and Sayanyambuu and spread
it in India. This is the tale how the Kalachacra was introduced to India.
Now I briefly dwell on the versions and their spreading of Kalachacra and its
componant part of astrological science in other countries of central Asia.
In the fire hare year of the first 60 year cycle (1027), “Dus’khor Jyyud” and its
great commentaries of the Kalachacra were Translated into Tibetan thus kalachacra
began spreading in Tibet and in the fire hare year of the third 60 year cycle Jabzun
Dagvajantsan, Dogon, Chosjal Pagva, etc, the wise banditos of the astronomical and
astrological sciences made detailed study of Tibetan astronomy and astrological
verifications, composing lunar calendar called “Sajaan Loto”.
In the earth horse year of the fifth 60 year cycle Garmava Ranjundorj, applying
kalachacra on the Tibetan geographical positions, wrote his famous book “All
Embraced Astrology”. In the year, the lama was invited to Mongolia khan’s courts for
a year, and it was noted in sutras that he gave great benedictions of kalachacra.
Tibetans furtherly spread the science of astrology and astronomy, in the year of earth
cock of the seventh 60 year cycle (1429), Dondov-Odser, Tsur school, wrote the sutra
“The fundamentals of the Buddhist astrology”. This works laid the foundation of the
Tsur School. Following principles, Jalvaan-mijid-dorj wrote his book “Orbiting of the
celestial bodies”, Garmava Tsegchigdorj, in wood monkey year of the 14-th 60 year
cycle (1824) composed his book “Gem beads of Good Teaching”, Baavoozuglagprenva,
in fire monkey year of the 9-th 60 year cycle (1536) wrote his book “Treasure fund of
the Great Commentary of the All Embraced Astrology”. In water mouse year of the 14-
th 60 year cycle (1832), Jamgan Yondonjamts, compiled his book “All Embraced sutra
of Astronomy”, in the same year Mipam Rinbuche wrote his “Sum Ray of Great
Vachir commentary of the Dus’khor”, “Great Gem mirror of introduction to the
astronomy”, “Wonderful sun of the celestial astrology”, and “Gladener of the fresh
students on detailed arrangement of the 12 constilations”. These are the wonderful
sutras of “Tsur school”.
In the fire hare year of the 8th 60 year cycle (1447), Da Pugva Lkundevjamts,
relying on the sutras by Lanchun Choidogjamts and Khaidav Norsonjamts, compiled a
book called “Oral testment of white lotus on the fundamentals of the astrology”. These
three books are called three oceans. The book served as foundations of “Pug” schools.
Following the principles of the school, Khaidav Norsonjamts compiled his book called
“Transparent Ray illuminations of the fundamentals of kalachacra. Many famous books
were written by Pugva Baldanprenlei and Lkhanba Dondov-Vanjal since that time. In
water pig year of the 11th 60 year cycle (1683), Desrid Sanjaajamts of Mergid wrote
a main sutra called” white sapphire of Pugva astrological school”. The Kalachacra
which had been handed down from India and Tibet, spread in neibouring country of
china, of an ancient culture in the version of yellow astrology (zodice) and the yellow
astrology was spread in Japan, Korea and Vietnam, etc...
As for Mongolia, Mongolian physician, philosopher Lubsandanzanjantsan (1639-
1704) renowned as “Lamyn Gegeen” compiled his Buddhist astrology books such as
“Bright light of obtainable and unobtainable”, Handbook of Buddhist Astrology and “All
Emraced astrology of causes”. In that way, he laid the foundation of the spread of the
Kalachacra in Mongolia.
In the fire hare year of the 13* 60 year cycle (1747), Mongolian historian.
philosopher Sumbo Khambo Ishbaljir (1704-1788) created a new kind of astrological
new school called “a new astrological school of perfect happiness” or “dGe ldan
rtzis gsar’, at applying the principles of Tibetan “Tsur” and Pug schools upon the
geographical positions of the land of Mongolia. So Mongolians used to have their own
astrological school.
During the period of the spread of Buddhism in Mongolia, alongside with
making commentaries on the words and meanings of kalachacra sutras, there were
many Mongolians who wrote books on its theories. Particularly, Gabju Lubsanchoinzin in
Great Enclosure (Urga) (the 20th century) made commentaries to the Great Commentaries
of kalachacra, Agramba Damba from khand ching Wang Monastery in Sain Noyon aimag
wrote a legand on shambal land, and Agramba Nonzaddorj (the 19* century) also compiled
a book on the creation of the universe of the kalchacra school. There were also not a few
people who wrote books on the debates and discussions on the theory of Kalachacra.
Namely, Agramba Dandar (20th century) of Khand Ching Wang Monastery compiled a
book callled “Dus tshig” and it was used as a handbook for Tibetan philosophy school.
Mongols used all the four school principles are Tsur, Pug, yellow astrology school
of perfect happiness. It is all evident when we read the books written by Mongolian
astrologers.
Kalachacra astrology began to spread since the great khan periods and it closely
linked with the nomadic livestock breeding engaged in, by Mongols on the great land of the
country.
In conclusion, I’d like to state that it was a great contribution to the world
mathematics and astrological sciences, made by central Asian people through developing
India traditional kalachacra astrology, writing independent theoretical books on it, Creating
Tsur, Pug, yellow astrology and a new astrological school of perfect happiness in
accordance with peculiar characteristics of their own countries and inventing the
easy way of their own countries and inventing the easy way of difficult mathematical
calculations of the astronomy and astrology.
At present, astrological Pug school in India, Tsur school in Tibet, yellow
astrology in china, Japan, Korea, etc, and a new astrological school of perfect
happiness in (outer) Mongolia are being still followed for making their calendars.
Ex Professor
School of Mongolian Languages and culture
Ulaanbaatar
Notes on Thirteen Banners of the Out Province of
Mongol in the early Qing Period
Darijab
Manchu ruler appointed Jasay who commander of banner (qusiyu) and

established banners in Mongols in 1636, after conquered the Mongols lived in
southern of Gobi desert. They grant title to Mongols nobles in April, and sent
officers to take a census in Mongols and fifty households set up a Niru that
unit of army and civil administration under the Banner in October. According
the record in early Annals of Manchu (Jiu Manchu Dang in Chinese, we
abbreviated it as JMD ) the 27 banners were established 1. It is an important step
that took Mongols social organization into Manchu system. But in Chronicle
of Qing emperors (Qing Shi Lu in Chinese) and other history records were
never mentioned the number of 27 Banners, called them “thirteen Banners
of out province of Mongol”. For example, on the occasion of Mongol nobles
extend New year’s greeting and presenting tribute to Emperor in the court was
recorded as “thirteen banners of out province of Mongol” in Chronicle of Qing
emperor during 1637 to 1642, And recorded as “twenty-seven Banners of out
province of Mongol” from 1642 to 1656.2 I feel puzzled in this contradictory
record for long time. It is very lucky that I have found a piece of document
in the first archives of China in Beijing in 1989, which written in 1637. It is
not only give as the reason why to record 27 Banners as “thirteen Banners of
out province of Mongol”, but also provide much other useful in formation about
Mongol history in the early Qing dynasty for us. Therefore I try to translate this
piece of archives from Mongolian into English and give a brief explanation of it.
The original text transliterated by Latin is as follow:
Barayun yar yin Tusiye-tu Cin Wang un qoyar jayun tabin dorben otoy,
qoyar qusiyu. jegun yar yin joriy-tu Cin Wang un jayun yeren yurben otoy,
qoyar qusiyu. Bogode dorben jayu docin doloyan otoy. dorben qusiyu. Eruke
yin toy-a qoyar tumen qoyar mingyan yurben jayun tabi.
Auqan qorin jiryuyan otoy, Namian qonn dorben otoy, qoyayula yin
tabin otoy, nige qusiyu. Manjusin vin arben doloyan otoy, Ayusi yin arben qoyar
otoy, qoyayula yin qorin yisiin otoy, nige qusiyu. Sangyar yin yucin naiman
otoy, Nayici yin qorin yisiin otoy, qoyayula yin jiran doluyan otoy. nige qusiyu.
Daraqan joriy-tu yin docin qoyar otoy. nige qusiyu. Mujang yin jiran otoy, nige
qusiyu. Dugureng jiyun Wang yin qorin tabun otoy, Jasayun Daraqan Daicing
yin yucin dorben otoy, qoyaula yin tabin yisun otoy. nige qusiyu. Urad ym
yucin doluyan otoy, nige qusiyu. Qaracin jiran otoy, nige qusiyu. Tiimed tabin
jiryuyan otoy. nige qusiyu. Caqar, Qalq-a, Abay-a, Qaracin, Turned Bogode
dorben jayu jiran otuy, yisiin qusiyu. Eruke yin toy-a qoyar tiimen yurben
mingy-a.
Tusiye-tu Cin Wang un tabun qusiyu yi nigedgeju qoyar qusiyu, Joriy-
tu Cin Wang un tabun qusiyu yi nigedgeju qoyar qusiyu. Auqan Naiman nige
qusiyu, qoyar Bayarin nige qusiyu, qoyar jaryud nige qusiyu, dorben Keuked
nige qusiyu, Mujang nigen qusiyu, qoyar Ongniyud nigen qusiyu, Urad nigen
qusiyu, qaracin nige qusiyu, qoyar Tumed nige qusiyu, Bogod arben yurben
qusiyu. Bogda Qaqan dur nigen jil dur yurben Uy-e alba erguku yin ucir dur
qorsiysan bui. aba ayan du ijayur un qusiyu baiy-a bui.3
Translated it into English is as follows:
The right wing [of Qorcin that commanded by] the prince of Tusiye-tu
has 254 otoy (A administrative unit of Mongol before submitted into Qing),
were consisted of two Banners. Left wing [of Qorcin that commanded by] the
price of joriy-tu has 193 otoy, were consisted of two Banners. These total four
Banners, 22,350 households.
Auqan [tribe] has 26 otoy, Naiman [tribe] has 24 otoy, total 50 otoy,
become a Banner. Manjusiri has 17 otoy, Ayusi has 12 otoy, total 29 otoy,
become a Banner. Sangyar has 38 otoy, Nayici has 29 otoy, total 67 otoy,
become a Banner. Daraqan joriy-tu has 42 otoy, become a Banner. Mujang
has 60 otoy, become a Banner. Dugureng jiylin Wang has 25 otoy, Jasay-un
Daraqan Daicing has 34 otoy, total 59 otoy, become a Banner. Urad has 37
otoy, become a Banner. Qaracin has 60 otoy, become a Banner. Turned has
56 otoy, become a Banner. The tribes of Caqar, Qalq-a, Abay-a, Qaracin and
Turned are total 460 otuy, 9 Banner, 23,000 households.
Five Banners of Qorcin Right wing [commanded by] prince of Tusiye-
tu have been composed of two Banners, Five Banners of left wing Qorcin
[commanded by] price of joriy-tu were composed of two Banners. Auqan and
Naiman is one Banner, two Bayarin is one Banner, two jaryud is one Banner,
Dorben Keiiked is one Banner, Mujang is one Banner, two Ongniyud is one
Banner, Urad is one Banner, Qaracin is one Banner, two Tumed is one Bannner,
total thirteen Banners. It is composed for presented tribute to Bogda Qaqan (the
Emperor of Qing dynasty) three times in a year, while hunting or going on an
expedition still in unit of original Banners.
This text recorded why and how to have composed the thirteen
Banners. But the name of some tribes were written down by their chiefs name,
not Banner’s name, therefore we need compare it with Old Manchu Annals and
other history record distinguish every Banner was mentioned in this document
and give a brief explanation, so that make it understandable.
In the first paragraph, the name of prince Tusiye-tu is Badali, who was
the Jasay of middle banner of right wing Qorcin, also commander of right
wing five Banners. The name of prince joriy-tu is Uysan, he is Jasay of middle
banner of left wing Qorcin, also commander of left wing five Banners, See last
paragraph of text.
While we compare this paragraph with some part of early Manchu
annals (JMD) that recorded the same event, the word Qusiyu in this text is
relatively gusa in Manchu, original meaning of this word in Manchu is banner.
The word otoy is Niru in Manchu text. The original meaning of Niru in Manchu
is arrow, it replaced by Sumu the Mongolian word with the same meaning later.
Even though the word otoy still used in this Mongolian document, but it is
relative to Niru in here, content of it is changed, Therefore the words Qusiyu
and otoy (Sumu) all Mongolian name of Manchu social unit in this text. The
number of 447 otoy of two wings of Qorcin appear in this text can correct the
wrong number of 448 otoy in JMD which have calculating mistake.
In the second paragraph, recorded the other Banners except of Qorcin.
Qorcin ten Banners is left wing of Mongol and other Banners together is right
wing of Mongols in that time. Left wing of Mongols is headed by Tusiye-tu
Cin Wang Badali, right wing headed by Eje the son of Lingden Qan of Caqar
when presenting tribute or in the other kind of ceremony in the court. 4 While
we distinguish the confused name of Banner chief and the name of Banners in
this paragraph, the Banners mentioned in that document should be as follows:
Auqan – –Auqan Banner.
Naiman –– Naiman Banner.
Manjusiri–Bayarin left-wing’s Banner, Manjusiri is the chief of this
Banner.
Ayusi ––Bayarin right wing’s Banner, Ayusi is the chief of this Banner.
Sangyar–-jaryud right wing’s Banner, Sangyar is the chief of this
Banner.
Nayici ––-jaryud right wing’s Banner, Nayici is the chief of this Banner.
Daraqan joriy-tu-- Dorben Keiiked Banner, Daraqan joriy-tu is title, his
name is Ombu, the chief of the Banner.
Mujang–Aru Qorcin Banner, Mujang is the chief of the Banner.
Dugureng jiyiin Wang-Ongniyud right wing’s Banner, Dugureng jiyiin
Wang is title, his name is Suduyureng, the chief of the Banner.
Jasay-un Daraqan Daicing --Ongniyud left wing’s Banner, Jasay-un
Daraqan Daicing is title, his name is Dung, the chief of the Banner.
Urad–Urad three Banners.
Qaracin – Qaracin Banner.
Tumed –Tumed Banner, Tumed had two banners in this time.
Auqan and Naiman were two tribes of the Caqar eight tribes before
they submitted to Manchu. Bayarin and jaryud were two tribe qf the five tribe
of Qalq-a before the}’ submitted to Manchu. Dorben Keuked, Ongniyud and
Urad are called Abay-a (uncle) for their chiefs are descendant of brothers of
Cinggis Qayan.
In the third paragraph, recorded the name of thirteen Banners and
explained the reason why to compose the thirteen banners. It is for convenient
them presenting tribute to Bogda Qaqan (the Emperor of Qing) three times in a
year, while hunting or going on an expedition still in unit of original Banners.
The main point of the information that the piece of Archives provide
us is as follows:
The first, it provided the information that a tribute regulation of
Mongols had been made by Qing government in the 1637. Thirteen banners
were set up for Mongols pay tribute and have an audience with Emperor, it is
a unit of presenting tribute but not really the Banner that social unit of Inner
Mongolia.
The Second, it provide the otoy’s number of every Banner of Inner
Mongolian in 1637 to us. The otoy’s number of Qaracin and Tumed Banners
in this text is not recorded in any other historic record, so it is very precious. If
we put the otoys number of seven Aimay headed by Momingyan recorded in
the old Manchu annals, which had 40 Niru and 942 households,5 we can know
the number of households and an approximate figure of population of the Inner
Mongolia under the ruler of Manchu at that time.
Notes:
1 See “Jiu Manchu Dang”(The early annals of Manchu), Vol.10. PP.5227—5252,
Taiwan, 1969.
2 Detail See Dalizhabu: The establishment of the Inner Jasay Banner in the initial
years of the Qing. Li Shi YanJiu (Historical Research), No.l, 1998.
3 Meng Wen Lao Dang” (the annals in Mongolian), No: 1, M60, PP.66—70. it is
preserved at the First Archives of China.
4 See “Qing Chu Nei Guo Shi Yuan Man Wen Dang An Yi Bian “ (The translating
of Manchu archives preserved in the academy of historian in the early Qing
into Chinese) vol.1. P.258. Translated by faculty of the first archives of China,
Beijing, 1989.
5 “Jiu Manchu Dang”(The early annals of Manchu ), Vol.10. P.5243.
Visiting Professor
Some Ideas on the Development of

Mongol Studies in Germany
Prof. (Dr.) Udo B. Barkmann
This article does not intend to work up the course of development and
achievements of Mongol Studies in Germany in its entirety. It is an attempt to
describe the changes in its various stages of development and under the different,
to a certain extent even politically contrary conditions and to analyse the relevent
approaches in their respective contexts.
Phase I: The Origins of Mongol Studies
Undoubtedly Mongol Studies is one of the young disciplines in the range of
the Oriental Studies in Germany, Nevertheless turcologists and sinologists devoted
themselves to the study of Mongolian language and literature resp. Mongolian
written documents much earlier than one could expect. So, in 1857 v. Erdmann
published a first essay about the “Kalmuckische Dschangar” (), v. D. Gabelentz
followed in 1863 with his essay on “Chinese-Mongolian Inscriptions”.
It is not surprising that it were sinologists first of all who occupied
themselves with Mongolian Studies as both Inner and Outer Mongolia were parts
of the Chinese empire until 1911. Investigation into the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty
in China (1271-1368) and multilingual inscriptions in Chinese, Mongolian and
Manchu, which had come down in the Chinese Empire from the time of the
Manchurian Qing-Dynasty (1644-1911) were inviting a close examination and
aroused interest in comparative linguistic studies. Moreover German foreign
policy gave important, however limited, impulses to the development of Sinology.
The rising political interest in the Chinese Empire was first of all a result of the fact
that Germany had come off worst in the colonial partition of the world. So it put
China in the focus of its interest. More and more Chinese interpreters and experts
who knew the country to serve in the diplomatic and military service in China were
needed. It were sinologists first of all who had long been active in the diplomatic
service of the German Reich in China that developed a feeling for Mongolian
issues, often influenced by their journeys through Inner and Outer Mongolia. So
in 1896 the legendary O. Franke (1863-1946), from 1888-1901 interpreter and
diplomat in the German Foreign Office in China, travelled to Krasnojarsk along
the Jehol-Area northwards through Eastern Mongolia and the Bujr-Nuur-Area. On
behalf of his employer he wrote a detailed description of the Mongolian areas he
had travelled.1
E. Haenisch (1880-1966), who had studied Sinology, Manchu and
Mongolian language under W. Grube (who died in 1908) at the Berlin University
from 1899-1904 wrote his doctoral thesis in 1904 on “The Chinese edition of the
Sanang Setsen, History of Eastern Mongols”.2 Later, from 1904-1911, similar to
Franke he was in service of the German Reich as lecturer in military academies
in Wuchang and Changsha. In 1913 he achieved his habilitation with an extended
version of his doctoral thesis.
In 1920, the Prussian Minister of Science, Art and Education appointed
Haenisch to the Chair in Mongol and Manchu languages at the Philosophical
Faculty of the Friedrich-Wilhelms-University in Berlin where, from the summer
term 1922, he was head of the Department of Sinology. In 1923 O. Franke was
appointed to the chair in Sinology in Berlin. So the alma mater of Gemany’s
capital offered best conditions for research work in the field of Mongol Studies,
promoted by two outstanding scholars, whose earlier practical activities and thus
intimate knowledge of East-Asian affairs resulted in a new vision of what Oriental
research can bring about, a rare phenomenon among philologists up to this time.
One of the students of Haenisch was, from 1922-1923, Paul Ratchnevsky3,
son of a Russian general, for whom after the Rusian revolution, Germany had
become the country of his choice. In 1923 Ratchnevsky settled in Paris, where
he first took courses in Chinese and Japanese at the Ecole Nationale des Langues
Orientales Vivantes, later at the Sorbonne. After finishing his studies, Ratchnevsky
occupied himself first of all with studies in Sinology, published articles in Germany
in “Sinica” and the “Chinese-German Almanach” which presented the works of
the French Sinology. During his years at the university Ratchnevsky’s favourite
subject was the Yuan-Dynasty. So Paul Pelliot recommended him to follow his
inclinations, which made him choose the Yuan legislation subject of his doctoral
thesis, which he defended in 1937 under the titel of “Un Code des Yuan”.
Meanwhile Haenisch was appointed Professor in Gottingen University,
later he succeeded Conrady to the chair in Sinology at Leipzig University, but
never lost his interest in Mongol Studies. In 1928 he went on an expedition from
Kyachta via Urga (now Ulan-Bator) to Kalgan, where he took chance to study the
rich collections of the library of the “Committee of Sciences” of the Mongolian
People’s Republic in Ulan-Bator. In 1932 Haenisch was appointed Head of the
Department of Sinology at Berlin University and succeeded O. Franke to the chair
in Sinology. Haenisch continued his work in Mongol Studies, which he could
intensify when he travelled to Inner Mongolia in 1936. He recommended F. Weller
from Leipzig to act as deputy for the chair, as Weller had a good knowledge of
Mongolian too.
One of Haenisch’s students from 1936-1938 was W. Heissig (born
in 1913), who aquired his first basic knowledge of Mongolian from Haenisch.
Already as a young man Heissig came to see the limits of the classical philological
approach to the Mongolian language. Later in 1941, at the University of Vienna,
he defended his doctoral thesis entitled “The Mongolian cultural changes in the
Hsingan Provinces of Manchukuo”, which is still esteemed high in the context
of contemporary history. Shortly after defending his thesis Heissig went to China
on military commission, from where he returned not before 1947. In the same
way as for O. Franke or E. Haenisch for Heissig, too, this activity in China, under
the dramatic circumstances of World War II, was a deep incision in his life. This
great tragedy of history definitely broadened his horizon considerably. It deepened
his understanding of regional interdependences at the background of East-Asian
policy. There and then he realized that research in Mongol Studies so far had hardly
been sensitive to the significance of Mongolian folk poetry. This insight, including
the knowledge he gained during his work at the Catholic University of Peking,
should prove to be important in his later career to develop a special feeling for the
chances but also limits of philological research.
In the second half of the thirties Haenisch concentrated on investigating
the “Secret History of the Mongols”, the oldest chronicle of the Mongols which has
come down to us from possibly about 1240. With the reconstruction of the text of
the “Secret History” “from the Chinese transcription using the Chinese interlinear
version and the Chinese translation” Haenisch left a scholarly masterpiece. He
presented the reconstructed text in 1937, a dictionary in 1939 and the German
translation of the text in 1941.4 To quote H. Franker “Neither a pure sinologist nor
a pure mongolist would have done this... Just someone like Haenisch who had the
knowledge of both a sinologist and a mongolist could tackle such a difficult task
with success.”5
The reconstruction and translation of the “Secret History of the Mongols”,
E. Haenisch’s lifework, laid the foundations for a more complex approach to
Mongolist projects in Germany. This was also the beginning of the promotion of
Mongol Studies through the “Notgemeinschaft der Wissenschaft”, later or present
“Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft” (DFG).
So the first phase of the development of Mongol Studies in Germany was
closely connected with the name of Haenisch. Up to 1945 Mongol Studies developed
in the “womb “of Sinology as a classical philological discipline, however far from
having its own concept as a discipline in its own right.
Phase II: Mongol Studies in the two Germanys
One of the results of World War II was the stabilization of the Mongolian
national state - the Mongolian People’s Republic. On the basis of the agreement
of the Yalta Conference China felt obliged to recognize the Mongolian People’s
Republic. Shortly after, in the period of the Cold War with the long-lasting East-
West Conflict, it was the Soviet Union which integrated Mongolia into the Eastern
Bloc. This development was sure to have consequences in some way or other on
the development of Mongol Studies in Germany, too, as two German states had come
into existence as a result of the policy of the allied powers after World War II.
When Haenisch left the Berlin University it was as if Mongol Studies had
come to an end at alma mater berolinensis. In 1953, however, Paul Ratchnevsky,
who had been appointed professor of Sinology at Leipzig University in February
1952, was given a teaching post at the Humboldt-University, the former Friedrich-
Wilhelms-University, in Berlin. Ratchnevsky offered courses such as “Introduction
into Written Mongolian” and a “Survey of Mongolian Literature”. He evidently
planned to establish Mongol Studies at Humboldt University both as a discipline
and a course of Studies. He asked the Mongolian Embassy in Berlin “to promote a
close cultural exchange with the University of Ulan-Bator and research institutions
in Mongolia”. In March 1954 he was appointed to the Chair in Sinology and Mongol
Studies at Humboldt-University. Ratchnevsky esteemed his appointment as an
estimation of Mongolian Studies. Full of joy he wrote: “For the first time Mongol
Studies was established as a major subject at a German university. It was an eight-
semester course, courses in Classical Mongolian and History were held by the
professor, a Mongolian lecturer had been engaged to teach Modern Mongolian.
The department of Mongol Studies was part of the East-Asian Institute.”6 To teach
spoken Mongolian (Chalch dialect) was a new feature. Certainly Ratchnevsky
was somewhat naive to think that he would shape Mongol Studies under the
given political circumstances in the German Democratic Republic (G.D.R./East
Germany) according to his own vision. In 1959 the Advisory Council to the State
Secretariat of Higher Education in the G.D.R. adopted a paper of propositions
on the “socialist development of Asian and African Studies”. A programmatic
declaration was added in I960.7 The Advisory Council demanded that a ten-year
conception should be worked out in “close cooperation with state institutions in
the home and foreign policy of the G.D.R.”. Furthermore it was laid down to work
out similarly characteristic descriptions of jobs as they are needed in the political
and economical life in the G.D.R. with respective demands laid down in course
programmes. The idea behind this concept was that the G.D.R. needed experts in
Asian affairs who met the demands of jobs and not academic requirements. One
must think of O. Franke, who, at the beginning of the century, said about Sinology:
“While the universities close their doors to it, as it seems to lack academic
standards, it is accepted in trade and industry and to a certain degree in the civil
service, but just to such a degree as it denies its academic character, that means it
is accepted as a language skill and knowledge of the country. There is no interest
in understanding the mentality of the Chinese in its historical context, and not
just see the language as a means of understanding but a key to literature. Ancient
China is of no use to us they mean at the universities - as we deal with the modern
one, which is necessary to know for the political and commercial business.”8 A
new feature in the G.D.R. was, this is true, the politcal indoctrination of Oriental
disciplines, their integration into a political concept of global dimension and -
seen in retrospect -amazing parallels to the idea of a “Foreign Affairs College”
(Auslandshochschule) as planned in the second half of the thirties.
So consequently Ratchnevsky followed the idea of research focussed on
language teaching. He suggested that “research should be focussed on describing
the language breaking with traditional concepts, which examines the structure
of the language from a new point of view, which uses modern methods, which
points out special features of the structure and explains these from a historical
point of view.” In 1961 Ratchnevsky put his assistent H.-P. Vietze in charge of
9
teaching Modern Mongolian. The building of the “Wall”, which in 1961 with
the tacit permission of the allied powers sealed the partition of Germany, made
Ratchnevsky understand, that it would be impossible for him to turn his vision
into reality. He gave up. In 1964 he was given emeritus status and resigned into
inner emigration.
For the above mentioned reasons Ratchnevsky could not put into effect
his ideas of how to develop Mongol Studies. It is, however, thanks to him that
Mongol Studies was revived as a subject in its own right at Berlin’s Humboldt-
University. He had created the conditions for its further existence - not little, or
quite a lot when seen in retrospect.
In his article on the stage of development Mongolian Studies had reached
in 1950 N. Poppe saw Mongol Studies basically reduced to a philological
discipline which concentrated on
1. (Since Ramstedt) investigation into Written Mongolian in the broadest
sence (lexicography, Middle Mongolian, description of the “Secret
History of the Mongols”, spoken languages (East and West Mongolian) ,
links of the Mongolian language to the Altaic group of languages etc.),
2. The secular and religious literature (including the rich epic folk poetry)
and
3. Historiography.
Poppe did not see any necessity to include research into Mongolian
history as a part of Mongol Studies. The reasons he gave for this were that
Mongolian history could only be reconstructed - up to the 13th century “on the
basis of Moslem and Chinese sources and only to a lesser degree on the basis of
the ‘Secret History’”, - in the 14th to the 17th century on the basis of Chinese
sources. Poppe’s view was “That the newest period in Mongolian history could
only be described on the basis of the same Chinese, Manchu and to a large extent
Russian sources.”10 He saw the Mongolian people as object of history, not as
subject or driving force of Mongolian national history. Recent results in research
work have largely reduced this view on Mongol history to absurdity.
When Heissig after long years as prisoner of war returned back to
academic life in 1951, he threw himself into work with great enthusiasm. In 1951
he took up a teaching assignment as university lecturer at Gottingen University.
He offered lectures and seminars on Mongolian language, literature and history.
Unlike other scholars he did not see the end of Mongolian history with the decay
of the Yuan-Dynasty in 1368. During his years of reflection Heissig had come
to the conclusion that it was time to emancipate Mongol Studies, to release it
from the “guardianship” of Sinology, to give it a new orientation under the “roof
of Altaistics. This orientation took into account the common roots and manifold
“genetic” links of Altaic peoples an was, considering the ties of Mongol Studies
to Sinology, due to the national development of Mongolia as a state. In a similar
way it was necessary to free Mongol Studies from the “stranglehold” of a classical
philological approach. From 1954, Heissig, together with S. Linhardt and O.
Pritsak published the “Gottinger Asiatischen Forschungen”, whose volumes first
of all were dedicated to the editing of Mongolian sources up to 1959. This series
of monographs later was continued unter the titel of “Asiatische Forschungen”
(presently 144 volumes) and completed from 1967 onwards by the yearly
“Zentralasiatische Studien”. In 1957 Heissig, D. Sinor and A. v. Gabain founded
the Permanent International Altaistic Conference (P.I.A.C.), headed by Heissig
until 1960 as General Secretary.11 The P.I.A.C., which since then holds regular
sessions, developed into an important platform for exchange and discussion on
the questions of the language, culture and history of the Altaic peoples in the
broadest sence of the word, bringing together since its foundation scholars of
different generations and national backgrounds.
When Heissig took up a teaching assignment at the Bonn University
towards the end of the fifties, he founded the “Seminar fur Sprach- und
Kulturwissenschaften Zentralasiens”. Without doubt the following concept for
the foundation of the Special Research Projekt SRP 12 (Sonderforschungsbereich
SFB 12) was of great significance. The concept of this SRP covered a wide range
of issues, did far more them what was the usual thing at that time, as for example
Project C “The political history of Tibet and Mongolia”. So in one part of Project
C the “political role of the Lamaist clergy which this group - a group which
seems to be devoted to just esoteric-philosphical aims has played and still plays
in the politcal desicions in Central Asia” was closely examined. This example
also shows that Heissig and his team wanted to do research work which was
effective in terms of politics without giving up its academic character. Another
important feature was to look for close contact with mother disciplines (such as
history and sociology) for the methodological aspect, which Orientalists often
and for good reasons tend to avoid.
Heissig also made it a point that through efficient academic research
there should be chances to participate in the “self-knowledge and self-portrayal
of other nationalities”12 to promote mutual understanding. This shows how
basically different he understood the term “applied philology” compared to the
scholars and researchers around him following a more classical Orientalist line.13
Quite a large number of publications shows the great success of this approach.
Whereas in the Federal Republik oft Germany one nor longer followed
the classical philological orientation and turned to a broader basis and embedding
Mongol Studies in Altaistics, the G.D.R. had adopted since the fifties a concept
of “area studies” (Regionalwissenschaften). The starting point was, no doubt, a
political approach, namely the process of “worldwide transition from capitalism
to socialism”. This and the relations of the G.D.R. to the respective countries
in Asia was the object of closer examination. Research in Area Studies meant
in practise the “investigation into the social processes in Asia in the context of
the international class struggle between imperialism and socialism”.14 Thus in
April 1974 the Ministry of Higher Education of the G.D.R. passed a “course of
study programme for the basic discipline Area Studies to be established at the
universities and colleges in the GDR”. Under the name of “East Asian Studies”
this scheme covered courses such as Japanese Studies, Chinese Studies, Korean
Studies, Vietnamese Studies and “Mongol Studies: studies on the development
of the Mongolian People’s Republic, the history of the Mongol peoples and the
Mongolian language and the social science in its own right Mongolistics”.
Apart from the “historical, economic, political, ideological, cultural
and linguistic aspects” special emphasis was put on the problems of a “non-
capitalist way of development” in Mongolia. The curriculum for students of
Mongol Studies included lectures and seminars on the history, economy, foreign
policy and international relations in East Asia to deepen their understanding of
interdependences in this area. Emphasis was put on teaching the language, with
language teaching also being in the centre of interest of research projects. This
mainly subject teaching oriented research could be carried out, generously
supported in terms of time, money and staff, through division of labour in
sub-specialization (politics, economy, history of the Party and the Revolution,
history, Mongolistics, Manchu Studies, Modern literature). A feedback for
research in Mongol Studies as a whole, however, was reduced to one area:
Mongolian language (publication of dictionaries by a team of mongolists headed
by H.-P. Vietze). The curriculum was kind of legal frame for course-work but
left teachers plenty of leeway to present new topics or approaches. So summing
up we can say that both in teaching and research the socialist Mongolian People’s
Republic was in the centre of interest. The Mongolian borderlands or Mongolian
minorities in the Soviet Union or China were of no interest. Staff and students
were, as a rule, engaged in interpreting and analytical work at all levels of state
activities. The frame for research in Mongol Area Studies or Classical Mongolistics
was to a certain degree coordinated with research institutions in the Soviet Union
or Mongolia. Graduates were trained to work mainly in academic institutions, the
Foreign Office, the State Planning Commission or as interpreters. The personal
networks resulting from this proved to be a useful link between the academic and
more practical fields of life.
On 23rd October 1975 the Bonn University presented a new degree course
scheme for “Linguistics and Cultural Studies of Central Asia”. According to it one
could choose Mongol Studies as a main or secondary subject with Tibetan Studies
as main or secondary subject. The main subject was not called Mongol or Tibetan
Studies but “Linguistics and Cultural Studies of Central Asia”. Per definitionem
“Linguistics and Cultural Studies of Central Asia” were understood to be “research
into the languages and cultures (history, society, literature, religion, material culture)
of the peoples of Central Asia, especially of Mongolia and Tibet and the teaching of
factual knowledge of the peoples living there as a contribution to change our views
of and broaden our minds on a new conception of the world so far predominantly
centred upon Europe. The topics in research and teaching do include themes relevant
to our times.”15

With offering this wide range of subjects in teaching the Bonn Seminar
took a step which had long been taken in research.
Phase III: Mongol Studies under the conditions of Globalization
The political changes in Mongolia since 1990 have led to the fact that
Mongolia today is a sovereign state and acts as an independent and self-confident
subject in international affairs, although its geopolitical location between Russia
and China will continue to make it object of the policies of its great neighbours. The
real chances of the Mongolian state lie in looking after its own interests in the play
of forces between globalization und regionalization. In this context Mongolia’s
integration into a North-East-Asian economic zone which is about to come into
being should no be’ underestimated. With a possibly more Asia-orientated policy
of modern Russia this tendency could even be intensified.
It is now up to Mongolists to take the decisive step and, with keeping
Heissig’s conceptional heritage, turn to the Mongolian national state as subject of
research. Critics of such a concept should be aware of the fact that both Chinese
and Japanese Studies have long taken this direction. To deal with political and
economic aspects of the countries which are subject of these studies has become
the normal thing today. In the context of Mongolia’s embedding in a region of
economic cooperation in North-East-Asia there will be links with Chinese and
Japanese Studies and research in Russian affairs, which will lead to a new quality
in interdisciplinary cooperation.
Investigation into the development of the Mongolian national state means
to study its history in the broadest sence (including contemporary history), its
policy and economy. Research work must be done to find out for instance about
the profound changes in the languages in this century, or the process of political
transformation. The fact alone that in modern Mongolia development-impulses for
any kind of political changes came from outside, that these processes were often
brought about under the strong influence of foreign advisers who often had and have
no knowledge of or show little understanding for specific characteristics of life in
Mongolia raises a number of questions. So, for example, a closer look is necessary
at the relation between Mongolia and China in the context of international law, the
political and economic relations between Mongolia and Japan, the conclomerate
of Russian intererests, and Chinese and Russian security interests in Mongolia.
Another issue which should not be neglected is Mongolia’s influence, in a positive
or negative way, on Mongolian minorities in Russia and China. When O. Lattimore
described his vision of Mongolia as once becoming a “leading state” for Mongolian
peoples he was laughed at. Today this vision has become reality. And last but not least
Mongol Studies can, and that I am fully convinced of, make a valuable contribution to
German development concepts in Mongolia.
If all these topics became an integral part of Mongol Studies at the
university, students would become much more interested in this course of study.
One should take into consideration that universities in our society today must be
achievement-oriented with an obligation to efficiency and that so far it is university
calculations based on staff-student ratio per course against which efficiency is
measured and which are the decisive factor in the decision-making concerning
both posts and assignments at research.
Academic work shall and must be free from restrictions, but it cannot be
seen as an end in itself. It must be efficient for society, because academic work is
publicly financed.
Footnotes :
1. O. Franke, Uber die wirtschaftliche Lage und Bedeutung der ostlichen Mongolei...,
in Munchener Allgemeine Zeitung, 24. Januar 1898.
2. E. Haenisch, Die chinesische Redaktion des Sanang Setsen, Geschichte der
Ostmongolen, im Vergleich mit d. mongol Urtext, Berlin, phil. Diss. 1904, 29 p.
3. U. B. Barkmann, Erinnerungen an den Nestor der ostdeutschen Mongolistik P.
Ratchnevsky, in Asien, Afrika, Lateinamerika, 6(1994), pp. 595-617.
4. E. Haenisch, Manghol un niuca tobca’an (Yuan -Ch’ao pi-shi). Die Geheime
Geschichte der Mongolen. Aus der chinesischen Transkription im mongolischen
Wortlaut wiederhergestellt. Bd. 1: Text und Anmerkungen. Leipzig 1937, 140 S.;
Worterbuch zu Manghol un niuca tobca’an (Yuan-Ch’ao pi-shi). Die Geheime
Geschichte der Mongolen. Leipzig 1939; Die Geheime Geschichte der Mongolen,
Aus der mongolischen Niederschrift des Jahres 1240 von der Insel Kode’e im
Kerulen-FluB erstmalig ubersetzt und erlautert, Leipzig 1941.
5. H. Franke, E. Haenisch zum 80. Geburtstag, in p. 2.
6. Cited by U. B. Barkmann, Erinnerungen an den Nestor der ostdeutschen Mongolistik
P. Ratchnevsky, in Asien, Afrika, Lateinamerika 6(1994), p. 600.
7. Erklarung des Wissenschaftlichen Beirates fur Asien- ud Afrikawissenschaften beim
Staatssekretariat fur das Hoch- und Fachschulwesen, private archive of the author.
8. O. Franke, Die sinologischen Studien in Deutschland, in Ostasiatische Neubildungen,
Hamburg 1911, p. 363.
9. Cited by U. B. Barkmann, Erinnerungen an den Nestor der ostdeutschen Mongolistik
P. Ratchnevsky, in Asien, Afrika, Lateinamerika 6(1994), p. 604.
10. N. Poppe, Stand und Aufgaben der Mongolistik, in Zeitschrift der Deutschen
Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 100 (1951), p. 88.
11. cf. Permanent International Altaistic Conference - Arbeitsbericht (1958 bis 1960)
12. W. Heissig, Mongolistik - ein Beispiel angewandter Philologie, Mitteilungen DFG
2(1969), p. 30
13. Same place.
14. Studienplan fur die Grundstudienrichtung Regional wissen schaften zur
Ausbildung an Universitaten und Hochschulen der DDR, Berlin 1974, private archive of
the author.
15. Studienordnung fur das Fach Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens an der
Universitat Bonn, in Bonner Universitats-Nachrichten, Amtliche Bekanntmachungen,
23. Oktober 1975.
Visiting Professor
Center of Mongol Studies, National University of Mongolia
(&) c/o. Embassy of Germany, Ulaanbaatar
Migration through the Ages:
A Case Study of Mongols in India
It’s a wonder that there is a bigger Mongolia in India than this Mongolia.
The population of Mongolia is 2.5 million and if we include Inner Mongolia, China
and Buryat, Khalmyks, Russia, their population reach up to 10 million, while in
India the number of Mongolians are about 30 million. There are also more than 4
million Mongolians in Pakistan (once Greater India), Afghanistan and Nepal.
Indo-Mongol relations dates back to 2700 years. Hunas (Hung Nus /
Khunus), Sakas (Scythians), Parthians, Kushanas and Mongols were coming
frequently to India in large numbers from North West frontiers and this yellow
race was called ‘Sweta Huns’ (whites), ‘Harahunas’ in ancient Indian books. Their
settlement started much before the times of Mihirkula, Kanishka or Temuchin. Not
only as invaders but also as students of Buddhism and Nagarjuna’s philosophy,
they were going to Nalanda University crossing the Himalayas by yaks and camels.
They were seen by Fa-Hian, Huen-Tsang and I-Tsing. Mongol pilgrims were
also visiting India. 17 rock paintings of Chitwa Dongri (Raipur, MP) reveals the
beginning Mongol settlement in India in the Neolithic age (i.e. 2500-600 B.C.).1
When Jalaluddin Khilji made matrimonial alliance with Ulghu, grandson
of Chengis Khan, who accepted Islam, married his daughter to him and as indicated
by Isami in ‘Futuhus-Salateen’ he was settled with his Mongols in thousands of
number at Ghyaspur, Kelogarhi and Indrapat, which was named as Mongolpuri in
Delhi. Later on they migrated to NEFA.
Khubilai Khan sent a troop to NEFA and Myanmar, which never returned
and settled in NEFA forever. Even Chaghtai Turks (i.e. Babur and the Great
Mughals) previously known as Barlas Turks were so much intermixed with
Mongols and Tatars in Central Asia (especially with the family of Chengis Khan)
that they were none else but Mongols and they settled in India in large numbers.
The historical migration of Mongols in lakhs of numbers is the story of
their settlement into the Mongolian crescent of India (i.e. from Laddakh, J.&K,
Himachal, Uttaranchal, Sikkim, Arunachal and NEFA; once Greater India too)
during a long span of thousands of years is the story of their journey of thousands
of miles. In this stretch of time and space, they have been influenced by the storms
of foreign geography, history and culture of their several stoppages.
Though the social and cultural impact on their physique, language, customs
and traditions are innumerable, they have still preserved a lot of things that they
are called by the name of Mongolians or Mongoloids in India. Keane says that
the Mongolians came in contact with Caucasian people, there the admixture took
place and hence the Indian Nagas, Khasis, Mishmis and Lushais are the Homo-
Mongolian in their special features.2
Indian Kiratas and Bodos appear as Indo-Mongoloids.3 Bodo-speakers
of Brahmaputra Valley are Indo-Mongoloids.4 The Mongoloids migrated in
successive waves covering thousands of miles, continued for many centuries,
and occupied North Eastern India at different periods.5 Dr. Shagdaryn Bira has
established that Mongol nomadic tribes in 7th and 6lh centuries migrated to the
northern parts of India. Former Mongolian Prime minister Amar became over
enthusiast in declaring that Mongolians migrated from western snowy mountains
of India with the camel caravans and settled in Mongolia.6 Former Chief Minister
of Mizoram, Lal Thanakola pointed that North-Eastern India’s Himalayan people
are Mongoloids descended from Mongols.7 The Kiratas had Mongoloid origins.8
The Khasis are unmistakably a Mongolian race.9 As I understand the course of
this great migration is still scattered and visible in the life of Mongoloids of India
especially of Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura etc. I have here
humbly tried to explore, highlight and analyze only some of the major similarities
still evident, vocal and prevailing in the Mongols in India and their Mongolian
brethrens in Mongolia.
India’s Himalayan people have racial, cultural and religious affinity to
the Mongols.10 There are innumerable similarities between Mongolians and the
Indian Mongoloids. The NEFA sisters, Uttaranchal, Himachal and Laddakh form
the large Mongoloid crescent of India. The most remarkable similarities between
the two are outwardly looks, way of walking, expressions and moods. It is very
difficult to differentiate between Mongolia and Manipur. The people are very
much similar to Mongols. The Ambassador of Mongolia H.E. Oidov Nyamdavaa
startled wonder struck to see the similarities between the two and while visiting the
NEFA, he said ‘ I couldn’t believe that I was in India’ (and not in Ulaanbaatar).11
The physical mark of blue spot on the back near the tail side of the newly born
Mongoloid children are very remarkable. The Mongoloids like Mongols are very
much meat-eaters and take every type of meat but preferences depend on the
natural availability. They also used to make dry meat like nomads. The Mongoloids
consume dairy products too much and like Mongols, put thick cream on the milk.
Laddakhi people use concentrated tea with butter same as the Mongols. They make
local wines same as Mongolians. The Mongoloids make ‘Zu’(rice beer) same as
Mongolians make ‘Shimiin Arkhi’ from milk. The daily foods have some climatic
variations. The utensils used in kitchen by the Mongoloids are also very similar.
Indian Himalayans also raise sheep, goats, pony-horses, camels, yaks and dogs
having same look.
Laddakhi, Himachali and Arunachali Mongoloids are identical with
Mongol dresses like ‘Deel’ and shoes etc. Some of the NEFA people also consider
the northern part of their Ghar or Gher, an honourable place as Mongol tradition of
Ger. The Mongoloid women use mounted pearls, coral, jade, jasper, crystal, topaz,
chalcedony, turquoise and agate with silver in their necklace as Mongols.
Some parts of NEFA has matriarchal society and no wonder NEFA is
called ‘Five Sisters’, while in Mongolia, women play much active part everywhere.
Respect to elders is also similar in Mongoloids. The Mongoloid women like
Mongols, avoid to address the husband or in-laws by their first name. The
Mongoloids have the same marriage system like Mongols.
The Mongoloids look after their cattle in the same manner as Mongols.
The Mongoloids in Arunachal carry baskets on their back as Mongolian ‘Arag.’
The language structure is same while pronounciation differs because of distance
of thousands of years. The Mongoloids folk dancer’s styles are also similar.
Wrestling, archery, throat-singing, drums and fiddles are very similar. Manipuri
‘Moirang Parva’ is similar to Mongol’ Morin Khuur’ and the Manipuri’ Pena’
sounds like ‘Morin Khuur’.
In Imphal, stone cairns are seen like in Mongolia. Manipuri Mukna style
of wrestling is similar to Mongolian ‘Buukh1. The Mongoloid especially Manipuri
wrestler’s dresses are similar too.
NEFA people also treat the guests with Snuffboxes like Mongols, which are
made of precious stones carried in embroidered pouches. There was a same practice of
headhunting in ancient times in Manipur and Mongolia. Like Mongols, the Mongoloids
perform the hair cutting ceremony of newly born children after consulting with the
Lamas. Manipuris, like Mongols, pass the knife through the handle side.
Therefore, it is my humble submission that the above-mentioned
similarities between Indian Mongoloids and Mongolians are enough evidence to
say safely that they migrated from Mongolia from time to time and ultimately
absorbed by the great Indian culture. A socio-historical survey of Mongols in India
proves that they are the descendants of Mongolians.
Let the socio-cultural relations between the two may restart and grow
again to herald a new era of blood friendship in India and Mongolia, who were
once upon a time great spiritual relatives.
References :
1. Yadu, ML. ‘Northern Indian patrika1 (English Daily, Allahabad) 27-6-1982.
2 Keane, A.H., ‘Caucasic Strain’, Man-Past-Present’ p.43f.
3 Das, ST.,’ Tribal Life of North-Eastern India’ (Giant Publishing House, Delhi.) p.245.
4 Chatterji, S.K. 1951.pp27-28
5 Ganguli; M.’Pilgrimage to the Nagas’ (Oxford Pub.Co.Delhi, 1904) p.2
6 Bhagabati.A.C.’Proceedings of North East India Historical Association. (Agartala,1998) pp2-3.
7 Amar A.,’ Mongolyn Tovch Tuukh’ (Ulsyn Khevleliin Khoroo, Ulaanbaatar, 1989) pp22-23
8 ‘NavBharat Times’ (Hindi daily, Delhi) 8-9-1991.
9 Meghalaya-Land&People’ (Pub.Directorate of Information & Pub. Relations. Government of
Meghalaya, 1991) p41.
10 Nyamdavaa 0. ‘Insights into the Mongolian Crescent of India’ (Himala Publishers, Delhi
1999.) p.47
11 Nyamdavaa, Ibid, p.56.
Head, Dept. of P.G. Studies & Research in History
NREC College, Khurja, U.P., India
Allauddin Ata Malik Juvaini and his work
‘Tarikh-i-Jahan-Gusha’
Dr. Muzaffar Hussain
Preface :
Allauddin Ata Malik Juvaini was a Persian historian who wrote an account
of Tarikh-i-Jahan-Gusha (History of the world conqueror) during 13th century. The
writings of Juvaini has reflected the Mongol dynasty in general but Chengiz Khan
and his successor, Seljuq ruler and Khawarizmi ruler in particular. He has covered
mostly the all parts of the conquest and the social, cultural and economic details
that reflects the real image of Chingez Khan and his successor. This paper is an
attempt to put in black and white both Juvaini’s life and times and provide details
about information on Mongol history as gleaned from Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha.
Early life and times
Ata Malik Juvaini was born in 1226 A.D. in Juvain, a city in Khorasan
in eastern Persia. This district, now known as Jaghatai, is roughly to the north-
west of Nishapur in Iran.1 The family of Juvaini was one of the oldest, noblest
and most famous in Persia and held high offices of state under the Seljuq and
Khawarizmshah dynasties. His great grand father Bahauddin Muhammad had held
the post of Sahib-i-diwan or Minister of Finance for Muhammad Jalaluddin and
Ogodie Khan. Bahauddin in absence of Arghun acted as deputy in 1246 A.D. and
played an important role in the administration of Georgia and Armenia. Juvaini’s
grandfather Shamshuddin Muhammad b. Muhammad was in the service of Sultan
Muhammad Khawarizm Shah who he accompanied on his fight from Balkh to
Nishapur in 1220 A.D. and after his death he served his son Jalaluddin Mankubarni
in the same capacity. Ata Malik Juvaini’s father Bahauddin Muhammad passed
his life in the service of the Mongol governors and he played an important role in
rooted out the enemies of Chingiz Khan and he was appointed as Sahib-i-Diwan
(Finance Minister) of Khorasan and Mazandaran several times, he has the job to
control over the occupied territories over western Asia and died in 1253 A.D. in
the Isfahan region where he had been sent to carryout fiscal reforms.2 Ata Malik
Juvaini’s brother Shamsuddin Muhammad Juvaini was Prime Minister to Abaqa.
This post was less important to Sahib-i-Diwan at the time that he also held. He
was also a Governor General of Iraq-i-Arab. He was very influenced and close
to emperor. He did a lot to the people on behalf of the emperor. The another
distinguished person of Juvaini’s family was his maternal uncle Muntajabuddin
Juvaini who was secretary to Sanjar, head of the Diwan-i-Insha and a notable
writer as his biography is given by ‘Awfi’ in the ‘Lubab-ul Albab’.
By these, it is very clear that the family of Juvaini was very much
concerned to the emperors of the Central Asian government that was prevailing
at the time. Ata Malik Juvaini was himself an important part of the administration
as evident from the several sources Rashiduddin Fazlullah (Jami-ut Tawarikh) and
Ibnut Tiqtaqi (Kitabul Fakhri) including his own writing ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’.3
Juvaini’s career
He was employed in the service of the Mongol government approximately
at the age of twenty years as it is mentioned in his own work ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan
Gusha’. He was one of the private secretary of Amir Arghun who nearly for thirteen
years (1243-1256 till the arrival of Hulagu) in Persia. Arghun was governor for
the Mongol sovereign of all the lands subdued by them west of the oxus namely
Khorasan, Mazamdaran, part of India, Iraq, Kirman, Azarbaijan, Georgia and
Mosul. Then on the advent of Hulagu, Arghun became one of his generals till
Helagu death in the plain of Radakan near Tus on June 21, 1275 AD.4
During the period of Helagu government Arghun was obliged to make some
important journey to the Mongol capital, generally located at Qaraqorum, either
to render account of his stewardship or to defend himself against false accusations
and on the most of these occasions he was accompanied by Ata Malik Juvaini who
was his private secretary and who spent some ten years of his life in these journeys.
Ata Malik Juvaini and his father Bahaduddin Muhammad along with the emperor
Arghun were on the Mongolian journey in 1246-47 and have got news of Kuyuk’s
death, after halting there for some time returned to Persia. The third journey of
Juvaini with Arghun to Mongolian capital on 1249-50. Here Arghun stayed for
a long time to clear the charges against him and returned to Persia only when he
had succeeded in completely clearing himself. On the occasion of His journey,
Juvaini was lucky to meet to Yisu, son of Chaghatai, the son of Chengiz, king of
the Chaghtai tribe. The fourth journey of Arghun with Juvaini was undertaken in
1257-52 AD with the aim of attending the great Qurillary or council of Mongol
prince and chieftains, at which Mangu was elected and crowned emperor but he
only arrived after the ceremonies were over and with a short stay returned to Persia.
During this stay, Juvaini was suggested to compose history to immortalize the great
deeds and conquests of Mongol sovereigns. Initially, he refused to do so, but due to
the impressive personality, close access to the administration and having the high
post, he agreed and started work from 1252 to 1260. During the stay at Qaraqorum,
he examined and described the ruins and inscriptions of Urdu baligh, the ancient
capital of Uyghuristan, on which, by command of Ogotany, the latest Mongol
city has been raised. Juvaini’s last journey of Qaraqorum in 1256, he resumed his
former position as one of Arghun’s secretary until Hulagu’s arrival in Persia early
in the year 1256 AD and Arghun’s departure to the court of Mongu Qua’an Juvaini
continued in Hulagu’s service in which he was steadily promoted. In the last stage
of life Juvaini fell a victim to the intrigues of Majdul Mulk of Yazad. This event
has damaged the image but soon he got relieve and the same honour as he held
earlier. Again in 1257 Hulagu have completed the destruction of the assassins and
setout to conquer Baghdad and ourthrow the ‘Abbasid caliphate’. Juvain was also
along with Hulagu at this occasion as is clearly stated by Rashiduddin Fazlullah
in his writing ‘Jami-ut-Tawarikh’.5 The misfortune came with Juvaini when the
emperor Arghun had revived the charge of embezzlement which had been made
against Alauddin Ata Malik Juvaini in the reign of his father Abaqa and proceed
to arrest to complete his agenda. An incident happened that Nazmuddin Asfar
(Asghar) who had recently died and his body was digging out. And exhumed and
ordered his body to be cast out on the road. Alauddin Ata Malik Juvaini was greatly
distressed by this event and was attacked by a violent headache, which shortly
caused his death. Adha Dhahabi states that his death was caused by a fall from his
horse. Anyhow he was died on March 5, 1283 at Mugham or Arran in Azarbaijan.6
Allauddin Ata Malik Juvaini was the governor of Baghdad and Iraq-i-
Arab. He did a lot to the people of this region and wanted to prosper the land.
He lightened the taxes by which the peasants and villagers were oppressed, and
exerted himself to bring barren land under cultivation and to create new villages
and water resources. From the Euphrates river he cut a canal from Anbar to Kufa
and Najaf, and on this work alone expanded more than 100,000 dinars of red gold,
founding one hundred and fifty villages on the bank of this canal and converting the
hitherto desent land lying between these two places into verdant and smiling groves
and pastures. He also constructed a hostel (ribat) for students and theologians at
Mashad Ali Najaf.7
Allauddin Malik Juvaini belongs to the family where a number of scholars,
doctors, poets and theologians who have played an important role in stimulating the
emperor by praising the bits of quality and personality of the administrator and in
lieu of that he gets valuable presents from the emperor or administrators. A few of
the most notable are mentioned here. Nasiruddin Tusi was a celebrated astronomer
and philosopher. He composed a Persian treatise on the biographies of saints and
conduct of pilgrims on the mystic path entitled ‘Awsaful Ashraf’ (Traits on the
Nobles) and dedicated it to Shamshuddin Muhammad Juvaini and other Persian
treatise on the astronomy entitled ‘Tarjuma-i-Thamara-i-Batlamiyus’ to his son
Bahauddin Muhammad. Another eminent protégé of Juvaini family was Safiuddin
Abdul Mumin who was expert in music and calligraphy. The work on music
entitled ‘Risala-i-sharafiya’ dedicated to Sharafuddin Hasan son of shamshuddin
Juvaini. The next was Kalimuddin Mitham who dedicated his commentary on the
‘Nahjul Blagha’ to Ata Malik Juvaini.8
The great scholar Shaikh Sa’di of Shiraz who has several fine qasidas
in praise of Ata Malik Juvaini and his brother Shamshuddin Muhammad. The
above men of learning and the poets have reflected the history of the time and the
personality of Ata Malik Juvaini and his families for the better understanding the
role and application to the central Asia history of the 13th century.9
Historiography or Source of Mongol History
The next important part of the study is Ata Malik Juvaini’s ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan
Gusha’. This work is actually in Persian language and it is translated in English
and Arabic language by a number of scholars especially under the organization
of E.F.W. Gibb Memorial series. This task was skillfully completed by Mirza
Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab Qazwini.10 The book ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ is in
three volumes. The volume I describes the history of Mongol and their conquest
down to the event following the death of the Great Khan Guyuk including the
history of the descendant of Joki and Chagtai. The second volume illustrates the
history of the dynasty of Khwarazmshah and his administrative importance. The
third and last volume states about the continuation of the history of the Mongol
and the over thrown of the Ismaili based chiefly on works found in Alamut as
Sargudhoashti sayyidna. This work has considerably influenced historical tradition
in Central Asia or east. It is also a historical authority of the first rank to describe
the history of Chingez Khan and his successor in analytical way. The author of this
work ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ was the only Persian historian to travel to Mongolia
and describe the countries of Eastern Asia at first hand. The accounts of Chingiz
Khan and his successsor’s conquest are given nowhere else in such details. Many
episodes, such as the battle on Sir Darya above and below otrar and the celebrated
seize of Khudjand are known to us only from the Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha. ‘Tarikh-i-
Jahan Gusha’ by virtue of the importance of its contents like history of Mongols,
the Khwarizm Shah and Assassins, the absence of any contemporary work dealing
with these subject and high position of Juvaini, all these referred it as one of the
most authoritative of their source for the period of which it treats. Fazlullah of
Shiraz, the author of ‘Tarikh-i-wassif’ which was composed during the years
(1300-1328 included in the fourth volume of his work a complete abridgment of
all three volumes of ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’. He praised immensely the work of
Juvaini.11
The author Rashiduddin Fazlullah of Jami-ut-Tawarikh who has also
written about the history of Eastern and praised the book ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’
in a way that this book has explained each and every happening unbiaously. The
author of ‘Kitabul Fakhri’ Safiyuddin Muhammad explicitly quotes certain passages
from ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’. The ‘Tarikh Guzida’, ‘Tarikh-Banakati’, ‘Habibus
Saiyid’ and other later histories that all makes extensive use of the ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan
Gusha’ in dealing with the period of which it treats and indeed it becomes more
and more clear for the history of the Mongols, Khwarazmshah and Assassins by
only original Persian source with which we go through firstly ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan
Gusha’ and then Jami-ut-Tawarikh.12 No doubt Ata Malik Juvaini and his work
‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ is one of the most important that gives the detailed history
of Chingiz Khan and his successor with open mind to remove the misconception
about the personality as persecutor or killer. The ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ is required
to reassess or re-evaluate in the contemporary times in available evidences.13 There
may be an exaggeration or favour for the emperor and his attitude as the trend
mostly are found at the time of writing history to his master or lords. Here the
discussion is not about these things but by chance not deliberate the author has left
or miss the line that create some little doubt in mind that are somehow explained
here.
There are many aspects about Juvaini’s writing ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’
which need honest analysis. Howard James Martin has reviewed the writing in
26 Oct. 1999 and found that the personality of Chengiz Khan that appeals the
historians, anthropologists and other audiences. Accordingly, the ‘Tarikh-i-
Jahan Gusha’ is as a primary source of Mongols, their campaigns, conquests and
empire in Central Asia and Near East that contains the account of court rituals,
administrative practices and kingship relations as well as sturdy details of military
tactics, elite behavior and much more that puts the flesh back on Mongol bones. It
is also an exquisite translation of a gem to savior page by page for its language. As
Juvaini was born into the Islamic Muslim Persian cultural elite, his sophisticated
Knowledge of Islam, politics, poetry and international affairs allowed him to write
compelling narratives.14
Although Juvaini’s chronicle is a history, it does not follow current
scholarly commentaries. It would be surprising if it did. Juvaini’s text is a
semi-chronological record based on original research and, for some subjects,
observation and participation. According to Boyle (XXXVII), “the history of the
world conquerer” was begun in Qaraqorum in 1252 or 1253; and Juvaini was still
working on it in 1260, when he had recently been appointed governor of Baghdad.
The book has three sections, each of which presents distinct topics in chapters.
Boyle’s footnotes make clear juvaini intended to provide more material for existing
chapters, to add new chapters to existing sections and to write another section, why
Juvaini did not remains a mystery. It is not clear from any point of view why he did
so.15
A critical appraisal on the three volumes of ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’
mentioned here. The first section begins with accounts of Mongol society before
Chingiz, the story of his rise to dominance and also provides information about
campaign devoted to westward expansion in the first decade of the 13th century.
The subjugation of Turks and conquest of intellectual centres of Bokhara and
Samarqand and campaigning south of the River Oxus. The narrative is very
complex and that’s why one who want to quickly understand the event will go
through the Boyle’s footnotes. The second section is a history of the sultans of
Khwarizmshah from their rise in the late 12th century to their fall to the Mongols in
the thirteenth. Juvaini’s attention here points a great concern with Muslim Sultan
rather than Mongols because he was a native of these region and learned the
history from his education and so he is very much inclined toward this region and
culture.16
The third and final section of this chronicle is concerned with post-Chingiz
imperial succession and the destruction of Juvaini’s own state and heterodox Ismaili
strongholds in north Persia. Juvaini witnessed some campaigns and provides
eyewitness accounts. The description about the destruction of Ismaili’s ‘castle’ and
its estimate of forces and the treatment of the object that he found in the castle. All
accounts are imaginary and no accuracy is found. Ata Malik Juvaini writes about
events (campaign, succession and struggle), people (Chingiz, his descendant’s,
Muslim caliph and sultan), locations (Samarqand and Herat) and ideas (theological
arguments and heresies). In all these, there is no continuity of chronology and
found mismanaged form of chapters that confused the readers and not become easy
to understand the events in general.17
It appears that Ata Malik Juvaini and his work ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’
presents invaluable material on the rise of Mongols, their conquest, warfare,
statecraft, religion, ritual, kingship and the emperor of Central Asia and the Near
East. The family of Juvaini contribution to the different dynasty especially, the
Khawarazmshah, Seljuq rulers Changiz Khan and his successors are remarkable.
They held the different post and proved themself very suitable for the time
required. Juvaini himself held the post of Sahib-i-Diwan and proved his ability to
the emperor with some allegation but was soon averted and replaced on the post
with some more honour. Anyhow Juvaini was a great Persian scholar and had
explained all the aspects of the emperor in very narrative way. The work ‘Tarikh-
i-Jahan Gusha’ the history of the world conqueror is no doubt a splendid work in
Persian language. It is translated into different languages like English, Arabic and
Turkish etc. The great efforts was made by John A. Boyle in 1958 and republished
in 1997 with an uptodate introduction by David O. Morgon. This book reflects
the different dynasty and its conquest in Central Asia and Near East. The special
attention was about Mongol dynasty and its emperor whose role in different field
of administration. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ with some little error that is
discussed earlier, has its authenticity about the conquest and statecraft of the rulers,
lastly Juvaini and his work ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ has an important place to study
the Mongol dynasty. The some other scholars, literary person, poets and historian
are also known through the study of Juvaini and his work ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’
of the time like Tusi, Shaikh Sadi, Kalamuddin Mitham, Nizamuddin Isfahani
and Hamamud-din of Tabriz. All these scholars have pointed out the situation and
position of the Juvaini’s time that is also a great evidence for the understanding of
Juvaini and his work as explained by him.
Thus conclusively we arrive on points that Mongol historiography needs
great many share of Juvaini’s writing for reconstructing the missing links of
Mongol historiography as Mongols not being acquainted with historiography such
sources are always sought after for filling the gap or completing the missing chain.
Among the Persian sources of Mongol historiography Ata Malik al Juvaini’s work
can be rated as one of the magnum opus for the Mongol history.
References :
1. Mirza Muhammad Qazwin, Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha: History of the world Conquerer
by Allauddin Ata Malik Juvaini. The Persian text edited in Gibb Memorial Series
XVI, vol. 3, (GMS, Old Series, London, 1912, 1916, 1937), pp. 24, 102.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Yaun-Chao-pi-shi, The Secret History of the Mongol Dynasty. Translated and
edited with introduction and notes by Wei Kwei sun with a forward by Prof.
Muhammad Habib published by Department of History, AMU, Aligarh, 1957, pp.
Introduction
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Fazlullah Rashiduddin, Jamiut Tawarikh – The collection of chronicles.
8. Abdullah b. Fazlullah, Tarikh-i-Wassef, the book printed at Bombay in 1853, pp.
109-117.
9. Mirza Muhammad Haider Dughlat, Tarikh-i-Rashidi. An English version under
the title ‘A History of the Mongols of Central Asia edited by N. Elias, translated
by E. Denison Ross (London, 1895), pp. 56-105.
10. Barthold, W., Turkestan down to the Mongol invasion, an English translation by
the author himself (Gibbs Memorial Series, New Series, No. V, London, 1928,
pp. 11, 165.
11. Lamb, Harold, Chingiz Khan, (New York, 1927), pp. 42-64.
12. Hamdullah Mustawfi Qazwini, Tarikh-i-Guzidah: Selected history written in
1334-35 (Gibb Memorial series no. XIV, vol. I, Persian text, 1911, vol. 2, pp.
13-87.
13. Ratchnevsky, Paul: Chingiz Khan: His life and legacy, translated by Thomas
Nivisin Haining, (Oxford, 1991), pp. 107-129.
14. Martin, H.J., Review of Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha, 1958, translated by J.A. Boyle with
an introduction of David O. Morgan, LXVII, 1999.
15. Ibid.
16. Howorth H.H., History of the Mongol (London, 1880-88), p. Introduction
17. Morgan, David, The Mongols, (Oxford Basil Blackwell, 1986), pp. 68-82.
Head, Dept. of History
J.S.P.G. College Sikandrabad
BulandShahr, U.P., India
Fresh Analysis in Mongol Historiography; Tracing
elements in Arabic, Persian, Uighur and Chinese
Dr. M. Waseem Raja
Key words; (ulus, Golden Horde, Kitan, Jurchen, Qïpchaq, khanate, sahib-diwan,
Uighur, bakhshi, haddad, nisbah, tazahhada, mubahat, mahabbat Allah, dhikr,
Ilkhanids, ujubatuz zaman)
(Preface; This paper is an attempt to show how the most talked about Mongol
Empire developed its own historiography though devoid of any such background
as they mostly relied upon the folk tradition and mythology. The Nomadic Mongols
when they acquired an Empire which became bigger and bigger needed something
which could be called their own history. It took centuries for them to find their
History not in the Mongolian heartland but in the Muslim realms which they had
occupied during course of their expansion. Later Mongol History becomes part and
parcel of Medieval Muslim Empires which they succeed from the Mongols. So an
interesting study as far as the emergence of Mongol Historiography is concerned.)
Introduction
In reconstructing the History of Mongol period in Central Asia
particularly the early history of Mongols, historians face enormous difficulties in
tracing the records, arranging them in particular context and giving it a shape as
part of the Mongol History. Early Mongols with nomadic backgrounds and far
away from any literary or other such civilized activities, were devoid of any written
records what to talk of written recorded History. They preserved their mythological
past in oral folk tradition, which provide some fodder for historiography to the
modern schlolars, and then emerges half history half mythology sort of Mongol
past. Mongol state emerged during 13th century but no serious efforts were made to
give a place to historiography in the Mongol courts. It was not until 15th century
that Golden Horde provides us with written histories which come not from the
center of the Golden Horde itself, but from Central Asia, where they emerge first
for the Timurid, and later for Shaibanid Uzbek, as a result of patronage of Islamic
historiographical activities. There is thus no indigenous historiographical tradition
in the Golden Horde or Jüchid ulus; if something existed along these lines, no
remnant or record of it has survived. What did exist in the way of ‘historical’
production was the body of oral tradition as it comes down from Chingizid Period
or before him. History makes way for the Mongols during 15th and 16th centuries
with the establishment of Islam as the state religion and under the patronage of
the Uzbeks, Noghays, Bashkirs and Tatars which is reflected in Schiltberger1, Ibn
Arabshah2 and other near contemporary writers on Mongol History.3 There is gross
absence at the Golden Horde court of official written historiography in broader
cultural terms and thus there Mongol historiography lacks vital ingredients.
Mystery of the Secret History ; The earliest work of the Mongol historiography
of the Mongol Empire is the famous and in many ways still mysterious so-called
Secret History of the Mongols, though not very accurate this work originated as
an oral composition, perhaps in 1228 or 1240. Moreover, it drew exclusively from
oral sources-legends, folklore, epics, genealogies, therefore does not reflect any
Chinese influence and interestingly it may be categorized as the wonder book with
the Mongol, but mystery surrounds it. The Mongols began their imperial history
without indigenous written history-writing precedents.
Uighur sources; It is not clear when the first Mongol historiography was written
down in Uighur script, or of what it consisted. During his reign Qubilai Khan, got
convinced of necessity to record the “authentic records” of earlier Mongol rulers.
He shown interest in the same and needed a translation of those work from Uighur
into Chinese desired to be presented to him in 1288 and 1290. The Altan debter
(Golden Book) which Rashid al-Din(Jami’ al-Tawarikh) was denied permission
to read, as well as the Tobchi’an of Chinggis, both seem to have referred to this
alternative to the Secret History. In both cases, security, was cited as justification
for the restricted access to Muslims or Chinese scholars.
Chinese Sources; During the Yüan dynasty which had conquered the Kitan
Liao, the Jurchen Chin, and the Chinese Southern Sung we find there Chinese
historiographic tradition continued in Chinese language although by ethnically
mixed commissions the historiography containing the Mongol elements had
developed. They followed Chinese models entirely which included tools like
annalistic narratives of reigns; tables; thematic chapters or treatises on such topics
as the economy, the army, and foreign affairs with the barbarians and biographies
of leading personalities, including members of the royal family, imperial relatives,
ministers and generals. The Mongol Yüan maintained the Chinese cultural and
political tradition of historiography, with the addition of dictionaries of Jurchen
and Kitan terms.
After the overthrow of the Mongol Yüan dynasty, the Secret History
was written down in phonetic Chinese characters under the Ming. This was not for
the purpose of writing the Yüan shih, the Chinese history of the Yüan dynasty, but
sometime between 1368 and 1398, since it was used between 1403 and 1408. The
Ming history of the Yüan followed the traditional Chinese historiographical pattern
as well, even to the point of discontinuing the dictionaries of foreign terms of the
Liao and Chin histories. Though a Mongol dictionary in the Yüan shih would have
added an asset to the scholars working for the same. Nevertheless, significantly the
Ming scholars did not utilize the Secret History to write the Yüan shih. Nor did the
intellectuals alleviate as recording “barbarian legends” per se in their histories.4
However, tracing the origins of legitimate Emperors of the Middle Kingdom (who
ruled with the Mandate of Heaven, to a wolf and a doe) might have been too much
for them. They could not have incorporated such material into their annals of the
Yüan.5
Mongol Imperial History; The Mongols began their imperial profession with an
oral historical tradition even after they had acquired some of the literate aspects
of imperial governance. In each successor state of the Grand Mongol Empire, the
Mongols adopted the historiographic conception of their more numerous indigenous
subjects. In China and Persia, this meant patronizing written history-writing. In the
Chaghataid and Jochid realms, there were no local written historiographic tradition
for the Mongols to adopt. In the Golden Horde, therefore the Mongols could only
have adopted the oral literary traditions of the Qïpchaqs, and therefore, that written
Golden Horde narrative chronicles never existed.6 But analysis of the phenomenon
of Golden Horde historiography should not be confined to the Golden Horde
itself. The Golden Horde retained enough vitality to give birth during the fifteenth
century to its own successor states, namely the Kasimov khanate in Muscovite
service, and the khanates of the Crimea, Kazań, Astrakhań, and Siberia, as well
as three Nogai Hordes. What is known about history-writing in these states, and
in later Mongolia, sheds additional light upon the problem of the missing Golden
Horde chronicles.
Persians Historiography;
The Chaghataid Khanate possessed no indigenous history-writing during
the 13 and 14th centuries. The already Muslim cities of Trans-Oxania continued
th
to some extent to produce other types of written works, such as city histories,
biographical dictionaries, administrative manuals, Islamic jurisprudence, and
hagiographies. The largely nomadic hordes of Moghulistan, previously populated
by Turkomen and Ghuzz, would have been devoted to oral historical genres. The
Chaghataid khans did not patronize chronicle writing.7 Juvaini8 and Rashid al-Din9
both wrote Persian-language, Persian-style Islamic chronicles, although Rashid
al-Din’s conception of a universal history was amazingly ground-breaking. The
rhetoric and panegyric of Juvaini and Rashid al-Din were typically flowery literary
Persian, and the ethos fundamentally Muslim, filled with innumerable quotations
from the Koran. However much the interpretation of the Mongol conquest differed
in Juvaini and Rashid al-Din from the émigré Persian-language history written in
Delhi. It was Juzjani under the Ghurids, to whom Juvaini’s “world conqueror” is
“the accursed”, all maintained the pre-Ilkhanate historiographic tradition of Iran.
The same is true for less famous Persian historians of the Ilkhanate, such as Wassaf
and Qazvini.10
Atâ-Malek al Juwayni started his career when he accompanied
his father to Taraz/Talas in 1248 with amir Arghun,12 Baha’al-Din died around
11
1253, remaining a sahib-diwan until his death. In 1255 Juwayni was taken into
the service of Hulegu, the future first Ilkhan. He was a member of the chancery
and in 1259 was appointed governor of Baghdad. He died, while still in post, on
5th March, 1283.13 Ibn Bibi14 notes that his father enjoyed good relations with the
grandfather of Juwayni, the sahib-diwan Shams ad-Din Muhammad al-Mustawti;
likewise, Ibn Bibi himself maintained close contacts with Juwayni.15 There was
friendship for generations between bureaucrats of Khwarazmian origin. Juwayni’s
grandfather, sahib-diwan (chief minister) Shams al-Din Muhammad, was in the
service of the ill-fated Sultan ‘Ala’ al-Din Muhammad Khwarazmshah, whom he
accompanied on his flight from Balkh to Nishapur (Nishapur) in 1220.16 However,
Juwayni’s father, Baha’ al-Din, became a Mongol official, he was appointed as
sahib-diwan by Chin-Temur, the Mongol governor of Khurasan. The appointment
was confirmed by the Great Khan Ogedei in 1235-36.17 Juwayni wrote his great
work the Tarikh-i Jahan Gusha between 1252/53 and 1260.18 It was not an easy
task, and he did not manage to correct all the dates in his History. However, this
was the first full record of the Mongol conquests written by a Persian author. Vasily
Bartold19 considered the works of Juwayni, along with those of Ibn al-Athir and al-
Nasawi, to be the main sources for the Mongol invasion.20 Juwayni’s work consists
of three volumes, of which the most important is the second, dedicated to the
history of the Khwarazm-shahs, especially of the last Khwarazm-shah, Jalal al-
Din Mankburni. Though Juwayni rarely mentions Rum, his account is of vital
importance for the history of the establishment of Mongol power in Iran, the end
of the state of the Khwarazm-shahs, as well as the history of institutions, since
both the Sultanate of Rum and the state of the Khwarazm-shahs had a common
ancestor in the Great Seljukid Sultanate. Juwayni was one of the chief sources of
Rashid al-Din.
Rashid al-Din Tabib Fadl Allah b. Imad al-Dawla, Abu al-Khayr, was born in
Hamadan( ).21 Rashid al-Din did not achieve high political
office until ah 697 (1298), during the reign of the Ilkhan Ghazan, when, after the
fall of Sadr al-Din Zanjani, he was appointed associate to Sadr al-Din’s successor,
Sa’d al-Din Sawaji.22 The Jami al-Tawarikh “Compendium of Chronicles” was
commissioned by Mahmud Ghazan, and initially was a history of the Mongols
and their dynasty, but gradually expanded to include the entire history since the
time of Adam to Rashid al-Din’s time.23 The full text, which he began to write
in ah700 (28 September 1299-15 September 1300) and finished ten years later,
in ah 710 (31 May 1310-19 May 1311), consisted of four parts: (1) the Mongol
and Turkish tribes; the Mongols, from the death of Chinggis Khan (1206-27) to
the death of Ghazan; (2) a history of Oljeitii (of which no copy is known); (3) the
Shu’ab-i panjgana [the Five genealogies of the Arabs, Jews, Mongols, Franks,
and Chinese,24 (4) the Suwar al-aqalim, a geographical compendium of which no
copy survives.25 Rashid al-Din also collected all of his compositions into a single
volume, entitled Jami’ al-Tasanif al-Rashidi (“The Collected Works of Rashid”),
complete with maps and illustrations. Rashid al-Din was an outstanding scholar
who used many sources while composing his work: Chinese, Kashmiri, Uighur,
Mongolian, Hebrew, Arabic, Tibetan, and Frankish. We can identify some of
these, of whom the most celebrated is Ch’eng-hsiang (chinksatik in the Persian
transcription) Bolad (Pulad), the representative of the Great Khan at Tabriz from
1287 until his death in 1313. Rashid al-Din knew Bolad in person. Another of
Rashid al-Din’s sources was the lost ‘Golden Register’ (Altan Debter), the Mongol
archive of the time of Chinggis Khan and his descendants.26 Rashid al-Din’s work
on the Mongols, especially the history of the Ilkhanid state, is noteworthy for its
excellent chronology and frequent use of official.
The Introduction of Muhammad Qazvini to the Tarikh-i Jahan gosha-
ye Juvayni as well as David O. Morgan and J. A. Boyle’s introductions to the
English translation of Genghiz Khan, The History of the World-Conqueror provide
us with brief biographies of Ata Malek Juvayni. Information brought into the work
is based on the works of Juvayni and certain great medieval historians such as
Rashid al-Din Tabib Fadl Allah, Vassaf and Hamdollah Mostowfi. Charles Melville
in “Jahan-gosha-ye Juvayni” and Lane in “Ala al-Din Juvayni” have provided
brief biographies of Ata-Malek Juvayni drawing on original resources as well as
prior research done about Juvayni. Regarding viewpoints of Juvayni, Esami’el
Hasanzadeh27 elaborated on the determinist viewpoints in the case study of Juvayni
in the Islamic Historiography. Hassanzadeh explores traces of fatalism in Islamic
theology in the ideas of the Sunni sect, particularly the Ash’ari school28. Houshang
Khosrobeigi narrated the life of Nasawi in “Khwaterenegari-ye Shahab al-Din
Nasawi” and “Shahab al-Din Nasawi wa Sirat-i Ou”, based on the autobiography
of Nasawi in his books.29
Minhaj-us- Siraj; The Tabaqat-i-Nasiri of Qazi Abu Omar Minhaj-ud-din
Osman bin Siraj-uddin is one of the earliest works concerning the Mongols, and
also covers all the Muslim dynasties of the Indian subcontinent from 864 to the
Mongol invasion until 1260. It is only the last chapter (Book XXIII) of the Tabaqat
that deals with the eruption of the Mongols and their earth-shaking exploits. The
chapter contains valuable information pertaining to the war between Sultan Sanjar
Seljuq and the tribes of Qara-Khitai, the conquest of Turkestan by Muhammad
Khwarazm Shah, and the conquerors of Halaku-Chingiz Khan and his descendants,
Juji, Uktae, Chaghatae, Kuzuk, Batu, Mangu, Hulaka, and Barkah. The Tabaqat
thus provides valuable insight into the political milieu and momentous happenings
that turned Central Asia upside down in the thirteenth century.
Qazi Minhaj Siraj was favourably placed for the task of writing an
authentic account of the events in Central Asia and northern India. He had a
distinguished pedigree. One of his ancestors, Imam Abdul Khalique, was married
to one of the forty daughters of Sultan Ibrahim of Ghazni, and all of them were
according to the venerable Qazi, ‘married to illustrious nobles, or learned men of
regime’. The Imam’s son was named Ibrahim after the sultan. And Ibrahim was
the great-grandfather of our author and an ecclesiastic of repute-another ancestor
was the highly respected divine, Siraj-ud-din Muhammad, generally acclaimed as
‘the wonder of the age’ (ujubatuz zaman), and ‘the most eloquent man of Persia’
(afsahul mulk). The Qazi’s mother was the foster sister of Mah Malik, which gave
him the privilege of spending his early years in the palace of Sultan Shihab-ud-din.
Providentially, the ancestors of the author had been high ecclesiastical officers at
the courts of Ghazni and the Ghori. Their fame should have preceded the author’s
and that, perhaps accounts for the ready acceptance, even the welcome he was
given in Sind when he emigrated to India (1227) owing to the Mongol conquest of
Afghanistan.
On his arrival in Sind, Sultan Qubbach appointed Qazi Minhaj Siraj
principal of the Firozia College at Uchchah but soon, thereafter, Qubbch was
defeated by the Sultan of Delhi, Iltutmish, and the Qazi was taken to the victorious
sultan, who interrogated him about his knowledge of men and affairs. Impressed
by his learning the sultan took him to Delhi, and appointed him Khatib and Imam
of the Friday Mosque,
The Tabaqat-i-Nasiri is, on the whole, a fairly reliable account of the
Mongols and no better picture-if not accurate-is to be found of the devastation
wrought by Chingiz Khan and his successors. His feelings towards them are
extreme but understandably bitter. He claims to have crossed swords with the
‘infidels’ and would thus have learnt from affected families the accounts of the
death and destruction that was brought about by the Mongols in Khwarazm and
the mountains of Gharjistan. Writing in the security of Delhi, he had freedom to
criticize the Mongols. Sometimes, he mentions the names of his informants and
their credentials. He was industrious in the collection of facts, and careful, too,
in the choice of informants. Strangely enough as regards facts he is corroborated
by Ala-ud-din Ata Malik Juwaini, who was writing the Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha at
almost the same time; sometimes, his statements are corroborated by the author/
compiler of the Secret History of the Mongols, although the three contemporaries
lived at distances of thousands of miles.
Besides veracity, the chief merit of the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, lies in its style.
Facts are narrated in plain, simple prose, free from flights of fancy and ornate
flowery language. The style is direct and unaffected. The Tabaqat., however,
suffers from two shortcomings. At times, it is too concise to be useful; on occasion,
it is irritating as an account of brevity, in regard to the invasion of the ‘infidels’ of
Chingiz Khan into Bengal as far as the walls of Lakhnauti in AH 642 (1245).Ye he
is arguably, unsurpassed by any contemporary or Mongol historian in his details
about the resistance the all-conquering Mongols received in Ghor and Ghorzistan.
Second, his plan is unsatisfactory. Instead of following a linear narrative of events
in chronological order, his text is organized by dynasty. This results in overlaps
and repetition sometimes with additional information as, for instance, the history
of the Khwarazm Shah. And there is some confusion of dates and place-names.
Yet, with all its shortcomings and errors of omission and commission, the Tabaqat-
i-Nasiri remains an invaluable and incomparable source on the invasions of the
Mongols and their frequent nightmarish visitations across the Indus, a source of
constant concern to the sultans of Delhi.30
Arabic Sources :
Mongol imitation of the Mamluks in diplomacy and religion did not extend to
the rich Arabic-language historiography patronized by the Mamluk Sultan al-
Mansur, ibn-Dawadari, al-Makrizi, al -Umari, al -Safadi, al-Yunini, ibn Duqmaq,
ibn Taghribirdi, Abu Shama, al-Aini, al-Yusufi – arguably the largest collection
of Arabic- language chronicles for any medieval Muslim state.31 Despite their
military and political rivalry, the Golden Horde copied political institutions such as
the vizierate and the diwans from the Ilkhanate, but not the practice of patronizing
court historians. Thus the Golden Horde’s greatest ally, the Mamluk Sultanate of
Egypt and Syria, and its greatest enemy, the Mongol Ilkhanate in Iran, maintained
impressive written historiographic traditions, but the Golden Horde borrowed
chronicle-writing from neither.
The history written in Arabic language outside the Mongol realm
include some of the important and reliable sources. Though mostly composed in
Egypt and Syria, they record events in Anatolia, and sometimes help to establish
the correct chronology. The most eminent historian is Abu’l-Hassan Ali ibn
Mohammad better known as Izz al-Din Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali Ibn al-Athir, whose
great compilation, al-Kamil fi al-tarikh marked a watershed in Arabic annalistic
historiography.32 The source is distinguished by the well-balanced selection of its
vast material, by its clear presentation, and by the author’s occasional flashes of
historical insight. Al-Kamil is an annalistic history from the beginning of the world
to the year ah628 (9 November 1230-28 October 1231) and from this point of
view represents a very popular type of ‘universal history’, like that of Tabari’s.33
Unfortunately we know very little about the life of Ibn al-Athir. He was born on 4
Jumada 1 ah 555 (13 May,1160) in Jazirat Ibn ‘Umar.34 He and his family moved
to Mosul (al-Mawsil) in 1180, where he received an excellent education. Though
he spent most of his adult life in Mosul as a private scholar, from time to time he
served the ruler of Mosul and as an ambassador visited Baghdad repeatedly. Near
the end of his life, in ah 626-628 (1228-31) he was an honoured guest of the atabek
of Aleppo (Halab) and visited Damascus. Ibn al-Athir died in Sha’ban or Ramadan
in ah 630 (May-June 1233).35 In the fourteenth century, the work of Ibn al-Athir
was continued by Abu al-Fida’ (1273-1331), the Ayyubid prince of Hama.
The next important source is the work of al-Nasawi. Shihab al-Din
Muhammad al-Nasawi (died c.1250) was a secretary and biographer of Jalal ad-Din
Mangburni, the Khwarazmid dynasty. Born in Nasa in Khorasan,36 he witnessed
first-hand the Mongol invasion of Khorasan and Jalal ad-Din’s subsequent flight
and military adventures of which he left an account written in Arabic c. 1241.37
Shihab al-Din was an honoured guest of the atabek of Aleppo (Halab) and visited
Damascus. He came to prominence in ah 615 (1218-19).38
Al Nuwairi as the historian of Mongols and question of Mongol conversion to
Islam?
Mongol intermingling with Moslem populace in the Western realm
(Trans-Oxiana) brought great many changes –as far as civilizational aspects
was concerned. Both in the sense of respect to Islam and development of new
historiography shaped up. There is a hint of the eventual Islamization of the
Mongols happening with the imperial view is seen here to fit in some way with
that of Islam, a sort of Chinggisid hanifism.39 Al- Nuwayiri’s direct source appears
to be unknown. It would seem, though, that the story as it here appears of relatively
late origins, i.e. it was in circulation sometime after Chinggis Khan’s lifetime,
as mentioned above---to the Mongols’ conversion to Islam. The use of the term
bakhshi also suggests a late origin, since this term is only used by late pro-Mongol
sources. It may be noted that this story, like some others in Arabic about the rise
of Chinggis Khan and the early history of the Mongols,40 differs somewhat from
the accounts in the Secret History of the Mongols and the pro-Mongol histories
in Persian.41 This discrepancy is worthy of further study. From Chinngis Khan’s
rise to power, al-Nuwayri provides a pithy but clear description of his invasion
of the territory ruled by the Khwarazm Shah Ala al-Din Muhammad, at first
summarizing from al-Nasawi’s work. One interesting passage which is left out is
the exchange of letters between Chinggis Khan and the Khwarazm Shah, in which
the formers refers to the latter as “my son.”42 After several pages, al-Nuwayri
switches to Ibn al-Athir, but only mentions him by name further along.43 Most of
the ensuing narrative follows this latter writer, although on occasion al-Nuwayri
inserts some information from al-Nasawi.44 In only one instance does al-Nuwayri
explicitly compares the evidence from his two main sources for the version of
Chinggis Khan’s life, with regard to a Mongol defeat at Ghazna followed by that at
Parwan in 1221 at the hands of Jalal al-Din b. Khwarazm Shah.45 For the former,
the al-Nuwayri gives Ibn al-Athir’s account, and then al-Nasawi mentioning the
main difference between them. For the second defeat, al-Nuwayri writes: When
the Mongols were defeated near Ghazna, Jalal al-Din sent an envoy to Chinggis
Khan telling him that whatever place he chose for a battle he would come there.
Chinggis Khan sent a large army with his [third] son Toloi Khan, and it arrived at
Kabul. Jalal al-Din set out with the Muslim armies, and [the two forces] met there
and fought a pitched battle. The Mongol army was defeated, and Toloi Khan b.
Chinggis Khan was killed. The Muslims looted what [the Mongols had] with them,
and liberated those prisoners in their hands. Ibn al-Athir did not mention the killing
of Toloi Khan, but al-Munshi [al-Nasawi] mentioned it, and he is correct. Actually
al-Nasawi was wrong in this matter, at least if we follow both the main Persian
sources and the Secret History of the Mongols. Toloi was not sent with this force,
but rather it was under the command of Shigi-Qutuqu, Chinggis Khan’s adopted
son, who was not killed in this reverse.
Chinggis Khan’s Sufi practices; Shihab al-Dn Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-
Nuwayri (d. 733/1333) authored the monumental encyclopedia and history entitled
Nihayat al-Arab fi Funun al-Adab between the years 714/1314 and 731/1330.46 The
fifth book of al-Nuwayri’s gigantic work contains his dynastic histories, including
a significant section on the history of the Mongols.47 Al-Nuwayri introduces
his section on the Mongols by stating that he has gleaned his information from
multiple sources, two of which are written histories: al-Nasawi’s (d. 638/1241)
Sirat al-Sultan Jalal al-Din Mankbirni48 and Ibn al-Athir’s (d. 630/1233) Al-Kamil
fi al-Tarikh.49 Al-Nuwayri’s account of the origin and rise of Genghis Khan is
important, for it provides an example of Mamluk historiography concerning the
history of the Mongols. Al-Nuwayri relates that Genghis Khan asked a Jew why
Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad had attained such an exalted station and great fame.
The Jew replied by saying that they loved God and had consecrated themselves
to him, and thus God granted them their exalted positions. Genghis Khan asked
the Jew, “And if I love God and consecrate myself to him, will God give this
to me?” The Jew said, “Yes, and I must also tell you that our books state that
you will have a dynasty.” So Genghis Khan left his work, which al-Nuwayri says
was a blacksmith, haddad, for according to “their language” the nisbah Timurchi
refers to the blacksmith,50 He practiced asceticism, tazahhada withdrawing from
his people and his tribe and sought refuge in the mountain where he would eat
those things which were permissible, mubahat. As a result of his ascetic practices,
Genghis Khan’s fame spread abroad. Groups from his tribe would go out to visit
him but he would not speak with them. He would indicate to them to clap their
hands. They would then say, “O God, O God, he is good” (ya Allah ya Allah
yakhshidir).They would continue this clapping and incantation while Genghis
Khan danced he devoted himself solely to the love of God (mahabbat Allah). The
Turkish and shamanistic roots of Genghis Khan are reflected. He states that this
passage “appears to reflect several motifs in early Mongolian imperial history and
culture.”51 al-Nuwayri’s objective presumably is not to write the story of the rise of
Genghis Khan according to “Mongolian imperial history and culture” but instead
to strike him in the mold of a Sufi ascetic who demonstrates an honest spiritual
desire for God in spite of his non-Islamic heritage. By doing so, al-Nuwayri may
be offering nominal religious justification for the success of Genghis Khan and
the Mongols. This episode, therefore, must be interpreted in light of the Sufi
terminology and themes obvious within the account.
Amitai comprehends the reference to these religious figures as “an
expression of the equanimity which the Mongols showed to different religions,
what some scholars have called ‘religious tolerance.’52 Later, Amitai implies that
the reference to the future success of Genghis Khan as the leader of an empire is
“an echo of the heavenly mandate to rule the world which Chingiss Khan and his
descendants claimed.”53 Additionally, the inclusion of divine sanction upon the
progenitor of the Mongol empire may reflect an indictment by al-Nuwayr of his
masters, the Mamluks. By stating that Genghis Khan enjoyed a degree of heavenly
approval, our author may be implying that the rise of the Mongols is a divine
judgment upon the decadence of the current Mamluk ruling elite. It seems clear
that al-Nuwayri is describing a Sufi dhikr and projecting this form of spiritual
devotion back onto Genghis Khan. The assembly of a crowd clapping their hands
and chanting while Genghis Khan danced is certainly indicative of Sufi practice
and, contrary to Amitai, should not be interpreted as “some type of shamanistic
ritual, a sort of Chingissid hanifism.” Sufi asceticism seems to have offered al-
Nuwayri the most logical template from which to construct such an image of the
great Mongol ruler.
Timurid Historians for Mongol History; The Central Asian territories of
Khwarezm, which had been part of the Jochid ulus, and of Transoxiana, under
Chaghataid control, became the core of Timur’s great empire. The extant Timurid
histories of the very end of the 14th and the beginning of the 15th century – Nizam
ad-Din Ali Shani, Taj al-Din Salmani, Mu’in al-Din Natanzi, Ghiyas al-Din Ali
Yazdi, Hafiz-i Abru and Sharaf al-Din Ali Yazdi – were all written in Persian,
the dominant “civilized” language of Central Asia and Khorasan,54 and relied on
Rashid al-Din for their versions of early Mongol history.55 It is possible some of
the Timurid histories which have not survived were written in Turkish, Arabic or
even Greek. No historical narratives had been written in the Chaghataid appanage,
Transoxiana or Mughulistan, between the death of Chinggis in 1227 and Timur’s
creation of an independent state in 1370. The motivation for the development
of Timurid historiography thus appears to have been Timur’s ambition and
achievements.56 The absence of a written historiographical tradition even in the
urban centers of Central Asia before Timur has been noted by historians trying
to reconstruct the history of the region, but never explained. Even the dynasty
of the Khwarezm Shahs did not patronize indigenous chronicle-writing, although
Jalal ad-Din was the inspiration of the refugee history by al-Nasawi. The Kazań
khanate did not generate any written chronicles.57 The Volga Bulghars also lacked
any written historical tradition. Down through conquest in the sixteenth century by
the Muscovites, Kazań (and Astrakhań) rulers did not sponsor the composition of
written historical accounts. A secular “Tatar” historical, who were not Chinggisids
and were overthrown in the 16th century by the Shibanid Chinggisid Kuchum, can
be written only on the basis of 17th century Siberian Russian chronicles, the Esipov,
Stroganov, and Remezov chronicles, which preserved Taybughid, presumably oral,
history and legends.58
Late 17th Century Historiography; At the turn of the seventeenth century Qadyr
‘Ali-Beg, an émigré from Siberia, wrote a chronicle in Turkic for khan Uraz-
Muhammed of the khanate of Kasimov, one in Muscovite service, with historical
source was Rashid al-Din, translated from Persian into Turkic. The chronicle is
manifestly Islamic in consciousness, and made use of folklore. Although Qadyr
Ali Beg wrote as a court historian for Uraz-Muhammed, the work, c. 1602, is
dedicated to Muscovite tsar’ Boris Godunov.59 A later 17th century Anonymous
history of Chinggis Khan, replete with “shamanist” historical legends, did not even
utilize the history of the Turks by the Khivan Chinggisid khan Abu’l Ghazi.60 The
Crimean khanate did not possess any written historical sources until the middle
of the sixteenth century. The earliest work, written after the death of Sahib Giray
in 1551, was the Tarih- i Sahib Giray Khan; the second, Tevarih Dest-i Kipçak,
by Abdullah ibn Rizvan, dates from 1623-1640; in the early 1650s Kerimli Haci
Mehmed Senai authored the Üçünçü Islam Giray Khan Tarihi; finally, in the
eighteenth century Seiid Muhammed Riza generated the last Crimean chronicle.
These chronicles as a group emphasized the separateness of the Crimean state,
even if under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Sultan, the importance of the
Chinggisid inheritance, the value of a Crimean identity, and opposition to Ottoman
“interference”.61 Ottoman chronicles first arose in the fifteenth century, primarily
in Turkish with historians as Efendi, Ibn-i Kemal, Mustafi Ali, Mustafa Selaniki,
and Mustafa Noima.62
Mongol historical writing resurfaced in the 17th century – Sagang
Sechen, Lubsandanzin (Blo-bzang-bs Tan-‘dzin), the Anonymous Altan Tobchi,
the Shira Tu’uji (Yellow Chronicle) – and once again the stimulus was foreign.
Presumably the fleeing Yüan had brought at least one manuscript of the Secret
History back to Mongolia with them. The motivation of these works was to integrate
Chinggis into the Buddhist historical and cosmological framework as much as to
record the glorious deeds of present Mongol rulers. Typically, the authors were
lamas.63
Conclusively, we find noticeably a cultural dynamic was at work which
has not as yet been fully appreciated in scholarship. The history of historiography
in the successor states of the Great Mongol Empire suggests that the Mongols
abandoned their native oral history only under the impetus of someone else, mostly
their subjects. The Mongol rulers adapted indigenous traditions of historical
preservation. In China, written Chinese dynastic annals, and in Iran, written
Persian chronicles and world histories, provided a model; these societies supplied
native cadres willing to serve their new Mongol sovereigns and in the process to
preserve the sedentary cultural norms which predated Mongol conquest. Certainly
as conquest dynasties the Ilkhanids and Yüan might have employed Persian and
Chinese language history-writing. But two additional points deserve mention.
First, the absence of written histories in various of the polities discussed here is
often attributed to political instability, as in the Chaghataid realm, or the absence of
rulers to patronize official court historiography, for example in conquered Kazań.
Certainly this was an element of the picture. But it is not the whole story. Khan
Uzbek of the Golden Horde ruled as stable, if not necessarily as rich, a state as the
Ilkhan Ghazan or the Yüan founder Qubilai, and he did sponsor written Islamic
works. But Khan Uzbek did not hire a court historian to record his deeds for all
posterity in writing. This choice was made quite independently of the prevalence
of the techniques of written culture in his realm, in diplomacy, government, and
religion. Written historiography apparently did not seem necessary or advisable
to him, and certainly not “superior” to oral epic. Perhaps historians, despite the
inconvenience thus wrought to themselves, ought to rethink Uzbek’s attitudes
from the perspective of his own culture.
Finally, from the 15th to the 17th centuries, previously unwritten legendary
material about Chinggis Qan was put to paper, from Mongolia, to Central Asia, to
the Volga-Ural region, to Egypt.64 West of Mongolia this novel folkloric material
reflecting assimilation of Mongol legendary motifs and themes by indigenous non-
Mongol, mostly Turkic, peoples. Historians have mostly been concerned with the
historical accuracy, or inaccuracy, of these writings about Chinggis, whether in
17th century Mongolia or elsewhere. For example, the presentation of Chinggis as
a Muslim is more than an historical falsity. But the penetration of the Chinggisid
cult and its adaptation by vast numbers of steppe peoples is itself a major fact
of Eurasian cultural history, which should be mapped and correlated with the
demographic movements of Mongols, Qïpchaqs, and other nomadic peoples who
could have disseminated Chinggisid legends, and the rise and fall of Chinggisid
dynasties. The preservation of oral historiography about Chinggis strikingly
different than the Secret History in later written works on Golden Horde territory,
including Kasimov, Kazań, and the Crimea, provides vivid testimony of Chinggis’s
charisma throughout an immense demographic zone from one end of Eurasia to the
other and beyond, brought to light, ironically enough, by pondering the absence of
written court historiography in the Golden Horde of the 13th and 14th centuries.
References :
1. Johann (Hans) Schiltberger (1380 – c. 1440) was a German traveller and writer. He
was born of a noble family, probably at Hollern near Lohhof halfway between Munich
and Freising. His account of Timur and his campaigns is misty, often incorrect,
and sometimes fabulous see Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). “Schiltberger, Johann”.
Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
2. The author of Aja’ib al-Maqdur fi Nawa’ib al-Taymur (The Wonders of Destiny of
the Ravages of Timur), See, AKA, ISMAIL. 1996. “THE AGRICULTURAL AND
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES OF THE TIMURIDS IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE
15TH CENTURY”. Oriente Moderno 15 (76) (2). Istituto per l’Oriente C. A. Nallino:
3. Devin DeWeese, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tükles
and conversion to Islam in historical and epic tradition (University Park, Perm. 1994),
pp. 85, 143 (quotation), 150, 411-420.
4. Denis Sinor, “The Legendary Origin of the Türks,” in Egle Victoria Žygas, Peter
Voorheis, eds., Folklorica: Festschrift for Felix J. Oinas (Bloomington, IN 1982), pp.
223-257.
5. The absence of material from the Secret History in the chronicles of the East Slavs,
vassals of the Golden Horde, or of the Armenians and Georgians, subordinate to the
Ilkhanate, is a separate question.
6. There is a separate issue of the language in which the court of the Golden Horde expressed
itself. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, this was Mongol, not Turkic; see A. P.
Grigor’ev, “Ofitsial’nyi iazyk Zolotoi Ordy XIII-XIV vv,” Tiurkologicheskii sbornik
9 (1977), pp. 81-89. But even the find of a birchbark text containing written Mongol,
in square script no less, on Golden Horde territory does not alter the likelihood that
historical compositions in Mongol at the Jochid court would have been oral. See N. N.
Poppe, “Zolotoordynskaia rukopis’ na berest’e,” Sovetskoe vostokovedenie 2 (1941),
pp. 81-136, reprinted in N. Poppe, Mongolica (Farnborough, 1972). Anyone in the
late fourteenth century Horde who understood a Mongol-language oral historical tale
would also have spoken Turkic and could have remembered it in the Turkic language,
even when the Mongol language had been forgotten. (Indeed, most perplexing aspects
of this birchbark are the use of square script so far west, which Poppe noted, and
the presence of Uighur-Language material, this late, on the Volga, which he did not
comment on.) Therefore, I do not believe the disappearance of the Mongol language
in the Golden Horde explains the absence of Horde historiography.
7. John E. Woods, “The Rise of Timurid Historiography,” Journal of Near Eastern
Studies,46, 12 (1987), p. 81. This characterization does not apply to the Arabic-
language “Supplement to the dictionary ‘Surah’ ” of Abul’l Fadl b. Muhammed,
known as Jamal Qarshi. In 1282 he had translated into Persian the Arabic-language
dictionary of al-Jauhari, and at the very beginning of the fourteenth century, he
wrote the “Supplement” at the request of the head of the local priesthood in Kashgar.
While it contains dynastic information and data about shaykhs and scholars, it is not
a “chronicle” of the kind discussed here. Barthold observed that he did not know a
“single Muslim literary composition written at the desire of any Jaghatay Khan.” W.
Barthold, Turkestan down to the Mongol Conquest (4th edition; Philadelphia, 1977),
pp. 51-52. Devin DeWeese kindly called my attention to this source.
8. He had visited Möngke’s court, been to Mongolia twice and seen much of the Mongol
empire
9. He consulted Mongol informants, Bolad, a Yüan envoy to the Ilkhanate, and Ilkhan
Ghazan himself, but both
10. Ata-Malik Juvaini, trans. John Andrew Boyle, The History of the World Conqueror,
2 volumes (1958 - reprinted Seattle, 1997); John Andrew Boyle, tr., Rashid al-Din,
The Successors of Genghis Khan (New York, 1971); David O. Morgan, “Persian
Historians and the Mongols,” in David O. Morgan, ed., Medieval Historical Writing in
the Christian and Islamic Worlds (London, 1982), pp. 109-124; Morgan, The Mongols,
pp. 21-22. Boyle’s introduction to Juvaini, vol. I, pp. xxviii-xxix, contrasts Rashid al-
Din’s plain and simple style with the more erudite and sophisticated prose of Juvaini.
11. Modern Jambul in Kazakhstan
12. The ruler of the Mongol lands west of the river Jayhun (Amu Darya, Ab-i Amuyah)
Juwayni. ii. p. 248-50; Juvaini (Boyle), pp. 511-12.
13. Juvaini (Boyle), p. xxxvii.
14. Ibn Bibi was a Persian historiographer and the author of the primary source for the
history of the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum during the 13th century. He served as head
of the chancellery of the Sultanate in Konya and reported on contemporary events.
His most famous book is El-Evmirü’l-’Alā’iyye fī’l-Umuri’l-’Ala’iyye. See, Bartusis,
Mark C., The late Byzantine army: arms and society, 1204-1453, (University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1992), 263.
15. Ibn Bibi (Duda), p. 6.
16. Nasawi. p. 222 (Arabic lext), p. 236 (Russian translation).
17. Juwayni. ii. p. 219-24: Juvaini (Boyle), pp. 484-8.
18. Juvaini (Boyle), pp. xxxvii-xxxix.
19. Vasily Vladimirovich Bartold also known as Wilhelm Barthold; 15 November [O.S.
3 November] 1869 – 19 August 1930) was a Russian historian of German descent
who specialized in the history of Islam and the Turkic peoples.
20. Bartold 1963: i. pp. 84-8; 1968: 38-41.
21. He was the son of a Jewish drug seller and originally trained as a physician (tabib).
In that capacity he entered the service of the Mongol court during the reign of the
Ilkhan Abaqa (1265-82). Around the age of 30 he converted from Judaism to Islam.
22. He remained wazir for the rest of his life. He wrote first the Ta’rikh-i Ghazni and
presented it to the Ilkhan Oljeitii. Oljeitii asked Rashid al-Din to continue the work
so as to provide a history of all the peoples with whom the Mongols had come into
contact.
23. The most important historiographic legacy of the Jami’ al-Tawarikh may be its
documentation of the cultural mixing and ensuing dynamism that led to the greatness
of the Persian and Ottoman empires, many aspects of which were transmitted to
Europe and influenced the Renaissance. This was the product of the geographical
extension of the Mongol Empire, and is most clearly reflected in this work by
Rashid al-Din. The text describes the different peoples with whom the Mongols
came into contact and is one of the first attempts to transcend a single cultural
perspective and to treat history on a universal scale. The Jami attempted to provide
a history of the whole world of that era.
24. Surviving as Topkapi Sarayi ms. 2932];
25. Morgan, ‘Rashid al-Din Tabib’. in EI’, viii. pp. 443-4.
26. Allsen 2001: 88-91: there also was another document under the same name, which was a
compendium of ritual texts for the Chinggis Khan cult.
27. Hassanzadeh, Esma’iel, “Andishe-ye Mashiyat-i Elahi dar Tarikhnegari-ye Eslami,
Tarikh-i Jahan-gosha-ye Jovayni”, Tarikh-i Eslam, second year, 2002 ,1, pp.133-
166.
28. He refers to Juvayni as the heir of this theology who believes that man has no
power to create things and that the world is managed absolutely by God.
29. Khosrobeigi, Houshang, “Khwaterenegari-ye Shahab al-Din Nasawi”, Zamaneh,
2007, 64, pp.33-36.
30. Haqqi, Syed Anwarul Haque, CHINGIZ KHAN, The Life and Legacy of an Empire
Builder, Primus Book, 2010
31. Donald Presgrave Little, An Introduction to Mamluke Historiography. An Analysis
of Arabic Annalistic and Biographical Sources for the Reign of al-Malik an-Nasir
Muhammed ibn Qala’un (Freiburger Islamstudien, Band II; Weisbaden, 1970),
pp. 1-99; Donald P. Little, “The Recovery of a Lost Source for Bahri Mamluke
History: Al-Yusufi’s Nuzhat al Nazi fi Sirat al-Malik al-Nasir,” Journal of the
American Oriental Society 94 (1974), pp. 42-54, reprinted in Little, History and
Historiography of the Mamluks (London, 1986), Essay II; Donald P. Little, “An
Analysis of the Relationship between Four Mamluk Chronicles for 737-745,”
Journal of Semitic Studies 19 (1974), pp. 252-268, reprinted in Little, History and
Historiography, Essay III; Li Guo, Early Mamluk Syrian historiography: Al-Yunini
‘s Dhayl Mir’at al-zaman, 2 vv. (Islamic History and Civilization Studies and
Texts, v. 21; Leiden, 1998).
32. Apart from the most informative of Mongol History Al-Kāmil fī al-tārīkh: “The
Complete History” he wrote Al-Tārīkh al-bāhir fī al-Dawlah al-Atābakīyah bi-
al-MawṣilUsd al-ghābah fi ma‘rifat al-ṣaḥābah: “The Lions of the Forest and the
knowledge about the Companions”Al-Lubāb fī tahdhīb al-ansāb
33. On the various types of historical writings, sec: Mcisami 1999: 9-14.
34. Jazirat Ibn Umar in Iraq was then part of the Great Seljuq Empire with its capital in
Isfahan.
35. Brockelmann 1943: i. p. 345; Rosental, ‘Ibn al-Athir’. in El’, iii, p. 734. 2M Abu al-Fida’,
ed. Dayyub; Gibb. ‘Abu’l-Fida’, in EI2, i, pp. 118-19; Little 1970: 42; Brockelmann
1949: ii. p. 45-6; 1937-49: ii. p. 44.
36. He was born in the castle of Khurandiz in the district of Nasa (west of Marw) in
Khurasan.
37. See, Levi, Scott Cameron; Sela, Ron (2010). Islamic Central Asia: An Anthology
of Historical Sources. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. p. 125
38. Nasawi, pp. 37-8 (Arabic text), p. 70 (Russian translation)
39. On the assimilation of Inner Asian motifs into the Islam practiced by people of Inner
Asian nomadic origin, see D. DeWeese, Islamization and Native Religion in the
Golden Horde: Haba Tukles and (Emersion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition
(University Park, 1994); R. Amitai-Prciss, “Ghazan, Islam and Mongol Tradition: A
View from the Mamluk Sultanate,” BSOAS, 59 (19%), 1-10.
40. See U. Haamiann, “Aljun Hfln und Cingiz Hftn bic den agypiischcn Mamlukcn,”
Der Islam, 51 (1974), 1 36; idem, “Turkish Legends in the Popular Historiography of
Medieval Egypt,” in Proceedings of the Vlth Congress oj Arabic and Islamic Studies
(Stockholm and Leiden. 1972), 97-107; R. Irwin. “What the Partridge Told the Eagle:
A Ncglectcd Arabic Source on Chinggis Khan and the Early History of the Mongols,”
in R. Amitai-Preiss and I). Morgan, The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden,
1999).
41. For a narrative based on these hist mentioned sources, see Ratchnevsky, Genghis
Khan, passim.
42. al-Nasawi, 32-4.
43. al-Nuwayri, Nihayat al-Arab fi Funun al-Adab , xxvii, 308 (= Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil,
xxii,365); Ibn al-Aihir is first mentioned by name in al-Nuwayrf, Nihayat al-Arab fi
Funun al-Adab, 27, 312 (= Ibnal-Athir, Kctmil, 12, 372).
44. In a note on al-Nuwayri, Nihayat al-Arab fi Funun al-Adab, xxvii, 310, the editor
points out that a sentence is taken from NasawF, 36. In al-Nuwayrf, Nihayat al-Arab fi
Funun al-Adab, xxvii, 311 2, the names of the Mongol commanders Jebe (called here
Jeme) and Subetei are inserted from Nasawf, 44. The bottom of al-Nuwayri, Nihayat
al-Arab fi Funun al-Adab, xvii, 327 seems to be a summary of al-Nasawf, 81.
45. al-Nuwayri, Nihayat al-Arab fi Funun al-Adab, xxvii, 227-8. For these episodes, see
J.A. Boyle,”Dynastic and Political History of the Il-khans,” in Cambridge History of
ban, vol. 5 (Cambridge, 1968), 318 -9.
46. M. Chapoutot-Remadi, “Al-Nuwayri,” The Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 8:158.
47. Volume 27 of the edition contains the dynastic history of the Mongols and is the
source for this article. See Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-Nuwayri, Nihayat al-Arab
fi Funun al-Adab, vol. 27, ed. Sa‘id ‘Ashur (Cairo, 1975), 300–420.
48. See al-Nasawi, Histoire du Sultan Djelal ed-Din Mankobirti, prince du Kharezm, ed.
Octave V. Houdas (Paris, 1891–95).
49. See Ibn al-Athir, Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh,ed. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Sal|m Tadmur| (Beirut,
1997).
50. Al-Nuwayri, Nihayah, 27:301.
51. Amitai, “Al-Nuwayri,” 28.
52. Amitai, Reuven Preisse: Mongols and Mamluks the Mamluk-ilkhanid war. 1260-1281.
(CambridgeStudies in Islamic Civilisation.)xv, 272 pp. Cambridge, etc.:Cambridge
University Press, 1995.i“Al-Nuwayri,” 28.
53. Amitai, “Al-Nuwayri, Ibid, 28–29
54. Yuri Bregel, Notes on the Study of Central Asia (Indiana University Research Institute
for Inner Asian Studies, Papers on Inner Asia, No. 28; Bloomington, 1996), pp. 35- 36.
55. Mihaly Dobrovits, “The Turco-Mongolian Tradition of Common Origin and
Historiography in Fifteenth-Century Central Asia,” Acta Orientalia Academiae
Scientiarum Hungaricae 47 (1994), pp. 269-277.
56. Woods, “The Rise of Timurid Historiography,” pp. 81-108. See also, Jaroslaw Pelenski,
Russia and Kazan: Conquest and Imperial Ideology, 1438-1560s (The Hague-Paris,
1973), pp. 13-16, despite the argument in M. A. Usmanov, Tatarskie istoricheskie
istochniki XVII-XVIII v. (Kazań, 1972), pp. 26-32, that such sources might have
existed and been lost in the Muscovite conquest and later fires. Allen J. Frank, Islamic
Historiography and “Bulghar” Identity Among the Tatars and Bashkirs of Russia
(Leiden/Boston, 1998), pp. 12-13, points out that the twelfth-century Andalusian al-
Gharnati cited an inextant history of Bulghar, and a 1550 report by Hajji Muhammed
Sharif Hajjitarkhani to the Ottoman Sultan of the repulse of a Muscovite attack on
Kazań has survived; nevertheless, he concludes that “We have no evidence that
narrative histories were compiled in the region during either the period of the Kazań
Khanate, or in the Golden Horde.” My thanks to Devin DeWeese for the reference to
Frank’s monograph.
57. See Jaroslaw Pelenski, Russia and Kazan: Conquest and Imperial Ideology, 1438-
1560s
(The Hague-Paris, 1973), pp. 13-16, despite the argument in M. A. Usmanov,
Tatarskie istoricheskie istochniki XVII-XVIII v. (Kazań, 1972), pp. 26-32, that such
sources might have existed and been lost in the Muscovite conquest and later fires.
Allen J. Frank, Islamic Historiography and “Bulghar” Identity Among the Tatars
and Bashkirs of Russia (Leiden/Boston, 1998), pp. 12-13, points out that the twelfth-
century Andalusian al-Gharnati cited an inextant history of Bulghar, and a 1550 report
by Hajji Muhammed Sharif Hajjitarkhani to the Ottoman Sultan of the repulse of a
Muscovite attack on Kazań has survived; nevertheless, he concludes that “We have no
evidence that narrative histories were compiled in the region during either the period
of the Kazań Khanate, or in the Golden Horde.” My thanks to Devin DeWeese for the
reference to Frank’s monograph.
58. Allen J. Frank, The Siberian Chronicles and the Taybughid Biys of Sibir’ (Indiana
University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies, Papers on Inner Asia, No. 27;
Bloomington, 1994), especially pp. 1-7. I owe this reference to Devin DeWeese.
59. Usmanov, pp. 33-96; Frank, Islamic Historiography, pp. 13-14.
60. Usmanov, pp. 97-133; Frank, Islamic Historiography, pp. 14-20.
61. Alan W. Fisher, The Crimean Tatars (Stanford, 1978), pp. 35-36.
62. Stanford Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Volume I: Empire
of the Gazis: The Rise and Decline of the Ottoman Empire, 1280-1808 (Cambridge,
England 1976), Pp.145-147.
63. Ts. Zh. Zhamtsarano, Mongol‘skie letopisi XVII veka (Moscow-Leningrad, 1936),
translated by R. Loewenthal as C. Ž. Žamcarano, The Mongol Chronicles of the
Seventeenth Century (Göttinger Asiatische Forschungen, Band 3; Wiesbaden, 1955);
L. S. Puchkovskii, “Mongol’skaia feodal’naia istoriografiia,” Uchenye zapiski instituta
vostokovedeniia 6 (1953), pp. 131-166; Charles R. Bawden, The Mongol Chronicle
Altan Tobči: Text, Translation, and Critical Notes (Göttinger Asiatische Forschungen,
Band 5; Wiesbaden, 1955); N. P. Shastina, ed. & tr. Shara Tudzhi. Mongol’skaia
letopis’ XVII veka (Moscow-Leningrad, 1957); John R. Krueger, tr. Sagang Sechen,
The Bejewelled Summary of the Origins of Khans. A History of the Eastern Mongols
to 1662. Part One: Chapter One through Five. From the Creation of the World to the
Death of Genghis Khan (The Mongolia Society Occasional Papers, #2; 2nd edition;
Bloomington, 1967 [all published]); N. P. Shastina, Lubsan Danzan [Blo-bzan Bstan-
‘dzin], Altan Tobchi (“Zolotoe skazanie”) (Moscow, 1973).
64. Ulrich Haarmann, “‘Großer Vater Mond’ und ‘Schwarzer Löwenjunge’ - eine
mongolisch-kiptschakische Ursprungssage in arabischer Überlieferung,” in Stephan
Conermann, Jan Kusber, eds., Die Mongolen in Asien und Europa, Kieler Werkstücke,
Reihe F: Beiträge zur osteuropäischen Geschichte (Frankfurt am Main, 1997), pp.
121-138.
Associate Professor
Department of History, AMU, Aligarh, India
Ibn Tughri Bardi : A Mamluk Historian of Egypt
Dr. Saifullah Saifi
Introduction:
After the fall of Aiyubids in Egypt there emerged a dynasty which
is known as Mamluks. They were dynasty of slaves, and of varied races and
nationalities. Their rule is important for many reasons .They checked for ever
the advance of Mongols and of Timur. Had they not done so the course of
history and culture in West Asia and Egypt might be different. They ruled
for about two and three quarter of the centuries (1250-1517).1 The dynasty is
divided into the Bahris (1250-1370) and the Burjis 1382-1517). The Bahris
were chiefly Turks and Mongols. They carried the name because they were
settled in the barracks of the isle of al-Rawadh in the River (Nahr) Nile. The
Burjis were known so because they were quartered in the towers (burj) of the
citadel. The Burjis were mostly Circassian slaves. In all there were twenty
four Bahri rulers and twenty three Burji rulers. The Mamluk rulers were not
ashamed of their lowly origin. These Mamluk rulers followed Shariah in
their religious matters but in their personal lives they were influenced by non
Islamic traditions and they decided their affairs according to Tura-i-Changizi.
The Mamluks had a galaxy of writers in their court who extensively
wrote on literary, cultural political and other aspects. Among them mention
may be made of Abd al Zahir, Abul Fida, Yahya al Yusufi, Ibn al Kathir, al
Dhahabi, Ibn Khaldun, al-Sayuti, al Maqrizi, al Aini, Ibn Tughri Bardi, Ibn
Iyas, al Asqalani, al- Sakhavi and many more. Among these writers Abul
Fida, Ibn Tughri Bardi, al-Sayuti and al-Maqrizi were Mamluks.2 The Arabic
Mongol historians have left a vivid account of the contemporary rulers and
general people.
Abul Mahasin Jamaluddin Yusuf born at Cairo. He is famous as Ibn
Tughri Bardi. His father was Tughri Bardi3 al Atabaki. He was a Hanafi Muslim
by sect. His complete genealogy was such: “Abul Mahasin Jamaluddin Yusuf
bin Tughri Bardi bin Abdullah Zahri Juvaini.” The father of Abul Mahasin was
a Mamluk from Asia Minor (Rum). He was purchased by Sultan at Zahir al
Barquq4 (d.801H). After an appropriate training he was incorporated among
his slaves. Gradually he was promoted to the various ranks. Under sultan al
Nasir Faraj he became Commander-in-Chief of the Egyptian armies, Amir al
Kabir Atabak of Damascus where he died in 815/1412.5 He left six sons and
four daughters, among whom Ibn Tughri Bardi was youngest.
Birth:
There is not one opinion regarding the year of birth among the scholars.6
Ibn al Imad has written : “He was born in Cairo in 812H/7
Ibn Iyas has also given emphasis on this date. But some other historians
are of the view that he was born in 813H. Hafiz Sakhavi writes : “it is fact that
he was born in Shawwal 813H in the house of Manjak al Yusufi8 near Madrasa
Husainiyah.
Tughri Bardi died while Abul Mahasin was two years old. The boy
Yusuf was looked after by his sister Bairam, wife of the Chief Qazi Muhammad
bin al Adim.9 After the death of his first husband his sister married Jalaluddin
Balqani10 and Ibn Tughri Bardi remained under her care. He was provided all
the facilities till his youth. When Balqini too, died he took refuge in the care
of his father’s slave and spent some years with them.
Education :
Ibn Tughri Bardi began his education under the care of his father’s
slave. At first he memorized the Holy Qoran, then learnt other religious books.
He studied under many noted scholars. He learnt fiqh from ‘Aini’, Abul Baqa
bin al Zia Makki and ash Shamni,11 Nahv (syntax) from Ala ur Rumi, Uruz
(prosody) from Kafiji, Qawam ul Hanafi.12, Navaji13 az Zainul Qasim14 and Ibn
Arab Shah. He also received education from Ibn Hajar. For the purpose of
further education he travelled far an wide. He went to Ibn Zahira in Makkah,
Badruddin al Aleef in Cairo, Abdul Khair bin Abd al Qawi, Hakim Tughri
Barmash al Faqih in Qal’a and Ibn al Tahan, Ibn Bardas and Ibn al Naazir.
Besides, obtained permission from az Zain al Zarkhshi and Ibn Furat for
different sciences and learnings. He also received education from Mar’ashi
and Ibn al Shama’a.15
Contact with nobility:
It is evident that from the very beginning Abul Mahasin had close
contact with the nobility. After the death of his father he was brought after
by his brother in law who had an important post in the court and thereafter a
group of nobles of his father who imparted him all type of education including
the warfare. He was bestowed a fief by the king at the age of five.16 Gradually
his contact with the nobility and the court strengthened. In 836/1432 he took
an active part in the Syrian campaign of Sultan Barsbay, with whom he was
on intimate terms, and turned to the writing of history. Ibn Tughri writes in his
book Al Nujum ul Zahira fi Muluk Misr wal Qahira : “Unlike other historians
I have not written this book for the appeasement of any amir and sultan and
there is no hidden interest.”17
It seems that he could not stand by his words. He could not help
himself being affected by the prevailing atmosphere. He did the same as was
done by his predecessor and teacher, al-Aini. Thus Mustafa Ziyada is of the
opinion:
“He wrote this book for his friend Sultan Muhammad bin Jaqmaq so
that the book could get the same position as was achieved by the book Iqdal
Juman by Allama Aini and Akhbar al Zaman written for Barsbay. But the
Sultan paid no attention towards this.”18
Ibn Tughri Bardi had not only written the book in praise of the Sultan
but he had close contact with him. The reason was that like Allama Aini, he
too went to the court and told the history and tried to become close to the
ruler. He got success in his effort. He remained in the assemblies of the sultan
which was consisted of learned scholars of the time. He remained time to
time present with the sultan even during his hunting excursion. He got access
in the court of Sultan Khush Qadam19 and was honoured with favour. But he
was unable to receive the same kindness and favour as was received in the
court of Sultan Muhammad bin Jaqmaq. Ibn Tughri Bardi wanted the same
position as Aini, Maqrizi and other historians previously held in the court.
To some extent he was successful in his efforts. He got that position due to
eminence, educational mastery and important writings. He got expertise in
lancing, archery, polo and horse riding. He had keen interest in music also and
was expert in playing different tunes. As he was son of Commander in Chief
and wali of the government one can wonder that why not he was made the
administrator of any region. However, he was deputed on the post of secretary
of “al Mahmil al Misri,”
As Historian :
Ibn Tughri Bardi received education in different sciences from different
teachers and wrote books on various subjects. But he concentrated mainly on
history. He had such mastery over it that he even can boast to surpass the other
luminaries of the time. He paid much attention on the subject. He had learnt
much from Allama Maqrizi and Aini. He tried at his best to follow them with
regard to write and compile the books.20 That is why he once announced that
there was no historian to equal him. After the death of his teachers-Maqrizi
and Aini there was no historian of his stature in Egypt. Mustafa Ziyada writes:
“After the death of Maqrizi and Aini, in the mid of 15th
century Abul Mahasin got central position among the historians of
Egypt.”21
Indeed, after the death of Maqrizi and Aini there was no historian who
can boast himself to equal him in importance and centrality. Ibn Tughri Bardi
writes about himself in the tone of cheerfulness, and pride :
“When we returned from the burial of Allama Aini, Badruddin
Muhammad bin Abdul Mun’im al Hanbali told me that the position is vacant
for you completely. I could not retaliate on this. After reaching home I sent
him a write up which was written by Allama Aini in which he had enquired
about the views of some people. Allama Aini, due to weakness and low vision
was unable to answer. In the same writing the Allama had praised me a lot
and had written about me to the extent that regarding the history the people are
dependent upon you. You are the only expert in this field thank God for this.
This was written two years before the death of Allama Aini, i.e. 849H. 22
From the above excerpt it is quite clear that Ibn Tughri Bardi had
command over history writing. To consult a student by the teacher and
bestowing him big epithets is itself really an important matter. He was laden
with all the good qualities of a good historian. But Sakhavi has pointed out his
certain defects in history writing, for example change in lineage, repetition
of the name, tampering with the words, change in the position of the persons,
repetition of the events of the people and narrating the events. 23. After
going through his writing and critical analysis of him it seems that Sakhavi
has unnecessarily criticized Ibn Tughri Bardi. Regarding the shortcomings
which Sakhavi has pointed out, it can be said that it is impression of personal
perverseness because it is possible that by showing these flaws before the
people and scholars Sakhavi could try to prove himself as the best from the
other scholars of the time who were in praise of him. In defense of Ibn Tughri
Bardi Mustafa Ziyada writes:
“According to the words of contemporaries and even apparent from the
books of Abul Mahasin, he was very active in research. He had mastery in the
field of history and other sciences. In the medieval period, from east to West,
there were few people so studious and laborious. Whatever he wrote he stood
by it. was responsible for it.24
Ibn Tughri Bardi was a realistic historian. If he found anything

was contradictory to his teacher, regarding the historical fact, he has given
comments on it and has even severely criticized.
“If Abul Mahasin found the fact contradictory to his teacher, he noted if
down completely and then criticized it.”25
We are not sure to what extent Ibn Tughri Bardi was successful in
criticizing the excerpts of his teacher, Maqrizi, but this much is proved that he
felt himself free while he criticized.
Ibn Tughri Bardi is counted among the important historians of Medieval
Egypt. By writing books in history he proved his intellectual maturity among
the scholars. In history writing his style is unique and unparallel. On whatever
period he wrote, he discussed the things at length. He wrote the events,
conditions of the nobles and other things with minutest details. For example
in his magnum opus al Nujum-uz-Zahira, which is known as reference book
he has given emphasis on new expression and manner.26 In this book there is
detailed description of the people who either ruled over Egypt or took part in
the administration. There is short description of all the people who took part in
the administration after the occupation of Egypt. The book also throws lights
on the social and geographical condition of the Egypt. He has given the name
of the people with patronym, epithet and a short sketch of the life. The details
of the dignitaries are given under the period in which they died. In the book
there is detailed account of the famous places, madrasas, rivers, and historical
buildings. Regarding the building he has paid special attention that when was
the particular building founded and during whose reign it was completed. The
description of the nobles and rulers are given chronologically and important
events of the period are also included. This book is full of information and
worth reading. This is consisted on seven bulky volumes. Due to its bulkiness
the author has written its abridgement and has given its name as al Anwaruz
Zahira min al Kawakib al Tahira. The book has been published from different
places in many volumes.
Ibn Tughri Bardi and his contemporaries :
It is beyond doubt that Ibn Tughri Bardi had achieved a great position
among the historians and luminaries of the time. But as we have seen he was
criticized by certain writers for his shortcomings. There were other writers who
were claiming for the similar position. In the later years of Ibn Tughri Bardi,
Hafiz Sakhavi got prominence. To eclipse Ibn Tughri Bardi’s fame he used
different tools to malign him and tried to attract the attention of the scholars
towards himself. He unduly highlighted the errors in his history writing. At a
place he writes about Ibn Tughri Bardi :
“I have heard that he was self praising and declared himself expert in
lancing, archery and other things. To sum up he was humane, polite and wise,
but is foolish in his claims.”27
According to many historians Ibn Tughri Bardi got prominence in

history writing after Maqrizi and Aini. But Hafiz Sakhavi was not ready to
accept it. Though he praised Ibn Tughri Bardi for other qualities he did not
digest the fact that he surpassed him in scholarship. Being overwhelmed by
personal bias what Sakhavi did that was not suitable for a scholar. Regarding
Sakhavi’s attitude Imam Shokani writes.
“In his writing flattery and suppositions have found much place.
Sakhavi was contemporary of Ibn Tughri Bardi God knows better how much
has he accused him for falsehood and slander. His entire biography is full of
errors.”28
Like Sakhawi there were few other historians who had ill-will and rival
attitude towards Ibn Tughri Bardi. Regarding them Mustafa Ziyada is of the
opinion:
“Among the contemporaries of Ibn Tughri Bardi only two persons had
shown their interests, one was az-Zahir Ibn al Sairafi and other was Sakhavi. Both
have written an extended biography of Abul Mahasin. The element of jealousy and
perverseness which was prevalent among the majority of the historians of the time,
they were not void of it.”29
There are a large number of historians who had an eye on both the
positive and negative sides of Ibn Tughri Bardi. Among them one is Ibn Iyas
who is dependable historian. Revealing the facts about Ibn Tughri Bardi he
writes:
“He always remained busy in study. He had special interest in history
writing, he wrote many books.”31
The author of Shazrat writes about him :

“He had special interest in history. He remained present
with the famous historians of the time-Maqrizi and Aini.
He made great efforts in the field of science of history.
Having excellent nature, quick memory, good ideas, perfect
Intellect and knowledge, got prominence in this art. Writing
important books, he included himself among the illustrious
historians.”32
Ahmad bin Husain Turkmani, also known as al-Marji had the same
liking with his teacher, Ibn Tughri Bardi, as Sakhavi had with Ibn Hajar. He
was panegyrist of his teacher. He has written a brief biography of his teacher
which is found in the last pages of al-Manhal al safi. He has praised a lot his
teacher in this biography. He writes:
“These are his qualities which I have narrated with my
pen. The reality is that his qualities are much more than that.33
What are these qualities pointed by al-Marji, are evident from this
excerpt:
“I have not seen anyone like him. He had such which qualities which
most of the people have not. He was sweet spoken, man of nice perception and
straight forward. He paid attention towards science of history and tried a lot
in achieving it. He was leader of history writers of his age. He had complete
control over music and musical tones. There was none to equal him in these
sciences.”34
Death :
Though the date of Ibn Tughri Bardi is death is not certain, Ibn Iyas
places it in 5 Zul Hajja 874 in Cairo. It is said that he had selected the place
himself for his burial near the tomb of Ashraf Inal.35 He was buried at the same
place which he wished for. His betrothed library was transferred to the tomb
mosque from which the people benefitted for a long time.
Works :
Ibn Tughri Bardi is voluminous writer. He has written many books
on different subjects. The first important work of the author is al-Manhal al-
Safi wa al Mustaufi ba’d al Wafi.36 This is a biographical dictionary of the
sultans, nobles, amirs and ulema from 650/1248 to 855/1451. Later on some
additions were made as late as 862/1458. The compilation is in Majam,
alphabet arrangement. The book has been published in 1956 from Cairo. The
work was intended as a companion volume of al-Safadi’s al-Wafi bi al-Wafiyat
upon which Ibn Tughri Bardi relied heavily. Since it has biographies of 2822
important peoples of Mamluk empire, obviously it is valuable primarily for
information on the author’s contemporaries.
Next book written by the author is al-Nujum al Zahira fi Muluk Misr
Wa al-Qahira.37 This brings the history of Egypt from 20H/641 down to the
beginning of the sultanate of Kait Bay. It continued also the biographical series
of the Manhal. It is a history of Islamic Egypt, beginning with its conquest and
ending with 872/1468. It was written for himself and his friends, especially sultan
Jaqmaq’s son Muhammad who died before he could succeed his father on the
throne. In the words of a modern writer it is a work by a courtier for courtiers.38 So
far as the format of al-Nujum is concerned it is arranged by reigns of individual
rulers rather than strict annalistic chronology. Nevertheless, within each reign
chronological order is followed, though there is no formal division of events by
years. In keeping with this arrangement Ibn Tughri Bardi withheld the obituaries
till the end of each sultan’s reign, at which point he grouped them by each year.
The structural innovation reinforce the biographical emphasis of this work.
The book is important because it has plenty of useful information about
the Mongols. It gives a description of Chingiz’s invasion which is extremely
interesting. There is a new and curious explanation of the term “siyasa”. As per
his explanation the word is a joint term “Si” “Yasa”, the thirty rules. Besides,
it discusses about “Tura” and “Yasaq”. According to the author some of the
Mumluk rulers preferred to rule according to it in their day to day affairs.
Al Nujum has some interesting information about Chingiz’s hunting

excursion. For example, the author criticizes Chingiz Khan for his love for
hunting and comments that how can a mighty king hike him waste three months
in such excursion. But he completely ignores the fact that the hunting was not
merely an excursion but a necessity. Due to harsh winter, the whole year round
there was no production. Animals were killed in nirgha and the dried meat was
consumed during the year. Besides, hunting provided an excellent opportunity
for physical and military exercises.
Another chronicle written by Ibn Tughri Bardi is Hawadith al Duhur fi
mad al Aiyam waal-Shuhur.39 This covers the period from 845/1441 to 874/1469.
This was written in continuation of al-Maqrizi’s al-suluk li Marifat dual al Mulu.40
The work begins where al-suluk ends. The work covers the reign of seven sultans
and the early years of Qayatbay. Simultaneously he continued his work al-Nujum.
But he omitted from much of the Hawadith’s fuller material regarding persons
and economic and political conditions. Although there is some overlap between
the al-Nujum and Hawadith, the former is not a detailed or as comprehensive
as the latter. Since Ibn Tughri Bardi had easy access to the court circles and
had familiarity with Mamluk administration, the Hawadith and contemporary
sections of al-Nujum constitute an invaluable personal commentary on persons,
institutions and events. The reason for the compilation of Hawadith as told by Ibn
Tughri Bardi was that “after the death of Maqrizi there was only detailed book
on history was Iqdal Jaman fi Tarikh ahliz Zaman written by Aini, but was not
without the possibility of errors and suppositions. Therefore necessity was felt
for writing a book which could be free from errors and imaginations.41 This book
has been compiled by William Popper and published in 11930 by Qarul Kutb al
Misriya Qahira.
Two other historical works not mentioned by him or his biographers
are ascribed to him: Nuzhat al Raj fi al Tarikh42 for 678/1279 to 747/1346 and
at Bahr al-Zakir fi ilm al awaial wa al-Akhir43 for 32-71/652-790.
He also wrote several condensations or extracts from his main works
such as al Dalil al Shafi ala al Manhal al Safi,44 Kitab al Wuzara45, al Bishara fi
Takmilat (supplement to al-Dhahabis’ Ishara al-kawqakib al-Bahira46 Mansha
al Latafa fi man Wali al Sa Itana wa al Khilafa.47
Ibn Tughri Bardi had not only a passion for history but he was scholar
of Turkic and Persian also. He is said to have interest in music. His works
other than on history were : Taharif al Arab fi al Asma al Turkiya,48 al-Amthal
al Sariya,49 Hilyat al Sifat fi al Asma wa al Sinaat,50 al-Sikkar al Fadih wa al
Itral Faih51 poem of mystic content, and short treatise on vocal music.
Conclusion :
Ibn Tughri Bardi was a versatile genius. His interests were broad. He
is known for his chronicles and biographical dictionary. Besides history, he had
also interests in literature. He was fond of Persian and Turkic literature. He was
also interested in Philological questions. He was keen observer of the economic
conditions of the time. He also wrote on the subject of Islamic mysticism. While
writing on history he kept his ethical and doctrinal prejudices separate from his
rational judgments, political and personal bias. He had passion for the truth. He
seems on the whole to have convinced of the profession of historian is to base on
objectivity and not to mingle the fact with fiction.
Notes and References :

1. Phillip K. Hitti, History of Arabs from the Earliest times to the Present, Mc Milan
Press Ltd., Landon, 1970, p. 671
2. Ibid, p. 687
Tughri Bardi is in fact ‘Tinkri Vibardi’. This is a Turkish word meaning ‘Gift of the
God’ see Ismail Basha, Hidayat ul Arfeen, Istambul , 1951 Vol.2, P. 560.
3. Ibn Tughri Bardi, Al Nujum ul Zahira fi Muluk Misr wa al Qahira,ed. William
Popper, University of California Publication, Vol.6, P.632.
4. Ibid.
5. Dairat al Ma’arif al Islamia, Lahore, Vol1, P.441.
6. Abd al Hayy Ibn al Imad, Shazrat al Dhahab fi Akbar man Dhahab, Brocklemann,
1937, Vol.2, p. 317
7. He was tyrant ruler, famous as Manjak al Kabir, see Khair ul Din al Zakali, al
Aalam,Cairo, 1954. Vol.8, P. 223.
8. Abul Khair al Sakhavi, Al Zau ul Lami li ahlal Qarn al Tasi, Cairo, 1353, Vol.10, p.
305.
9. He is also known as Ibn Javada, born in Halb in 792H. He died of cholera in 819H,
See al zau ul Lami, Vol. 8, p.35.
10. al Aalam, Vol.4, P.93
11. Umar Raza, Kahala, Majam al Muallifin, Damascus 1960, Vol.2, P.149.
12. Jalal ud Din Sayuti : Nazm al Aqiyan fi Ayan il Ayan, New Berk, 1927, P.166.
13. Ibid, P.144.
14. al Zau ul Lami, Vol.6, P.184.
15. Ibn Tughri Bardi, al Manhal al Safi Wa al Mustaufi ba’d al Wafi, Cairo, 1956, Vol.1,
P.208.
16. Al Nujum, Vol. 6,p.30.
17. Ibid, Vol.1, P.2
18. Mustafa Ziyada, Al Muarrikhun fi Misr fi al Qarnil Khamis Ashr al Miladi al Qarn al Tasi
al Hijri. Cairo, 1954, P.3.
19. Al Zau ul Lami, Vol.3, P.174.
20. Al Nujum, Vol.1, P-3-28.
21. Al Muarrikhun fi Misr, P.36.
22. Ibn Tughri Bardi, Hawadith al Duhur fi mad al Aiyam wal Shuhur P.1.
23. Al Zau ul Lami, Vol.10, P. 307
24. Al Muarrikhun fi Misr, P-35.
25. Ibid, P.100.
26. Al Nujum
27. Al Zau ul Lami, Vol.10, P.306.
28. Muhammad bin Ali Shokani, Al Badrul Tali, Cairo, 1378H, Vol.2, P.351.
29. Al Muarrikhun fi Misr, P.36.
30. Ibn Iyas (852-930 H), Muhammad bin Ahmad Ibn Iyas, born in Cairo. His books are
Badai al Zuhur fi Waqai al Duhur and Iqd al Juman fi Waqai al Zaman. For further
information see Ma’jam al Muallifin, Vol.8, P.236.
31. Ibn Iyas, Tarikh Misr, Bulaq, 1311H, Vol.2, P.118.
32. Shazrat al Zahab, Vol. 7, P.317.
33. Al Nujum, Vol. 1, P.9.
34. Ibid, Vol.1, PP.9-17.
35. Ashraf Inal (784-865H) was a ruler of Egypt and Syria. He was known as Malik al
Ashraf, died in Cairo. See al Aalam, Vol.1, P.12.
36. Mustafa Badii, Al Makhtutat al Musawwira, Cairo, 1959, Vol,2, P.118.
37. Ibid, Vol.3, P.306.
38. Carl F. Potry. ed, The Cambridge History of Egypt, Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, 1998, Vol.1, P.439.
39. Al Nujum, Vol.6, PP.368-69.
40. Hawadith, Vol.1, P.1
41. Al Muarrikhun fi Misr, P. 33
42. Al Nujum,
43. Al Muarrikhun fi Misr, P.33
44. Ghulam Yahya Anjum, Misri Muarrikhin : Tanqidi Mutalia, Nishat Offset Press,
Tanda, Faizabad, 1987, P.124.
45. Ibid.
46. Ibid.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid.
50. Ibid.
51. Ibid.
Research Associate, M.M.A.J, A.I.S.
Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi
Who says Chengis Khan was Bloodthirsty only!
Dr. M A Lari ‘Azad’
European historians have projected Chengis Khan as the most cruel invader
ever born in history. They have repeatedly exaggerated him as a blood thirsty,
ruthless hurricane who stormed Central Asia and Europe in Medieval times. They
haven’t spared him in declaring a Vampire. Even in Persian chronicles of India,
‘Chengis1 word has been used for the most horrifying monster ever known to
the world. No foreign chronicler has ever talked about him other than a bloody
cyclone of Mongolia. He became so infamous in the pages of History that Mongols
in general were made pseudonym of terror.
But it is not true, its an exaggeration of imaginary stories, a broad day light
lie. It is an injustice of chroniclers who have written on mere hearsays. Chengis
Khan was the builder of the greatest ever empire of the world, but unfortunately
he has not been counted with Alexander the Great or Napoleon Bonaparte. British
Empire was larger but scattered, Chengis’s Empire was biggest in one boundary
i.e. from Hungarian borders to the China Sea shores. I have found a lot of incidents
in the life of Chengis Khan which are sufficient enough to reconsider him from
entirely a different point of view. Here I have tried to mention only few incidents
which throw a new light on the face of Chengis Khan. I don’t want to wash his
deeds which he did in Zhongdu (May 1215), Khozand, Bukhara, Samarqand
(March 1220), Khurasan, Merv, Balkh, Herat and Nishapur, as these were the
cases of genocide, but I want to reflect a glimpse of his entirely second phase
which is less known to the world, though a reality.
Chengis Khan, when he was very young, one day, in an earnest ceremony,
swore the eternal vows of a blood-brother with Jamukha, heir to the leadership of
Jadirat clan, along the banks of the river Onon. When Temuchin’s newly married
wife Bortei was captured by Merkits, Jamukha helped him to reunite with Bortei.
When Temuchin was about thirteen, imprisoned by Taychi’uts, escaped in
the darkness and hiding, saved by Sorkan of Suldu clan. In 1200, when Temuchin
was executing the Taychi’uts, he embraced the crying Kada’an, the daughter of
Sorkan, consoled her and honoured by giving her seat beside him in evening feast
and gratefully appointed her father and brother into the ranks of his army.
One day, thirteen year old Bo’orchu, son of Nayan the rich, helped
Temuchin, and the later parted with vows of undying friendship.
When he was almost sixteen, Temuchin recognised Christian Kerait King
Toghril as his father. When his newly married wife Bortei was captured by Merkits,
Toghril helped him to reunite with Bortei. In 1195, when Toghril was deposed by
his brother and the Naimans, restored the old Kerait King to his throne.
Temuchin accepted Jelme, as a presented servant by his father, an old
swordmaker-blacksmith, who came down to fulfil a promise made to Yesugei.
Later on, Jelme’s brother Subedei came and was soon became Temuchin’s general
and rank beside him in his history.
Kokochu, son of Monglik, the old servant of Yesugei, convinced thousand
shamans that he had been told in a trance by Munkhe Tengri, the Supreme God
Himself that the whole world would be given to Temuchin and his sons. Chengis
Khan respected Kokochu and was grateful to him for providing celestial support.
In 1200, Temuchin captured Togode of the Besuts, whose clan like
Sorkans were vassals of the Tayichi’uts, but when Togode challenged valiantly
and returned with offer to serve Temuchin or die, was appointed commander of a
troop and got a new name Jebe ‘the Arrow’.
In 1202, Temuchin had the faithful Mukali, the brilliant orphan who had
been adopted by his mother Ho’elun. Years later, when he became master of an
empire, the proud man who had been with him in that darkest hour was revered in
the ‘Muddy Water Drinkers’.
In 1203, Temuchin gave the most valuable prizes to the two herdsmen
who had warned him of the approaching army of Keraits. Temuchin didn’t allow
the slaughter of Keraits; his ambition was to rule them not to destroy them.
In 1204, Temuchin lavishly and sincerely praised the heroism of his
enemy, the Naimans.
In 1206, he forbade for any man to own a Mongol slave. He also excused
the shamans and the priest of other religions from mandatory active service for all
men. European ambassadors, merchants and missionaries were astonished by the
safety provided to travelers in his empire by his staging posts. He promoted men
only on merits, not on the basis of their birth, as practiced by other medieval rulers.
In 1211, Chengis Khan modified his previously uncompromising attitude
towards treacherous rebels.
In 1214, he gifted life to all the craftsmen, scholars, physicians and artists
from prisoners to be slaughtered.
In 1218, at Kashgar, his commander Jebe announced that within Mongol
empire all religions were respected equally.
In 1219, at Bukhara, the Persian inhabitants sent their Imams to surrender
the city to Chengis Khan and saved their lives. Chengis allowed them and addressed
from an open-air pulpit that their misfortune had been brought upon them by the
sins of their rulers.
In 1221, Chengis Khan, on the advice of his Khitan chancellor, greeted the
Persian people as his subjects and citizens.
In 1222, at Hindukush, Chengis Khan travelled 2000 miles with the great
Taoist philosopher Changchun and owed respect for the sage.
In 1227, the nomad “Emperor of Mankind” died unseen, unknown,
unlamented and unsung leaving stories of horrified bloodshed of an “Oceanic
King” behind him and unfortunately a great military genius was overshadowed
by the much publicized mask of a dreaded monster. At the beginning of the 13th
century, he was so far ahead of his time, in his military strategies that he became
the model for even the famous commanders of the modern world.
I have humbly submitted here only some of the activities of personal
and political life of Chengis Khan, which to some extent reflects reverse to his
monstrous face and inspires any researcher to reconsider the psychology behind
history and historiography on Chengis Khan.
Head
Dept.of P.G. Studies & Research in History
NREC College, Khurja
U.P., India
Historiographical Contacts between India,
Tibet and Mongolia
India’s relations with Mongolia goes back to very early age. I have
traveled deep in Mongolia and also visited the so called ‘Mongol Crescent in
India’ especially North East India and I found a lot of amazing similarities. While
studying in the National Library of Mongolia, National Museum at Ulaanbaatar
and Tibetan Section in National University of Mongolia, famous Monasteries and
Lamaseries in different parts of Mongolia, I observed numerous source-materials
of historiographical contacts between India and Mongolia which I have all the
reason to believe that it reached via Tibetan Monks and Tibetan translations in
ample number both of Buddhist (Pali) and Sanskrit literatures.
At the end of the second millennium before Jesus, the great steppe zone
of Eurasia stretching from the banks of Danube to the Enisei, the Baikal and the
Southern borders of Mongolia was populated by nomadic tribes known by the
common name Sakas (Scythians) linked together by one language (basically old
Persian) and identity of culture and artistic ideas called ‘animal style.’ These
nomadic tribes during their great migration under the pressure of the Hsiung-nu
in the Seventh and Sixth centuries spread to the northern areas of India. The great
repercussions the Sakas had in the ancient India, among other foreign influences,
some elements of the nomadic mode of life and culture, like the stretched dress
such as tunic and trousers. The Sakas are supposed to have disseminated Indian
culture and religion to Central Asia as far as the Far East.The historical traditions
about the Kushanas have been preserved in Mongolia for many centuries long after
the fall of the Kushana empire. In the Mongol chronicle of the second half of the
Thirteenth century ‘Cayan teuke’1 (‘White History’) there is enumerated ‘Kusan-u
Mongyol ulus,’ that is, ‘the Mongol power of Kushana’ among other Buddhist
palces Kashmir, Khotan (Li-yin Sartayul ulus), China, Tibet, Nepal (Balbu). The
‘White History’ says: ‘Kusan-un Jad Mongyol-un yajar-a Vacirbani-yin qubilayan
Temucin neretu qayan Kubegun toruju... Qamuy cambudeba yirdincu-yi erke-
degen oruyulju uridus-un bayiyuluysan qoyar yosun-i tegside erkileged ...’2 (‘In
the country of Jad Mongolia of Kushana there was born a prince named Temujin,
the incarnation of Vajrapani... (He) having put under (his) power all Jambudvipa,
followed the two laws3 which had been initiated by the predecessors....’) The
‘White History’ attributed the name ‘Kushana’ to Mongolia as if Mongolia was
a successor of the Kushana Empire. In ancient Mongol chronicles it is mentioned
of Kanika4 -qayan, that is Kanishka-Khan, as a great Cakravarti emperor (Yeke
cakravardi qayan or Mahacakravartiraja) alongside Asoka. The Mongol authors
considered the Buddhist policy of the ‘two principles’ (civil power and Dharma)
founded by Asoka and Kanishka was continued to be followed by great Mongol
Khans, especially Khubilai.
The Mongols learned of the Kushanas and their emperor Kanishka
mostly from Buddhist sources. There is a Buddhist historical tradition concerning
Kanishka and his deeds in favour of Mahayana Buddhism. It is referred in multi-
language sources - Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan, Khitan, Saka, Sogdian, Uighur and
Mongol. This tradition is often neglected and considered to be a later religious
fiction without any serious considerations by those who study the history of the
Kushanas. In reality of what is told in the tradition is not devoid of historicity and
could throw light upon some problems of the political and religious history of the
Kushanas.
There was well known to the Mongols an appeal (Sanskrit, lekha) of
Matriceta to Kanishka called ‘Maharajakaniskalckha’ (in Mongolian: yeke qayan
Kanika-dur ilcgegsen Jakiy-a bicig’). It was translated from the Tibetan and was
included, together with the appeals of Nagarjuna, Cadragomin and others, into the
Mongol Tanjur.5 It reflect Kanishka’s religious policy as well as how the Kushanas’
religious and political traditions had been handed down to the Mongols long after
many centuries since the fall of the Kushana empire.6
The Sakas were followed by the Kushanas, another nomadic people
originated from Central Asia who made India a world power stretching in the
Eastern direction up to ancient Khotan. The nomads, especially Yueh-Chi tribes,
made substantial contribution to the Kushana civilization. During the period of
Kushana Empire the Mahayana Buddhism spread all over Asia. From the Kushana
capital there must have been a continuous coming and going to Mongolia and
Buddhist learning and Buddhist culture must have gone to China and Mongolia.7
The Kushanas or Yueh-Chi who had close relations with Hsiung-Nu and who were
forced to leave their original habitat under the pressure of the latter might have
transmitted all that they had in common with or borrowed from Hsiung-Nu who,
on the other hand, left noticeable traces on Mongol history and culture.
Buddhism was well known among the old nomadic peoples of Mongolia.
According to Chinese sources the Turkish Khan Toba (569-581A.D.) adopted
Buddhism and built monasteries and sent a mission to China to bring sacred books.
This is the earliest data of the official introduction of Buddhism among the Turkish
peoples. The spread of Buddhism and Buddhist culture in the neighbouring countries
in ancient times could not but create favourable conditions for nomadic peoples
to become acquainted with the religious and cultural achievements of India. It
could be shown by the examples of the Sogdians and Uighurs. In the Fifth-Eighth
centuries, the Sogdians, one of the Persian peoples, who created a highly developed
culture on the territories of the present-day Soviet Tadjikistan and partly Soviet
Uzbekistan, played a prominent role in the history of Central Asia. The Sogdians
are known for unfolding an extraordinarily broad trade and economic, missionary
and colonial activity in the region from Tibet to Mongolia. In Mongolia there were
Sogdian colonies. The Sogdian language was then the ‘Lingua Franca’ throughout
the Central Asia. It was with the Sogdians as intermediaries that Buddhism had
taken root among the Turkish and Mongol nomads. The Russian Mongolist B.
Vladimirtsov ascertained that the Sanskrit loan words in the Mongol language were
taken in Khotanese and Sogdian forms through the Uighur writing. For example:
Sans.-Vinya, Khotanese-Vinai, Uighur-Mongol-Vinai; Sans.-Sasana, Khotanese-
Sasana, Mong.-Sasan / Sasin; Sans.-Jataka, Sogd.-C’ttik, Uighur-Cadik, Mong.-
Cadiy; Sans.-Patra, Sogd.-P’ttr, Mong.-Badir, Sans.-Maharaja, Sogd.-My’r’c,
Uighur-Mharac, Mong.-Mharaca; Sans.-Vajra, Sogd.-Bcr, Uighur- Vcir, Mong.-
Vcir, etc.
One of the most cultural peoples of Central Asia, the Uighurs, created
their own powerful statehood (Eighth-Ninth centuries) on the territory of present-
day Mongolia. The Uighur culture born in the steppe as a result of the synthesis of
cultural achievements of nomadic and agricultural peoples, continued to develop
even after the collapse of the Uighur Kingdom in 840 A.D. Having moved from
Mongolia to Eastern Turkestan, they went on existing as a political and cultural
force under new conditions and they did not interrupt their traditional ties with
the Mongols. The Uighur culture was tied with the Indo-Iranian cultural world.
Buddhism, Manichaeism, and Nestorianism was spread among the Uighurs with
the first one prevailing over the others. The cultural mission of the Uighurs in
connection with the Mongols and the contribution they made to bring the Indo-
Buddhist culture within the reach of the Mongols. It was the Uighur contact that
introduced Mongolia to Buddhist India.
The Uighur script, originated from the Aramaic-Sogdian variety of writing,
was borrowed by the Mongols and served as a flexible instrument of Mongol
literature and learning for many centuries. In this script all Mongol translations
of Buddhist literature are available. The Uighur baysi (teachers) helped the
Mongols to render Buddhist sutras into Mongol and Uighur translations have been
considered the best patterns to follow in Mongolia.
The ancient indo-Buddhist culture disappeared from history. It had been
inherited and enriched by other Asian countries Sri Lanka, Nepal, Tibet, etc. When
there was set up the Mongol state of Chinggis-Khan, Buddhism had become a
factor in the history of Indo-Mongol contact via different countries of Central
Asia. In the beginning of the Mongol state, the Uighurs and the Sogdians were
the intermediaries through which Buddhism, and with it Indian culture, spread
to Mongolia. Several Buddhist temples were built in the capital Kara-Korum.
According to the Sino-Mongol inscription of 1346 A.D. from Erdeni-Dzu, under
the reign of Ogedei-Khan (1186-1241 A.D.) the foundation to a Buddhist edifice
was laid, which was completed by Mongke-Khan (1209-1259A.D.). A great stupa
covered with a tall pavilion of five stories was constructed. The four sides of the
pavilion constituted rooms around which there were the statues of various Buddhas
in accordance of the sutras. It is difficult to have a full idea of the stupa, it has not
yet been excavated. It seems that at Kara-Korum there was something like the
Mongol counterpart of Borobudur in Indonesia. The Buddhist temples at Kara-
Korum were centres of Buddhist learning. The sources say that great dabates on
Buddhism were often arranged at the court of Mongol Khans. During the Mongol
empire a new Chapter had been opened in the history of Buddhism in Mongolia.
Buddhism came from Tibet and began to play an important part in the life of
the Mongols. Khubilai (1260-1294 A.D.) tried to use Buddhism in his political
interests to rule over foreign countries. He declared Buddhism a State religion and
the head of the Saskya monastery of Tibet ‘Phags-pa bLa-ma (1235-1280 A.D.) an
Imperial preceptor. The Mongol Khan, many centuries after Asoka and Kanishka,
restored a policy of Universal Empire based on Buddhist Dharma. During the reign
of Khubilai the so-called Buddhist political concept of the two principles became
firmly established. The two principles meant a close alliance between the Throne
and the Altar, i.e., the Khan’s power and Dharma. This political doctrine based on
old Indo-Buddhist traditions found its historical and juridical substantiation in the
‘White History’. It is said that the cornerstone of sacred religion is the Dharma,
the lord of doctrine is the bla-ma, the head of power is the Khan, the Sovereign
of terrestrial power. The doctrine cannot be loosened, the laws of the Khan such
as the golden yoke, cannot be crushed down. ‘Phags-pa bLa-ma urged Khubilai
to rule peacefully, according to Dharma peace is obtained by peace unlike fire
is put out by water not by fire itself, The preaching of the Tibetan preceptor of
Khubilai recalls what had been preached in the Asoka’s edicts-true conquest is
the conquest of self and the conquest of men’s hearts through Dharma. ‘Phags-
pa bLa-ma wanted Khubilai to follow this teaching of Buddha just as Ashoka
did by renouncing war (Ashoka is known to be the only monarch on record who
renounced war as the worst form of violence).
In the Eighth-Ninth centuries with Buddhism the impact of Indo-Buddhist
cultural traditions became strong. A new state script called ‘square script’ devised
after a model of the Devanagri and the Tibetan writing system was introduced.
The first feature of the script is the vertical writing, the Mongol Choiji-Odser,
wrote Mongol grammar, ‘Jiruken-u tolta,’ under the influence of the Indo-
Tibetan Vyakarana school founded by Panini. He also translated into Mongol
the Santideva’s ‘Bodhicaryavatara’ with a commentary and wrote the ‘Buddha’s
Jataka’ and others.
The Indo-Tibetan and Mongol contacts began to bear real fruits in the
second half of the Thirteenth century when Mongolia had specially close intercourse
with Tibet. These relations were characterised by the activity of the Mongol side,
thanks to her dominating position in the Empire. History and other works were
written at Tibetan monasteries by order, or in honour of, Mongol Khans and the
members of their families. The history of Chinggis’s ‘Golden kin’ practically took
the first place in Tibetan chronicles and had to be exalted from a Buddhist view.
‘Phags-pa bla-ma Blo-gros rgyal-mchan (1235-1280A.D.), the State
Preceptor of the Mongol Empire in the reign of Khubilai, initiated this trend in
Tibetan historiography. In his book Ses-bya rab-tu gsal-ba,8 written in the Earth-
Tiger year (1278 A.D.) by order of prince Chingim, Khubilai’s elder son, he deals
with Mongolia as one of the three main Buddhist monarchies along with India and
Tibet, and with Mongol Khans as powerful cakravartins or dharmarajas9.‘Phags-
pa bla-ma says: ‘More than 3250 years after the nirvana of Buddha, as a result
of the previous good deeds in the country of Mongolia, in the North, khan Jin-
gir (Chinggis) was born. He put under his power many countries with different
languages and origins, beginning in the North, and thus he became like the
powerful cakravartin.’10 ‘Phags-pa bla-ma did not make Chinggis dharmaraja.
Most probably it was too obvious for him that Chinggis was not yet as good a
protector of Buddhism as later Mongol authors tried to make out. According to
‘Phags-pa bla-ma, the first Dharmaraja in Mongolia was Khubilai. He wrote that
‘Khubilai, having adopted the precious teaching, protected the king’s power in
accordance with Dharma and therefore he glorified the teachings of Buddha’11. In
his other book, Rgyal-po-la gdams-pa’i nb-tu byed-pa, ‘Precepts to the King’ and
its commentary,12‘Phags-pa bla-ma called Khubilai ‘a Dharmaraja, protecting the
spiritual power of Buddha who masters the true knowledge’13.
His initiatives were taken up by both Tibetan and Mongol historians. In
the Hu-lan debter, ‘The Red Annals’, written by Chal-pa Kun-dga’ rdo-rje in 1346
A.D., the Mongol Khans rank high among the Indian, Tibetan and Chinese rulers.
The influence of the Mongol historiographical traditions, which were available
to the author through oral and Mongol sources. Kun dga’ rdo-rje gave a Mongol
name to his book: ‘Hu-lan deb-ther’, and in the word Hu-lan (hulan, instead of
the present ulan, red) is recorded the phonetic peculiarity of the Middle Mongol
language. As regards the word ‘deb-ther’, the author in all probability borrowed it
from Mongol ‘debter’ which in its turn came to Mongolia via the Uighur language
from the Iranian da’ftar.14 In the Thirteenth century the Mongols used to call their
historical and other books ‘debter’ distinguishing them by means of adjectives:
Koke debter (MNT § 203), Altan debter, etc.
After Kun-dga’ rdo-rje the Tibetans too followed this Mongol tradition:
Deb-ther snon-po by Gzon-nu dpal (Fifteenth century.), Deb-ther rjogs-ldan gzon-
nu’i dga’-ston by the Fifth Dalai-lama (Seventeenth century.), Deb-ther rgya-
mcho by Dkon-mchog bstan-pa rab-rgyas (Nineteenth century.) etc. The influence
of the Mongol historical data in the ‘Red Annals’ is too obvious. The genealogy of
Chinggis in the book of Kun-dga’ rdo-rje does not differ from that in the Niyuca
Tobciyan or in the book of Rashid ad-Din, though it does not contain the details of
the last two sources. The data of Kun-dga’ rdo-rje on the history of Mongolia were
taken by later Tibetan historians, such as Gzon-nu dpal, Dpa’-bo Gcug-lag phren-
ba (1504-1556 A.D.) and others.
During the period of the Mongol Empire the impact of the Mongol historical
tradition upon Tibetan historiography was strong. The Tibetan historiography had
a great influence on the Mongol historical and political thought of that time. The
Cayan teuke (‘White History’) first written in the reign of Khubilai but which
reached us in the Sixteenth century version the earliest monument of Mongol
historiography which bears the influence of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist historical and
political thought. This book was obviously written using the same model that
had been worked out by ‘Phags-pa bla-ma according to the Buddhist historio-
cosmogonical conceptions in the book Ses-bya rab-gsal. Like in the ‘Phags-pa bla-
ma’s book,in the ‘White History’, world history is represented by three Buddhist
monarchies, that is, India, Tibet and Mongolia.The ‘two orders’ concept in the
‘White History’ is related to ‘Phags-pa bla-ma’s teaching of religious and secular
bases of king’s power set forth in his works, particularly in the epistolary ones
dedicated to Khubilai and members of his family. So the ‘White History’, with the
Ses-bya rab-gsal of ‘Phags-pa bla-ma, constitute the examples of close contacts
and ideas under the specific conditions of the relations between’ the two countries.
The historiographical contacts between Mongolia and Tibet were broken
off for some time at the end of the Fourteenth century. But they recommenced with
new strength at the end of the Sixteenth century, when Lamaism was introduced into
Mongolia under the patronage of Mongol Khans. This time Mongol historiography
had to be reorientated due to pressure from the new religion. The Indo-Tibetan
Buddhist ideology had gained prevalence in Mongol historiography as it did in all
other spheres of life. It had become the cornerstone of the philosophical outlook
of historians. Mongol historians tried to interpret the history of their own and
other countries after the example of their Tibetan colleagues. Consequently, in
Mongol historiography, there prevailed the Buddhist methodology of history in
common with the Tibetan one. The Tibetan historical school played an important
intermediary role for Mongol historiography having passed on all what it had
itself borrowed from the Indian Buddhist philosophical views and historical and
legendary data.
On the basis of Buddhist sutras, such as Abhidharmakosa by Vasubandhu,
Abhiniskramana-sutra, Manjusrimulatantra and others, there were formed, in
addition to the old Mongol historical ideas, quite new, Buddhist concepts on
history in Mongol historiography i.e., to begin the history of Mongolia with some
general historical problems, like the creation of the universe, the origin of mankind
and human society.
The Mongols showed a particular interest in the history of India and Tibet
as the lands of origin of their religion. The history of India and Tibet turned out to
be a common introduction to history in almost all Mongol chronicles. Apart from
the Mongols it is difficult to find any other non-indigenous authors, who attached
such an importance to India and Tibet and studied their history with such devotion.
What Mongol writers wrote of the history of India was based on the century-old
Indian traditions which contained not sole legends but history as well. The data
concerning the early history of Buddhism in India, some ancient Indian kings,
such as Ajatasatru, Asoka, Kaniska and others. Asoka, whom the Mongols called
Fasalang-aca nogcigsen, was popular among them as a great Dharmaraja, and his
name became an honorary title, given to prominent religious and political figures
in Mongolia. The other emperor Kaniska was also known in Mongolia as a king of
the Kushans and an initiator of the last Council of Buddhists.
Concerning the history of Tibet, Mongol historians were distinguished
by their good knowledge and erudition. In most Mongol historical works there
are mentioned as main sources such Tibetan chronicles, as the ‘Red Annals’ by
Chal-pa Kun-dga’ rdo-rje, the ‘Blue Annals’ by Gzon-nu dpal, ‘The Feast of the
Sages’ (Mkhas-pa’i dga’-ston) by Dpa’-bo Gcug-lag phreri-ba, ‘The History of the
Abbots of Sa-skya’ (Sa-skya gdun-rabs) by Nag-dbari kun-dga’ bsod-nams Grags-
pa rgya-mcho, ‘The Feast of Youth’ (Deb-ther rjogs-Idan gzon-nu’i dga’-ston) by
the Fifth Dalai-lama and so on.
During the development of the religious and cultural relations of Mongolia
with Tibet the Tibetan language spread in Mongolia to such an extent that it became
eventually a language of learning and religion and to rival the national language.15
Mongol scholars created a vast literature in Tibetan not only on religion, but on
philisophy, logic, grammar, poetics, medicine, astrology, etc.16 These works had
the most vivid effects in the long-time mutual historiographical contacts between
Tibet and Mongolia.
There were many connoisseurs of the history of India, Tibet, China and
other countries among the Mongol chroniclers who wrote history in Tibetan. For
instance Jaya pandita Blo-bzaii phrin-las (1642-1715A.D.), Sum-pa mkhan-o Ye-
ses dpal-’byor (1704-1788A.D.), Mgon-po-skyabs (Eighteenth century), Caqar-
gebsi Blo-bzati chul-khrims (1740-1810 A.D.) and others. Their works had a large
popularity in the Tibetan language world. Jaya pandita Blo-bzari ‘phrin-las was
the most erudite of the scholars on the history of the Buddhist literature of India
and Tibet. He wrote the four-volume book Thob-yig gsal-ba’i me-lon17 which by
the richness of its material surpasses even the Fifth Dalai-lama’s Thob-yig Gari-
gai chu rgyan. Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-ses dpal-’byor, who came from the mixed
Tibeto-Mongol ethno-cultural world in the region of Kuku-nor, embodied all the
best that was gained by the Mongol and Tibetan historiographies as a result of
their coming into direct contact. His books marked the greatest achievement of
the whole Tibetan-language historical literature. They stand out from those of
other authors of his time by the richness and novelty of their material, depth of
their analysis and originality of their interpretation of historical facts and as well
as by their critical approach. His book Dpag-bsam Ijon-bzari is dedicated to the
history of India, Tibet, China and Mongolia. This encyclopaedic work surpasses
comparison with any other book in both Tibetan and Mongol historical literature.
This book of Sum-pa mkhan-po attracted many Tibetologists starting
from Csoma de Koros. The fundamental monograph by the Soviet Tibetologist
R.E.Pubaev on the Dpag-bsam Ijon-bzan is sufficient.18 The Mongol sources used by
Sum-pa mktian-po for writing the history of Mongolia in his book offers difficulty
because the author did not name his Mongol sources. It was W.Heissig who first
pointed to the Sira tuyuji, the Γangya-yin urusqal by Kun Mgon-po-skyabs, and the
Altan Kurdun mingyan kegesutu bicig as the Mongol sources of Sum-pa mkhan-
po.19 But Sum-pa mkhan-po, when writing the history of Mongol Khans, followed
much more the Erdene-yin tobci by Sayang Secen rather than the Sira tuyuji and
least of all the Altan Kurdun and the Γangya-yin urusqal.20 Kun Mgon-po-skyabs
made a great contribution to the Tibetan language historiography of the Mongols
and enriched Buddhist literature with his translations. It is unique that a Mongol
writer authored a book on the history of Buddhism in China in Tibetan. The book
is called Rgya-nag chos-’byun. ‘History of Buddhism in China’.21 His command
of the Chinese made it possible to use a number of original Chinese sources. As
J.W. de Jong pointed out, Kun Mgon-po-skyabs translated several Buddhist sutras
from Tibetan into Chinese and vice versa.22 The most attractive translation made
by Kun mGon-po skyabs from Chinese into Tibetan is of DA Tang Xiyuji by
Xuanzang (Seventh century).23As a result, the Tibetan language historians of Tibet
and Mongolia could get acquainted with an important source of the history of
Central Asia. Probably Mgon-po-skyabs’ translation was spread in manuscripts. A
modern Mongol historian who used this translation was Sh. Damdin (1867-1937
A.D.), the author of the ‘Golden Book’ (Gser-gyi-deb-ther). Caqar gebsi Blo-bzan
chul-khrims is the author of one of the best biographies of Con-kha-pa: Rje thams-
cad mkhyen-pa Con-kha-ba chen-po’i rnam-thar go-sla bar brjod-pa Bde-legs kun
‘byun-gnas. It was written in Mongol (1786-1790 A.D.) and after a time in Tibetan
(1802 A.D.). So It was widely spread among both Mongol and Tibetan readers.
The most prominent Buddhist canonical Sutra-Suvarnaprabhasottama-
sutra (In Tibetan gser-od, in Mongol-Altan Gereltu) was highly venerated in several
Asian countries has been translated into Tibetan, Chinese, Khotanese, Sogdian,
Uighur, Japanese, Manchu and Mongol too. Mongols adored it with bibliolatrous
fervour. There are two colophons published by Prof. Ts Damdinsuren (1979A.D.)
indicates that its first Mongol translation was done by Sakya monk Sirabsengge
(ses rab sen ge) at the beginning of the Fourteenth century.24 It was translated into
Mongol at the initiative of the last Mongol Khan’s court in the period of the Yuan
Empire, Toyan Temur Toyan Temur gayan was called the ‘Bodhisattva’.25 and was
compared with the’ Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara.26 Sirabsengge didn’t translate the
Sutra from the original Sanskrit but while translating from Tibetan, consulted with
its Uighur and Chinese version Sirabsengge said that he did its Mongol translation
from its Tibetan translation done by Ye ses-sde.27 Sirabsengge’s Mongol translation
was included in Mongol ‘Kanjur’ when the ‘Kanjur’ was rendered from Tibetan
into Mongol. The 31 chapter version of ‘Kanjur’ has a short colophon which says
that the translation was done by Mati badra sagara sri badra toyin corji relying
on Kun-dga od-zer manjusri pandita mergen gusi.28 The worship of this Sutra in
Mongolia belongs to the regin of Altan Khan (1507-1581AD) of the Tumed, the
initiator of the conversion of the southern Mongols to Lamaism. The publications
of the colophon in transliteration by Kara Gyorgy and partly by W. Heissig.29 The
Sutra was first published by means of block-printing method by the order of Altan
Khan, the king of Dharma (Dharmaraja). The book must have been reprinted in
many copies for wider circulation throughout Mongolia. The exact date of the
earliest Mongol publication of the Sutra appears in 1584 AD. An anonymous
writer of the colophon exalts Altan Khan to the rank of the incarnation of king
Chakravartin of the Jambudvipa,......’ Altan qayan...... the descendant of Cinggis
qayan in the twenty-fifth generation, is like Brahma.....’.30 The colophon blesses
that the printing of the Sutra will be beneficial for the qayan and other people
perform enlightened deeds (bodhi) and to be born in the land of Suhavati31and
by distributing this book long live the qayan,32and all living beings acquire
Buddhahood.33 During last four hundred years, the Sutra had become adorable
for almost every Buddhist Mongol. S. Bagchi indicated in the introduction of his
edition of this Sanskrit Sutra in 1967AD. that like a religious treatise it is adoration
of the Buddhas and the Bodhisattvas. There is a chapter of the Sutra on Regal
science (Rajasastra), the instruction of the Lord of gods (deva).34 The sutra runs in
the words of Brahma (Mong-Eserun). Tibetan translation is closer to the Sanskrit
rendered by R.E.Emmerich.35 The Sutra describes the main function of a king
as Dharma.36 Buddha was an advocate of democracy and popular government,
that’s a kind of constitutional monarchy.37 Sh. Bira says that the impact of Sutra’s
teaching of regal science upon the politics of Mongols was very high. The Mongol
political theory of a Divine son (Tengri-yin kobogun, Sans. Devaputra), a Dharma
Empire (Nom-un qayan, Sans. Dharmaraja), a Chakravartin Emperer (Kurdun
orciyulayci qayan), and the concept of the unity of Imperial power and religion
was derived from this Sutra and adopted to the Mongol society and politics.38
This Sutra with other canonical texts are the main sources referred in Mongol
chronicles. Rashiputsang, the Mongol writer of ‘Bolor Erike’debates that not the
Secular Laws (Biciq-un yosun) but ‘Dharma Laws (nom-un yosun) can reign the
state.39 The Biography of Altan Khan40also notices the Sutra’s impact upon the
ideas of the Biography. Expressions like ‘Bodisun Altan qayan’ (Boddhisattva
Altan Khan) ‘Tengri-yin kobogun Altan qayan (Devaputra Altan Khan) ‘nom un
Altan qayan (Dharmaraja Altan Khan), ‘Qotala Esrun cakravardi nom un qayan
(Brahma Chakravartin Dharmaraja Khan41 elevated the Tumed Khan the first
convert to Lamaism among Mongol Khans. Sh. Bira argues that this greatest Sutra
played a great role in the manners of Mongol nomads and enlightening them to
the ideals of a Buddhist monarchy lead by ‘Devaputra’ i.e. Dharma Law abiding
king, the Divine son.42 However I observe that there is no reference this Sutra in
the ideas of the said biography.
After 200 years of setbacks, owing to the instability of the country since
the end of the Sixteenth century, Buddhism and its cultural tradition began to be
revived in the steppes of Mongolia, and this process went on strengthening in
the years to come, it is rather symbolic that this period of Indo-Buddhist cultural
revival in Mongolia coincided with the period when India found itself under
British rule with all its unfavourable consequences. The Indo-Buddhist revival
took place in Mongolia again with Tibet playing intermediary role in Indo-Mongol
intercourse. Since this period, the Tibetan variety of Buddhism or Lamaism
became a decisive force in the spiritual life of the Mongols and exerted an impact
on the Mongol society. Numerous monasteries with their own schools were built.
Through Buddhism the Mongols had the possibility to learn much that was related
to different branches of ancient Indian knowledge: the so called ten sciences
(dasavidya) which included the science of medicine (Cikit-savidya), the science of
linguistics (Sabdavidya), the science of logic (Pramavidya), the science of Poetics
(Kavyavidya), the science of prosody (Chandavidya), the science of astrology
(Gananavidya) and so on.
The Mongol translation of the two great collections of Indo-Buddhist
and partially Tibetan books known as ‘Kanjur’ and ‘Tanjur’ the most prominent
phenomenon in the of Indo-Mongol spiritual intercourse,’ the ‘Kanjur’ (108
Volumes) and the ‘Tanjur’ (226 Volumes) containing altogether 8077 texts were
translated into Mongol from Tibetan during Eighth to Eighteenth centuries. The
Tibetan ‘Kanjur’ and ‘Tanjur’ were translated from Sanskrit by joint efforts of
Tibetan translators (lotsavas) and Indian panditas. The contents of the ‘Kanjur’ or
the Tibeto-Mongol Tripitaka, the sacred commandments of Buddha divided into
three Parts-Vinaya, Sutra and Tantra. The ‘Tanjur’ comprises the commentaries
and philosophical, secular and scientific works written by erudite savants. The
Mongol ‘Kanjur’ and ‘Tanjur’ give an idea of the wide range and scope of the
translations of the Mongols. All works of the ‘Kanjur’ and ‘Tanjur’ are not related
to religion. There are many secular, scientific and literary books written by ancient
Indian sages. The Mongol ‘Tanjur,’ the one full set copy is being kept in the
National Library of Mongolia in UlaanBaatar, is of great value. It is the collection
of precious works on different branches of knowledge, such as philosophy, logic,
grammar, poetry, prosody, medicine, astrology, art and so on. It keeps nearly 40
Sanskrit grammatical treatises, such as Paninivyakaranasutra, Kalapadhatukaya of
Durgasimha, Sarasvatavyakarana of Anubhutisvarupa, Candravyakaranasutra and
many others.43
Panini’s sutra was translated into Tibetan by ‘Dar-ba Lo-tsa-ba Ngag-
dBang Phun-Tshogs IHun-gRub in 1658 A.D. with the help of two Indian panditas
Bala Bhadra and Gokulanatha Mishra. This Tibetan translation of the Panini’s
grammar was rendered into Mongol by Sumadishila or Lubsang-Chultum in the
Eighteenth century. From the literary works included into the Mongol ‘Tanjur,’ is
mentioned ‘Meghaduta’ of Kalidasa, ‘Kavyadarsha’ of Dandin, ‘Chandaratnakara’
by Ratnakara, ‘Bodhisattvadanakalpalatu’ of Ksemendri, ‘Buddhacarita’ of
Asvagosa, Sh. Bira together with two colleagues, Gaadan and Sukh-Batar, translated
the Dandin’s ‘Kavyadarsha’ (The Mirror of Poetry), the book on the theory of
poetry into Mongol with extensive comments published in Ulaanbaatar.44 They
have revised the verbatim old Mongol translation of the ‘Kavyadarsha’ collating
it with the Tibetan version as well as with the original Sanskrit and using several
Tibetan and Mongolian Tibetan-language commentaries on the ‘Kavyadarsha .’
This non-Buddhist book on ‘Alankara’ by Dandin has gained popularity
in Tibet and Mongolia and it had been studied through to the modern times. The
latest Mongol connoisseur of Kavya was Sh. Damdin or Zaba Damdin (1867-1937
A.D.) who in the Tibetan written his slokas dedicated to the monastery Gandun-
Tegchelin according to the 32 varieties of the Alankara ‘Simile’ which is the
second among the 35 arthalankaras in the Dandin’s ‘Kavyadarsha.’ Bira with his
colleagues discovered the commentaries written by Mongols in Tibetan on the
Dandin’s ‘Kavyadarsha.’ refered to the works of Mongols on the ‘Kavyadarsha.’45
The Sanskrit version of the Dandin’s ‘Kavyadarsha’ in the traditional Tibetan
transliteration, the xylograph of the ‘Tanjur’ of the Narthan edition. It is the
original Sanskrit that was translated into Tibetan and Mongol. It had been
preserved because the Tibetans were the first to invent a transliteration system of
Sanskrit words with such a precision and accuracy that it could do credit even to
those who elaborated the modern Sanskrit transliteration. This Tibetan version of
the Sanskrit of the ‘Kavyadarsha ‘ could become a fascinating subject to be studied
by the joint efforts of Mongol and Indian scholars. According to it, initially one
has to reconstruct it into Devanagari letters with a Latin transliteration and after
that it would be interesting to carry out a textual critical analysis by collating it
with all the existing Sanskrit versions so that the degree of its authenticity can be
accertained.
The Mongol ‘Tanjur’ also contains numerous treatises on medicine
compiled after the pattern of Ayurveda, Susrutasamhita, Carakasamhita, such
as Ashvayasamhita of Shalihotra, Astangahrdaya of Vagbhata, its commentary
Brahmaveda Saranga-dharacaraka of Sharvahitamitradatta. The Mongol
translations of ‘Nitishastras,’ such as Prajna-Satakanama, Prakarana, Nitishastra
Prajnadanda-nama, Nitishastrajana Posanabindu nama—all ascribed to Nagarjuna,
Satagatha of Vararuci, Rajanitishastra of Canaka. The numerous works on Buddhist
philosophy written by Nagarjuna, Asanga, Vasubandu, Dignage, Dharmakirtti and
others.
An enormous quantity of Sanskrit texts had been translated, in some
cases from Sanskrit itself but mostly retranslated from the Tibetan, Uighur and
Chinese by several generations of learned Mongol kelmerci (translators). This
literature having been brought into the consciousness of the Mongols made our
two peoples spiritually and culturally closer. Resultantly a new literary language of
the Mongols called nom-un kele (literally the language of Dharma) was born and
the elegant rules for translation were laid down to be followed for centuries. Most
of the Mongol translations, though they were mostly retranslations from other
languages, turned out to be accurate and literal because the Buddhist translators of
Eastern peoples adhered to as the main guiding principle that every translator had
to give an exact word-for-word equivalent of the Sanskrit so that it does not violate
the rule of absolute faithfulness to the sacred original. When ever we have any
difficulty in settling a reading or an understanding of a Sanskrit text we can do so
very satisfactorily with the help afforded by its Tibetan and Mongol translations.
The Mongols produced their own Buddhist literature. They wrote books not
only in mother tongue, but also in the Tibetan which had been performing almost
the same function in Mongolia as that of Latin in Europe. The literature written by
Mongols in Tibetan came to be known as the Tibetan literature of the Mongols, the
term has already become current amidst the academicians. The Tibetan literature
of the Mongols surpassing by volumes the literature in the Mongol language is of
great interest for the study of the traditions of Indo-Buddhist literature in different
countries of Asia. This literature enjoyed popularity not only in Mongolia itself
but in other Buddhist countries—Tibet, China and so on. The Russian scholar F. 1.
Sherbatskoi esteemed highly the works of Agvan-Dandar Lharamba on Buddhist
logic. He wrote of this Mongol philosopher that he ‘is a profound and honest
minded thinker, a first-rank philosophical mind’ who nearly a thousand years after
Dharmakirtti, first paid attention to one of the most difficult problems of theory of
knowledge.46
The character and extent of the Indian influence of the indigenous
Mongol culture is that the Indo-Buddhist influence on Mongolia was not quite
straightforward owing, to the indirectness of the Indo-Mongol contact itself. The
Indian cultural and religious influx had absorbed all that it had encountered on
its way to Mongolia just as a great river takes up all its tributaries. The Indo-
Buddhist cultural impact upon Mongolia was syncretistic, having intermingled and
interacted with other cultures and religions of Central Asia rather than being purely
Indian.
Buddhism brought with itself different cultural elements and traditions
to Mongolia having changed and modifying them in its own manner and spirit.
If we take the earlier period of Buddhism in Mongolia, we see the Central Asian
cultural traditions retransformed by Buddhism. When in the Fourteenth century
the Greek Romance of Alexander found its way into the literature of the Mongols
through Central Asian countries, it already had Indo-Buddhist colouring. In the
Mongol version of the Alexander Romance (Mong. Sulyarnai, Arabic-Turkish
Dh’ul-Qarnain) of which only a few folios preserved we have references to the
Garudi bird (Garuda) and mount Sumur (Sumeru or Meru).The Greek Phoenix is
translated here as Garuda, while the mountain which Alexander climbs to enter the
temple is called Sumeru. Here One can observe the influence of Indo- Buddhist
mythology.
The later period of Buddhism in Mongolia, brought a lot of Tibetan
cultural and religious traditions. Lamaism, for instance, has been predominating
in Mongolia since the Sixteenth Century. And Tibet became a kind of half-way
house between India and Mongolia. It transmitted to Mongolia all that it had itself
received and borrowed from Buddhist India many centuries before. The Tibetan
language had been an important vehicle of Buddhist learning and intellectual
activity in Mongolia. Most of non-Buddhist Indian literary works, such as tales of
Vikramaditya, stories of Raja Boja, Pancatantra, some tales of Rama and others
came to Mongolia from Tibet after they had been transformed there to such a
degree that they have very distant likeness with their prototypes. As Prof. Ts.
Damdinsuren showed, the Mongol versions of Rama stories are closely connected
with the oral traditions of Indian Ramayana in Tibet.47
The traditional Mongol historiography has a great impact of Indo-Tibctan
Buddhist historiographical traditions. One can use the term, ‘Indo-Tibetan,’
because it seems that it conveys best of all the very essence of the matter. It was
only after the Tibetans enriched the Indo-Buddhist historiographical traditions
by creating their own historiography that the Mongols came into contact with
Buddhist traditions of writing history. The exception of the ‘Rajataringini’ (History
of Kashmir) there was no historical text in India. Most scholars exaggerate the fact
and fail to take into account that it is not the lack of historical or, to be more exact,
historiographical materials but the absence of finished products of historical writing.
What was really lacking in India was the absence of a sensible view of historical
facts and historical criticism. But as regards the historical philosophy, one must
admit that India ranks high and it did not at all yield to any country with developed
historiography, like Greece or China. The existence of historical thinking in India
could be testified first of all by Buddhist historiographical traditions. Buddhism had
a stronger sense of history than did Hinduism. It is the Buddhist traditions closely
linked with the very beginning of ancient Indian historical thinking that, having
intermingled with the local historical traditions of other countries, served as the
basis for the development of Buddhist historiography in several Asian countries
e.g. Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Tibet and others. Mongolia also had a considerable
Buddhist tradition of writing history.The old Mongol historiography has much in
common with the Buddhist historiography of other countries. Buddhism became
basic methodology of Mongol historiography and the Mongol historians followed
the philosophical principles of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist historiography. The
philosophical ideas of Buddhist cosmogony worked out in the ‘Abhidharmakosa’
of Vasubandu in one way or the other served as a general introduction to Mongol
history to link the history of Mongolia with the universal history of Buddhism
in other countries, particularly in India. The Mongol chroniclers elaborated a
traditional scheme for writing history, that is, the scheme of the three Buddhist
monarchies (India, Tibet and Mongolia). The history of Mongolia became a part
of universal Buddhist history and the genealogy of Mongol Khans had to be
artificially related to the kinship of Mahasammata, the legendary forefather of all
kings of the world. Indo-Buddhist historical traditions broadened the knowledge
of Mongol historians. They were keen in studying the prehistory of mankind and
history of statehood and religion of other countries of the world-India, Tibet,
Nepal, China and others. The contribution of Mongol historians to the study of the
history of Buddhism and Buddhist literature, the basic ideas of the origin of man’s
society and state in old Mongol historiography were almost the same as those of
‘Abhidharmakosa.’ The Mongol chroniclers during many centuries repeated the
idea of moral regress corresponding to the progress of society to its present stage
of civilization. At the earliest stage of human history all men were morally perfect,
there had been no state nor kinship, no sex nor marriage, no property, no work, no
caste, no war, no old age, no disease. The earth itself consisted of a delicious edible
substance. After one of the men tasted it all took to eating it. Then men’s bodies
became coarser meanwhile the edible substance disappeared but was replaced by
other edible plants. Then it was discovered that food could be collected. As soon
as this was done, there was a shortage of wild rice. The land was then divided into
private holdings, but as a result theft was invented. Lastly, to maintain the moral
order people come to contract that a respectable, honest man should be elected
king. This is the origin of the first king known as Mahasammata.
The Indo-Buddhist cultural and religious impact upon Mongolia might be
strong, it had not at all deprived the Mongol culture of its own fertile soil out of
which it had grown up many centuries before. Mongolia occupying the central part
of the steppe-mountainous zone of Central Asia, had from ancient period been the
‘Locus-classicus’ of nomadism. It was the centre of the domestication of animals.
Its mountainous and steppe zone environs probably constitute one of those regions
of Eurasia in which at the end of the Second and beginning of the First millenia B.
C. there was a transition from the mixed farming and herding economy to purely
nomadic pastoralism. The birth of nomadic civilization was one of the gains of
human progress. Pastoralism, like agriculture, created its own distinctive culture.
The ancient Mongol culture was original and truly nomadic which preserved its
identity and distinctive nature for centuries, despite the fact that it underwent
different foreign influences.
The Mongol culture having been confronted with Indo-Buddhist culture,
responded by absorbing and adapting the foreign influence thus making them
their own. Even the Buddhist religion with all its different traditions had to be
retransformed in accordance with the conditions of Mongolia and its indigenous
religion—Shamanism—so that it at last gained a predominant position in Mongolia.
With the influx of Buddhism there was a very complicated process of interaction
of the new religion with the ancient Shamanist ideas of the Mongols. Buddhism
had to take up some old concepts of Shamanism and had to undergo some process
of adaptation in Mongolia. Despite the fact that severe methods were used in the
suppression of Shamanism, the old Mongol faith has never been fully crushed
down. Buddhism in Mongolia could have a success only after being encouraged by
the Mongol Khans and rulers as the spiritual instrument for the realization of their
political aims to strengthen their power. The Mongol rulers adopted the Tibetan
form of Buddhism at a time when they were confronted with the historical necessity
of overcoming the country’s disconnection and internecine in the face of the danger
of foreign aggression. The Manchu adversaries were more successful in using the
Lamaist religion to subjugate the Mongols. The Tibetan Buddhism, having turned
into a religion of the oppressed minority in the Manchu Empire, played a specific
role in the life of the Mongols. The Manchu policy of encouraging Lamaism in
Mongolia had resulted in consequences that the conquerors themselves could not
at all foresee. The more Mongolia became Buddhist the more it became alien to
the heterodox Manchu-Chinese oppressors in the spiritual, cultural and political
sense. Mongolia had never been closely linked with the Indo-Tibetan Buddhist
cultural world in the Manchu domination. The rebirth of the Mongol statehood
in 1911A.D. took the form of a Buddhist monarchy with the Khan proclaimed as
‘Bogdo-Khan, enthroned by the many (Sanskrit Mahasammata) and holding the
reigns of State and Religion.’
If the Mongols, through out centuries, even during the dismal period
of foreign Manchu domination, did not cease to venerate India not only as the
homeland of Buddhism but also as a country to which they attributed all that had
been considered the highest attainments of wisdom, and these feelings, which
stay strong in Mongolia even today one should acknowledge the great merit of
the old Mongol chroniclers. The Mongol literati, particularly chroniclers, were
connoisseurs of the history and culture of Buddhist India.
India had become familiar to Mongol historiography many centuries ago.
In the ‘Niyuca Tobayan’ (‘The Secret History of the Mongols,’ written in 1240
A.D. the earliest surviving Mongol chronicle,) India is mentioned as Hindusun
(Hindustan) and the river Sindu as Sindu murin. ‘Sayan teuke’ (‘The White
History’), prescribed traditionally to Khubilai and supposedly compiled between
1260 A.D. and 1280 A.D. but handed down to us in the wording of the Sixteenth
century, opens up with the history of India, which, although is extremely brief
and schematic, says that king Mahasammata was the first to set up ‘the policy of
two laws’ (laws of Dharma and laws of the King) in the country of Magadha, the
Vajrasana (in Mong. Ocirtu sayurin) in India. It says that this policy of two laws
had been developed during the reign of kings Suddhodhana and Ardasidhi, and
that it had been inherited and continued by the kings of Tibet and Mongolia.
The Mongol chroniclers of later periods dealt with the history of India
and Buddhism in detail relying upon what they could find in their Indo-Tibctan
Buddhist sources. A new scheme of writing history, i.e., the scheme of the three
monarchies—India, Tibet and Mongolia was introduced. Mongolia is believed to
have, common genealogical relationship with India. Mongol chroniclers, believing
that the forefather of all kings was Mahasammata, linked the origin of Mongol
Khans with the family of this first legendary king of India. They wanted that their
Khans had the oldest and sacred origin keeping with the spirit of the time when
Buddhism had been predominating in the Mongol society. The ancient Indo-
Buddhist traditions had become the main components of historical and political
consciousness of the Mongols. The Mongol rulers, up to the modern times,
have been taking advantage of Buddhist historic-political concepts, such as, the
concept of the unity of laws of Dharma and Secular Power, the concept of kings—
Chakravartins, and the concept of kings of Doctrine or Dharmarajas, etc., in their
attempts to buttress their statehood.48
The books of modern Indian scholars, medieval Indian historians left us
some data on the Mongol invasions against the Delhi sultanate in 1220-1230 A.D.
and on those military and political relations which brought into direct contact the
Indians and the Mongols. Indian historians reflect the peculiarities of the Indo-
Mongol contacts in those days, when vast Mongol invasions in the countries of
Central Asia reached the northern Indian borders.
Indo-Mongol historiographical Contacts, just as the general historical
and cultural links, share some distinguished features. These contacts have been
mostly indirect both in the chronological and geographical sense; they have been
maintained through many intermediate links in the general process of mutual
intercourse of historical thought between the peoples of Central Asia, and that
is why time was often required until the contacts could take place in reality. The
old Mongol tradition, spead in Central Asian countries during the period of the
Mongol Empire, some centuries after the fall of this Empire, reached India, and
influenced the Indian historiography of the Mughal Empire.
The Mughal Empire have shown interest in the history of Central
Asia particularly in the history of the Mongols and their Khans. The Mughals
themselves came from the assimilated Chaghataya Mongols. Their rulers were
descendants of Timur. Babur descended from the ‘Golden family’ of Chinggis-
Khan on his mothers side and from the lineage of Timur on his father’s side. Timur
considered himself not only a gurgan (Mong. kurgen), a son-in-law of Chinggis
having married the daughter of the Chaghataya Khan of Mawarannahr (Qazan)
who belonged to the family of Chingizides, he was also proud of having a common
lineage with Chinggis himself. Timur’s genealogy is engraved on his dark jade
tombstone in Samarqand. Timur and Chinggis had a common forebear, Buzanchar
(Budancar), who descended from the maid Alanquwa. This legendary virgin was
ravished by a moonbeam. So the Mughal rulers had reason to claim blood relation
with the forerunners from Central Asia.
It is the mark on the historical, ideological and political outlook of the
historians of the Mughal Empire, as it had in the countries of Central Asia in the
time of Temurides. A new trend gained foothold in the Indian historiography during
the reign of Mughal emperors.This had been virtually defining the substance of the
Mughal historiography. Mughal historians wrote of Alan-yua saying : (Alan-yua)
was the happy daughter of Juina Bahadur of the Qiyat tribe and Barlas family. Her
physical and mental beauty went on increasing from her earliest years, until by
loftness of thought and sublimity of genius, she became the Unique of the Age, and
her acknowledgment by friends and foes, relatives and strangers was magnanimous,
pious, and a lover of wisdom. The lights of theosophy shone from her countenance,
the divine secrets were manifested on her forehead. She sat secluded behind the
screen of chastity and abode in the privy chamber of meditation on the unity, was
theatre of holy epiphanies and an alighting-stage of divine emanations. When she
grown to maturity, she was, according to the custom of princes and the practice
of great ones of Church and State, given in marriage to Soybean Biyan, king of
Mughulistan and her own cousin, and they joined that unique pearl of purity with
a temporal ruler. As he was not her match, he hastened to annihilation and Her
Majesty Alanquwa, who was the repose of the spiritual world, became likewise
the ornament of the temporal world and, applying herself of necessity to outward
acts, she became the sovereign of her tribe (alus). One night this divinely radiant
one was reposing on her bed, when suddenly a glorious light cast a ray into tent
and entered the mouth and throat of that fount of spiritual knowledge and glory.
The cupola of chastity became pregnant by that light in the same way as did her
Majesty Miryam (Mary), the daughter of Imran (Amran)....’49

Abul Fazl reconfirmed the old Mongol legend with his understanding.
This fact could serve as a vivid illustration of the alterations that had happened
with the Mongol legend in the works of Mughal historians in India. Abul Fazl
accompanied with his retelling of the legend of Alan-yua in his book attached
importance to the ‘ideological’ substantiation of the old Mongol legend, as he
considered it an official beginning of the genealogy of Akbar. Abul Fazl used the
legend of Alan-yua’s virginal conception from light for ‘proving’ the sacred origin
of the ‘Golden family’ before the eyes of those who worshipped light. The light
had been worshipped widely by Central Asians since the time of the appearance of
Zoroastrianism and Manichaeanism in ancient Persia
Abul Fazl’s considerations of the unusual origin of the ‘Golden family’
have been based on the idea of the miraculousness of light. He writes: ‘Praised be
the God who maintained holy human souls from Adam down to this child of light,
in prosperity and adversity, abidance and want, victory and defeat, pleasure and
pain, and other contrasted conditions, one after another, and made them partakers
of emanations of the holy light. Before this holy light made its fortunate alighting
from high heaven, Qiyan was withdrawn from the associations of climates and
cities and supported in a solitary wilderness, and many ancestors were given to her
(Alan-yua) generation after generation, for two thousand years in these Highlands
(Kohistan), there by purifying her and familiarizing her with the land of holiness
and converting the human element into a collection of all degrees, divine and
earthly. When the spiritual preparation was complete, Yulduz Khan was brought—
for the ends of divine wisdom—from the mountains to the city, and seated on a
throne, till the turn of the holy series reached Her Majesty Alan-yua and that divine
light, after passing without human instrumentality, through many eminent saints
and sovereigns, displayed itself gloriously in the external world. That day (viz., of
Alan-yua’s concept) was the beginning of the manifestation of His Majesty, the
king of kings who after passing through divers stages was revealed to the world
from the holy womb of Her Majesty Migram-makani for the accomplishment of
things visible and invisible....’50
Abul Fazl explains ‘Those who by a soaring flight on the wings of genius,
have passed beyond the worship of materiality and can behold the Causer, do not
think occurrences like this strange or wonderful in this wide domain of Divine
power....’ ‘...they admit there was a child without father or mother, viz., the first
man or Adam, and they accept a child without a mother, whom they call Eve. Why
then not admit a child without a father? Especially when they arc fully assured of
such an occurrence in the case of Jesus and Mary’He Concludes, ‘If you listen to
the tale of Mary, Believe the same of Alan-yua’51Abul Fazl raised the legendary
foremother of the Mongols Alan-yua to the highest rank of ‘Theotokos’ (‘Mother
of God’) following the Christian doctrine of virgin Mary, the Mother of Jesus. He
interpreted Christian legend of the virginal conception of Christ in the womb of
Mary by the ‘Holy Ghost.’ He does not use the notion of ‘Holy Ghost,’ having
replaced it by ‘holy light.’ He drew a parallel between the Mongol legend of Alan-
yua and the Christian legend of the Virgin Mary so that his words sound more
convincing to his compatriots. The Mongol and Christian legends of the virginal
conception, could be linked together to one common origin. Both of the legends
have originated from the Zoroastrianian and Manichaeanian doctrine of light.
The concept of the eternal conflict between the two initial forces, light
and darkness, occupies a central place in Zoroastrianism and Manichaeanism.
Time, which has neither beginning, nor end, is represented in the scheme of
the three times, each of which is characterized by the peculiar correlation of the
two fundamental principles light and darkness. In the last, the conflict must be
concluded with the victory of light which once and for all triumphs over darkness
and freed from darkness, thus having become completely pure for ever. In the
realm of light there dwells the father of sublimity or the father of light, god of
light. He is a kind sovereign of this realm reincarnating in four forms: Deity, Light,
Might, Wisdom. In order to resist darkness the father of light ‘provokes’ the two
spiritual causes—the Mother of life and the Firstman. The term ‘to provoke’ or
‘provocation’ is very specific to Manichaeanism which does not tolerate for the
realm of light any idea of birth from anything connected with carnal knowledge.
Accordingly the light-bearing Christ, ‘called forth’ by the father of light woke
Adam from deep sleep, drove out the demons who guarded him and let him eat of
the fruit of the tree of life and know good and evil.
The ancient Persian mythological doctrine of light has spread in two
directions: to the west and to the east. Going to the west, in the Near East direction,
it could have exerted its influence on the appearance of the Christian story of the
virgin Mary. (It is recognized by scholars that the cult of Mary appeared under the
impact of ancient Persian and other eastern pagan cults). As regards Mongolia, in as
much as Central Asian faiths, specifically Zoroastrianism and Manichaeanism, had
already been known in Mongolia during the period of the ascend of the Mongols
on the historical arena when they tried to exalt the family of their great Khan
Chinggis, the legend of the birth of the founder of the ‘Golden family’ from the
Father of Light could have taken its shape under the impact of the ancient Persian
mythological doctrine of light or its Central Asian versions.
Abul Fazl propagated the cult of the foremother of the ‘Golden family’
in the Mughal historiography. Thus the Mughal historiography, glorified the
dynasty of the rulers who had come from Central Asia where their distant and
near forebearers had been famed by their power and glory. Abul Fazl resolute
that Buzanjar (Budancar) was the ninth ancestor of Chinggis Khan and Qaracar-
noyan, the fourteenth of His Majesty, the Lord of Conjunction, that is Tamerlan,
and the twenty-second of His Majesty, the king of kings, that is Akbar.52He alloted
to the forefather of the ‘Golden family’ all the great merits.He writes: ‘When he
(Buzanjar) came to years of discretion, he adorned the sovereignty of Turan, and
the chiefs of the Tartar and Turk tribes, etc., who were like satraps bound the girdle
of service on their waists. He composed the distractions of the time by the vigor of
his administration, distributed justice and benevolence and, for a prolonged period,
soothed and adorned the world by his nobility and wisdom. He was contemporary
with Abu Muslim Marwazi. When his existence closed, there remained two sons,
Buqa and Tuqaba (? Tuqta).’53
When Indian historiographers were engaged with the topic of the common
origin of the rulers of India and Mongolia and incidentally with the history of
the Mongols, Mongol historians were simultaneously endeavouring to substantiate
the genealogical relationship of Mongol Khans with the legendary Indian king
Mahasammata. It becomes quite obvious that the aspirations and beliefs of Indian
and Mongol historians were reciprocal.
Pd. J.L. Nehru as a historian wrote : ‘World developments and common
interests are forcing Asiatic countries to look at each other again. The period of
European domination is passed over as a bad dream and memories of long ago
remind them of old friendship and common adventures.’54 As regards Mongolia,
since the triumph of the People’s Revolution of 1921 A.D. she has felt the need
of restoring her traditional ties with other countries. Into the yellowed pages of
the Mongol newspaper ‘Unen,’ there were many news and reviews on India and
its national movement. During the first post-revolutionary years, the Mongols
expressed their solidarity with the Indian people in their struggle for independence.
Among the first literary publications meant for the masses were the Mongol versions
of stories from Vikmmacarita (Mong. ‘Biqarmijid qayan-u tuyuji,’ published in
1923 A.D.), Vetalapancavinshati (Mong. ‘Siditu kegur-un uliger,’ published in
1928 A.D.) and others. These works were the most favourite books of children.
Mongol tales of Vikramaditya is repleted with Sanskrit names and words which
are not so much corrupted in Mongol that they could easily be reconstructed. For
example: om svati (Mong. ova suvasdi), kalpa (Mong. galba), Ananda (Mong.
Anangda), Mathura (Mong. Madura), Jyoti (Mong. Joti), Ratna (Mong. Radna),
Nagaraja (Mong. Nagarantsa) and soon.
D. Natsagdorzh (1906-1937A.D.),the founder of the contemporary
Mongol literature, devoted one of his poems to an Indian theme. He wished to
acquaint himself with the young Indian dancer who ‘makes the world melt by her
gracious manner’ and ‘provokes everybody’s love by her beautiful eyes.’ There
was introduced into Mongol literature a real Indian heroine side by side with Tara
(Mong. Dar-ekh), the goddess of charity and beauty, glorified over centuries by
Mongol poets.
The thought that India, is the birthplace of Buddha and Buddhism comes
the mind of the Mongols. They used to call India by names of ‘Qutuytun-u orun’
(from Sanskrit Aryadesha), ‘Burqan-u orun’ (The land of Buddha), ‘Nom-un orun’
(Tha land of Dharma) etc. It is said in some old Mongol chronicles that when
the troops of Chinggis reached India, he was met by a Bodhi deer (Mong. Bodi
gorosun) who bowed before the Mongol sovereign several times. Chinggis right
there understood that India was a sacred land that could not be conquered and so
he resolved to return. In this way Mongol Buddhist writers elucidated the peace-
making force of Dharma. In old Mongol translations of Buddhist sutras, India is
called Enedkeg and sometimes Hinedkeg.
Neither the Himalayas, nor the great deserts lying on the way between
India and Mongolia prevent them from coming into contact in one way or the other.
Mongolia and India eventually became spiritually kindred or, as the Buddhists
would say, the Mongols and Indians have become brothers in Dharma. , It was the
learned representatives of the Mongol society, mostly the lamas who knew India
best of all and felt themselves part and parcel of the Indo-Tibetan Buddhist cultural
world. For them, India was the homeland of great sages and the centre of wisdom.
They have left vast Buddhist literature in their own and Tibetan languages. Among
the Mongols there were great connoisseurs and admirers of Indian Buddhist
literature and culture. They have made a contribution to the preservation and
development of Indo-Buddhist literature. Almost the whole literature of Mahayana
Buddhism has been translated into Mongol from various languages—partly from
Sanskrit and Chinese and mostly from Tibetan by many generations of learned
kelemerci-translators. Mongolia can compete with Sri Lanka, China and Tibet
with the wealth of its translated Buddhist literature.There are the Mongol Tripitaka
‘Kanjur’ and its commentary ‘Tanjur’, they are great monuments of the history of
Indo-Mongol cultural contact. In this connection the Mongol ‘Tanjur’ is of great
value.
The Mongol Buddhist literature has played the main role in popularizing
the knowledge of India in Mongolia. The Mongols wrote on all branches of
Buddhism. Unlike the Mongol secular literature, which has a long tradition, the
Mongol Buddhist literature was formed around Buddhism and after the pattern of
its Indo-Tibetan prototype. It was written in the Tibetan, the language of church
and learning in old Mongolia. Mongol authors’ Buddhist writings were rather
prodigious. Many authors left the ‘sumbums’ (Tib. gsung-’bum), i.e., collected
works. These ‘collectanea’ of Mongol authors have been venerated by literati not
only in Mongolia but in Tibet and China. The few Mongol writers are the grand
Khampo nom-un qayan Lubsan-Danzan Jaltsan (1639-1704 AD), the main disciple
of the First Incarnation of Jibzundampa Under Gegen Jinavajra (Zanabazar), Zaya-
paijdita Lubsanprenlei of Khalkha (1642-1715 AD), Sumpa khampo Eshebaljir
(1704-1788 AD), Alagsha Dandar-lharamba (1758-1842AD), Yeke Khampo
Agvan-Khaidub (1779-1838 AD), Chorje of Urga Agvan-Baldan (1797-1864),
Tzakhar-gebshi Lubsan-Chultum (1740-1810 AD), and tsaba lama Damdin (1867-
1937 AD).
The Buddhist Indian tradition had been transmitted to Mongolia through
the mediation of Tibet, which has been continued by the Mongols up to the
modern era.These works covered all the subjects of Buddhism, from theology to
logic, from Buddhist philosophy to grammar and rhetoric. For example, Agvan-
Baldan, from Urga, wrote a commentary on Prajnaparamita (258 ff), exegesis
on Abhisamayalankara, Madyamikavatara etc. His all-comprehending erudition
has been displayed by three-volume book ‘Grub mtha’chen mo’i mchan ‘grel.’
Although it is called a commentary on ‘Jam-dbyangs bzhad-pa’i ‘Grub-mtha’i
chen-mo,’ represents an introduction to various siddhantas in India and provides
Indo-Buddhist thought with the unique materials. The insight of the Mongol author
into the depths of the intellectual activities of ancient India after so many centuries
had passed since their flourishing in the motherland. He has demonstrated the
breadth and profundity of his knowledge by dealing, besides his main topic, related
to various Buddhist siddhantas (schools) and the Madyamika, with the ancient
Indian materialistic teaching of Lokyada and atomistic theory of Vasheshika and
Sankhya; and he has given his own interpretation of these theories.
The traditional understanding of the Mongol author as regards the
enumerated subjects, for instance : Lubsanprenlei cites an old Indian legend on the
divine origin of linguistics. He says that in the land of 33 devas, Sarvajna, i.e., Siva,
having perceived the science of linguistics for the first time, taught it to Satakratu or
Indra, the king of the Devas. Indra taught linguistics to rsi Vrihaspati and instructed
him to teach it to all devas. After Vrihaspati, the Mongol author writes of Panini,
who wrote the Paninivyakaranasutra in 2000 shlokas. He writes of other Sanskrit
grammars, such as Patanjali’s Mahabhasya, Kalapasutra, Candravyakaraija, Vrtti
of Durgasimha, Sisyahitanyasa of Ugrabhuti, etc.
Even modern Mongol chroniclers were of the opinion that India, the
motherland of Buddhism, was the primo locus of mankind, the original home of
man. They put India into the centre of world history. Such erudited chroniclers,
as Sumpa-Khampo Eshebaljir (1704-1788 AD), and Tsaba Damdin (1867-1937
AD) could not break their traditional Buddhist outlook of India. Indocentrism
was the basic concept that had commanded the minds of Mongol writers up to
the modern era. Sumpa-Khampo Eshebaljir wrote of Europe, but he still believed
that India was the centre of world history and religion. Tsaba Damdin, who knew
of modern science and culture that had begun developing in Mongolia after the
People’s Revolution, tried to prove that the Mongols and not only Mongol Khans,
had originated from India.
In the traditional Mongol chronicles on India, geographically, India
was known as Jambudvipa (Mong. Jambadiv), one of the four Mahadvipas or
continents with the mount Sumeru (Mong. Sumber uul) in the centre of them. Out
of the rivers of India there are specially mentioned Ganga, Yamuna, Sindu, and
Sarasvati. Jambudvipa is usually depicted as having the shape of the upper shell of
tortoise (Kurmaprstha). Out of the kingdoms on the continent of Jambudvipa the
best known for the Mongols was Magadha, the land where Buddhism flourished.
Kapilavastu, the home of the Sakyas (the Buddha’s family), Nalanda, the Buddhist
university city , Pataliputra, the centre of Sangha, Lumbini, the birth town of
Buddha and others were well-known among the Mongols from books.
India was believed to be the birth place of man, social order and statehood.
The Buddhists had a zealous historical approach to the origin of their religion,
although there has been much of religious dogmatism and scholasticism. According
to the Vinaya, when Buddha was living at Kapilavastu, the Sakyas held a council
and asked to him ‘When did the Sakyas originated? Who was the first Sakya?
To what ancient race do they belong?’ Buddha, resolved to let Maudgalyayana
(Mong. Molon-toyin) tell the story. Such type of question aroused historical
interest among Buddhists and the need to answer might have caused the birth of
Buddhist religious historiography wherever Buddhism spread. The same happened
in Mongolia.
This was actually the birth of statehood in general. This earliest Indian
version of the ‘Social Contract’ theory was well known in Mongolia, and when
Mongolia freed from the Manchu empire, the Mongol ruling circles resolved
to entitle their king as ‘Olan-a ergugdegsen’—the translation loan-word of
Mahasammata and to call the official system of chronology of the Mongol state by
the same name (olan-a ergugdegsen).
The long genealogy list of legendary and historical kings of India which is
incorporated into most Mongol chronicles, some of these kings, such as Ashoka,
Kanishka, Vikramaditya, Raja Bhoja etc., were regarded as great patrons of
Buddhism whom Mongol Khans tried to follow. Ashoka and Kanishka were known
in Mongol as the founders of the so-called policy of two laws (laws of Dharma
and laws of the King) and the organisers of the third and the fourth Buddhist
councils respectively. Sometimes, Ashoka’s name has been translated into Mongol
as ‘Qaslan-aca nogcugsen’ and has been an honorary title for the most famous
politicians of Mongolia. Kanishka was written as Kaniga which corresponds to the
original Kushan equivalent. The name of Vikramaditya has been Mongolized as
Biqarmijid known among the general people.
The old Mongol political and social ideas have imbibed much of what
originated from ancient India. Indo-Buddhist traditions, which penetrated into
Mongolia in different ways and at different periods, have become an important
component of the historical and political consciousness of the Mongols. Various
Buddhist religious and historio-political ideas, such as, the ideas of the unity of laws
of Dharma and Secular Power, the ideas of kings—Chakravartins and Dharmarajas
and others, which Mongol rulers did practice to strengthen their statehood and the
Freedom of Mongolia. Buddhism was regarded by the Mongols as a symbol of
the unity of the nation and national identity. Whenever Mongolia fought for its
freedom it always advanced one catchword: ‘To restore statehood and religion.’
When Boydo-gegen, the head of Buddhist church in Mongolia, was enthroned in
1911, he was proclaimed ‘Boydo-Khan elected by the great body of peoples’ and
‘holding the reigns of State and Religion.’
The Indian influence on Mongolia could not be concentrated to religion and
culture alone, but has gripped other spheres, from politics to language and folklore.
This fact has made the image of India more popular among wider circles of the
Mongols. India has descended from the heights of a sacred land to an ordinary
one with its earthly ups and downs and with its langauge and folk tales of Mongol
masses. Sanskrit, though long dead as a spoken language in its motherland, was
alive in Mongolia. It was wrongly believed to be the language of Buddha himself
and therefore studied alongside Tibetan by those who seriously wished to gain
in-depth understanding of Dharma. Recitations from Dharanis, sacred formulae,
until recently had been done in Sanskrit in accordance with the precise rule for
enunciation laid down especially for that purpose. In the Sixteenth century, Ayushi-
gushi invented a system of transliterating Sanskrit words with Mongol letters.
Mongols left a tradition of translating from Sanskrit into Mongol. In 1305 AD.
Choiji-Odser, rendered Santideva’s ‘Bodhicaryavatara’ from Sanskrit into Mongol.
The fascination of the Mongols for Sanskrit could be judged also by the Sanskrit
words and terms borrowed and incorporated into Mongol. Even today Sanskrit loan
words are being used both in literary and colloquial Mongol. In Mongolia, for new
scientific terms, it is preferred to have them adopted from Sanskrit. Sanskrit terms
relating to diverse branches of sciences, from cosmonautics and astronomy and
linguistics to medicine, botany and zoology, have been adopted in modern Mongol
terminology. For ‘cosmos,’ Mongol specialists restore an old Sanskrit term ‘Sansar’
(Sans. Sansara). Thus the term ‘Sansar’ denoting an old religious-cosmological
notion (Sansar-un kurdun or chakra of Sansara) has now assumed a quite modern
scientific meaning (Sansar—cosmos, sansar sudlal—cosmosnautics, sansaryn
nesgegci—cosmonaut). The names of planets and stars in Mongol are taken from
Sanskrit. The days of the week in colloquial Mongol are called in Sanskrit: Adya
(sun, Sunday) <Sans. aditya; Sumya (moon, Monday) <Sans. somya; Angarag
(Mars, Tuesday) <Sans. angaraka; Bud (Mercury, Wednesday) <Sans. budha;
Barhasbad (Jupiter, Thursday) <Sans. brhaspati; Sugar (Venus, Friday) <Sans.
sukra; Sancir (Saturn, Saturday) <Sans. Sanaiscara. Some Sanskrit words have
been Mongolized to such an extent that the Mongols do not even imagine their
foreign origin. For example : avyas <Sans. abhyasa (talent), buyan <Sans. punya
(good deeds), agsin <Sans. kshana (instant), tiv <Sans. dvipa (continent), garig
<Sans. graha (planet), tsadig <Sans. jataka (tales), suleg <Sans. sloka (poems),
badag <Sans. padaka (strophe), arsaan <Sans. rasayana (nectar), etc. The Mongols
have a tradition of having Sanskrit names. In old times it was, connected with
religion, but now it has become a custom. This fact brings the Mongolian image of
India much closer. These Sanskrit names are common in Mongolia: Arya <Sans.
Arya, Adya <Sans. Aditya, Ayus <Sans. Ayushya, Bunderya <Sans. Vaidurya,
Ocir <Sans. Vajra, Ocirbal <Sans. Vajravali, Darma <Sans. Dharma, Darambajar
<Sans. Dharmavazra, Zandan <Sans. Candan, Zandra <Sans. Candra, Indra <Sans.
Indra, Radna <Sans. Ratna, Radnasid <Sans. Ratnasiddhi, Sumadi <Sumati, Udval
<Sans. Utpala, Badam <Sans. Padma, etc.
The role that literature and folklore played in making the Indian image
more familiar to the Mongol masses can’t be overestimated The Mongols could not
get acquainted with the secular Indian literature in original versions as it happened
with religious literature. Their way to Mongolia was too long and the tales from
Ramayana, Pancatantra, Vetalapancavinshati, Vikramacarita etc. have undergone
such alterations while they have become known in Mongolia that it is difficult to
find their prototypes or to ascertain their resemblance with their Indian versions.
The Mongol versions of Vikramacarita, the tales of Raja Bhoja and Krsna, could
have some relation with the variations of these stories—Sanskrit and Puranic
which are now available in India. By way of collating Mongol versions with their
respective Indian recensions, many Indian parallels and motifs in Mongol stories
of Vikramaditya, Raja Bhoja and Krsna have been found.55 Some Indian folklore
elements— motifs, heroes, notions, as well as some loan translation words and
expressions have received general recognition in Mongol literature. The Mongols
and the Indians have much in common as regards their literary and artistic ideals. Its
not possible to detect who idealized King Vikramaditya (Mong.Biqarmijid-qayan)
more, the hero of ancient Indian folklore, the Indians or the Mongols. The tales of
Vikramaditya, Bhoja and Krsna, have had a phenomenal popularity among, both
the literate and illiterate Mongols. In India Vikramaditya’s name was associated
with the traditional Vikram calendar. As Pd. Nehru wrote, in India, Vikram or
Vikramaditya has long been a national hero, an ideal prince. In Mongolia, just as
in India, people liked to read the tales of Vikramaditya because most of them dealt
with his desire to do good to his people,and to sacrifice himself or his personal
interest in favour of someone else. In short, he was the very embodiment and
symbol of goodness and self-sacrifice for which the ordinary people might have
loved him most of all both in India and Mongolia. Some Indian influence has
touched even the deep-seated strata of Mongol folklore, for example, the ‘Yirugel’
(well-wishes), ‘Sibsilege’ (recitations) which are popular among Mongol cattle-
breeders. i.e.:
“Make khokhur56 out of elephant’s hide / Make bulur57 out of sandal wood
Let always spring up from the bottom / Like the water of Ganges
Let flourish always from the top / Like the tree Kalpavrksa”58
Mongol cattle-breeders used to recite the following Sibsilege on the
occasion of new born animals or when they choose sires or father animals:
“Let cattle multiply / Let him (father animal) eat the grass of mountain Sumeru
Let him drink the water of ocean Sun / Let him become the leader of thousands
of cattle / Let him become the head of tens of thousands of cattle.”59
In Mongolia, there is a traditional feeling of admiration and respect for
India. Dr. RaghuVira wrote during his visit:
“India and Mongolia, / Old comrades in the march of centuries,
Have met again. / Past memories crowd the brain.”60
During my visit, I witnessed a lot of reverence about India and Indian
culture and Buddhism in Mongolia. Everywhere, everyone shown sheer love and
utter respect to me as an Indian ‘Bagsha’ i.e. Teacher. While watching me walking
anywhere in Ulaanbaatar, youngsters used to say ‘Namaste India’ and smile with
zest and admiration. Academicians and diplomats were very optimist to hail my
academic exchanges. I can say with full confidence that Indo-Mongol age old
relations are inseparable till dooms day.
References :
1. Cayan teuke, The Manuscript of the State library in Ulan- Bator (no pagination).
2. Ibid.
3. The two laws: Khan’s power and Buddhist doctrine (Dharma).
4. The Mongolian writing of the name Kanishka fully corresponds to the original
Kushana equivalent. As J. Harmata writes, Gabbnri prakrit the outcome of Kanishka
was Kanik(ka). Accordingly, the rise of these striking forms can more probably be
presumed in some Eastern Iranian dialect, possibly in the language of the Kusanas
themselves. In the book: From l ecataens to Al-luwnnzmlKaclerian, Pahlavi, Sogdian,
Persian, Sanskrit, Syriac, Chinese, Greak and Latin Sources for the History of Pre-lslamic
Central Asia. Ed. Harmata J., (Budapest, 1984), p. 186.
5. Mongol Tanjur, vol.l32,pp.42’I ‘b’-427 ‘a.’ ‘The Tibetan translation: Tanjur, vol. 173,
pp. 53 ‘a’ - 58 ‘b.
6. Bira, Sh., Matriceta’s Appeal to Kanishka ‘Central Asia in the Kushana Epoch,’ in
proceedings of the international conference on History, Archaeology and culture of
Central Asia in the Kushana Epoch ,vol. II, Moscow, pp. 162-165 (in Russian).
7. Nehru. J.L. Glimpses of World History. (London-New York),1964,p. 83.
8. Sh. Bira says that Csoma de Koros first mentioned this book having referred it to the
class of Lo-rgyus in ‘Enumeration of historical and grammatical works to be met with in
Tibet’. A. Vostrikov considered ‘A. Csoma de Koros’ to be of epoch-making significance.
, 13.
9. Phags-pa bla-ma, Ses-bya rab-tu gsal-ba. SA-skya bka ‘-’ bum. Vol.pa.ff.19b-20a.
10. Ibid, f. 19 b
11. Ibid.
12. Sa-skya bka ‘-’ bum, vol.pa, ff. I a/ 394a-37 a /430 a.
13. Ibid., f. 37 a/ 430 a.
14. Bira, Sh., Some remarks on the Hu-Lan deb-ther of Kun-dga’ rdo-rje: Acta Orient.
Hung. XVII, p.73
15.
16.
17. Bira, Sh., The Clear Mirror by Jaya pandita Blo-bzari ‘phrin-las. Acta Orient. Hung.
XXXIV.
18.
19. Heissig W., Die Familien-und Kirchengeschichtsschreibung der Mongolen. Teil I.
(Wiesbaden, 1959), p.162
20. Cf. Sum-pa mkhan-po’s Dpag-bsam Ijon-bzan, f. 301, Sayang Secen’s Erdeni-yin
tobci, (Ulanbator 1961), pp.70-76
21. ,
22. De Jong, J.W’s. Review on S.Bira’s ‘O Zolotoj knige’ S. Damdina: T’oung pao, vol. LIV
(1968), pp. 173-189
23. In facsimile : Tibetan translation of Hsuan tsang’s ‘Ta T’ang Si-yu-ki’ by Gung Gombojab
with the foreword of Sh. Bira, Monumenta Historica, t. VI, fasc.2, (Ulan-Bator 1973);
24. Ts. Damdinsuren, ‘Two Mongolian colophons to the Suvarnaprabhasottamasutra’ Acta

Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. T. XXXIII fase 1, 39
25. Mong tusatu bodi sedkil i nasu turqaru duran aca ulu angqijirayuluyci bodistv.......... Ts.
Damdinsuren, Ibid Colophon A, p43
26. Mong. ‘asuru ujeskuleng tu you torulki inu ariyun oron daki tngri yin kobegun metu amurling
yui kulicengqui nomuyan inu ariy a Avalokita isvai bodistu metu....’ Ts. Damdinsuren Ibid 2
p42 (English translation by G.Kara)
27. Ts. Damdinsuren, Ibid, Colophon ‘B’p49
28. Li ligeti Catalague du Kanjur Mongol imprime (Budapest 1942) p55 The MSS of the
Kanjur contains two versions of the Sutra only one has 31 chapters, the other 29 chapters.
29. Kara Gyorgy Az Aranyfenyszutra, suvarnaprabhasottamasutrendraraja, yon tan bzan po
szovege. Kizzeteszi (Budapest 1968) Vol. II pp 214-219 W. Heissig Ch. Bawden Catalogue
p 204-206 Zur geistigen Leistung der neubekehrten Mongolen des spaten 16, und fruhen 17
Jhdts Uraf Altaische Jahrbucher. Band XXYI, Heft 1-2 1954 Otto Harrassouitz. Wiesbaden,
pp 102-104
30. Mong Cinggis qayan u qoin tabtuyar uye inu boluysan cagirayar un qubilyan Altan qayan
kemen aldarsijuyui erdem bilig iyer cimegdeju, yirtincu dekine egenegce tusa yi sedkiku
inu, Esrua metu edui ken ber jasaday ugei.... Kara, G, Ibid, p-214
31. Mong’ene degedu Altan gerel tu erketui sudur nuyud qayan u adisdid iyar qayan qatun
teriguten qamuy amitan bodi yabudal tur oroqun boltuqai oroyad saca sugavadi degedu
jiryalang tu ulus tur toroku boltuyoi....Kara, G. Ibid, p-215
32. Kara, G., Ibid, pp. 218-19
33. Ibid, pp. 216-217
34. Sh. Bira translated the chapters title as ‘Qayan u sasdir tengri ner un erketu yin tangyariy.....
Kara, G.’s ed. II p-123, Tibetan Kanjur khure ed. rgyud pha (14) f 37a Emmerich R.E.
translates it differently as the Chapter on Regal science called Instruction concerning Divine
Kings’ p-57
35. Emmerich, R.E.Eng. Trans. p58
36. Kara, G.’s ed. II, p 110. Kanjur version f 50 b cf. Emmerich’s Trans p-59, Tibetan Kanjur
version, f-37b,.
37. Bagchi, S. Introduction Suvarnaprabhasasutra, p17
38. Bira. Sh., International Conference of Mongolists (JNU & IAMS, Delhi) Bulletin 1994
No.2(14)1995 No. 1(15) Sharma, R.C.Ed. ‘Mongolia Tryst with Change and Development
(Vision & Vebture, Patiata 1997)
39. Erikc, Bolor Mongolian Chronicle by Rasipunsug Scripta Mongolica 3 pt II Cambridge
(MS) 1959, p 177
40. Jurungyas’ Ed. Erdeni tunumal neretu sudur (Beijin 1984)
41. Ibid pp. 28, 108, 124 etc.
42. Bira, Sh. Ibid
43. Bira, Sh., Sukhbaatar O., ‘On the Tibetan and Mongolian translations of Sanskrit
grammatical works,’ Indologica Taurinensia, vol. VII, (1979), pp. 127-137.
44. Dandin’s Kavyadarsha in Modern Mongolian and with Commentaries. Ed. Sh.
Bira, Corpus Scriptorum Mongolorum. tomus.XX, fasc IV, (Ulan-Bator, 1982) (in
Mongolian).
45. Ts. Damdinsuren. ‘A Brief I n f o r m a t i o n of the Kavyadarsha and its
Commentaries (in Mongolian),’ Studia Mongolian, tomus IV, fasc. 1. Ulan- Bator,
1962, pp. 3-23. Sh. Bira. ‘Mongolian Commentaries on Dandin’s Kavyadarsha,’
XXVI International Congress of Orientalists, Delhi, 4-10th January 1964. ‘The
Dandin’s Kavyadarsha in Tibet and Mongolia. Indologica Taurinensia, vol. VI
(1978), Torino.
46. in ‘Biblithcca Buddhica’.T. XIX, 1916, p.8
47. Ts. Damdinsuren, Ramayana in Mongolia, (Ulan-Bator, 1976) (in Mongolian).
48. XIII-XVII BB., M., 1978
49. Abu1 Fazl, ‘AkbarNama’, Beveridge H., vol.1, (Delhi. 1972), p. 178.
50. ‘AkbarNama’ vol. I, p. 197.
51. Ibid.
52. Ibid, pp. 178-179.
53. Ibid, p. 180. & 183-184.
54. Nehru, J.L., The Discovery of India, (Asia Publishing House, 1966) p.154.
55. Lohia, Sushma, The Mongol Tales of the 32 Wooden Men in their Mongol Version of 1746
(1686) Trans & annotated, Otto Harrassowitx, (Wiesbaden, 1968) pp. 1-51.
56. Khokhur —Wine skin for keeping mare’s milk—airag.
57. Bulur —A long stick for churching mare’s milk.
58.
59.
60. Catalogue du Tanjur Mongol imprime par Academician Rintchen, Satapitaka Series, Vol-
33, (Delhi, 1964) P.7.
Head
Dept.of P.G. Studies & Research in History
NREC College, Khurja
U.P., India
Mongol Translation of Dr. Lari’s Article
‘Relevance of Buddha’s Teachings Today’ by S. Tuvshin
Mongol Translation of Dr. Lari’s historical story
‘Mahabhinishkraman’ by S.Dembrel
Dr. Lari’s Introduction in Mongol
APPENDIX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
‘The Secret History of the Mongols’, Trans. & Ed: Cleaves, Francis Woodman (Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,1982)
‘Altan Tobchiyan’ (Summerises with Mongol State in 17th Century) (Ulaanbaatar, 1990)
Bawden, Charles R., ‘The Mongol Chronicle Altan Tobči: Text, Translation, and
Critical Notes’ (Göttinger Asiatische Forschungen, Band 5; Wiesbaden, 1955)
Juvaini, Ala ad-Din’Ata-Malik, ‘Tarikh-i-Jahan Gusha’ trans. Boyle, John Andrew, ‘The
History of the World Conqueror’ 2 volumes (1958 Reprint, Seattle, 1997)
Rashid ad Din, ‘Jame’ut-Tawarikh’ General History (1310-11AD.)
Rashid al-Din, Tr., Boyle, John Andrew, ‘The Successors of Genghis Khan’ (New York,
1971)
Ibn Arabshah, ‘Aja’ib al-Maqdur fi Nawa’ib al-Taymur’ (The Wonders of Destiny of the
Ravages of Timur)
Amitai Preiss,Reveren, ‘Mongols and Mamluks’ (The Mamluk-Il khanid War 1260-1281)
(Cambridge Uni.Press,NewYork,1995)
Allsen, Thomas T., ‘Commodity & Exchange in the Mongol Empire’ (Cambridge Uni.
Press, NewYork,1997)
Amar, A., ‘The Concise History of Mongolia’ (Ulanbator, 1934)
Aka, Ismail,‘The Agricultural and Commercial Activities of the Timurids in the First Half
of the 15th Century’. Oriente Moderno 15 (76) (2). Istituto per l’ Oriente C. A. Nallino:
1996
Berger, Patricia, Bartholomew, Terese Tse, ‘Mongolia: The Legacy of Chinggis Khan,’
(Thams and Hudson, Asian Art Musuem of San Francisco, 1995.)
Blunt, Wilfrid, ‘The Golden Road to Samarkand’, (The Viking Press, New York, 1975.)
Bira, Sh., Ed. ‘Mongolia & India’ (International Association for Mongol Studies,
Ulaanbaatar,1989)
Bruun,Ole & Odgaard, Ole, Ed: ‘Mongolia in Transition’ (Curzon Press Ltd.Surrey,1996)
Bira, Sh., Ed.: ‘Mongolia’ (International Asso. For Mongol Studies, Ulanbator)(An
International Annual of Mongol Studies) Vol.1 (22) 1990
Boyle, J.A., ‘Dynastic and Political History of the Il-khans’ in Cambridge History of ban,
vol. 5 (Cambridge, 1968)
Barthold, W. ‘Turkestan down to the Mongol Conquest’(4th Ed; Philadelphia, 1977)
Bregel,Yuri, ‘Notes on the Study of Central Asia’ (Indiana University Research Institute
for Inner Asian Studies, Papers on Inner Asia, No. 28; Bloomington, 1996)
Chambers, James,‘Genghis Khan’, ( Sutton Publishing, Phoenix Mill, 1999).
Curtin, Jerimiah, ‘The Mongols: A History’, ( Little Brown, Boston, 1908).
Chamber, James, ‘The Devil’s Horsemen: The Mongol Invasion of Europe’, (Atheneum,
New York, 1979).
Cohen, Daniel, ‘Conquerors on Horseback: The nomad empires of Attila, Chingis Khan,
and Timur’, (Doubleday, Garden City, 1970).
Dorj, T. & Baatar, S., Ed: ‘Mongolia in Brief’ Tr. Eng. by Gankhuyag, D. (Ulaanbaatar,2000)
Das, S.T., ‘Tribal Life of North-Eastern India’(Giant Pub. House, Delhi)
Fox, Ralph, ‘Genghis Khan’, ( John Lane the Bodley Head, London, 1936).
Forbath, Ladislaus, ‘The New Mongolia’, (William Heinemann, London, 1936.)
Fisher, Alan W., ‘The Crimean Tatars’ (Stanford, 1978)
Grousset, Rene, ‘The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia’, trans.(Naomi
Walford. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, Fourth PB Edition, 1994.)
Gernent, Jaques,‘Daily Life in China: On the Eve of the Mongol Invastion 1250-1276,’
(The Macmillan Company, New York, 1967).
Grunebaum, G.E.Von, ‘History of the Mongols: A Volume in the Islamic World Series’,
(University of California, Los Angeles, 1972.)
Ganguli,Milada, ‘A Pilgrimage to the Nagas’ (Oxford & IBH Pub. Co. Delhi,1984)
Halperin, Charles J., ‘Russia and the Golden Horde,’ (Indiana University Press,
Bloomington, 1985.)
Hildenger, Erik,‘Warriors of the Steppe: A Miltary History of Central Asia, 500 B.C. to
1700 A.D’.,( Sarpedon, New York, 1997.)
Hartog, Leo De,‘Genghis Khan: Conqueror of the World’, (I.B. Trauris Publishers,
Paperback edition, 1999.)
Howarth, Patrick, ‘ATILLA, King of the Huns: The Man and the Myth’, Carroll & Craf
Publisher, New York, 2001.
Hull, Mary, ‘The Mongol Empire’, (Library Binding, 1998).
Ho-tien, Ma, ‘Chinese Agent in Mongolia’, trans. ( John De Francis, The John Hopkins
Press, Baltimore, 1949.)
Heissig, W., ‘The religions of Mongolia’ (Tr. Samuel,G., London & Henley, 1980)
Haqqi, Syed Anwarul Haque, ‘CHINGIZ KHAN, The Life and Legacy of an Empire
Builder’( Primus Book, 2010)
Jenny F.So & Bunker, Emma C.,‘Traiders and Raiders on China’s Northern Frontiers,’
(University of Washington Press, Seatle, 1995).
Jagchid, Sechin & Symons, Van Jay, ‘Peace, War, and Trade along the Great Wall:
Nomadic-Chinese Interaction through Two Millenia’,( Indiana University Press,
Bloomington, 1989.)
Kessler, Adam T., ‘Empires Beyond the Great Wall: The Hertage of Genghis Khan’,
(Nartural History Museum of Los Angelos County, 1993).
Kahn, Paul, (An Adaptaion) ‘The Secret History of the Mongols: The Origin of Chingis
Khan,’ (North Point Press, San Francisco, 1984.)
Kotkin & Elleman, M.E., Ed. ‘Mongolia in the Twentieth Century’ (Sharpe, London)
Legg, Stuart, ‘The Barbarians of Asia: The Peple of the Steppes from 1600 B.C.’ Dorset
Press, New York, 1970.
Lamb, Harold, ‘Tamerlane, The Eartch Shaker’, (Robert M. Mc Bride & Company, New
York, 1928.)
Lamb, Harold, ‘Genghis Khan: The Emperor of All Men’, ( Robert M. McBride &
Company, New York, 1927.)
Lamb, Harold,‘Genghis Khan, the Mongol Horde’, ( Pinnacle Books, New York, 1976.)
Lister, R.P., ‘Genghis Khan’, (Barnes & Noble Books, New York, Third edition, 1993.)
Langlois, John D., Jr, ‘China under Mongol Rule’, ( Princeton University Press, 1981.)
Lari Azad,M.A., ‘Religion and Politics in India During the 17th Century’ (Criterion
Publications, Delhi, 1990)
Lari Azad, M.A., ‘Indian Historiography’, (Mahindra Publications, Gorakhpur, 1987)
Lari Azad,M.A., ‘Mongol-Hindi Learner’ (Tarema Association, Ulaanbaatar, 2002)
Levi, Scott Cameron; Sela, Ron‘ Islamic Central Asia: An Anthology of Historical
Sources’( Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press(2010)
Morgan, David, ‘Mongols (People in Europe)’, (Blackwell Publishing, Hardcover, 1986.)
Man, John, ‘Gobi: Tracking the Desert’, (Yale University Press, New Haven and London,
1997.)
Mayhew, Bradley, ‘Mongolia’ (Lonely Planet Publications, Melbourne, 1993)
Morgan, ‘The Mongol Empire and its Legacy’ (Leiden, 1999).
Morgan, David O., ‘Persian Historians and the Mongols’ in Morgan, David O., Ed.,
Medieval Historical Writing in the Christian and Islamic Worlds (London, 1982)
Nyamdavaa, Oidov, ‘Insight into the Mongolian Crescent of India’ (Himala Publishers,
Delhi,1999)
Onon, Urgunge, ‘Chinggis khan: The Golden History of the Mongols’, (The Folio Sociaty,
London, 1993.)
Parker, E.H. , ‘A Thousand Years of the Tartars’, ( Dorset Press,New York, 1987.)
Prawdin, Michael, ‘The Mongol Empire (Its rise & Legacy)’ (Tr : Eden & Paul, Cedar)
(George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London,1940)
Phillips,E.D., ‘The Mongols’ (Ancient Peoples & Places) (Thames & Hudson,
London,1969)
Pokotilov, Dmitrii, ‘History of the Eastern Mongols during the Ming Dynasty from 1368
to 1634)’ (China,1947)(Part 1:Translations of the Russian Text: Lowenthal, Rudolf;
Part II : Addenda & Corrigendo to Pokotilov’s…..by Franke,Wolfgang)(Porcupine
Press, Philadelphia,1976)
Poppe, N., ‘The Mongolian Monuments in hPags pa script’ (Tr. & Ed.Krueger, J.R.)
Wiesbaden,1957
Ratchnevsky, Paul, ‘Genghis Khan : His Life and Legacy’, trans. Thomas Nivison
Ronay, Gabriel, ‘The Tartar Khan’s Englishman’.
Rossabi, Morris, ‘Khubilai Khan: His Life and Times’, ( University of California Press,
Berkeley, 1988.)
Roberts, Wess, ‘Leadership Secrets of Attila The Hun’, (Warner Books, 1985.)
Rachewiltz, ID., ‘Papal Envoys to the Great Khans’ (London,1971)
Serruys, Henry, ‘The Mongols in China during the Hung-Wu Period (1368-1398)’,
(Washington DC, 1957).
Spuler, Bertold, ‘The Mongols in History’, trans. (Geoffrey Wheeler. Praeger Publishers,
New York, 1971).
‘History of the Mongols: Based on Eastern and Western Accounts of the Thirteenth
and Fourteenth Centuries’, Trans. (Helga and Stuard Drummond. Dorset Press, New
York, 1988.)
Saunders, J.J., ‘The History of the Mongol Conquests’, (University of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia, 2001.)
Sharma, R.C./ Bira, Sh., (Ed.) ‘India & Mongolia’ (Scholar’s Publishing Forum,
Delhi,1999
Sharma, R.C., Ed.: ‘Mongolia, Tryst with Change and Development’ (Vision and Vebture,
Patiala,1997)
Sharma, R.C., Ed: ‘Perspectives on Mongolia’ (Seema Pub, Delhi, 1988)
Turnbull, S.R.,‘The Mongols’,( Osprey Publishing, London, 1980).
Wiencek, Henry & etc, ‘Storm Across Asia: Genghis Khan and the Mongols, The Mogol
Expansion’, (HBJ Press, New York, 1980).
Weese, Devin De, ‘Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tükles and
conversion to Islam in historical and epic tradition’ (University Park, Perm. 1994)
Yamada, Nakaba, ‘Ghenko: The Mongol Invasion of Japan’, ( Smith, Elder, London, 1916.)
Zhamtsarano,Ts.Zh., ‘Mongol‘skie letopisi XVII veka’ (Moscow-Leningrad, 1936), Trans.
by R. Loewenthal as C. Ž. Žamcarano, The Mongol Chronicles of the Seventeenth
Century (Göttinger Asiatische Forschungen, Band 3; Wiesbaden, 1955)
Time-Life Books Editors, ‘Time Frame AD 1200-1300: The Mongol Conquests’, (Time-
Life Books, Alexsandria, 1989.)
The Mongolian Ministry of Education, Science & Culture & UNESCO: ‘The Ancient
City of Kharakhorum’ ( Kato,Shimpei) (New World Press, Beijing)
Okada, Hidehiro, ‘China as a Successor State to the Mongol Empire’
Haining, Thomas D., ‘The Vicissitudes of Mongolian Historiography in the Twentieth
Century’
Poliak, A.N., ‘The Influence of Chingiz Khan’s Yasa Upon the General Organization of the
Mamluk State’
Dobrovits, Mihaly, ‘The Turco-Mongolian Tradition of Common Origin and Historiography
in Fifteenth Century Central Asia’ Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae
47 (1994)
Irwin, R., ‘What the Partridge Told the Eagle: A Neglected Arabic Source on Chinggis
Khan and the Early History of the Mongols’
Krueger, John R., Tr. Sechen, Sagang, ‘The Bejewelled Summary of the Origins of
Khans. A History of the Eastern Mongols to 1662’ Part One: Chapter One through
Five. From the Creation of the World to the Death of Genghis Khan (The Mongolia
Society Occasional Papers, #2; 2nd Ed; Bloomington, 1967)
Preisse, R. Amitai, ‘Ghazan, Islam and Mongol Tradition: A View from the Mamluk
Sultanate’ (BSOAS, 59 NO.1,1996)
Preisse, Amitai Reuven, ‘Mongols and Mamluks the Mamluk-ilkhanid war1260-1281’
(Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization) xv, 272 pp. Cambridge, etc. Cambridge
University Press, 1995
Woods, John E. , ‘The Rise of Timurid Historiography’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies,46,
12 (1987)
Becker, Jasper , ‘Mongolia’
Weatherford, Jack , ‘Genghis Khan’
Angus, Colin , ‘Lost in Mongolia’
‘World Mongolians’ (Magazine) Ed : Gankhyag, Sh. (Ulaanbaatar, 2000)
Bodrov, Sergei , ‘Mongol’ (Film)
‘Meghalaya : Land & People’ (Directorate of Information & Pub. Relation, Govt. of
Meghalaya, 1991)

Mongolia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mongolia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 MONGOLIA THROUGH THE AGES |1

The Secret History of The Mongols

‘The Secret History of the Mongols’ (Mongyol-un ni’uca tobca’an) is

International Association for Mongol Studies

The Foundation of The Mongol State By Chinggis Khan

Stone Statues of The Mongols

Some of the most interesting and significant remains created by the

Institute of History, Mongolian Academy of Sciences

Doctor Ph. S. Otgonjargal

Buddhism and Religious Diversity

Ex. Prof., Dept.of History

Chinghis Khan has been accepted as the symbol of Mongolian national

Head, Dept. of History

Dr. Khereid J.Urangua

India has wonderful tradition of ancient linguistics. Modern linguistics

Water Kidneys Bladder Scratum Tongue Taste Tasting

Air Lungs Colon Skin Sense Sensing

Space Heart Abdomen Ear Sound Hearing

Earh Join, mix Spleen Stomach Four Four Yellow

Today in Mongolia are functioning about 150 Buddhist lamaseries. If in

National University of Mongolia

2. Lattimore O. Solution in Asia.Boston 1945. pp.177-178

8. Western Political Quarterly.March 1956.p.41

National University of Mongolia

The Mongolian National University

Philosophy is universal, but the main problems of current philosophy are

Mongols and Dogs

Mongolians consider their dogs as one of the family member. However,

“Kalachacra” belongs to a componant part of the tantraism in Mahayana

Manchu ruler appointed Jasay who commander of banner (qusiyu) and

Some Ideas on the Development of

Ibn Tughri Bardi was a realistic historian. If he found anything

According to many historians Ibn Tughri Bardi got prominence in

The author of Shazrat writes about him :

Al Nujum has some interesting information about Chingiz’s hunting

Notes and References :

Dr. M.A. Lari ‘Azad’

24. Ts. Damdinsuren, ‘Two Mongolian colophons to the Suvarnaprabhasottamasutra’ Acta

You might also like