"THE URIANGQAI CONNECTION", SOME SOCIAL STUDY AND TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF

THE "SECRET HISTORY"

Author(s): Harry Jackendoff
Source: Mongolian Studies , 1977, Vol. 4 (1977), pp. 5-38
Published by: Mongolia Society

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43193046

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

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mongolian Studies

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 "THE URIANGQAI CONNECTION",
SOME SOCIAL STUDY AND TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF THE
SECRET HISTORY

Harry Jack endo ff

(Philadelphia)

The Secret History seems to contain quite a number of lacunae,

interpolated 'romantic' elements and seemingly irrelevant passages of
narrative : yet while parallel redactions covering the same period of history
leave many of these irrelevant or romantic portions out, they significantly
maintain much of the Secret History's lacunaic structure.
What I have somewhat facetiously titled "The Uriangqai Connec-
tion" conjectures that these people- who are the original people of Mt.
Burqan Qaldun- can be treated in an almost "functional" literary (if not
historical) light throughout the early course of both Cinggis' ancestry, and
(through Jelme) his early career.1 It can be, with little reservation, asserted
that Burqan Qaldun plays a focal literary, symbolic if not actually
historical role in the narrative. To show that the Uriangqai play an
analogous "literary" role may seem rather specious- but the aim of such
analysis is double-edged.
Analyzing the Secret History as (historical) literature is the only
valid perspective from which to gain access to the author and to any
evidence of conscious organization of his material. Our interest is in
examining the narrative structure, both in its own right and as compared
to subsequent or "parallel" redactions. A discussion of this sort (in the
genre of historiography) entails most of all an adequate accounting of the
available socio-historical data- without which the notion of the author's
treatment, his biases, etc., could not at all be abstracted. Thus, the social
and historical commentary in this article is organized so as to examine the
chronicle in light of its "literary" vs. historiographical merits. The aim is to
present an interpretation of the chronicle as a trustworthy, perhaps
intentionally opaque, piece of literary historiography.2

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

Allowing for the distinct possibilit

social relations occurred and was ret
chronicle by the author, one can claim t
text is invalid. Nevertheless, one can st
internally inconsistent data in the narrat
of social-historical discontinuity, the ass
porary understanding of social facts
historical events (as he remembered
him)- glimpses of an earlier structur
would still result and be isolatable in an
In any case we have no basis upon wh
the social organization after the em
analysis of the discontinuities in the te
we assume a socio-historical continuity
SH through the later empire. The only
case of social continuity vs. retrospectiv
again, the extent and type of textual in
lacunae. Such interpolation is obvious in
anticipating names (i.e. Ong Qan for ToT
it is more apt to be so in the case of less
According to Vladimirzov's revised th
Mongols , the state of affairs during Cin
was one where the social structure base
in a state of decay, and that basically, a
of this anarchy, whether we should a
combination of conscious Chinese policy
whole steppe, or as does Vladimirzov (an
structural changes wrought specifica
abandonment of a forest culture for a p
clearly the rise of Cinggis and the autoc
becomes the logical conclusion of such a
Yet if this was indeed the state of aff
p. 77) turns only to Cinggis' Bilig and
support- we might expect this same cas
by any contemporary Mongol favorably
the empire. Comparison might be made
the 8th century Türkic Orkhon inscrip

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 D on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 7

clear by Kül Tegin that politica

the prevailing social conditio
Chinese-induced anarchy. Ce
'explanation' in Rashid-Eddin
description of a previous peri
contemporary writers- for V
once-removed from the contem
EyT has intimations of the soc
tion4 ; yet interestingly, we
effect anywhere in the SH. Ne
politically motivated discourse.
Unlike, for example, the CWT
the rhetorical devices employ
Nowhere are there any qualitat
of affairs or events given in the
accoutrement usually found in
in the SH is a remarkably dry,
string of 'historical' events. In
may rest on the fact that no a
author at interpretation or con
which is often the "raison d'etr
many a modern history, the SH
as to its accuracy, of course, m

II

1. In the history of the ancestral line of Temujjin, beginning with

para. 9, two Uriangqai chiefs are mentioned by name as allowing
Alan Qoa's [AQ] father, Qorilartai-Mergen [QM] to migrate in
the vicinity of Mt. Burqan. QM is an outcast 'noble' of the
Qori-Tumat tribe, and he has been apparently sanctioned (for
what reason we are not told) and is forbidden by the Qori-Tumat
to hunt certain game. Thus when we meet him he has announced
the formation of a new 'clan', the Qorilar.

Whether the description is to be taken as broadly as that one given in

Waley's translation from the Chinese interlinear, that QM "took refuge"

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
8 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

with the Uriangqai,6 it is clear that QM

conqueror, but at most as a peer to th
find basically the same account- howe
chiefs are not given, and conspicuousl
QM's reason for leaving Qori-Tumat terri

2. In para. 10 of the SH Alan Qoa [A

daughter, is taken to wife by Dobun
Duwa Soqor [DS] found her and cont
them (SH 7). These two brothers a
grandsons of Boijigidai- Mergen a
This whole lineage also resides in and
When the elder brother DS dies, his
form a new tribe, the Dörben, becau
they feel their father's younger brot
the clan (SH 11).
3. In the paragraphs immediately foll
tells us that Dobun Mergen [DM ] goes
instead of hunting (or being unsucce
upon an Uriangqai hunter and asks f
which point the Uriangqai selflessly
keeps only parts for himself. Follo
told that a poor man whom DM mee
of this same meat which DM has just
pay for it by giving his son as a serv
one thigh of the deer and took
acquainted with the SH it is the servant obtained in this
transaction who is later accused of fathering Alan Qoa's last three
sons- the youngest of whom is Bodoncar, the direct progenitor of
Cinggis' line. The poor man and his son are of the Ma'aliq Baya 'ut
tribe.)

This rather enigmatical story of Dobun Mergen [DM] and the

deermeat has received commentary on the term used by DM in asking for
the meat from the Uriangqai hunter- the Mongol word [širotya]. No one
to my knowledge, however, has seen this story as relating in any way to
Duwa Soqor 's sons claiming DM's ineptitude, or 'unfitness' as clan head- a
statement which directly precedes the account at hand. Commentaries
have usually chosen to take the deermeat episode at face value; the
assumption being that this was a common enough practice which the

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 9

author happens to mention as a prelu

Baya 'ut servant boy.
The intuitive reading, which I am r
must attempt to disqualify if we do
what is given here as Event 3 has bee
specific intent of making a perjora
[DM]. Clearly there is no need to m
meat which he had to exchange fo
author mentions this previous transa
his narrative, or haphazardly- becaus
to him." If we should take this latter
one, then the account is of interest
customs and norms of transaction wh
if he had the slightest reason to ques
his historical narrative would no lon
by the author as informative in so
would resolve us on a version of the
having some functional import in the
Pelliot's article, " Širotya- Širaty
recognizes the significance this event
structure, but rather glances over it
morphemic than of social commenta
[Su7a/sau7at] which represents only a
tracing its similar meaning in later Č
Uriangqan of Tannu-Tuva one can ad
the SH appearing as a postposition) /u
a part of the hunt, and from this fac
/šira/šira-u/ as being the root specif
thus concludes, after identifying this
Dobun Mergen was a request for a h
"pour les Mongols du temps, cela suff
dans sa générosité, largement dép
l'obligeait." (Ibid., p. 110).8
As it stands, Pelliot's discussion is
our possible interpretations of the
"functional" reading, i.e. that it is i
If the Uriangqai went beyond what w

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
10 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

contrast by the succeeding episode, a

noticeable in this light to both the SH
Specifically, however, Pelliot has follow
the Chinese interlinear translation says
linguistic form such that Dobun Mer
(Ibid., p. 104), a point which brings on a
of class structure.

