BURIAL CUSTOMS OF THE PAGAN MONGOLS

Author(s): N. D. AHUJA
Source: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 1967, Vol. 29, PART II (1967), pp.
215-221
Published by: Indian History Congress

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44138022

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian History Congress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 NON-INDIAN HISTORY 21 5

BURIAL CUSTOMS OF THE PAGAN MONGOLS

N. D. AHUJA (Chandigarh)

A perusal of thé accounts of the burials of some great Mongol

Khans and Chiefs makes an interesting and significant study of this
aspect of the social life of the pagan Mongols. A fair account of the
same is given by Ata Malik Juvaini (1193-1260 A.D.), in his Tarikh-i -
Jahangusha (History of the World Conqueror).1 The Persian historian
has been particular to describe minutely the strange customs which
prevailed among the Mongol Khans.
The Mongols, though pagans, did not burn their dead. J(a) They
buried their dead in the fashion of the Egyptians. The death-time
(18.8.1227 A.D.), the funeral procession and the burial of the Great
Khaqan Chingez Khan have been described below :
"The imperial tent, in front of which of late a lance had
stood with point in earth (the sign that the owner of the tent lay
sick) was the last to be struck. No one except the princes, the Oralok2,
Yeliu-Chuts'ai-3 (Prime Minister) had the entry into this tent. The
veteran body-guard surrounded it as with an iron-ring by day and
night. Only once did the ring open, to give passage to Shidurge4 and
his train, who were carried forth as corpses. But now the Mongols
were striking camp, tent by tent. The nobles with their troops
dispersed in all directions, until at last there only remaind the thousand
riders of Chingez Khan's Old Guard. In a thickly aggregated mass,
through which no unprivileged glance could penetrate, they surrounded
the cart in which the Emperor lay; and when they had departed there
was no one left alive in the whole neighbourhood . On its way, this train of
silence and death left nothing but death behind. All living creatures
that were unlucky to be spied by these horsemen, whether man or
beast, bird or snake, were ruthlessly hunted down and slaughtered. Thus
did they convey the body of the Khakan over mountains and streams,
through forests and across deserts . . At the foot of the mountain
they wanted to take the corpse out of the cart and bear it to the
summit, but the body of the Khakan lay as if fixed upon the bier.
They therefore lifted the whole cart and carried it upwards-*beneath
this tree (where he had once before rested); they interred Chingez Khan
together with the cart in which he had made his last journey and from
which he did not wish to be separated... Around the great tree, lonely
at the time of the interment, saplings sprouted and grew, so that
soon there was an »impenetrable forest on the hill-top and none could
find the grave-mound ever more. Many travellers have sought the

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
21 Ö INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

burial place of Chingez Khan. The mountain massif known as

Delugun-Roldok is known, but no one can say which of the peaks is
Burkan-kaldum. When asked to point it out, the Mongols are silent."5
However there was two years' mourning after the death of Great
Khaqan6 at the end of which Iiis successor and son Agotay celebrated
his accession by sending forty of the most beautifal Mongol maidens
'to serve Chingez in the Other World'; horses too were sacrificed.
Juvaini describes Batu Khan's7 (1243-56) burial in the following
words : ''They buried him in conformity with the Mongol custom;
and among that people it is the usage, when one of them dies, to
prepare a place under ground about the size of a chamber or hall, in
bigness proportionate to the rank and degree of the accursed one who
may have departed to hell. They furnish it with a throne and cover-
ing for the ground and they place there vessels and numerous effects,
together with his arms and weapons and whatever may have been his
own private property, and some of his wives and slaves, male or female
and the person he loved most - above all others. When they have
placed that accursed one upon the throne, they bury his most beloved
along with him in that place. In the night time the place is covered
up and horses are driven over it, in such a manner that not a trace of it
remains.1'8 It appears the Mongols were particular about maintaining
secrecy regarding the last abode or site in respect of their buried Khans.
Hence no trace of the grave was allowed to remain. It also indicates
that no 'mounds' or 'mezars' in the form of a grave, raised platform
or tomb, etc. were made in the fahsion of^the Muslims.9 This explains
the conspicuous absence of any such commemorative plate or platform
and also the untraceable burial places of Mongol Khans and Chiefs.
Pelliot10 in his well-known Notes on Marco Polo (Travels 1271-95
A. D.) has quoted profusely from Chinese sources, e.g. Hei Ta,
Shih,11 Yuan Shih,12 Yuen-chao-pi-Shi. 13 as well as from Catpini,14 in
this context. His narration too supports the above view. He has men-
tioned (From Yuan Shih) that the earth removed to dig the pit was
made into lumps which were kept in proper order. When the coffin was
lowered, the pit was filled up and covered in the same order of original
lumps of earthji.e. last first and first last, so that the earth regains exact-
ly its original shape at the top. If there was earth in excess, it Was
carried away far off to other places.15 He quotes further, from Car-
pini, that "they fill up the pit and place over it the grass as it was be-
fore so that the place should be impossible to find afterwards.'5 38 The
particular care taken to fill up the pit in order of lumps, to remove the
excess of earth very far off and to place grass over the pit, appears to

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 NON-INDIAN HISTORY 217

signify that restoration of original appearance

the burial and the maintenance of the grave
keep of secrecy in this respect were considere
has further stated that they fill up the pit an
as it was before so that it should.be impossible
wards. 17 From another authority(Hei-Ta-Shih)
of the Mongols (Khans, of course) had no moun
trodden over by horses so as to appear as even
The practice of secret burials continued amo
tion amongst them accepted Islam and with
of secrecy vanished. Fourth Ilkhan Arghun
last of the Mongols to get such a secret burial i
Guzida (select History) of Hamdulla Mustauf
tomb was made in the mountains of Sujas and a
they concealed the place making the whole
sanctuary (qurugh ?) so that people could n
pass that way. 19 However, later on i.e. afte
was Uljay Khatun d/o Arghun Khan who found
and made it manifest. According to Jami-ut-T
Histories) by Rashid-ud-Din Fazl-ul-lah,20 th
(1261-65) was burriedon a hill-top on the island
Tuli (d 1232)'s other two sons-the Illrd Khakan
fourth Khakan Kublai Khan (1260-94) (i.e. gr
were buried somewhere on the summits of the
Boldok - where the greatest of the Khans, Chingez was laid to
rest.38 Baraq (Rd. 1266-71) was also buried on a high mountain.23 The
Und Ilkhan Abaqa (1265-83), son of Hulagu and great grandson of
Chingez Khan was burried somewhere on another hill-top on the Sohi
island .

Though it may be difficult to find out a precise reason for making

obscure quite intentionally the very last abodes of such big Khans, yet
one may advance various possible reasons therefor. It appears that the
pagan Mogols believed in assimilation through annihilation i.e. one gets
submerged in the vast all-pervading Entity and no distinction between
the two remains after that Union. Politically it may be due to the fact
that the persecuted persons or their followers may not subsequently dig
out and desecrate the bodies of the big Khans at any future time. The
sanctity of the Khans could be maintained by keeping their burial
places secret and hence their dead bodies safe from any later possible
vandalism. This fact is further corroborated from the difference that we
find in the burial form of the commonalty or less important men from

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
218 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

that of the Great Khans. In the case of

class the practice was different. Their
manifest by hanging some horse-skins ov
This is supported by the account given by
these sources a horse was ridden round ti
Its head was then washed in Kways. Its
moved and a pole was thrust in at the bel
Ibn Batuta states that four horses were im
tomb of a Yuen Mongol Chief (Togan
grandson and 9th successor of Kubla Kh
of the Yuen dyansty (an off-shoot of t
horse skins upto 16 is also mentioned i
custom of the pagan Mongols look sim
the heathen Oyuz m the 10th and 11th ce
Oyuz have been described in detail by Ibn
The impaling of the horses on the t
chiefs is a novel funerary custom. Like a
some peculiar and particular significance which is obscure now
for want of some concrete original reference thereabout. Maybe, that
the Mongols, pngan as they were, might have adopted this practice of
hanging horses on poles to invoke spirits and to lay a curse on enemies
or to protect the dead agaist vicious spirits. Examples are not lacking to
show that horse-skins or cattle-skins were often hung by the branches
of trees either to scare away enmies or bad spirits.30
This custom may possibly be due to another reason also. Horse has
been a part and parcel of the lives of Mongols as of all inhabitants in
Central Asia and Turkistan. It is stated, out of fun, that a Mongol
loved his horse more than his wife. Horse, being the best loved article
(after a human being) for a Mongol, might have been sacrificed just as
a most loved human being was sacrificed in case of big Khans. Examples
of making sacrifices of best loved pieces to keep off death or bad spirits
are not lacking. Even as late as the 16th coutury A. D. a Sunni Muslim
Emperor Babur was advised by astrologers, etc. to sacrifice the best
loved and valued article to the life of ailing prince Humayun. The
custom of moving round the object was also prevalent as is clear from
Babar's circumbulating round Hamayun's cot. On the same analogy,
we may presume that riding a horse around the grave and to sacrifice
it and hang it there must have originated from a belief that bad spirits
would be kept off the dead body and the departing soul. The pagan
Mongols also believed in the Sky-God - Tengris. It may also be possible
that the custom of sacrificing horses (the best loved article) might have

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 NON-INDIAN HISTORY 219

meant the pleasing of the Sky- God so that

ned for any act of omission and commission
horses impaled varied from chief to chief a
his status and importance in this world. The
horse skins hung over them allude further
the sacrifice might please the Sky-God-the M
Incidentally we find mention of the sacred
''Yajnas" e.g. "Rajasua Yajna" and "Asvam
too which were performed to appeae and
glorious victories. Another possible reason
can be adduced from the analogy of the Eg
the horses were sacrificcd and hung on the
by means of these horses the dead would be
heaven. This belief is supported from
funerary rites of the Oyuz.33 A reproducti
from IbnFadlan may make a very interestin
"When one of them dies, they dig a grea
of a house. Then they go to him and pu
belt and bow. In his hand they place a w
and in front of him they leave a woode
Everything that belonged to him they b
that house. Then they seat him in it and ro
setting a kind of clay dome over it. Then
horses they kill a hundred, two hundred or
to their quantity. They eat the flesh of the
and tail, which they suspend (or stretch) on
are the horses on which he will ride to Paradise."

Whatever may have been the causes for the origin and belief in
such novel sacrificial funeral customs of the pagan Mongols, a glance at
these customs makes it an interesting side-study of the social history
of the Mongols in the 12th and 13th centuries A.D. It apears from a
perusal of the various accounts of Mongol history that so long the
Mongols remained under cultural influences of the Qip-Ching pagans,
these practices remained prevalent amongst them. However with the
spread of Islam among some of their branches, after tho conversion of
7th Ilkhan Ghazan ( 1295-1304 ) in 1290 A.D. these practices appear
to have been abandoned gradually though here and there some forms
of the same continued to some, extent.
1. Being a contemporary writer Juvaini is to be considered the most authentic
evidence. His work has been translated by Raverty. I have mainly made
use of this translation though I have referred to original Persian text too.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 220 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

l.(a)The Giliak, a small and distant branch of

however cremated their dead.
2. Highest Chief of the Retainers.
3. Sago Astrologer, a scion of the Liao family of China who became Chingez
Khan's Prime Minister after the surrender of Kin Emperor.
4. Son of Hsi-Hsia King who had ventured to defy Chingez Khan.
5. Cf. Michael Prawdin, Tr. Rden & Ceder Paul, The Mongol Empire (1963 Ed),
pp, 228-230.
6. Ibid, p, 236.
6.(a)Sykes, Percy Hittory of Persia, Vol II (Pat 190.), p. 87.
7. Son of Jiju Khan (d 1225), grandson of Chingez Khan and the 1st Chief Khan
of the Golden Horde€
8. Juvaini, Ata Malik, Tarikh-i-Jahangusha, Tr. Reverty p. 1173.
9. Certain hadiths express disapproval of the rounded mounds which cover the
tombs and disapprove more strongly the monuments that crown them; both
features are everywhere to be found. See Maurice Gaudefroy Demombyna's
Las Institutions Musulmanes , Tr, Muslim Institutions, by John p. Macgregor.
p. 17 2.
10. Chinese envoy who visited Mongolia in 1232 & left an account of his visit.
11. History of the Mongolian a' House, a 14th century work. Its first part was
translated into German by F. E. A. Kraus© and published under the title
Chingis Han (Heidelbergi 1922).
12. "Secret History of the Mongols " compiled in 1240.
Extracts translated into German with explanatory notes by Erich Haenisch
(Saxon Academy of the Sciences, 1931)
13. See F. N. 26 infra.

14. Pelliot, Marco Polo , p. 331.

15. Ibid, p. 333.
16. Pelliot, op cit; p. 333.
17. Ibid; of pp 333. 353.
18. Mustaufi Hamdulla, Tarikli-i-Quzida , Tr. Strange, G; p. 233.
19. Ibid, p 233-34, Muataufi's was completed after A D 1330. He also wrote
Zafarriama and a geographical work called Nuzwatul Lalul.
20.(a)Son of Tuli and grandson of Chingez Khan who ransacked Khilafat at
Baghdad in 1258 A. D. Was head of Ilkhani Mongols.
21. Fazl-ullah, Rashid-ud-Din, Jami-ut-Tawarikh (Ed. Ali Zande), p. 94). Rashid-
ud-din was physician to Abaka Khan s/o Halaqu. Being a great statesman
died historian : he was made his Vazir by Ghazan and later by Ghazan's
brother and successor Uljayut. His work comes down to live after 1318.
22. Cf Michael Prawdin, Tr. Eden and Cedar Paul, The Mongol Empire p. 229.
23. Fazl Ullah, Rushid-ud-Din. Jami-ut-Tawarikh, (Ed. Ali Zande), p. 138,
24. Fazl-Ullah, Rashid-ud-Din, Jami-ut-Tawarikh (Ed. Ali Zande), p. 164.
25. Cf. lbn Batuta, Travels in Asia & Africa (1325 54), Tr. Har Gibb (1919),
pp. 299-300.
26. Camini as quoted by Christopher Dawson, 'The Mongol Mission (1955), pp.
12-13. Giovanni Piano. Carpini a Eranciscan Friar was sent by Pope Innocent
IV as his legatee to the court of Chingiz Khan's grandson. He travelled in
the Mongol territory from 1245 to 1247 A. D.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 NON-INDIAN HISTORY 2Ž1

27. Ibn Batuta, op. cit., p. 300.

28. Gibbs in his translation of Batu tahas however, differed and doubted the name
and identity of the chief as given by Batuta. See Gibbs, op cit., p. 373.
29. See note 2 on p. 8 of Rockhill, " The Journey of William Rubruck to Eastern part
of the World " (1900). Also p. 22. Ibid. William of Rubruquis was a Franciscan
Friar, a learned man who had accompanied the King of France on the Crusade.
He had already read Carpini's report and had profited by the account of
Longjumeaus' experiences, has paid a visit to Hayton, King of Armenia who
had already vieited Karakorum as vassal of the Mongols. Rubruquis was
dispatched to the court of Mongol Khan as an envoy from King of France and
as a missionary asking permission to settle down in Mongolia and preach
Christianity among the Mongols. He spent more than six months in Mangu's
camp near Karakorum. We owe to him an account of his journey (and his
reception) which next to that of Carpini, is the most detailed and accurate
report we possess concerning the 13th century Mongols. He had many
conversations also with Mangu Khan (cf. Michael Prawdin, Eng. Tr. by
Eden and Cedar Paul " The Mongol Empire pp. 298-300.
30. We have also examples to show that some Muslim Emperors in Medieval age
e.g. Balban in India hung the corpses of some dacoite and robbers by the
tree branches to scare away people from the idea of committing crimes of
robbery, etc.
31. Cf. Ibn Batuta, op. cit., p. 373.
32. Cf. Rubruck, op cit., pp. 82-83.
33. Cf. Ibn Fadlen, Tr. A. P. Kovalevosky, p. 128.

BRITISH INDIA AND THE NEAR EAST CRISIS, 1833-41

RAM LAKHAN SHUKLA (Patna)

British policy in the Near East crisis of 1833-41 was no simple thing
guided solely by one clear-cut motive or factor. Rather it reflected the
far-flung interests of Britain as an imperial power. Political, strategic
and commercial considerations all combined to shape and influence it.
Here we have to examine how far it was influenced by the considerations
of Indian security and the safety of British routes to India.
The Eastern Question with all its geopolitical implications was not
fully grasped by the British until after the Greek War of Indep-
endence. The Greek settlement brought in its train momentous questions
of diplomacy and strategy affecting an area for which the British were
particularly solicitous because of their trade and empire in the East.
But even before they fully realized the magnitude of their task and
interest in the area France and Russia had established a strong foothold
there. France had conquered Algeria (1830), and Russia had penetrated
far into Turkey and Persia, approaching the natural lines of communi-
cation to India, and even her physical frontiers.3

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:20:50 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms