CHAPTER LI.

OF THOSE WHO DID REIGN AFTER CHINGHIS KAAN, AND OF THE

CUSTOMS OF THE TARTARS.

Now the next that reigned after Chinghis Kaan, their first Lord,{1}

was CUY KAAN, and the third Prince was BATUY KAAN, and the fourth was

ALACOU KAAN, the fifth MONGOU KAAN, the sixth CUBLAY KAAN, who is the

sovereign now reigning, and is more potent than any of the five who

went before him; in fact, if you were to take all those five together,

they would not be so powerful as he is.{2} Nay, I will say yet more;

for if you were to put together all the Christians in the world, with

their Emperors and their Kings, the whole of these Christians,—aye, and

throw in the Saracens to boot,—would not have such power, or be able to

do so much as this Cublay, who is the Lord of all the Tartars in the

world, those of the Levant and of the Ponent included; for these are

all his liegemen and subjects. I mean to show you all about this great

power of his in this book of ours.

You should be told also that all the Grand Kaans, and all the

descendants of Chinghis their first Lord, are carried to a mountain

that is called ALTAY to be interred. Wheresoever the Sovereign may die,

he is carried to his burial in that mountain with his predecessors;

no matter an the place of his death were 100 days’ journey distant,

thither must he be carried to his burial.{3}

Let me tell you a strange thing too. When they are carrying the body

of any Emperor to be buried with the others, the convoy that goes with

the body doth put to the sword all whom they fall in with on the road,

saying: “Go and wait upon your Lord in the other world!” For they do in

sooth believe that all such as they slay in this manner do go to serve

their Lord in the other world. They do the same too with horses; for

when the Emperor dies, they kill all his best horses, in order that

he may have the use of them in the other world, as they believe. And

I tell you as a certain truth, that when Mongou Kaan died, more than

20,000 persons, who chanced to meet the body on its way, were slain in

the manner I have told.{4}

NOTE 1.—Before parting with Chinghiz let me point out what has

not to my knowledge been suggested before, that the name of

“_Cambuscan_ bold” in Chaucer’s tale is only a corruption of the

name of Chinghiz. The name of the conqueror appears in Fr. Ricold

as _Camiuscan_, from which the transition to Cambuscan presents no

difficulty. _Camius_ was, I suppose, a clerical corruption out of

_Canjus_ or _Cianjus_. In the chronicle of St. Antonino, however,

we have him called “_Chinghiscan rectius_ Tamgius _Cam_” (XIX. c.

8). If this is not merely the usual blunder of _t_ for _c_, it

presents a curious analogy to the form _Tankiz Khán_ always used

by Ibn Batuta. I do not know the origin of the latter, unless it

was suggested by _tankis_ (Ar.) “Turning upside down.” (See _Pereg.

Quat._, p. 119; _I. B._ III. 22, etc.)

NOTE 2.—Polo’s history here is inadmissible. He introduces into

the list of the supreme Kaans _Batu_, who was only Khan of Kipchak

(the Golden Horde), and _Hulaku_ who was Khan of Persia, whilst he

omits _Okkodai_, the immediate successor of Chinghiz. It is also

remarkable that he uses the form _Alacou_ here instead of _Alaü_

as elsewhere; nor does he seem to mean the same person, for he

was quite well aware that _Alaü_ was Lord of the Levant, who sent

ambassadors to the Great Khan Cúbláy, and could not therefore be

one of his predecessors. The real succession ran: 1. Chinghiz; 2.

Okkodai; 3. Kuyuk; 4. Mangku; 5. Kúblái.

There are quite as great errors in the history of Haiton, who had

probably greater advantages in this respect than Marco. And I may

note that in Teixeira’s abridgment of Mirkhond, Hulaku is made to

succeed Mangku Kaan on the throne of Chinghiz. (_Relaciones_, p.

338.)

NOTE 3.—The ALTAI here certainly does not mean the Great South

Siberian Range to which the name is now applied. Both _Altai_ and

_Altun-Khan_ appear sometimes to be applied by Sanang Setzen to

the Khingan of the Chinese, or range running immediately north

of the Great Wall near Kalgan. (See ch. lxi. note 1.) But in

reference to this matter of the burial of Chinghiz, he describes

the place as “the district of Yekeh Utek, between the shady side

of the Altai-Khan and the sunny side of the Kentei-Khan.” Now the

Kentei-Khan (_khan_ here meaning “mountain”) is near the sources

of the Onon, immediately to the north-east of Urga; and Altai-Khan

in this connection cannot mean the hills near the Great Wall, 500

miles distant.

According to Rashiduddin, Chinghiz was buried at a place called

_Búrkán Káldún_ (“God’s Hill”), or _Yekeh Kúrúk_ (“The Great Sacred

or Tabooed Place”); in another passage he calls the spot _Búdah

Undúr_ (which means, I fancy, the same as Búrkán Káldún), near the

River Selenga. Búrkán Káldún is often mentioned by Sanang Setzen,

and Quatremère seems to demonstrate the identity of this place

with the mountain called by Pallas (and Timkowski) _Khanoolla_.

This is a lofty mountain near Urga, covered with dense forest,

and is indeed the first woody mountain reached in travelling from

Peking. It is still held sacred by the Mongols and guarded from

access, though the tradition of Chinghiz’s grave seems to be

extinct. Now, as this Khanoolla (“Mount Royal,” for _khan_ here

means “sovereign,” and _oolla_ “mountain”) stands immediately

to the south of the _Kentei_ mentioned in the quotation from S.

Setzen, this identification agrees with his statement, on the

supposition that the Khanoolla is the Altai of the same quotation.

The Khanoolla must also be the _Han_ mountain which Mongol chiefs

claiming descent from Chinghiz named to Gaubil as the burial-place

of that conqueror. Note that the Khanoolla, which we suppose to be

the Altai of Polo, and here of Sanang Setzen, belongs to a range

known as _Khingan_, whilst we see that Setzen elsewhere applies

Altai and Altan-Khan to the other Khingan near the Great Wall.

Erdmann relates, apparently after Rashiduddin, that Chinghiz was

buried at the foot of a tree which had taken his fancy on a hunting

expedition, and which he had then pointed out as the place where he

desired to be interred. It was then conspicuous, but afterwards the

adjoining trees shot up so rapidly, that a dense wood covered the

whole locality, and it became impossible to identify the spot. (_Q.

R._ 117 _seqq._; _Timk._ I. 115 _seqq._, II. 475–476; _San. Setz._

103, 114–115, 108–109; _Gaubil_, 54; _Erd._ 444.)

[“There are no accurate indications,” says Palladius (_l.c._ pp.

11–13), “in the documents of the Mongol period on the burial-places

of Chingiz Khan and of the Khans who succeeded him. The _Yuan-shi_

or ‘History of the Mongol Dynasty in China,’ in speaking of the

burial of the Khans, mentions only that they used to be conveyed

from Peking to the north, to their common burial-ground in the

_K’i-lien_ Valley. This name cannot have anything in common with

the ancient _K’i-lien_ of the Hiung-nu, a hill situated to the west

of the Mongol desert; the _K’i-lien_ of the Mongols is to be sought

more to the east. When Khubilai marched out against Prince Nayan,

and reached the modern Talnor, news was received of the occupation

of the Khan’s burial-ground by the rebels. They held out there very

long, which exceedingly afflicted Khubilai [_Yüan shi lui pien_];

and this goes to prove that the tombs could not be situated much

to the west. Some more positive information on this subject is

found in the diary of the campaign in Mongolia in 1410, of the

Ming Emperor Yung-lo [_Pe ching lu_]. He reached the Kerulen at

the place where this river, after running south, takes an easterly

direction. The author of the diary notes, that from a place one

march and a half before reaching the Kerulen, a very large mountain

was visible to the north-east, and at its foot a solitary high

and pointed hillock, covered with stones. The author says, that

the sovereigns of the house of Yuan used to be buried near this

hill. It may therefore be plausibly supposed that the tombs of the

Mongol Khans were near the Kerulen, and that the ‘K’i-lien’ of the

_Yüan shi_ is to be applied to this locality; it seems to me even,

that K’i-lien is an abbreviation, customary to Chinese authors, of

Kerulen. The way of burying the Mongol Khans is described in the

_Yüan shi_ (ch. ‘On the national religious rites of the Mongols’),

as well as in the _Ch’ue keng lu_, ‘Memoirs of the time of the Yuan

Dynasty.’ When burying, the greatest care was taken to conceal

from outside people the knowledge of the locality of the tomb.

With this object in view, after the tomb was closed, a drove of

horses was driven over it, and by this means the ground was, for a

considerable distance, trampled down and levelled. It is added to

this (probably from hearsay) in the _Ts’ao mu tze Memoirs_ (also

of the time of the Yuan Dynasty), that a young camel used to be

killed (in the presence of its mother) on the tomb of the deceased

Khan; afterwards, when the time of the usual offerings of the tomb

approached, the mother of this immolated camel was set at liberty,

and she came crying to the place where it was killed; the locality

of the tomb was ascertained in this way.”

The Archimandrite Palladius adds in a footnote: “Our well-known

Mongolist N. Golovkin has told us, that according to a story

actually current among the Mongols, the tombs of the former Mongol

Khans are situated near Tasola Hill, equally in the vicinity of the

Kerulen. He states also that even now the Mongols are accustomed

to assemble on that hill on the seventh day of the seventh moon

(according to an ancient custom), in order to adore Chingiz Khan’s

tomb. Altan tobchi (translated into Russian by Galsan Gomboeff),

in relating the history of the Mongols after their expulsion

from China, and speaking of the Khans’ tombs, calls them _Naiman

tzagan gher_, _i.e._ ‘Eight White Tents’ (according to the number of

chambers for the souls of the chief deceased Khans in Peking), and

sometimes simply _Tzagan gher_, ‘the White Tent,’ which, according

to the translator’s explanation, denotes only Chingiz Khan’s tomb.”

“According to the Chinese Annals (_T’ung kien kang mu_), quoted

by Dr. E. Bretschneider (_Med. Res._ I. p. 157), Chinghiz died

near the _Liu p’an shan_ in 1227, after having subdued the Tangut

empire. On modern Chinese maps _Liu p’an shan_ is marked south of

the city of _Ku yüan chou_, department of _P’ing liang_, in _Kan

suh_. The _Yüan shi_ however, implies that he died in Northern

Mongolia. We read there, in the annals, _s.a._ 1227, that in the

fifth intercalary month the Emperor moved to the mountain _Liu p’an

shan_ in order to avoid the heat of the summer. In the sixth month

the empire of the _Hia_ (Tangut) submitted. Chinghiz rested on the

river _Si Kiang_ in the district of _Ts’ing shui_ (in Kansuh; it

has still the same name). In autumn, in the seventh month (August),

on the day _jen wu_, the Emperor fell ill, and eight days later

died in his palace _Ha-lao-t’u_ on the River _Sa-li_. This river

Sali is repeatedly mentioned in the _Yüan shi_, viz. in the first

chapter, in connection with the first military doings of Chinghiz.

Rashid reports (_D’Ohsson_, I. 58) that Chinghiz in 1199 retired

to his residence _Sari Kihar_. The _Yüan chao pi shi_ (Palladius’

transl., 81) writes the same name _Saari Keher_ (_Keher_ in modern

Mongol means ‘a plain’). On the ancient map of Mongolia found

in the _Yüan shi lei pien_, _Sa-li K’ie-rh_ is marked south of

the river _Wa-nan_ (the _Onon_ of our maps), and close to _Sa-li

K’ie-rh_ we read: ‘Here was the original abode of the Yüan’

(Mongols). Thus it seems the passage in the Yüan history translated

above intimates that Chinghiz died in Mongolia, and not near the

_Liu p’an shan_, as is generally believed. The _Yüan ch’ao pi shi_

(Palladius’ transl., 152) and the _’Ts’in cheng lu_ (Palladius’

transl., 195) both agree in stating that, after subduing the Tangut

empire, Chinghiz returned home, and then died. Colonel Yule, in

his _Marco Polo_ (I. 245), states ‘that Rashid calls the place of

Chinghiz’ death _Leung shan_, which appears to be the mountain

range still so-called in the heart of Shensi.’ I am not aware

from what translation of Rashid, Yule’s statement is derived,

but d’Ohsson (I. 375, note) seems to quote the same passage in

translating from Rashid: ‘_Liu-p’an-shan_ was situated on the

frontiers of the _Churche_ (empire of the _Kin_), _Nangias_ (empire

of the _Sung_) and _Tangut_;’ which statement is quite correct.”

We now come to the Mongol tradition, which places the tomb of

Chinghiz in the country of the Ordos, in the great bend of the

Yellow River.

Two Belgian missionaries, MM. de Vos and Verlinden, who visited

the tomb of Chinghiz Khan, say that before the Mahomedan invasion,

on a hill a few feet high, there were two courtyards, one in front

of the other, surrounded by palisades. In the second courtyard,

there were a building like a Chinese dwelling-house and six tents.

In a double tent are kept the remains of the _bokta_ (the Holy).

The neighbouring tents contained various precious objects, such

as a gold saddle, dishes, drinking-cups, a tripod, a kettle, and

many other utensils, all in solid silver. (_Missions Catholiques_,

No. 315, 18th June, 1875.)—This periodical gives (p. 293) a sketch

of the tomb of the Conqueror, according to the account of the two

missionaries.

Prjevalsky (_Mongolia and Tangut_) relates the story of the _Khatún

Gol_ (see _supra_, p. 245), and says that her tomb is situated at 11

versts north-east of lake of Dzaïdemin Nor, and is called by the

Mongols Tumir-Alku, and by the Chinese Djiou-Djin Fu; one of the

legends mentioned by the Russian traveller gives the Ordo country

as the burial-place of Chinghiz, 200 versts south of lake Dabasun

Nor; the remains are kept in two coffins, one of wood, the other of

silver; the Khan prophesied that after eight or ten centuries he

would come to life again and fight the Emperor of China, and being

victorious, would take the Mongols from the Ordos back to their

country of Khalka; Prjevalsky did not see the tomb, nor did Potanin.

“Their holiest place [of the Mongols of Ordos] is a collection of

felt tents called ‘Edjen-joro,’ reputed to contain the bones of

Jenghiz Khan. These sacred relics are entrusted to the care of a

caste of Darhats, numbering some fifty families. Every summer, on

the twenty-first day of the sixth moon, sacrifices are offered

up in his honour, when numbers of people congregate to join in

the celebration, such gatherings being called _táilgan_.” On the

southern border of the Ordos are the ruins of Boro-balgasun [Grey

town], said to date from Jenghiz Khan’s time. (_Potanin_, _Proc. R.

G. S._ IX. 1887, p. 233.)

The last traveller who visited the tomb of Chinghiz is M. C. E.

Bonin, in July 1896; he was then on the banks of the Yellow River

in the northern part of the Ordo country, which is exclusively

inhabited by nomadic and pastoral Mongols, forming seven tribes or

hords, Djungar, Talat, Wan, Ottok, Djassak, Wushun and Hangkin,

among which are eastward the Djungar and in the centre the Wan;

according to their own tradition, these tribes descend from the

seven armies encamped in the country at the time of Chinghiz’s

death; the King of Djungar was 67 years of age, and was the chief

of all the tribes, being considered the 37th descendant of the

conqueror in a direct line. His predecessor was the Wushun Wang. M.

Bonin gives (_Revue de Paris_, 15th February 1898) the following

description of the tomb and of the country surrounding it. Between

the _yamen_ (palace) of the King (Wang) of Djungar and the tomb

of Chinghiz-Khan, there are five or six marches made difficult by

the sands of the Gobi, but horses and camels may be used for the

journey. The road, southward through the desert, passes near the

great lama-monastery called _Barong-tsao_ or _Si-tsao_ (Monastery

of the West), and in Chinese _San-t’ang sse_ (Three Temples). This

celebrated monastery was built by the King of Djungar to hold

the tablets of his ancestors—on the ruins of an old temple, said

to have been erected by Chinghiz himself. More than a thousand

lamas are registered there, forty of them live at the expense of

the Emperor of China. Crossing afterwards the two upper branches

of the Ulan Muren (Red River) on the banks of which Chinghiz was

murdered, according to local tradition, close to the lake of

Chahan Nor (White Lake), near which are the tents of the Prince

of Wan, one arrives at last at the spot called _Yeke-Etjen-Koro_,

in Mongol: the abode of the Great Lord, where the tomb is to be

found. It is erected to the south-east of the village, comprising

some twenty tents or tent-like huts built of earth. Two large white

felt tents, placed side by side, similar to the tents of the modern

Mongols, but much larger, cover the tomb; a red curtain, when

drawn, discloses the large and low silver coffin, which contains

the ashes of the Emperor, placed on the ground of the second tent;

it is shaped like a big trunk, with great rosaces engraved upon it.

The Emperor, according to local tradition, was cremated on the bank

of the Ulan Muren, where he is supposed to have been slain. On the

twenty-first day of the third moon the anniversary fête of Mongolia

takes place; on this day of the year only are the two mortuary

tents opened, and the coffin is exhibited to be venerated by people

coming from all parts of Mongolia. Many other relics, dispersed

all over the Ordo land, are brought thither on this occasion;

these relics called in Mongol _Chinghiz Bogdo_ (Sacred remains

of Chinghiz) number ten; they are in the order adopted by the

Mongols: the saddle of Chinghiz, hidden in the Wan territory; the

bow, kept at a place named Hu-ki-ta-lao Hei, near Yeke-Etjen-Koro;

the remains of his war-horse, called Antegan-tsegun (more),

preserved at Kebere in the Djungar territory; a fire-arm kept in

the palace of the King of Djungar; a wooden and leather vase called

Pao-lao-antri, kept at the place Shien-ni-chente; a wax figure

containing the ashes of the Khan’s equerry, called Altaqua-tosu,

kept at Ottok (one of the seven tribes); the remains of the second

wife, who lay at Kiasa, on the banks of the Yellow River, at a

place called on Prjevalsky’s map in Chinese Djiou-Djin-fu, and in

Mongol Tumir-Alku; the tomb of the third wife of Chinghiz, who

killed him, and lay to-day at Bagha-Ejen-Koro, “the abode of the

little Sovereign,” at a day’s march to the south of the Djungar

King’s palace; the very tomb of Yeke-Etjen-Koro, which is supposed

to contain also the ashes of the first wife of the Khan; and last,

his great standard, a black wood spear planted in the desert, more

than 150 miles to the south of the tomb; the iron of it never gets

rusty; no one dares touch it, and therefore it is not carried to

Yeke-Etjen-Koro with the other relics for the yearly festival. (See

also _Rockhill, Diary_, p. 29.)—H. C.]

NOTE 4.—Rashiduddin relates that the escort, in carrying Chinghiz

to his burial, slew all whom they met, and that forty noble and

beautiful girls were despatched to serve him in the other world, as

well as superb horses. As Mangku Kaan died in the heart of China,

any attempt to carry out the barbarous rule in his case would

involve great slaughter. (_Erd._ 443; _D’Ohsson_, I. 381, II. 13;

and see _Cathay_, 507–508.)

Sanang Setzen ignores these barbarities. He describes the body of

Chinghiz as removed to his native land on a two-wheeled waggon, the

whole host escorting it, and wailing as they went: “And Kiluken

Bahadur of the Sunid Tribe (one of the Khan’s old comrades) lifted

up his voice and sang—

‘Whilom Thou didst swoop like a Falcon: A rumbling waggon now

trundles thee off:

O My King!

Hast thou in truth then forsaken thy wife and thy children

and the Diet of thy People?

O My King!

Circling in pride like an Eagle whilom Thou didst lead us,

O My King!

But now Thou hast stumbled and fallen, like an unbroken Colt,

O My King!’” (p. 108.)

[“The burying of living men with the dead was a general custom

with the tribes of Eastern Asia. Favourite servants and wives

were usually buried in this way. In China, the chief wives and

those concubines who had already borne children, were exempted

from this lot. The Tunguz and other tribes were accustomed to kill

the selected victims by strangulation. In China they used to be

buried alive; but the custom of burying living men ceased in A.D.

1464. [_Hwang ming ts’ung sin lu_.] In the time of the present

Manchu Dynasty, the burying of living men was prohibited by the

Emperor Kang-hi, at the close of the 17th century, _i.e._ the forced

burying; but voluntary sepulture remained in force [_Yu chi wen_].

Notwithstanding this prohibition, cases of forced burying occurred

again in remote parts of Manchuria; when a concubine refused to

follow her deceased master, she was forcibly strangled with a

bow-string [_Ninguta chi_]. I must observe, however, that there is

no mention made in historical documents of the existence of this

custom with the Mongols; it is only an hypothesis based on the

analogy between the religious ideas and customs of the Mongols and

those of other tribes.” (_Palladius_, p. 13.)

In his _Religious System of China_, II., Dr. J. J. M. de Groot

devotes a whole chapter (ix. 721 _seqq._), _Concerning the

Sacrifice of Human Beings at Burials, and Usages connected

therewith_. The oldest case on record in China dates as far back as

B.C. 677, when sixty-six men were killed after the ruler Wu of the

state of Ts’in died.

The Official Annals of the Tartar Dynasty of Liao, quoted by

Professor J. J. M. de Groot (_Religious System of China_, vol.

ii. 698), state that “in the tenth year of the T’ung hwo period

(A.D. 692) the killing of horses for funeral and burial rites was

interdicted, as also the putting into the tombs of coats of mail,

helmets, and articles and trinkets of gold and silver.” Professor

de Groot writes (_l.c._ 709): “But, just as the placing of victuals

in the graves was at an early date changed into sacrifices of

food outside the graves, so burying horses with the dead was also

modified under the Han Dynasty into presenting them to the dead

without interring them, and valueless counterfeits were on such

occasions substituted for the real animals.”—H. C.]