It is precisely this point which becom

rights might Dobun Mergen be asserting
these rights to claim a part of the hu
approached by the latter hunter?
Should we take an extreme position i
bit hinges on Dobun Mergen 's "righ
deermeat episode as an integral part of
rights to the meat- that is, if his comp
hunters are socially ambivalent- then a
conscious insertion of this episode in
obvious concerning both DM's ungen
hunter, and his nephew's claims that
Moreover, this carries us much furth
implies that it was due to the Uriangqai
the servant boy who in this case is pro
the father of Bodoncar- the founde
Bodoncar's first wives and subjects wer
saved Cinggis' life much later in the SH
would make a rather strong case for the
Uriangqai.
Altogether, this is a rather radical position, but as stated here it is
the extreme version of an "Uriangqai connection. " If we are to hold at all
to the thesis that the SH was consciously constructed, then we are taken
to task to show that Dobun Mergen had rights to the meat, and that there
is nothing untoward in the circumstance of the exchanges.
One might easily avoid the trouble with the assertion that each of
the SH episodes is disjunctive, and that any interpretations of "conscious
narrative" must be abandoned due to a necessary lack of sophistication on
the part of Mongol written literature at the time. Viewing the SH as a
disjunctive collection of stories and hearsay, strung together in attempted

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 11

chronological order, gives us a

statistical-like collection of termi
a rather a priori , self-defeating s
we must take up the challeng
acceptable interpretation of th
piece of literary historiography.
of Dobun Mergen's [DM] rights
within a social framework which w

It seems to me that either of t

is just as unlikely that the SH
fragments as it is a fabricated
Conventionally, it has been treat
justification to withhold the m
surprisingly the conventional po
the latter "extreme". On this then rests our interest in the deermeat
episode.
Vladimirzov's contention was that the empire-period itself marked
the final product of an already decayed feudal-type economic state- a
stage which antedates our period by several generations and makes possible
a specific liege duty (as opposed to some general steppe code of
obligation) requiring the Uriangqan to give up a part of his game.
A strict feudal interpretation is possible as well, for the SH author
and his audience would belong to the period Vladimirzov points to as
crucial; the Uriangqai's lower status during the empire- through the
retrospective interpolation of the author- is thus our second alternative.
Both of these obligation-forms would be considerably stronger than what
Pelliot intimates in his discussion of /širotya/. Rather, Pelliot notes that
the Mongol scholar Žamcarano interpreted this event as pertaining to an
old form of "clan communism" which would entail a different, non-
hierarchical relation between the Uriangqai and the Mongols. There is a
range of subtle possibility between a non-hierarchical status and the strict
social-stratification model implied by the term ťfeudaT; it is this range
which we shall attempt to develop.
The final alternative, however, is that the linguistic demand- form
Pelliot traces is tied to what we know were existing hospitality codes and
obligations which could not be ignored without breaching some general
social norms or cultural etiquette of the steppe. Though intuitively more

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
12 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

probable, this latter possibility runs i

Mergen refuses food to the Ma'aliq Baya '
general rule of steppe etiquette, in th
audience DM would be rather a scoundrel-
'Uriangqai connection' thesis already raise
Could Dobun Mergen [DM] have like
hunter the meat, or is the use of this dem
Ma'aliq Bay a 'ut man as belonging to the n
overstepped his obligation by giving the
made by Pelliot is rather one of a steppe n
etc., and not one of the Uriangqai having
Mongols of that time.
All of our considerations as to what were the actual social and class
relations in this early part of the SH are bound to be difficult sledding, for
nowhere in the text do we find any explicit differentiations made between
what must have been an already complex set of class distinctions.
Vladimirzov notes:

"The first pages of the SH are filled with the genealogies of

aristocratic clans: there is not a single mention of those who
become later Vassals'- unayan-boyol. One looks in vain for the
genealogy of the Jalair, Baya 'ut, etc. . . . this is very 'symp-
tomatic'."
( Regime , p. 99, translation mine)

It is to be assumed that the Mongols are specifically nobles, for

Qorilartai Mergen [QM] is mentioned as a noble and he has married his
daughter to Dobun Mergen [DM] who must therefore be his peer. QM has
as well come to the Uriangqai as a peer however, being allowed by them to
take up residence in the Mt. Burqan area. Having been forbidden to hunt
certain game by his own tribe, we might say he is in a delicate enough
position to ally himself, subordinately, to the Uriangqai of the time. Yet
we have been told that the Mongols are of this same region; why has QM
not approached them as recognized authorities of the Mt. Burqan area?
Certainly, if the Uriangqai as a tribe are of inferior status to the Mongols
(implied in at least one interpretation of the deermeat episode) this would
have been the case. The Uriangqai are later to appear in the role of an
inferior tribe, a group of them are taken as subjects by Bodoncar and his

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 13

brothers, as well as the fact that

Jelme as a house-servant to Yisug
be the case concerning these Uria
The clearest interpretation wou
his son-in-law Dobun Mergen to
the Uriangqai being either ent
hierarchy- or actually the predo
Mongols themselves (as nobles or
nate. Rashid Eddin distinguishe
Mongol people, and the Mongo
421-23). Thus this tribe encounte
non-nomadic forest people, and t
is thus avoided.

To which people would the Uri

admit that in cdhtext of the SH n
of references to this Uriangqai pe
it is specifically stated that th
hunted on Burqan Qaldun), lea
distinction is wrong, or misp
Mongol- Uriangqai relations.

What seems a more plausible in

people were already divided into
Mongol peoples of the much late
centuries. According to Vladimir
internal stratification does not o
breakdown of the empire. This
clans were themselves correlative to social class distinctions before the

empire. In working out the relationships between the clans in the SH and
JaT he has come to the conclusion that social order (based on clan
composition) was in a state of rapid decomposition throughout the early
period of the SH. If one assumes that clan corresponded to class status at
some early period (and there are many reasons why this is plausible, the
foremost of these being the hereditary nature of the unayan boyol ), a
careful look at the SH shows that this "correspondence" in fact was rather
random and indiscriminate; the easiest conclusion to draw is that the
earlier system must be breaking down. I really do not see much at fault
with Vladimirzov here, for there is ample enough evidence to show that

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
14 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

some major cultural or political fluctuatio

time in Mongol society- the breakdown o
tion might have been one among several o
the necessity of relying on the paradigm
fault here. Elizabeth Bacon has done much to loosen the restrictions on
the notion of ťclan' in the SH9 by her results. What she does provide for
our discussion is an escape route- provided merely by opening the
parameters on the usual anthropological conception of a clan. What for
Vladimirzov is a decomposing clan organization- transformed by the
empire into a novel structure- appears now as a relative continuum. With
Bacon's reformulation of 'clan' arguments to those of /oboh/ structure,
the eventually crystalized empire period is rather heralded by some rapid
social fluctuations handled within the framework of the /oboh/; and with
the stagnation of the state, this same structure allows a general return to
earlier mechanics of social organization.
The Uriangqai might well be a non-Mongol people, not subject to the
same social decay which the Mongols are undergoing; but if they are
themselves already a socially stratified group, many of the apparent
inconsistencies of the SH narrative are resolved. The deermeat episode on
which we have so far focussed suggests that such rights of a noble-class
pertained to the Mongols in the early period. Dobun Mergen met the
Uriangqai hunter either as altogether different from either of the two
previous men or as belonging to a people with no aristocratic line.
This now brings up the subject of the servant boy sold for the
hindquarter of deermeat. As is relatively clear throughout the SH , the
existence of subject peoples play a definite historic role, if only a
secondary one. Bodoncar and his brothers take a camp of freely-
nomadizing people as their subjects (SH 35-39); Ho'elun takes up the
family standard and tries rallying Yisugei's and Caraqa's people and herds
from the departing Tayici'ut (SH 70-73); Sigiqutuqu is found with a gold
ring in his nose "designating him a Tatar noble" (SH 138), and is
thereupon adopted by Ho'elun as Chinggis' foster-brother; and as
mentioned, there is the case of Jelme, an Uriangqai boy, presented by his
father to Yisugei.
Of interest, though from a completely different context are several
references by Henning Haslund-Christensen to class distinctions, subject
people, and slaves in his adventure travelogue, Men and Gods in Mongolia

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 15

(N.Y.: Dutton and Co., 1935). It will

place if only for their parallels to
of Sarts lived as subjects of the Tor

"The Sarts were the Torgut Rege

the cultivated land necessary f
other duties beneath the dignity
This peculiar circumstance o
community being subject to a M
be due to the fact that the inhabitants of Khoten Sumon were
descendants of a part of the rebel army of . . . Yaqub Beg who,
after their defeat by the Chinese sixty years earlier, had sought
refuge with the Torgut Khan of that time."
(Ibid,, pp. 260-261)

With regard to slavery he recounts the story of a Swedish prisoner of

war made a slave by the Dzungars. According to her account, she was
initially stripped of all her clothing, bound, and forced to perform "tasks,
such as fall to the lot of bondslaves." Later, upon being given as a slave to
a Khoshut princess, "she was given some old skin clothing wherewith in
some measure to cover her hitherto completely naked body" (Ibid., p.
170-171). In several places in the SH , being stripped seems to have been
correlative with being taken a captive (SH 133, Jurkin strip 10 Mongols;
SH 145, Jelme steals into the enemy camp stripped, to pose as an escaping
Mongol captive; SH 155, the Tatars stage an insurrection with concealed
weapons while they are being stripped by their Mongol captors). Haslund's
example indicates that this stripping was not of a functional nature (that
is, confiscating the clothing for later use), because in the case of
no/i-Mongol captives (especially a Swedish one) this clothing had absolute-
ly no use for a Mongol nomad. A question arises here as to whether this
practice has to do with the simple degradation of captives, or if some
symbolic importance was attached to clothing itself. Here what comes to
mind are the prohibitions for washing one's clothes, and the oft-remarked
fact that the Mongols will wear their clothes until they become mere tatters
found in such early accounts as Rubruck, Carpini, Akanc. The importance
is of course that this might be tied in some way to one's change of status
when captured.
This is one of the most perplexing problems in the SH material- that

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
16 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

is, making the distinction between a 'slave'

generally, and a 'captive'- as is initially the
lady taken by the Djungars. The relative
question in several parts of the SH noted ab
sections dealing with Ambaqai being taken
Borte captured by the Merkit (SH 98; 109),
Tayici'ut (SH 79-81), and of primary im
Tatar) being taken captive (?) or being kille
Knowing of the rule forbidding the use
it was that outlawed the use of the homony
Tolui's death [/toli/=mirror]), we are led to
could have actually been killed by Yisügei,
which is revenged in Yisügei 's poisoning. J
les Peuples Altaique Anciens et Médiévaux ,
(Paris, 1963) holds that among the Mon
prisoner would be considered correlativ
significant features of life was one's /qut/
resulted in being taken captive ( Ibid ., p
something more than a simple conception of
in the foundations of Mongol social thou
complex and metaphysically esoteric concep
for person, etc. underlie the notions of
function. Following Roux- and any adheren
we would have to take such complexities in
Vladimirzov's treatment of social structure is of course essential. He

is not overly concerned with any underlying "esoteric" Weltanschauung ,

for he rather casually dismisses shamanic culture as a remnant of the
"earlier forest-hunter" period ( Regime , p. 73). In the first part of Regime ,
where he is dealing with the SH period, he is primarily concerned with the
class of hereditary vassals attached to a clan or house, the /una7an boyol/
of the Si/, a distinction which he had not yet made in Genghis Khan (there
he refers only to /bo7ol/, or slaves). He suggests that these hereditary
vassals were no more than serfs tied to a clan or people, their main
obligation being to render services, such as manpower in hunting battues
and wars. Yet, as well, the /una7an bo7ol/ seem to be treated in almost all
cases as closely allied, parallel clans- relatively independent, with only
perfunctory restraints against their actually being altogether 'free'.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 17

The difference between these

house slaves (not to mention pris
of the word 'slave') is indeed grea
at all the equals of the people th
bo7ol/- and his earlier treatmen
important distinction by taking
its qualifiers.
Jelme is given as a servant /ötölä bo7ol/, and as such is tied to
Gnggis' house with specific obligations; if freed, he will be called a
'darqan' (see the discussion of Jelme 's position below, pp. 27-28). Here
Vladimirzov points out that Muqali, later in the SH (SH 203) gives his sons
to Cinggis as a host, and not as a master ( Regime , p. 118).
Indeed, such a rendering of the difference between servants as one
who is hosted vs. one who is mastered may prove (initially) sufficient for
our discussion. It is useful as well in visualizing the subtle relationship
implied by /una7an bo7ol/, for the 'serf' as such may have no more
"obligations" than for instance, Da Vinci or Haydn had to their patrons.
In fact, as is apparent in the analogy to such artists, if their fame were
great enough, a relatively minor dignitary would consider himself
privileged to become their patron or host. Nevertheless, by symbolic title
alone, Emmanuel Kant was "obedient servant" of his otherwise unknown
patron Baron von Zedlitz. The important distinctions would have to come
from whether the obligations of the /una7an bo7ol/ (which we must
remember stood for a relation carried on through the lines of descendants)
were based on notions of personal respect, or cultural norms built onto a
concept of 'duty or some such culturally embedded notion.
The implicit values tied to a given social distinction (e.g. an
identified title or name) prove the greatest stumbling-block: to merely
specify distinctions made, without noting whether they are symbolic,
practical (that is, actually acted upon), or based on an economical or
cultural function, is to explain no more than the fact that our own social
distinctions might be inapplicable for analogies of historical explanation.
Like Vladimirzov 's simplified version in Genghis Khan , many other
observers have not paid sufficient attention to the possible differences in
the typology of 'slave' status. The simple fact that several distinctions do
exist in the SH , and Vladimirzov has gone to much effort to show this in
the first half of Regime , should be sufficient to indicate that when reading

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
18 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

the Sff there are more socially causal fa

An example of this sort from modern 'e
highlights our problem in the Sff, is
leading to the lynching of the widow
narrative of his stay in Crete before W
author, perhaps, perceive only the surfa
over love, and the suicide is ruthlessly
town. It is meant to be highly dramatic
to us; actually it need not be, if given a
Yet how this easily compares with y
captured and held in a 'kang' by the T
with Ho'elun's unexplained and precipit
(Sff 68-73). Most assuredly there are de
going on than meet the casual glance.
The many possible interpretations, t
be attached to the types of social distin
Sff time, allow us a fairly wide scope. E
need not be any close ties between the
time, there is no apparent reason why
that Dobun Mergen had no rights to wi
hunter, with his receipt of it remaining
is little reason to believe that this hiera
three social strata. More likely than no
and interwoven, more adequately mode
cal manifold than a society- woman's "s
Vladimirzov contends that the title u
'nobles' of Mt. Burqan- /ejet/- means "h
( Regime , p. 112). Certainly this is ref
the Sff author in his naming these Uri
obvious fact that Qorilartai- Mergen goe
permission to nomadize in the area. Th
similar position at this point, with the
hosts. Perhaps they are as well to be
Uriangqai : the author might never have
Sff was composed, but this still would
social standing even in that earlier peri
at many a social gathering as Baron von

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 19

have been of noble birth himself

Mongols' favor. If a social an
Vladimirzov hypothesized (and as
is easily within reason.1 1
Assuredly, if the Uriangqai the
this first hunter is of a lower clas
to the meat. This might be so
subordinate position to the Urian
say that the Uriangqai are not a m
SfiT, and seeing that their lat
unmentioned, we can venture th
them is not a retrospective extrap
debt is due the author as to the c
period, it is one of aggrandizeme
the chronicle itself and its intertw

4. SH 16-21. The Ma'aliq-Baya'

deermeat is suspected by Do
having been the father of thre
their father DM. Alan Qoa, th
counters their queries with a
folk parable showing that the
unbreakable and strong.

We should make special noti

focusses commentary on the b
smoke-hole of the yurt bringi
womb with his hand and impreg
context: for AQ actually adm
incredible. "It is indeed right
conclude her story, and offering
should they dispute her explanatio
remain stronger if they stick to
womb. Now certainly the story o
the other chronicles, the EyT and
the Altan Tobči by Mergen Gegen
the way to general folkloristic an
the later chronicles for confirma

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
20 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

well-established, the appearance of this

and the Boijigins takes on a mythologic
"it is indeed right for (her boys) to
confirmed in a parallel chronicle, for th
version- "it is right you should have sus
account we find that the chronicle relat
a narrative fact before AQ is ever quest
tion to both the SITs and the AT s (a
open. The SH author, of course, h
testimony (and leaves it up to the read
to take the author's word for it). Thoug
deermeat episode whatever, it retains t
now being "A person named Maqali o
translation, p. 42). AQ scolds her sons f
words of others" ( Idem .); while as men
in the other 17th century chronicle
testimony to the fact that this episode
by the Mongols is its complete disavow
Here Dobun Mergen has a wife Bulgan Q
he has the first two sons. After her dea
when DM dies. The child born is Bodon
she dreams the story of divine concept
as having no more import than a dream
was still to be placed). I think it wo
Mongol, as it seems to have been to t
story of divine conception is indeed
suspicion from the Ma'aliq Baya 'ut serv
Mergen Gegen specifically avoids by in
keeping intact genealogical relations of
Dobun Mergen).
As for the issue of the "arrow parab
Alan Qoa [AQ] shows that sticks (here a
alone but not when held together- as he
should overcome their suspicions), ther
later emendation by scholars, for the pa
of dowels or sticks as in the parallel chr
(in the YCPS version) gives the word

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 21

instead of /sumut/ (arrows) whic

accidental reversal of consonan
YCPS.1 3 The problem with the u
we realize that arrows had an alre
the Mongols of the time the SH w
In the SH we have evidence of
one's neck while taking an oath.
arrow represented to the Mongols
case, then the story of AQ's giv
taken as symbolic on quite a di
otherwise be expected. That is to
if) the marriage vows will remain
almost have to be taken by a con
simple reading of the surface par
redactions of the history (or by
would be recognized, and perhaps
double-entendre. (See below ft. 16
Tobči ťNova' should resolve the iss
the Mongolian original, 1 5 and it
form given is /sumut/ or /müsü
culpable of the mistaken rev
transcribers made the same (yet
here, /müsüt/, is already out-of-p
attracted notice only because of t
modern translators, who had, pr
Schmidt's Eyt would have been co
I think we can assume that arrows were not to be broken as
examples for children if sticks or tent-pins would service instead. Arrows
were a valued commodity and not made for the breaking. Serruys notes
that, in the Ming period, specific arrows called "ling-chien" had to be held
in the hand of officials wishing to exercise their function of authority
(1958, p. 21), and in the period of the Qalqa Jirum- where the code
specifies the symbolic act of 'pressing' for any pact, oath, or agreement
between men- corresponds directly to the period of the later chronicles; to
assert that this notion of arrow, in its symbolic role, would not have been
missed is I think evident. I would not want to press the issue of the SH
author having substituted the word /sumut/ for this double meaning, but

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
22 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

the considerably richer interpretation

parable is well- worth noting. 1 7
What comes of Alan Qoa's [AQ] ad
23-24 we find that upon AQ's death
family inheritance, leaving the fifth
because "he is the youngest and weakes
Rache wiltz translation, p. 59, The Mon
1, Spring, 1970). Three things are of no
to follow their mother's advice by not s
blood relation; (2) AQ has held the fa
Dobun Mergen [DM], and though a wom
had prior rights to it over even an eldes
this latest ostracization of their young
similar to the reasoning Duwa Soqor's
Both the EyT (Krueger translation, p
translation, p. 117) include this accou
reason for excluding Bodoncar- exact
sons' condemnation of DM.

From this point (SH 24) until paragraph 44 of the text we are to
deal with the affairs of Bodoncar and his immediate family. I think that
the conclusions to be drawn from our 'Episode' 4 are reasonably clear;
that is, the origin of Bodoncar and his brothers is questionable in the eyes
of the SH author. If Alan Qoa's answer to her sons' suspicions- that is that
no matter what, it is still most practical to stay together- actually utilizes
arrows, the author's own feelings are assuredly obvious. This is only a bit
lessened if it should prove that /miisüt/ (dowels, archaic) was the term
used . . . Mergen Gegen 's insight, and subsequent change, corroborates the
obvious. The myth of divine origins is not put across to an always gullible
audience: the SH author admits, as does AQ herself , to the incredible
nature of this story, and substitutes an alternative. That the sons actually
follow AQ's advice- and accept her explanations- is evident up to this
point. When one of Bodoncar 's brothers seeks him out later in the
narrative, the importance placed on which brother comes indicates that
the family unity may not be so tight, and that even more importantly,
AQ's authority, and genealogical origin, is again being questioned.

5. SH 24-42. After his latent ostracization from the family Bodoncar

has proved himself quite resourceful and successful at survival. He

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 23

catches a hawk and in the sprin

residence in a small hut by the
is concerned, becoming supe
geese rot on every stump." (de
during this period Bodoncar g
migrated into the area, and
kumiss, returning to his hut at
At the end of the year Bodo
brothers. Specifically in the SH
decided for some reason to fin
left him earlier for dead.

It is worth noting this in detail. E

EyT, AT (anon.) has given us prev
and throughout the following
importance in tracing the later ge
comes to fetch Bodoncar as his eld
while the EyT and the AT (ano
Bodoncar's eldest half-brother. F
and the stick-breaking parable, t
family unity than the SH , t
unnoticed- but the differences
would Bodoncar's brothers go to s
might be dead? In the two later c
for altruistic, family-unity reaso
full brother who seeks him out, a
by that of the eldest half-brothe
for a change, especially when we
play in later genealogical ties bet
least to my mind, that Bodoncar'
seeking him out because of the e
that might have arisen among
brothers.

It is not stated specifically that

line) came from this tribe, accord
are the direct issue of the above-
EyT makes itself rather explicit
from a wife taken from these peop

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
24 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

Then Bugu Qatagi produced the Qatagin

Saljigud clan, and Bodancar the Boijigin
was in the womb of the pregnant slave,
Jajiridai, and he became founder of the
sons born to Bodoncar were named B
from the woman he had forcefully tak
of Princely Lineage. Qabiji 's son was

Qagan . . . Bardan Bagatur . . . Yisugei Bagatur

translation, p. 43).

Antoine Mostaert identifies Bodoncar 's hosts as

woman who is first taken states herself as being init
belonging to the Adangq an- Uriangqai.1 8 Pellio
translation (p. 126) allows she might have been
Jarciut- Adangqan. This woman's origins are of som
"Uriangqai connection," but presumably Mosta
response to Pelliot's footnote. It would appear, at l
EyT is representing this woman as Budan, the foun
Jajiridai- but further on in the SH (44) we are told
a concubine who was the maid-servant of Qabici's m
to a son Jewuredei, founder of the Jewureyit. This
branch, the EyT confuses with what in the SH is t
line. The EyT very conspicuously has obscured, or
Jamuqa at all- Sa7an Sečen mentions him only
accompanying Cinggis Qan in a campaign as "J
Vajirayid" (Krueger trans., p. 60), and this is notably
much later than Jamuqa's death in the SH.19 I
"Vajirayid" tribe, he is not the son of Budan Qatun
chronicle. In an ambiguity just like that one in the
extremely noteworthy, no mention is made of
"D'une (autre) femme épousée par Bodoncar naq
appelé Barim-ši'iratu Qabiči" (SH 43, Pelliot tra
author goes on :

6. SH 43 [Pelliot translation, p. 127]. "Bod

concubine) une (fille) venue comme "compag
Qabici-ba'atur, et elle mit au monde un fil
Jawuradai. Jawuradai a l'origine était adm
perche de sacrifice."

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 25

SH 44. "Quand Bodoncar ne fu

constamment a la maison l'
Jawuradai) pourrait bien etre
(l'endroit de) la perche de sacr
de Jawurayit, et c'est lui qui f

From this point, SH 45-52 gives

Ambaqai, and the commencem
Temujjin's early life.
Thus, the SH then mentions 3 w
mentioned pregnant woman w
Jadaran and the Menen-Ba'arin
Bodoncar and this woman, the
second, the concubine a maid-serv
Jeurat were descended; and thi
nothing at all is said (as contra
wives). We can be almost positive
he lived by his falconry, and the
well as all of his brothers just aft
have been) this Adangqan-Uriangq
together from this is that Qabici
the other wives or came, herse
mentioned because her own lin
EyT's assertion that she was fr
Princely Lineage . Yet these ambi
important section for Mongol gen
on the author's part- is as Vladim
genealogical distinctions, rather '
Now leaving this aside, there i
that Bodoncar is willing to recog
part of the family. The latter 's f
by Qabici after his father's death
of Alan Qoa's sons questioning th
but Bodoncar himself seems to h
by allowing him to take part i
Vladimirzov ( Regime , p. 63), th
to do with membership in the f
dispute when Ho'elun is latently

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
26 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

Ambaqai's wives and Todo 'en Girte.20 Y

Jewuredei would seem to bear an even
later history, for Cinggis' first son
succession to the qanship because his br
that he is of Merkit blood ( SH 254),
Cinggis' wife, in the raid immediatel
101).
The Jewuredei case is of interest actually for four reasons. (1) It
parallels to some extent the questionable parentage of Alan Qoa's latter
three sons (i.e. "a man of the . . . tribe was often seen around her tent");
(2) it offers a parallel to the later question of Juci's legitimacy ; (3) it is the
first, (and only other) mention in the SH of the sacrifice around which
Ho'elun's ostracization was effected; and (4) in the contest over family
membership which Qabici (the eldest son) brings about, it is in some ways
a parallel to Temujjin's murder of (also) a half-brother, Bekter (SH 76).
For our own purposes I am sure it has already been taken note of the fact
that Jewuredei is accused of being fathered by an Adanqan-Uriangqai man,
of the tribe Bodoncar has subjugated along with his brothers.
Up to this point the Uriangqai relationship has been guessed at, but
after the marriages and genealogies given subsequent to the seizure of this
(otherwise unnamed) people by Bodoncar- at least two of his three-
mentioned wives are connected in some way with this tribe. The
appearance of this Uriangqai man as a suspected father further establishes
this connection. Of special importance it seems is the fact that Bodoncar
has never inquired into the names of his hosts, and that they likewise never
asked him his name and origins; the SH is very explicit in this (SH 29),
prior to seizing them and identifying the pregnant woman, no mention has
been made of their identity by the SH author and as he makes clear, even
to Bodoncar himself. What reason could the author have in this?

Reflecting on the AT s note that the brothers argued some time over
whether to follow up Bodoncar 's course of proposed action, I would
venture a guess that had they known each other's identity the course of
events would not have proceeded in the same fashion. And this implies
that some relationship between the Uriangqai and the Mongol ancestors
would have already existed.
From this point in the narrative nothing more is heard of the
Uriangqai until SH 97 when we find that Yisugei, Temujjin's father, had

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 27

received at Temujjin's birth, a gif

(Yisugei's) family. We hear of thi
bride Borte, and became an 'anda'
regained some stolen horses). Her
son to Temujjin as a tent-slave.
Kuo-yi Pao, in his Studies in
(Bloomington, 1965, pp. 48-50)
Gnggis' service. From a later pa
Qan's praise of Jelme: "Having en
Jelme, you served my gate a
Yladimirzov also discusses Jelm
unayan-'s. ötölä- boyol , Jelme be
confirm our earlier guess that th
at the time- for according to him
rich to present such a sumptuo
earlier time ( Regime , 98), and m
man selling his son to Dobun M
adulthood before his service begin
Uriangqai are still /ejet/ of Mt. B
the Mongols, they themselves are
to the Boijigin.
We find mention of the Urian
federation in which Temujjin i
Cinggis (SH 120-123). Actually i
have any part in the author's ac
other tribes and peoples being
Jamuqa's camp to side with Te
ostensibly caused by the "riddle"
tion of this above, fn. 1). Thus t
brothers broke with Jamuqa's fe
with a long list of others in SH
derive their relationship, apparen
based, back to Bodoncar. Qorci of
it not for an auspicious sign in
separate from Jamuqa "born of
Bodoncar" (SH 121). It still seems
only the head of the lineage de

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
28 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

Tayici'ut, the Jadaran, very likely man

mentioned, as well as many unmentioned
close as those listed in SH 120 are in this
only, Temujjin is elected to head.
Jelme is referred to when Temujjin ass
nates the organization of the alliance u
Bo'orcu and Jelme respectively his "shado
with earlier in the SH text: When young
contemplate murdering their half-brothe
twice chides them with the reminder tha
shadow, and no whip but your horse's t
the metaphor it can only mean that her f
none of the accoutrements of their statu
waits until the assumption of the qan 'shi
these 'positions' points to this shadow/wh
tion of the minimum conditions of asserti
in charge of everything" (SH 125), Bo'orcu
also his anda- would imply that he can act
Jelme, 'as the whip', and also the servant a
through Jelme that Cinggis gives comm
mediary between the qan and the people u
Interestingly, directly following this,
another earlier metaphor. Cinggis sends
To'oril (Ong Qan) of his being made qan
"it's fine, for how have the Mongols do
don't break your agreement; don't untie t
tear off the collar (from your coai)." (Pel
and emphasis). This is, of course, the sa
above case of Bodoncar's reasons for takin
Uriangqai hosts- that 'every coat should ha

7. SH 145. Cinggis is wounded in the ne

forces (SH 141-145), and when he ca
swoons. Jelme sucks the blood all
continue has to spit it out (as he had
the area where Cinggis lies. When t
Cinggis awakes and complains of ex
himself almost nude and steals milk f

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 29

very first thing that Cinggis s

and gaining some strength is:
been better if you'd thrown u
you go into the enemy camp f
you might have had to tell th
answer is this : a) your situatio
to go further to spit ; and b)
shorts and was taken I could
you but I was found out and s
should be killed and were ta
escape.' Thus, Jelme feigned b
going half-nude as proof of his
8. SH 147. After the defeat an
Sorqan Sira and Jebe, who had
battle, come over to Cinggis' si
asks them if they know who
my horse in the neck?" Jebe a
willing to submit to the Qan
himself to Cinggis' service: "I
and shatter the stone if I'm sh
my English). Cinggis complies;
and for being such a good shot

This last is a rather interesti

implications even to the author o
asking "Who shot ME in the neck
being similarly wounded, and o
encounter with Jebe deals entirel
case of whether the horse actuall
enough more trivial circumstances
well-being is amply noted by the
being so treated in the narrative w
not pronounce outright the fact
for shooting a qa'an, or the autho
Mongol audience when Jebe was al
in the empire. I specify the fact
Ař£", and had to allude to the qu
horse)- because it certainly wou
had an arrow in his neck a few d
say, one doubts whether he could

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
30 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

his immediate presence.) If this is in

occurrence, there is equal reason to s
mentions it metaphorically because of
previous to, the time of composition of
most extreme example of a man's m
non-incriminating. If the actual even
further evidence that for Cinggis to hav
being shot, he could not have freely ju
the hand of the law' so to speak.
We have already mentioned briefly t
stripped, or some variation of this invol
be taken captive (p. 15, above); here,
one's clothes seems to be preliminary
much later historical case of Fru Brigat
with the functional nature of saving clo
with some idea akin to "clothing makes
pun); and although I may well be taking
than is warranted, my own intuitive
enigmatical Yassa prohibition given by
to wash their clothes until they were co
Another supposed Yassa fragment
Gnggis' particular admonition to Jelme
blood further away. It appears rather lu
dying man should straightway castigate
methods he is using. The question her
aspect of choking (and I am assuming h
'spitting', for in Jelme's case he had
swallowed which clogged his chest, in o
in the camp on one's food. Makrizi g
choking alone, such that the man (chok
out of the camp and killed (Ibid., p. 85,
R. Krueger translates a similar passage (
one from responsibility if another man
this simple inversion reflects an entirely
Yassa fragment, one with more pragm
perspective our case appears rather spe
fragment with the Jelme/Cinggis episod

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 31

incongruous circumstance that

otherwise trivial detail.

The guess is, on this reading, t

the SH author and his audience w
be trusted22) immediately recog
defilement of the camp, the even
norm such as this would have to
point I have raised on a conjectur
supportive evidence for the qu
reasonable interpretation of the

Ill

With the case of Jebe, and the

the neck' for 'who shot me in the
the strongest evidences of the au
narrative. However throughout t
show that the SH reflects much
cultural meaning than meet th
analyses. That Jebe is indeed the
wound, that he is given grace and
indeed, an historical fact well w
up to this point can only be attr
treated as (causally) continuous
ography. The reasons for this latt
as much on Rashid-Eddin's repor
served as his source) as to the
pattern of the SH narrative.
This disjunctive appearance w
taking into account the importa
schauung , on conceptions of ind
tion to what would be for the
causation. We have seen evidence
more complex than heretofore
anarchic state of affairs, as w
direction of Elizabeth Bacon's stu
problems Vladimirzov encounter

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
32 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

the pure notion of 'clan'. Actually, Ba

textual analysis, but with general anthrop
application of her results in Obok to SH i
Our analysis of the story of Alan Qoa
parallel chronicles for similar, but altern
some of these cases where changes are dr
that interpretation has occurred either in
consciously by the authors of the text in
Tobci could prove extremely valuable for
evidenced by the major (yet entirely pros
story of Alan Qoa 's [AQ] relation to Dob
the assertion of 'divine conception'.24
Altan Tobci 'Nova' can easily be con
interpretations of the "arrow parable." T
conclusion which can be made from the
is that the AQ story of miraculous concep
to be taken verbatim, and does not signa
or 'mythic' qualities of the SH , a functio
for this story. The glaring difference h
one hand (where it is stated as "folkloris
SH on the other points to very conscious
latter-mentioned chronicles. The Mergen
fact that AQ's explanation of the birt
questionable in the Mongols 'eyes- even at
Qan cult was strongly held; his entir
indicative of the absence here of an unconscious 'common folklore motif.'
Certainly the parallel exists between AQ's story and, say, the Christian
story of Immaculate Conception- but in what Christian sect do we find
the 'motif' variant of a second husband (or in Mergen Gegen 's case- wife)
outrightly interpolated into the narrative to avoid incredulity? There is of
course no Christian sect which even hints at the possibility of this
explanation (a hint occuring in even the EyT)' the Christian case can
better be argued as utilizing an 'unconscious motif' than any of the
Mongol stories of Alan Qoa. And on this note, I think our discussion has
advanced to some degree, the position that the SH author sees the Boijigin
line as not out-of-the-ordinary and as, in fact, likely stemming from the
lower social rank of the Ma'aliq Baya 'ut.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 33

Finally, what I have called t

strongest form (as stated above) i
people's case at the expense of th
hold the extreme form of the th
behind this article's title: if noth
between this people and the Mon
relation, presumably that of 'ho
we could treat the Uriangqai, the
literary" light similar to that on
spent any time with the literary
with the literary interpretation
that while our examination of
position of only pseudo-historic
has been that the SH has a seem
from this vantage) can be presen
literary analysis on this cue, as r
the Mongols is a further matter,
the early period of the chronicle
Burqan-Qaldun, are respectively
of the Mongols- and if we only
Jebe's arrow while the mountain
of a possible literary connection
carried out, perhaps the historic
its literary merit increased, but
written and organized literature
remain high either way.
Should the skeptic reply t
'connection'," "these people m
narrative with no conscious incl
the alternative is striking: there
rather, the episodes and the eve
i.e. they are true. Guessing that
and similarly the trust of the chr
much better for him. A people w
are not going to be remembered,
of the Mongols' genealogical hi
fragments will not answer to
inclusions in the narrative, in the

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
34 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

The greatest example of a mytholo

strongest, only a conditional nature
Alan Qoa, the origin of the Borjigin is
well-drawn context, the origin of the s
"functional proof" of the arrow-break
longer a random inclusion of some d
fragment.

Conclusion on SH as History:

Taking into consideration that the background of the Secret History

is not entirely clear, even if it is to be considered chronicle, saga, text, or
romance, like any piece of literature it will reflect the culture in which it
was produced. As far as the search for "historical truth" is concerned, a
disclaimer can be made against the use of any chronicle- and here we will
probably always have a basic rift in academic thought. Anyone failing to
recognize the most general pragmatic assumption of the reliability of a
chronicle's context can disqualify any inquiry by voicing the doubt that
"your witness is prejudiced, and cannot be telling the truth. Therefore all
analysis of falsehood is doomed to falsehood." Such a skepticism must
eventually entail the whole of the historians' craft as against more
'scientific' and 'objective' pursuit which the scholar should engage.
(Perhaps in this case the arguments of an Uriangqai "connection" should
be regenerated statistically.) Yet if we are studying culture rather than
'true history', the opinions, concepts and even imagination of one's
informants are as relevant as actual situations or occurrences in the reality
which they depict. For our purposes then, whether or not a particular
event actually took place, the fact that it has been described or interpreted
by contemporary sources in a particular way provides us with useful
historical perspective. The question of the S/T s actual historical merit, we
can relegate to its being an interpretative variant- as a 'biased account'
providing one possible variant among several. Certainly many variants do
exist, and we can weigh our choice of what facts to accept, as we do for
numerous differing accounts of current events, on the basis of internal
(and external) consistency.
We must still harbor doubts as to the nature and use of the

chronicles, for at the end of the last century in the field of Russian

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 35

history, A. A. Shakhmatov int

hopefully would allow unbiased
outside the localized political fabr
considering the relative success o
over the objectivity of such histo
scholars of Russian history- as it
To that extent the historians'
Reinterpretations of the Norman
Biblical chronicles is an ongoi
available historical interpretation
provide some form of linear co
explanation of the historian's
criterion of the historian is to fi
perspective than that explanation
Unfortunately in many cases t
environment may present rather
asked to present a perspective w
view) at the expense of creating
from the public's eye. Many hav
Khan played such a role with Ma
the 12th-13th century Mongol
picture of the historian the wri
consideration, and judgment, here
an historian, not at all exempt
causal analysis, then we have gon
product of genuine historiograp
question, even though a thoroug
been subjected to the tests of c
historical literature naturally un
the purpose of this article to sh
historical case to higher and hig
even the first judgments have bee

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 36 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

NOTES

1. The portion of the Secret History subjected to analysis runs primarily to para.
147 of the text, ending with the subjugation of the major intra-clan (Mongol)
alliances against Cinggis. This basic unification of the Mongols under Cinggis
has been chosen as a suitable cut-off point between what might be called his
"early period" and his later career as an empire-building general.
2. Throughout the paper, titles of works will be given in abbreviation,
italicized: e.g., the Secret History = SH ; Erdeni-yin Tobci = EyT ; Cheng-wou
tsHn-tcheng lou = CWTTL' Jami-al Tawarikh = JaT ; Altan Tobci (anon) = AT
(anon.); Yüan-ch'ao pi-shih = YCPS. Names of tribes will be left as is.
Two-or-more word names of individuals will be, however, only given in full
once per paragraph, with subsequent entries in any one paragraph abbreviated
(capitalized but not underlined). Spellings are in accord with de Rachewiltz's
Index to the Secret History of the Mongols (Bloomington, 1972) wherever
possible.
3. His more famous, and unfortunately still quoted, theory (in The Life of
Ghengis Khan ; trans. Mirsky, New York, 1930) of an aristocratic vs. peasant
class struggle represented by Cinggis' nomadic, aristocratic horse-breeders
against an alliance of more lowly shepherds led by the "democratic" forces of
Jamuqa is renounced in this later work (Le Regime Social des Mongols , Le
Feodalism Nomade ; trans. Michel Carso w, Paris, 1948, pp. 106-109); as well,
this more famous thesis is attributed to Barthold's Obrazovanie Imperii
Chingis Khana (Ibid., p. 109ff). The whole thesis is, of course, not only a
crude Marxist interpretation of any and all historical causation, but based only
on the questionable reading of "Jamuqa 's riddle" (SH 118). It will merit little
further comment, therefore, in our discussion.
4. Cinggis makes the following statement when he assumes the qan-ship (after the
5-colored bird cries "chinggis" and the jade seal of the empire appears from a
rock which miraculously splits open):

"When I, in confusion, was constituting (my realm),

painstakingly driving (things) together,
This very Bede people of mine . . .
Although they suffered in the confusion, as a consequence of having
become the nucleus of things in general,
They shall be called the Köke Monggol ..."

Erdeni-yin Tobci' Sa7ang Sechen: History of the Eastern Mongols to 1662

(trans. J. R. Krueger), Chapters 1-5. Mongolia Society Occasional Paper 2,
Bloomington, 1966, pp. 47-48.
5. For example: "The German attack on Poland effected a basic change in
American thinking." (J. Garraty, The American Nation , N.Y., 1966, p. 759).
While most likely true, this would have to be classed as a subjective
interpretation of the data, with obvious causal assumptions made after the fact
of the war with Germany. Causal connectives of this sort are not used, to my
knowledge, anywhere in the SH.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JACKENDOFF 37

6. Arthur Waley, The Secret History

Pieces. New York, 1964, p. 217.
7. Krueger, 1967, p. 42.
8. Mostaert and Eberhard avoid brin
demand-form, but both of these comm
crucial term [širolya]. Mostaert (in
Secrète des Mongols" JRAS 12, 194
/širá/, or 'skewer'. Thus, though he al
meat to go unspecified, he no longer
hind-quarter, and that the Uriangqai
Eberhard, in his "Remarks on Širo
the same line of argument by rath
demand-form (i.e. taking this for gran
made from boiled or stewed intestines
animal" This implies- though the imp
the Uriangqai hunter keeps the entrails
rest of the deer was superfluous to h
about his giving up his quarry in th
strayed from the mark by taking u
further comments on a possible dem
pinpoints and "answers" the outstandi
should DM benefit so greatly, and in
simple deermeat episode?
9. Ohok: A Study of Social Structur
monograph no. 25, New York, 1958.
10. The widow's lynching appears "un
suicide for no more reason than his u
town lynch her not only because they
by her disdain- but because of her pr
law by refusing to remarry and put th
this token she is committing a 'crime
social fabric and notions of respect a
of cultural value, and the male comm
by having a woman assert membersh
own.

11. "Les moeurs nomades, le regime de clan avec des clans suzerains, les
incursions, les pillages et les guerres incessantes, ne permettaient pas aux
pauvres et aux clans faibles de maintenir une existence indépendante. Ils
etaient obliges de rechercher la protection des maisons, des clans forts,
c'est-a-dire de devenir leurs vassaux serfs, leurs bergers et leurs rabatteurs. La
simplicite des moeurs nomades, l'absence de toute culture spécifique,
l'intimité entre "maitres" et "esclaves" ou "la même nourriture est servie aux
maîtres et aux serviteurs", comme le constate un auteur arménien, ne
modifiaient en rien le fond des relations existantes." ( Regime , p. 88)
12. Charles R. Bawden (translator), The Mongol Chronicle Altan Tobci, Göttinger
Asiatische Forschungen, Band 5, Wiesbaden, 1955, p. 115.
13. Krueger, personal communication.
14. See H. Serruys, "Oaths in the Qalqa Jirum," Oriens Extremus 19, 1972,

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
38 MONGOLIAN STUDIES

131-141; also "A note on Arrows and O

(1958), pp. 279-294.
15. By Zamcarano's tabulation of the par
Seventeenth Century (trans. R. Lowenthal
Band 3, the only paragraph missing in the
sentence concerning Bodoncar.
16. In the EyT we have shafts (Krueger tra
and the AT (anon) gives sticks (Bawden tr
17. I eagerly await the translation of bLo-b
18. "Sur Quelques Passages de L'Histoire S
[pp. 285-361] p. 289; part of a series of
Passages ..." appears in HJAS 14 (1951),
pp. 285407.
19. This conspicuous deletion of Jamuqa can
here; apparently the EyT has vaguely rep
break and later conflict with Cinggis with a
SH of Cinggis' brother Qasar's sedition. Th
the EyT chronicle is no more than my gues
20. Surprisingly, while Vladimirzov recogn
Jewuredei, he is unwilling to see Ho'elun
holds what seems an untenable position th
which expelis Ho'elun has no socio-legal
qan-ship has alternated from Qabul, a Mo
back to Qutula, Qabul's son. Here Bacon'
extreme help in visualizing what form th
this camp might have been. As an /oboh/,
part. This is beyond our interests here,
forthcoming article "The Problem of L
Ostracization of Ho'elun: Points of Interpretation in the Secret History ."
21. Fragment # 15, V. A. Riasanovsky, Fundamental Principles of Mongol Law ,
Tientsin, 1937, p. 84. Along with this is a prohibition to give food or clothing
to a captive without the permission of the captor. ( Ibid ., p. 83, Fragment #6.)
22. D. Ayalon's 3-part article ("The Great Yassa of Chinggiz Khan. A Reexamina-
tion," Studia Islamica 33, 34, 35 (1971-72)) and Pavel Poucha's contribution
("Uber den Inhalt und die Rekonstruction des ersten Mongolischen Gesetz-
buches") to Ligeti's Mongolian Studies (Budapest, 1970) are two of the more
recent contributions to this long (and often heated) controversy.
23. Kuo-yi Pao (op. eft., p. 58) translates a passage of the SH text where Cinggis,
in explaining the organization of the camp, says, "If you distribute the food in
that manner, my throat is not hoarse ('I will not choke'), and my heart is free
of sorrow." Though this reference to choking may have no more than
metaphoric connotation, it is noteworthy for its bearing on the foregoing
discussion.
24. At present, Baldanjapov's Russian translation (Ulan Ude, 1972) is extremely
scarce in this country- my access to it was limited to enough time to copy out
these few paragraphs of the translation.

This content downloaded from

193.255.88.137 on Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:14:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms