1977 - N. Ts. Münküyev - A New Mongolian P'ai-Tzŭ From Simferopol
1977 - N. Ts. Münküyev - A New Mongolian P'ai-Tzŭ From Simferopol
1977 - N. Ts. Münküyev - A New Mongolian P'ai-Tzŭ From Simferopol
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
Akadémiai Kiadó is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Acta
Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae
ΒY
3 Cf. Tôru Haneda, Une tablette du décret sacré de l,empereur Genghis : MTB 8
(1936), pp. 85—91 + 1 pl. (pp. 89 — 90) ; Haneda Tôru, Chingisu kôtei seishi hai 成吉
思皇帝聖旨牌(Une tablette du décret sacré de Vempereur Genghis) : HHSR I, pp.
130—136 (pp. 133-135).
4 Cf. ibid., pp. 90 — 91 ; HHSR I, pp. 134 — 135.
5 Cf. Wang Kuo-wei, Meng-Ta pei-lu chien-cheng 蒙韃備錄箋證{Νotes to the
Complété Account of the Mongolo-Tatars) : I-shu, tsë 37, pp. 14b —15a.
6 Cf. ibid. (Wang Kuo-wei's note).
7 Cf. Tôru Haneda, op. cit.,plate, and p. 91, Appendice ; HHSR I, plate VII.
8 Cf. ibid., pp. 85-87; HHSR I, pp. 130-132.
29 On the tien-jui-chien it is said in the Yuan shih 88 (vol. 20),pp. 2a—b (1081/3 —
4) : Tien-jui-yuan 典瑞院(《Court in charge of sceptres»). [It] was of the primary se
cond grade in rank. [It] kept impérial seals and golden and silver tallies and tablets.
Only in the first year of Chung-t'ung (1260) two secretaries in charge of tallies and
impérial seals 符寶良(5 fu-pao-lang were put [there] ... In the eighteenth year [of
Chih-yuan] (1281) [it] was reformed into tien-jui-chien. [It] was of the primary third
grade in rank.
30 For détails of the fum-lin-yuan or Impérial Academy (engaged, primarily, in
translating texts) cf. P. Katchnevsky, op. cit., pp. 147 — 15】.
31 For the ch'u-mi-yuan or Military council of the Yuan cf. ibid.,pp. 140—141.
32 Cf. Haneda Tôru, Genchô ekiden zakkô : HHSR /, p. 105.
33 Cf., e.g., 'Ata-Malik Juvaini, op. cit., vol. I, pp. 255 and 257, and vol. II,
487, 488, 489 ; Rasïd-ad-Dïn, CôopmiK Aemonuceü III, translated from Pers
A. K. Arends (Moscow—Leningrad 1946), pp. 119 and 264.
34 Cf. Rasïd-ad-Dïn, op. cit., p. 280.
35 Cf. ibid., p. 278.
36 Cf. B. A. W. Budge, The Monks of Kûblai khân Emperor of China (London
pp. 60 and 75.
37 Cf. H. Yule, op. cit., p. 35.
38 Cf. Rasïd-ad-Dïn, op. cit., pp. 277 — 278.
39 Cf. ibid., p. 278.
40 Cf. ibid.
41 Cf. ibid.
42 Cf. ibid.
There were very many p'ai-tzü in Iran because they were issu
-as bad been in Mongolia earlier, not only by the Ilkhan, but by t
khatuns and other représentatives of the Mongolian nobility as well.4
Comparatively less information on p'ai-tzu in the Golden Horde (
1502) is contained in the sources, though, as will be demonstrate
the former dominions of this Mongolian ulus more specimens of the
«tablets of authority» were found than anywhere eise. These wer
tablets discussed below. It is reported that the khans of the Gold
Öz Beg (1312— 1342), his son and successor Jani Beg (1342— 1357)
Beg (1357 — 1359), son, murderer and successor of Jani Beg, gran
(baisa, baissinum and paysam) together with yarlighs with a red s
tians, conferring privilèges on them, in 1333, 1344 and 1358 re
a golden tablet being dealt with in the case of Jani Beg.44
As stated by D. Banzarov (1822—1855), as early as 1846, B
granted a baisa (p'ai-tzü) and yarligh to the Kievan metropolitan
whom, as well as on other heads of the Russian Orthodox Church at
times, privilèges were conferred on by the khan of the Golden Hord
article on the p'ai-tzü from Grusevka, D. Banzarov, citing his source,
to a Russian version of Berdi Beg's yarligh in an old Russian manu
by Α. I. Artem'ev in Kasan and containing, among other documen
translations of six yarlighs given to the Russian clergy by the kh
Golden Horde.46 In his note 12 to this article of D. Banzarov, P. S. Savel'ev
(1814-1859), who had received a letter from Α. I. Artem'ev concerning the
manuscript and the word baisa contained in it, cited the whole passage in
question from this manuscript (in D. Banzarov's article the dates of the
document were omitted);47 Tant percme 6aiîcy ga gpjibiKt et anoio TaMroro garni
43 Cf. 'Ata-Malik Juvaini, op. cit., vol. I, p. 255, and vol. II, p. 598 ; Rasïd-ad
Din, op. cit., p. 278, and Сборник летописей II, translated from Persian by Ju. P.
Verchovskij (Moscow—Leningrad 1960), pp. 119 —120, and 141.
Cf. H. Yule, op. cit., p. 352.
45 Cf. D. Banzarov, Пайзе, или металлическая дощечки съ повельтями монголь
скихъ хановъ: ZSPANO II (1850), pp. 72—97 (р. 94) ; Paise oder Metallplatten mit den
Befehlen der Mongolischen Chane als Inschrift: MSI A V (1851), pp. 328 — 339 and
VI (1852), pp. 441—448 (p. 448); Черная etpa или шаманство у монголовъ и друггя
статьи Дорджи Банзарова, edited by G. N. Potanin (St. Petersburg 1891), pp. 47—64
(p. 63); Собрание сочинений (Moscow 1955), pp. 140 — 160 (pp. 159 — 160).
46 On the manuscript from the end of the XVII or beginning of the XVIII Cen
tury, which belonged to archaeologist A. I. Artem'ev (1820—1874), See D. Banzarov's
note on the same pages cited above in note 45. See also note 47 below.
47 Cf. D. Banzarov, Пайзе: ZSPANO II (1850), pp. 96 — 97; Черная etpa,
p. 64; Собрание сочинений, pp. 159 — 160 (note 12 of P. S. Savel'ev, not included in
the German version of the article in question Paise oder Metallplatten . . .). The texts
of the yarlighs mentioned were studied most thoroughly by M. D. Priselkov (1881 —
1941) on the basis of différent copies (the manuscript, which was once in A. I. Artem'ev's
55 The expression npiuM басму лица его is cited here in the form taken in th
most important copies of the chronicle. Cf. ibid., note 67. This form was discussed
P. M. Melioranskij. Cf. P. Melioranskij, Что такое «басма» золотоордынскихъ по
хана Ахмата? : ZVOIRAO, vol. XVII, fasc. I (1906), pp. 0129—0140 (p. 0129). Fo
discussion of this article cf. Протоколъ засЪдатя 17 ноября 1905 года: ibid., pp
-XVIII.
66 Cf. К. Inostrancev, op. cit. : ZVOIRAO, vol. XVIII, fasc. IV (1908), p. 0178.
67 Cf. V. V. Grigor'ev, Объяснеше Монгольской надписи, найденной въ Сибири:
ÊMVD 16 (1846), pp. 126 — 149 -j- 1 fig. (for a separate issue see V. V. Grigor'ev, Мон
гольская надпись временъ Монгкэ-хана, найденная въ Восточной Сибири. Чтете и
переводъ архимандрита Аввакума. Издана с присовокуплетем изследовашя о письменахъ
у Монголов В. В. Григорьевым. (Изъ Журнала Министерства Внутреннихъ ДЪлъ). (St.
Notes
op. cit., p. 7, note). For the word jali cf. X. Poppe, op. cit., pp. 90 — 91. For the for
mula yeke suu jali-in igegendür and literature on it cf. F. W. Cleaves, The Mongolien
Documents, p. 44, note 6.
f For the orthography jrly without vowels, instead of the form jarliy, cf. F. W.
Cleaves, The Sino-Mongolian Inscription of 1362 : HJAS 12 (1949), p. 93, note 3.
g For the word büsüre- cf. kusire- in the Minusinsk, Nyuki and Bogotol p'ai-tzü
in hP'ags-pa script (see L. Ligeti, Monuments en écriture 'phags-pa, pp. 109 — 114) and
büsire- in Toghtogha's, Öz Beg's and "Abd Ulläh's p'ai-tzü in Uighur script (see L. Ligeti,
Monuments préclassiques 1, pp. 284 — 287). In the Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362
(line 48) this word is given in the form busire- which F. W. Cleaves compares with monglce
for monglce and fub fugier for jüb jügier in the same inscription (cf. F. W. Cleaves, The
Sino-Mongolian Inscription of 1362 : HJAS 12 (1949), p. 128, note 234). Cf. also bisire
«respecter, vénérer, révérer, adorer» (J. E. Kowalewski, Dictionaire mongol—russe
français, t. 2, p. 1136b).
h Aida- «to be slain» in the final formula of the p'ai-tzü has been translated
inadequately by many authors. Thus, D. Banzarov rendered aldaqu in the Grusevka
p'ai-tzü as «. . . wird schuldig sein». Cf. D. Banzarov, Erklärung, p. 130, and Разъяс
нение: Собрание сочинений, p. 127. Cf. also his Пайзе: ZSPANO II (1850), p. 79;
Paise-. MSIAV (1851), p. 334; Черная etpa, p. 52; Собрание сочинений, p. 146, where
the word in question is translated as проступится «fehlt». A. M. Pozdneev also some
times translated it as будетъ виновенъ «shall be guilty» (Лекцш p. 125), though in other
works he understood it in a différent way (see below). C. 2. 2amcarano thought that it
was more correct to translate aldaqu as разорится, будетъ разоренъ «shall ruin himself,
shall be ruined» than to render it as ошибется, будетъ виновенъ «shall be mistaken, shall
be guilty», or будетъ убить «shall be slain» [cf. C. 2amcarano, Лайзы y монголсвъ въ
настоящее время: ZVOIRAO XXII, fasc. I-II (1914), pp. 155-159 (p. 158)]. G. N.
Rumjancev (1903 — 1966) in his notes to D. Banzarov's collected works subscribed to
C. 2. 2amcarano's opinion of this question (G. N. Rumjancev in 1955 could not men
tion C. 2. 2amcarano's name, but, nevertheless, having cited him almost Verbatim,
pointed out in a foot-note his article, omitting the author's name. Cf. D. Banzarov,
Собрание сочинений, p. 285, note 183 and foot-note 1). The interprétation of the word
aldaqu of the p'ai-tzü in Western literature, where it is rendered e.g., as «soll sich
schuldig machen», «sera tenu pour punissable», or «shall be held punishable», does not
differ from that by previous Russian authors. For the literature on this question cf. F.
W. Cleaves : HJAS 16 (1953), p. 49, note 19. In The Mongolian Monuments N. N. Poppe
also renders the expression aldaqu uk'ugu in the Minusinsk, Nyuki and Bogotol p'ai
tzü in hP'ags-pa script as «shall be guilty and die» (N. Poppe, op. cit., pp. 57 — 58) and
in note 70 on p. 102 writes : «Most investigators have translated these words incorrectly
as «погибнетъ, умретъ» i.e., «will perish, die» (e.g., Avvakum, Pozdneev), and only
Banzarov gave a correct translation «проступится, умретъ», i.e., «commits an offense
and dies». Actually, aldadu is not a passive formation from ala- «to kill», because verbs
ending in vowels form their passive with the suffix -yda-, and only stems ending in -l
(e.g. olda to be found < ol- to find) take the passive formative in -da-. Mo. aida- exists
independently of ala- «to kill», and means «to yield, lose, miss, fail, sin, err». It is by
origin a passive in -da- from *al- = Turkic al- «to take». In the yarlyk's of the Khans to
the Russian metropolitans we find an exact translation: «а възмоутъ и ни по велицкй
язв!, извижятся и оумроутб», «въ гркскхь боудеть да оумретъ». (N. N. Poppe refers to
D. Banzarov, Пайзе, Черная etpa. . . ., p. 52, and Собрание сочинений, p. 146, in foot
note 227, and to M. D. Priselkov, op. cit., p. 98 ; p. 102, in foot-note 228). In fact, Avva
kum, who rendered aldaqu uk'ugu as «погибнетъ, умретъ» (cf. V. V. Grigor'ev, Объясне
ven] for [our] longevity, and read scriptures on our behalf. Let [the authoritie
tence any man, who shall not obey our impérial edict, to the death punishmen
tsui) an-ta-hsi (aldasi).»
Of these texts, which are, besides the Hei-ta shih-lueh, Chinese translations fr
Mongolian, in Ôgôdei Khagan's edict of 1232, quoted in the Τ a-Yuan ma-cheng
the term aldasi (an-ta-hsi) is given in the combination an-ta-hsi tsui ( «the punishm
aldasi»), i.e., Chin. tsui is not preceded, besides Mo. aldasi, by any other Chin
terminative, while in his edict of 1238, cited in the inscription in the Taoist monast
we have an-ta-hsi ssù-tsui «death punishment aldasi». Generally speaking, unde
Yiian, especially during the later period of its rule, the term aldasi seems to have
a settled légal term for «exécution» clear to everyone. Therefore, it was used in of
documents without indicating its exact meaning in Chinese.
Thus, the term in question is used without such a determinative in the Y
tien-chang four times [cf. Gentenshô sakuin kô 元典章索引稿 Draft Index to
Yiian-tien-chang, compiled by Gentenshô kenkyuhan 元典章研究班(《The grou
studies in the Yuan-tien-chang») of the Jimbunkagaku kenkyûjo (Institute of Hum
tarian Sciences,University of Kyoto, Kyoto 1961), p. 3/1]. Below I translated the p
sages concerned from this source, correcting erroneous characters in the text on t
basis of the well-known work by Ch'en Yuan [cf. Ch'en Yuan 陳垣,Shen k9o
tien-chang chiao-pu 沈刻元典章校補 (Collation and Supplément of Omissions in
Yïian-tien-chang of Shen s Xylographie Edition), Cha-chi 札記(Pciginal Records
chapters (Peking 1957)].
The foliowing text is contained in the section of the Yuan-tien-chang prohib
the slaughter of cattle and the hunt of game and reflecting Buddhist influence on
Mongol upper classes [cf. YUan-tien-chang,Shen Chia-pen's édition, ph. rep. Chung
shu-chii (Peking 1957), chap. 57 (ts9ê 17), p. 27a] : «An impérial edict proclai
by emperor Môngke. What shall that be, if not to sentence to an-ta-hsi (aldasi) what
people if only they are the men who slaughter secretly living beings on the quiet,
the first and eighth days of the first decade, and fifteenth and twenty-third days,
four days of each moon, beginning from this year ting-ssù (1257) ? Our impérial
is written on the eleventh day of the seventh moon, year of the Snake (22 Au
1257), in the locality [called] Tien-chih-êrh (Denjir).»
The impérial edict issued by Khubilai Khaghan (1260 —1294) in the sixth moo
of the second year of Chung-t'ung (June 29一 July 28, 1261) and aimed at pun
offenders against the state sait, tea, liquor and other monopolies (cf. Y uan-tien-ch
22 (ts9ê 8), pp. 2a—3b) contains a section which read s as follows (cf. ibid” p. 3b):
«At the time when the Tatar people's households claim sait at sait-mines, let
them claim [sait], having calculated themselves how much [they] will eat ! Let [th
be liable to the punishment an-ta-hsi (aldasi) on the basie of the previous régulatio
if [they] demand too much and beyond measure and, living everywhere, carry
smuggled sait on the sly to différent localities and sell [it there] ! Yet again it is exp
that persons, who are guarding passes, will patrol and check strictly. If for a
[any persons] carry the smuggled sait on the sly and sell [it], officiais, who are guar
passes, are to be punished together with the criminals.»
Khubilai's edict of the third moon of the eighth year of Chih-yuan (April 11
May 11, 1271) devoted to the division of the population into différent social c
(cf. Yuan-tien-chang 17, ts'ê 6, pp. 2a—12a) contains a section concerning slaves bel
ing to the Mongolian soldiers (cf. ibid., p. 6a—b), in which it is stated (p. 6a):
«As to the households of slaves in the Mongol décades, who in the year jen-tzû (12
were regietered in the records of population separately [from their owners], [the lat