Skip to content

The Office and Noble Titles of the Mongols from the 14th to 16th century, and the study of the “White History” Čaγan Teüke


Pages 133 - 177

DOI https://doi.org/10.13173/centasiaj.59.1-2.0133




By examining Mongol and Chinese documents, this article analyses Mongolian official titles from the 14th to the 16th centuries. It shows that there are many historical layers in the set of official titles. The titles inherited from the Mongol-Yuan administration were still used within the ordinary nobility. In the late 15th century, the Mongol royal family suppressed all non-royal warlords. During the Ming period, it was frequently Chinese captives who suggested the ‘updated’ official nomenclature to the Mongolian warlords. The official titles recorded in the Mongolian “White History” Čaγan Teüke clearly preserve these historical layers. This proves that the White History was indeed written in the late 16th century, and not during the Yuan era (13th–14th centuries).



本文透過蒙古文、漢文資料整理了十四至十六世紀蒙古的官制,揭示其中的不同時代層次。元朝官制的名號一直使用著,代表了異姓貴族權臣的霸權時代。到了十五世紀末,蒙古王族壓下了異族貴族霸權之後,引入了新一輪的官號,蓋過舊有的元代官號。這些新官號似是來自投降的漢人俘虜介紹而來的。蒙古文《白史》記載的官制,就清楚展示了這些官號的不同層次。從而證明,《白史》其實是十六世紀寫成的,不是元代的作品。


Tung Wah College 東華學院 (Hong Kong)

1 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 37:2 (1977), pp. 353–380.

2 Gombojab Hangin, “The Mongolian Titles Ĵinong and Sigeĵin”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 100:3 (1980), pp. 255–266.

3 Henry Serruys, “Siülengge~šülengge”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 92:1 (1972), pp. 92–95.

4 Song Lian 宋濂 (1310–1381) ed., Yuan Shi 元史 (Beijing: Zhong Hua Shuji 中華書局, 1976).

5 Paul Pelliot and Louis Hambis, Histoire des campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou ts'in-tcheng lou (Leiden: Brill, 1951). Christopher P. Atwood, “Commentary of Shengwu qinzheng lu 聖武親征錄, Commentary Project of the Center for Central Eurasia ‘Civilization Archive’, Seoul National University, 2009; Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2004), p. 499 [Shengwu qingzheng lu].

6 Wulan (烏蘭 Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu 蒙古源流研究 [The Study of Erdeni-yin Tobči] (Shenyang: Liaoning minzu chuban she 遼寧民族出版社, 2000), pp. 231, 247–248, 601 [42v].

7 Igor de Rachewiltz (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 854–856 [§239].

8 Boγorĵu, one of the unsuspecting generals of Činggis Qan, was transcribed as Bo-er-zhu 博爾朮 in Shengwu qinzheng lu (13th century) and Yuanshi (14th century) or Bo-wo-er-chu 孛斡兒出 in the Chinese translation of the Secret History of the Mongols (late 14th century). However, his name was recorded as Boγorĵi (بورغورجی Būgūrĵi, بقرجی Boqorĵi, بغرجی Bughurji or بورجی Bωrĵi) in the 13th and 14th century Arabic and Persian historical records. The Taoist priest Qiū Chùjī 丘處機 mentioned as the protagonist of the early 13th-century Xiyou ji 西遊記 had his name transliterated as Bo-lu-zhi 播魯只 (∗Bωrĵi < Boγorĵi). In the 17th century Mongolian historical book Altan Tobči, his name was also written as Boγorĵi. Paul Pelliot and Louis Hambis, Histoire des campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou ts'in-tcheng lou, pp. 342–344.

9 Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1335 in memory of Chang Ying-jui”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 13, no. 1/2 (1950), pp. 1–131. The 31st line in the Mongolian passage: Daiĵang Gungĵu 大長公主 /dai-zhang gong-zhu / (the great elder princess).

10 In session §248 of The Secret History of the Mongols, the (Jurchen) Jin dynasty was defeated by Činggis Qan. The Jin emperor gave his daughter to Činggis Qan to make peace. The name of this daughter was recorded as Güngĵi (< Gungĵu 公主 gong-zhu, Princess). The Mongols considered the Chinese title (‘Princess’) as her name but not an aristocratic title. Igor de Rachewiltz (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 176–177, 898–899. Lubsangdanĵin (Blo bzang bstan 'dzin), Čoiĵi (喬吉 Qiaoji) ed., Altan Tobči [Altan Tobchi Nova] (Köke qota/Hohhot: Öbör Mongγol-un arad-un keblel-ün qoriy-a, 1999), pp. 473–475.

11 Francis W. Cleaves, “The Bodistw-a Čari-a Awatar-un Tayilbur of 1312 by Čosgi Odsir”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 17, no. 1/2 (1954), pp. 44, 74, 95.

12 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 236, 610 [46r].

13 David M. Farquhar, “Structure and Function in the Yuan Imperial Government”, John D. Langlois (ed.), China under Mongol Rule (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), pp. 25–55. David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1990).

14 Elizabeth Endicott-West, “Imperial Governance in Yuan Times”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 46, no. 2 (1986), pp. 523–549.

15 B. Ia. Vladimirtsov, Obshchestvennyĭ stroĭ mongolov [Общественный строй монголов] (Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1934); trans. Michel Carsow, Le régime social des Mongols: le féodalisme nomade [The Social System of the Mongols] (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1948). Sechin Jagchid and Paul Hyer, Mongolia's Culture and Society (Boulder: Westview Press, 1979).

16 Joseph Fletcher, “The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 46, no. 1 (1986), pp. 11–50.

17 Thomas T. Allsen, “Guard and Government in the Reign of the Grand Qan Möngke, 1251–59”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 46, no. 2 (1986), pp. 495–521. David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 245–247.

18 Rashīd al-Dīn (1247–1318), M. Raušan and M. Mūsavī (ed.), Jāmic al-Tawārīkh (Tehran, 1373/1994), pp. 906–909. John A. Boyle (trans.), The Successors of Genghis Khan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), pp. 278–284. Chinese translation with annotation by Zhou Liangxiao 周良霄, Chengjisi Han de jichengzhe 成吉思汗的繼承者 (Tianjin: Tianjin guji chubanshe 天津古籍出版社, 1992), pp. 332–343. W. M. Thackston (trans.), Jami 'u't Tawarikh-Compendium of Chronicles (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1988), p. 443.

19 The posts of the Central Secretariat were listed and ranked correctly: 1st Chief Councillor Čing-sang (丞相 chengxiang), 2nd Privy Councillors Bingĵang (平章 pingzhang, i.e., 平章政事 pingzhang zhengshi), 3rd Senior Vice Councillor Yiučing (右丞 youzheng), 4th Junior Vice Councillor Soočing (左丞 zuozheng), 5th Second Privy Councillor Samĵing (參政 canzheng, i.e., 參知政事 canzhi zhengshi), 6th Adviser to the Central Secretariat Samyi (參議 canyi), 7th and 8th Senior Supervisor Langĵung (郎中 langzhong). David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 169–175. The only mistake in the Jāmi'al-Tawārīkh was to combine the Central Secretariat (zhongshusheng 中書省) with the Bureau of Military Affairs (shumiyuan 樞密院) into one department. It wrongly added the great military general's honour title Dai-fu as the 2nd rank post of the Central Secretariat.

20 ھنتون Hantun, i.e. Antong 安童 (Yuan Shi, pp. 3081–3084); اوچاچار Očāčār (∗Öčičer), i.e. Yue-chi-cha-er 月赤察兒 (Yuan Shi, pp. 2949–2952); اولجای Oljāy (∗Ölĵei), i.e. 完澤 Yuanze (Yuan Shi, pp. 3173–3174); ترخان Tarkhan (∗Qarγasun Darqan), i.e. Ha-la-ha-sun Da-la-han 哈剌哈孫˙答剌罕 (Yuan Shi, pp. 3291–3295).

21 Herbert Franke and Denis Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China, vol. 6, Alien Regimes and Border States, 907–1368 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1994), pp. 505–507, 513–514.

22 Yuan Shi, pp. 480, 536.

23 Yoshida Junichi 吉田順一 and Chimed Dorji 齊木德道爾吉, Harahoto shutsudo Mongoru monjo no kenkyū ハラホト出土モンゴル文書の研究 [Study on the Mongolian documents found at Qaraqota] (Tωkyω: Yūzankaku, 2008), pp. 72–77.

24 Igor de Rachewiltz (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 50–51, 152–162, 462–466, 817–842.

25 Yuan Shi, pp. 2523–3295. D. M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 245–247.

26 D. M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, p. 3.

27 Gerard Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of pre-thirteenth-century Turkish (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. 387. Paul Pelliot and Louis Hambis, Histoire des campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou ts'in-tcheng lou (Leiden: Brill, 1951), pp. 297–299. Eldengtai 額爾登泰, Menggu mishi cihui xuanshi 蒙古秘史詞匯選釋 [Explanation of selected vocabularies from The Secret History of the Mongols] (Köke Qota/Hohhot: Nei Menggu renmin chu ban she 內蒙古人民出版社, 1991, 2nd edition), p. 158.

28 Gerard Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of pre-thirteenth-century Turkish, pp. 539–540.

29 HAN Rulin 韓儒林, “Menggu dalahan kao 蒙古答剌罕考 [The Study of Mongol's Darqan], Huaxi xiehe daxue Zhongguo wenhua yanjiusuo jikan 華西協合大學中國文化硏究所集刊 [Studia Serica], vol. 1 (1940–1941), pp. 155–184; Qionglu ji 穹廬集 (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 2000), pp. 23–53. Etani Toshiyuki 惠谷俊之, “Darqan kω 答剌罕考” [The Study of Darqan], Tωyω shi kenkyū 東洋史研究, vol. 22:2 (1963), pp. 185–202. D. M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 29–30, 63.

30 Louis Hambis, Le Chapitre CVII du Yuan che; les généalogies impériales mongoles dans l'histoire chinoise officielle de la dynastie mongole (Leiden: Brill, 1945), pp. 10–12.

31 Paul Pelliot, “Notes sur le Turkestan de M. W. Barthold”, T'oung Pao, 2nd series, vol. 27:1 (1930), pp. 45–46. Paul Pelliot and Louis Hamis, Histoire des Campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou Ts'in-tcheng Lou (Leiden: Brill, 1951), pp. 331–335.

32 Paul Pelliot, Notes on Marco Polo (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, librairie Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1959–63), pp. 221–222. The Kitan-Liao used the Chinese honorary title Grand Preceptor Taishi 太師 for the high ranking regional military commander jie-du-shi 節度使. Jin Shi 金史 (Beijing: Zhong Hua Shuji 中華書局 1975), p. 5. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Lingĵi of Aruγ of 1340”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 25 (1964), pp. 55–56, note 32.

33 Paul Pelliot, “Notes sur le Turkestan de M. W. Barthold”, pp. 42–47. The Ming translation contradicts that of the Yuan: t'ai-shi 太石 according to the Sheng-wu ch 'in-cheng lu and ∗dai-si 大司 by the royal pedigree collected in Yuan shi. It is reasonable to believe that the Yuan translations are correct as they were translated for the Yuan court. Both Mongols and Chinese in the Yuan era knew that the title Taiši of the 12th century Mongols was neither ‘crown prince’ Tai-zi 太子 nor the Yuan period's ‘Grand Preceptor’ Tai-shi 太師. But they failed to realise that this title was borrowed from the (Kitan) Liao dynasty, so they rendered its pronunciation into Chinese.

34 Although Pelliot had already clarified this translating mistake, many scholars continued to follow the wrong lead. On the other hand, we can also assume that the Ming court wrongly translated the title ‘Grand Preceptor’ Tai-shi 太師 to ‘crown prince’ Tai-zi 太子. Henry Serruys said that the term Tai-zi 太子 in the 4th year of the Zhengtong emperor (1439 A.D.) was a wrong translation of ‘Grand Preceptor’ Tai-shi 太師, the title of the Mongol warlord Esen (也先 Ye-xian). Henry Serruys, “Notes on a few Mongolian rulers of the 15th century”, Journal of American Oriental Society, vol. 76:2 (1956), pp. 82–90 (p. 88); Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, p. 361. Ming Shi lu 明實錄 [The Veritable Record of the Ming] (Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sincia, 1984), pp. 2600–2601. However, Henry Serruys was incorrect because he wrongly put the comma in the sentence (ancient Chinese did not have punctuation marks). The sentence should be read as “Toγos the Crown Prince” 脫谷思太子 (Tuo-gu-si Tai-zi) and “Esen the Prince of Huai” 淮王也先 (Huai Wang Ye-xian). Toγos was a son of Taisung Qaγan. He later became the Molan Qaγan after Esen killed Taisung Qaγan in 1452. It was impossible for this Ming record to be wrong because the Ming court needed to reward those Mongol nobles according to their rank and background. The higher their standing, the greater their reward. Wrong translations would not have been acceptable given their political knowledge of the Mongols. In particular the realisation that the powerful Western Mongols (Oirats) were controlling the Eastern Mongols and that the Taisung Qaγan led the Ming court, eager on diplomatic and military balance, to respect and encourage the officers, nobles and dynastic princes of the Eastern Mongols over the Western ones.

35 Muqali (木華黎 Mu-hua-li) is one of the Four Stalwart (Dörben Külüg) of Činggis Qan. Yuan Shi, pp. 2929–2945. Igor de Rachewiltz, Chan Hok-lam, Hsiao Ch'i-ch'ing and Peter W. Geier, In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yuan Period (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1993), pp. 3–8.

36 The set of Three Dukes 三公 san-gong has three groups: the most valuable is Three Top Instructors 三師 san-shi, then Three Dukes 三公 san-gong, and Three Junior Dukes 三少 san-shao. Three Top Instructors 三師: Tai-shi 太師, Tai-fu 太傅 and Tai-bao 太保. Three Dukes H 三公: Tai-wei 太尉, Si-tu 司徒 and Si-kong 司空. Three Junior Dukes: 三少 are Shao-shi 少師, Shao-fu 少傅 and Shao-bao 少保.

37 Yuan Shi, p. 384. Üs Temür 玉昔帖木兒 (Yu-xi Tie-mu-er or 玉速帖木兒 Yu-su Tie-mu-er) is a grandson of Boγorĵu 孛斡兒出 (Bo-wo-er-chu' 博爾朮 Bo-er-zhu) who was one of the Four Stalwarts (Dörben Külüg) of Činggis Qan. He was firstly the cook baγurči of Qubilai Qan. Then he was appointed as the head of the Censorate Yu-shi-tai 御史臺 to investigate the conduct of the government. Because he did it very well, Qubilai called him the ‘Competent Dignitary’ Örlög Noyan (月呂魯那顏 Yue-lü-lu na-yan or 月兒魯那顏 Yue-er-lu na-yan). Yuan Shi, pp. 2945–2948.

38 Ibidem, pp. 3341–3349.

39 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 237, 261, 611 [46v].

40 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”.

41 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 278–279, 330–33, 640–641 [58v-59r]. It was also recorded in the Chinese book Huang Ming bei-lu kao 皇明北虜考 [Study of Northern Barbarian of Ming Dynasty] written by Zheng Xiao 鄭曉 (1499–1566). See: Bo-yin-hu 薄音湖 (Buyanhuu) and Wang Xiong 王雄 ed., Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian 明代蒙古漢籍史料匯編 [Collection of Chinese historical books about the Mongols in the Ming era] (Köke Qota/Hohhot: Nei Menggu daxue chubanshe 內蒙古大學出版社, 1993), vol. 1, p. 213.

42 Zheng Xiao 鄭曉 Huang Ming bei-lu kao 皇明北虜考, “Among the barbarians, Taiši is the most honourable. As the king (i.e., Qaγan) was young, it was feared that the Taiši could usurp his power, and no Taiši was appointed.” Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 1, p. 216. Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, pp. 357–358.

43 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra-Altan Khan and the Mongols in the sixteenth century (Leiden: Brill, 2003), pp. 84–85, 92–94, 228, 233–234 [174, 260, 272]

44 Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362”, p. 81. The Chinese character /fu/ 夫 or 府 or 副 were translated into Mongolian script /wu/. This Chinese pronunciation /fu/ 夫 or 府 or 福 or 傅 was sometimes transliterated into /wuu/. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1335”, p. 92.

45 Antoine Mostaert and Francis Woodman Cleaves, Les lettres de 1289 et 1305 des ilkhan Arγun et Ölĵeitü à Philippe le Bel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962), pp. 17–18, 23–24 [line 4].

46 Yoshida Junichi and Chimed Dorji, Harahoto shutsudo Mongoru monjo no kenkyū, pp. 110 111.

47 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 265–266, 292–293, 620–622 [50v-51r].

48 Üs Temür had already been appointed the head of the Censorate Yu-shi-tai 御史臺 in 1275. Its head was Censors-in-Chief Yu-shi ta-fu 御史大夫 and its short form was da-fu 大夫 (Mandarin da-fu<Middle Chinese ∗dai-fu), in Mongolian daiwu (< M.C. ∗dai-fu). David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, p. 241. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362, pp. 71, 87, 115. Theoretically, Censors-in-Chief da-fu did not carry any military power. But the traditional practice of Mongol nobleman was to be a good warrior, especially Üs Temür who was the descendant of the Four Stalwarts and had been the bodyguard of Qubilai. It is interesting that both Tai-fu 太傅 and da-fu 大夫 would be translated as Mongolian daiwu. However, the daiwu∼daibu for 15th–16th century Mongols were unlikely to have been da-wu, rather than ‘Grand Tutors’ Tai-fu 太傅 because all the Tai-fu were famous military commanders but not da-fu. The deepest impression was made only by those Tai-fu with significant battlefield glory.

49 Jāmi'al-Tawārīkh said the head in charge of military affairs was Tai-fu. It seems that it described the real political situation in the last era of Qubilai's reign but not the actual military bureaucratic system.

50 Yuan shi, pp. 3099–3116. Igor de Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, pp. 584–607.

51 Ming Xiaozong Shilu 明孝宗實錄 [Veritable Records of the Ming Emperor Hong-zhi], the 5th year of Hong-zhi (1492), the 10th lunar month, the day yi-mao 乙卯. Ming Shi lu 明實錄 (Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sincia, 1984), pp. 5764–5765.

52 Igor de Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, pp. 245–269. Yuan Shi, pp. 3687–3695.

53 Ibidem, pp. 2949–2952. He is the grand-grandson of Boroqul 孛羅忽勒 (bo-luo-hu-le 博爾忽 bo-er-hu) who was one of the Four Stalwart (dörben Külüg) of Činggis Qan.

54 Öčičer (or ∗Yočičar), i.e. 月赤察兒 Yue-chi-cha-er (Yuan Shi, pp. 2949–2952). He was also very famous in Central Asia so that he was recorded in the Persian historical book with the name “the White-bearded Taiši”. Liu Yingsheng, “War and Peace between the Yuan Dynasty and the Chaghadaid Khanate (1312–1323)”, R. Amitai and M. Biran ed., Mongols, Turks, and Others (Leiden: Brill, 2005), pp. 339–358 (p. 344). Yingsheng 劉迎勝, Chahetai hanguo shi yan jiu 察合台汗國史研究 [The Study of History of the Čaγatai Khanate] (Shanghai: Shanghai gu ji chu ban she, 2006), pp. 373–377.

55 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, p. 358. Zheng Xiao, Huang Ming bei-lu kao 皇明北虜考, Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 1, pp. 200–201.

56 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 266–267, 278, 280, 622, 639–640, 642 [51v, 58v, 59v].

57 Zhaqisiqin 札奇斯欽 (Sechin Jagchid∼Sečen Ĵaγčid), Menggu huang jin shi yi zhu 蒙古黃金史譯注 [Translation and annotation of Altan Tobchi Nova] (Taipei: Lianjing 聯經, 1979), p. 241.

58 Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke) - Eine mongolische Quelle zur Lehre von den beiden Ordnungen: Religion und Staat in Tibet und der Mongolei (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1976), p. 410.

59 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 169–175. This department made most official appointments at levels below their own, and decisions or recommendations to the emperor on virtually all areas of government: taxes and revenue, ritual matters, relations with the princes, criminal cases, rewards, and public works.

60 The Mongolian translated term had already appeared in session §132–134 of The Secret History of the Mongols. It is about the campaign against the Tatars in 1195 in which Temüĵin co-operated with the Jin army led by Chief Councillor Čing-Sang. Igor de Rachewiltz, The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 56–58, 486–488. Čoiĵi ed., Altan Tobči, pp. 188–195, 191 note 18. The Central Secretariat of Yuan had two heads: the Right Chief Councillor and the Left Chief Councillor, the right one being higher in ranking.

61 Igor de Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, pp. 9–11. Yuan Shi, pp. 3081–3084. Although Antung failed due to betrayal and was imprisoned by Qaidu for 10 years, he was still reinstated as Čingsang after his release in 1285.

62 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 367–368, 396–398. Yuan provinces were referred to as Mobile-branch Central Secretariat 行中書省 xing zhongshu sheng.

63 Yuan Shi, pp. 1382–1383.

64 Liu Yingsheng, “War and Peace between the Yuan Dynasty and the Chaghadaid Khanate”. Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝, Chahetai hanguo shi yan jiu 察合台汗國史研究 [The Study of History of the Čaγatai Khanate] (Shanghai: Shanghai gu ji chu ban she, 2006), pp. 364–369.

65 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 265, 293–294, 620–621 [50v].

66 Ibidem, pp. 281–282, 645 [60v]. Sechin Jagchid, Menggu huang jin shi yi zhu, p. 246. Čoiĵi ed., Altan Tobči, pp. 631–632. Manduqai Qatun had been the second wife of the Manduγul Qaγan. After Manduγul's death in 1479, she married the young prince Dayan Qaγan (AD 1479–1517) in order to ensure the power of the royal family.

67 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, p. 89.

68 Zhou Liangxiao, Chengjisi Han de jichengzhe, pp. 334–335.

69 Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362”, pp. 66, 90 [line 40].

70 In the late Yuan era, the title Ping-zhang was also used in the army. It was a post with a ranking following the posts of the Bureau of Military Affairs (樞密院 shu-mi yuan). This military system was initially adopted by the Ming army. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 (1672–1755) ed., Ming Shi [History of the Ming] (Beijing: Zhonghua shu ju, 1974), p. 2193.

71 The only Bingĵang mentioned was in Erdeni-yin Tobči. Kama Bingĵang made a false accusation against Toqtoγa Taiši. As a result, Toqtoγa Taiši was killed and the Yuan Dynasty collapsed. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 237, 262, 611–612 [46v-47r].

72 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, p. 247.

73 The 2nd official was Associate Overseer of the Bureau of Military Affairs 同知樞密院事 Tong-zhi shu-mi yuan shi (“Tong-zhi 同知”). The Mongolian form of this title was recorded as čümüi ön-ü tungĵi. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362”, pp. 66, 80, 90, 120 note 169, 121–122 note 175, 124 note 207 [line 39]. Therefore, we can reconstruct the Mongolian name for the short form of zhi-yuan 知院 as ∗ĵi ön. This term cannot be seen in preserved Mongolian materials, but exists in Uighur as či-ön. Since there was no /ĵ/ phonetic value in historic Turkic it was transformed into /č/. Geng Shimin 耿世民 and James Hamilton, “L'inscription ouïgoure de la stèle commémorative des Iduq de Qočo”, Turcica, vol. 13 (1981), pp. 10–54.

74 Yuan Shi, pp. 3135–3138. His son was El Temür, who was later given the title Taiši.

75 Baoyin Delige 寶音德力根 (Buyandelger), “Shi Ming dai Menggu guan cheng A-ha-la-hu zhi-yuan he Die zhi-yuan 釋明代蒙古官稱「阿哈喇忽知院」和「迭知院」” [Explaining the Mongolian official title Aqalaqu ĵi-ön and Ded ĵi-ön in the Ming era], Nei Menggu da xue xue bao: zhe xue, she hui ke xue ban 內蒙古大學學報:人文社會科學版 [Journal of Inner Mongolia University: Humanities and social sciences], 1996:2, pp. 1–5.

76 The son of Taiši Begersen (∗Beg-Arslan) was Nemekü Čoyang. If Čoyang was a title, perhaps it was derived from the term ĵi-ön (∗ĵi-ön>ĵiön>ĵyan>ĵoyan). As the original meaning had become obscured, its spelling became uncertain and distorted, misread as ĵoyang∼čoyang. Maybe he was ĵi-ön with lower ranking. Zhu Feng 朱鳳, and Jia Jingyan 賈敬顏 ed., Han yi Menggu huang jin shi gang 漢譯蒙古黃金史綱 [The Chinese translation of Altan Tobči] (Köke qota/Hohhot: Nei Menggu ren min chu ban she, 1985), pp. 80, 92, 188, 194. Charles R. Bawden (transl.), The Mongol chronicle Altan Tobči (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1955), pp. 180, 187. Sechin Jagchid, Menggu huang jin shi yi zhu, p. 273. Čoiĵi ed., Altan Tobči, pp. 657. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 342 note 76.

77 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 353, 651 [62v-63r]. In Chinese records, Alaγ (阿剌 A-la) carried the title ĵi-ön when he killed Esen Taiši. Possibly after this event he was promoted to Čingsang, and 17th-century Mongolian histories used his highest ranking to describe him: Alaγ Čingsang. See: Ming Shi, p. 8503.

78 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 354, 378, 652 [63v]. Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, p. 89.

79 Yuan Shi, p. 4521 and 571, 588.

80 Peter Zieme, Buddhistische Stabreimdichtungen der Uiguren (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1985), pp. 178–179. Yuan Shi, pp. 3260–3261. The name of Uighur monk Qarunadaz was translated into Chinese as ∗Ga-lu-na-da-si 迦魯納答思 (Mandarin Jia-lu-na-da-si). Many Tibetan monks were granted the title Si-tu or Grand Instructor 大司徒 Da Si-tu (∗Dai Ši-tu). Luciano Petech, Central Tibet and the Mongols: the Yüan Sa-Skya period of Tibetan history (Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1990), pp. 79, 84, 87, 92, 124. A copper seal of the Grand Instructor made in 1312 is still preserved in Tibet. Zhaonasitu 照那斯圖 (Junast<∗ĵaγu-nasu-tu) and Xue Lei 薛磊, Yuan guo shu guan yin hui shi 元國書官印匯釋 (Shenyang: Liaoning min zu chu ban she, 2011), p. 21.

81 A seal of the Grand Instructor in Phags-pa script impressed onto a painting is discussed in David M. Farquhar, “The Official Seals and ciphers of the Yüan period”, Monumenta Serica, vol. 25 (1965), pp. 362–393 (385–387).

82 Yuan Shi, pp. 148, 382, 521, 615, 923, 1686–1687, 2014, 2869, 2889.

83 Ibidem, p. 486.

84 Ibidem, p. 961. Besides being made Tai-wei, he was concurrently promoted to ping-zhang (∗bing-ĵang) of Central Secretariat and zhi-yuan (∗ĵi ön) of the Bureau of Military Affairs.

85 M. Farquhar, “The Official Seals and ciphers of the Yüan period”, pp. 384–385. Zhaonasitu and Xue Lei, Yuan guo shu guan yin hui shi, pp. 22–25.

86 Ming Shi, pp. 3798–3799.

87 Ming Yingzong Shilu 明英宗實錄 [Veritable Records of the Ming Emperor Zheng-tong], the 4th year of Zheng-tong (1439), day gui-mao 癸卯, 1st lunar month (Ming Shi lu, pp. 2600–2601). One Mongolian leader rewarded by the Ming emperor was a certain Tie-mu-er Sa-ha-tai 帖木兒撒哈台 (∗Temür Saqaltai “Temür the Bearded”), with the title Grand Marshal Tai-wei 太尉.

88 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 265–267, 291–292, 620–624 [50v-51v].

89 Yuan Shi, p. 980.

90 The Mongolian used long vowel -igü- (∗-i'ü-) was used to render the Chinese diphthong /ao/∼/io/.

91 He was also recorded as A-luo-chu Shao-shi 阿羅出少師 in Zheng Xiao's Huang Ming bei-lu kao. See: Bo-yin-hu and Wang Xiong (eds.), Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, p. 214.

92 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 278, 281, 330–331, 640, 644–645 [58v, 60v].

93 Ibidem, pp. 353, 651 [62v-63r].

94 Igor de Rachewiltz (transl.), The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 764–766 [§202].

95 Ibidem, pp. 854–856 [§239].

96 Ibidem, pp. 967, 985 [§265, 269].

97 A Sino-Mongolian glossary book called Zhi Yuan Yi Yu 至元譯語 was edited and sold in public in the reign of Qubilai (1260–1294). This book was collected into a popular encyclopedia called Shi Lin Guang Ji 事林廣記 in the Yuan China. In this book, the royal prince 大王 da-wang was paired with the Mongolian pronunciation (in Chinese character) 口 kou (< Mongolian: ∗kö'ün). Da-wang 大王, textually meaning “Great King”, which was a Chinese colloquial title for Prince. Shi Lin Guang Ji 事林廣記 (Beijing: Zhong Hua Shi Ju 中華書局, 1988), pp. 188–190, 454–457. For the written Mongolian köbegün, dialect pronunciation ∗kö'ün and its sound recorded in Chinese ∗ kou, read Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian Inscription of 1335 in Memory of Chang Ying-Jui”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 13, no. 1/2 (1950), pp. 51–52.

98 John A. Boyle, “On the Titles given in Juvanī to certain Mongolian Princes”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 19 (1956), pp. 146–154.

99 Yuan Shi, p. 1833.

100 Yeh-lü T'u-hua 耶律禿花, the Khitan tribesman who submitted to Činggis Qan, was also called ∗Yeke Noyan (也可那延 Ye-ke Na-yán). Yuanshi, p. 3532. Igor de Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, pp. 112–121. His title was also recorded as 也可那延 Ye-ke Na-yǎn in the Chinese edict in 1247. Cai Meibiao 蔡美彪 (ed.), Yuan dai bai hua bei ji lu 元代白話碑集錄 [Collection of Yuan-era Mongolian epitaphs translated into Mandarin Chinese] (Beijing: Ke xue chu ban she, 1955), p. 14.

101 The leader of Keyerid was granted the title Ong (< Wang 王, the King or the Prince) by the Jurchen Jin Dynasty. He was therefore called Ong Qan (王汗 Wang Han). But this title was for legitimate rulers around the Jurchen Jin Dynasty, within the tributary system. The nomads on the steppe thought that this title was reserved for the highest rulers and not really related to princes. Paul Pelliot and Louis Hambis, Histoire des campagnes de Gengis Khan: Cheng-wou ts'in-tcheng lou, pp. 209–212.

102 Igor de Rachewiltz (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols, pp. 133–134, 138, 761–762, 782–783. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362 in memory of Prince Hindu”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 12, no. 1/2 (1949), p. 96 note 13.

103 Yuan Shi, pp. 2735–2756. Paul Pelliot and Louis Hamis, Histoire des Campagnes de Gengis Khan, pp. 362–364.

104 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 17–19.

105 Yoshida Junichi and Chimed Dorji, Harahoto shutsudo Mongoru monjo no kenkyū, pp. 80–83, 86–93. A royal prince's name was written as Mongolian Sangasiri köbegün and Chinese Sang-ge-shi-li Da-wang 桑哥失里大王 in the Yuan's official documents found in the ruins of Qara Qota.

106 Matsukawa Takashi 松川節, “カラコルム出土1348年漢蒙碑文─嶺北省右丞郎中總管收糧記” [The Sino-Mongolian Inscription of 1348 from Qara-qorum], Nairiku Ajia gengo no kenkyū 内陸アジア言語の研究 [Studies on Inner Asian languages], vol. 12 (1997), pp. 83–98. Its name in Chinese should be Ning Wang Xu-mie-gai 寧王旭滅該 (Yuan Shi, p. 912).

107 Herbert Franke, “A 14th century Mongolian letter fragment”, Asia Major 2nd series, vol. 11 (1965), pp. 120–127. Prince Xi-ning (or His-ning 西寧) was the royal title of the lineage of Čübei, who was a descendant of Čaγatai (the 2nd son of Činggis Qan). Differing from his other lineage members, Čübei supported Qubilai Qaγan. His campsite was around what is today Dunhuang.

108 Ming Yingzong Shilu, chapter 50, 4th Zhengtong year (正統四年 1439), day gui-mao 癸卯, 1st lunar month (Ming Shi lu, pp. 2600–2601); chapter 75, 6th year of Zengtong (1441), day jiazi 甲子, 1st lunar month (Ming Shi lu, pp. 2726–2727); chapter 79, 6th Zhengtong year (1441), day renzi 壬子, 5th lunar month (Ming Shi lu, p. 2750); chapter 80, 6th year of Zengtong (1441), day renshen 壬申, 6th lunar month (Ming Shi lu, p. 2754); chapter 225, 4th Jingtai year (景泰四年 1453), day bingxu 丙戌 1st lunar month (Ming Shi lu, p. 3601).

109 Baoyin Delige 寶音德力根 (Buyandelger), “Wang-liu, A-ba-ga, A-lu menggu —Yuan dai dong dao zhuwang houyi buzhong de tongcheng, wanhu ming, wang hao 往流、阿巴噶、阿魯蒙古──元代東道諸王後裔部眾的統稱、萬戶名、王號” [Ongliγud, Abaγa, Aru Mongol: the Names, the Tümen's name and its Prince titles for descendants of the Left-handed Princes], Nei Menggu da xue xue bao: zhe xue, she hui ke xue ban 內蒙古大學學報: 人文社會科學版 [Journal of Inner Mongolia University: Humanities and social sciences], 1998:4, pp. 1–11.

110 Baoyin Delige, “Wang-liu, A-ba-ga, A-lu menggu”, pp. 8–10.

111 Okada Hidehiro 岡田英弘, “Dayan Hān no roku manko no Kigen ダヤン˙ハーンの六萬戶の起源”, Tωyω shi ronsω: Enoki Hakushi kanreki kinen 東洋史論叢:榎博士還歷記念 (Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha, 1975), pp. 127–137 (p. 134).

112 Gombojab Hangin, “The Mongolian Titles Ĵinong and Sigeĵin”, pp. 259–260.

113 Herry Serruys, “Pei-lou fong-sou 北虜風俗, Les coutumes des esclaves septentrionaux de Siao Ta-heng 蕭大亨”, Monumenta Serica, vol. 10 (1945), pp. 117–208 (pp. 128–130).

114 Zhu Feng and Jia Jingyan ed., Han yi Menggu huang jin shi gang, pp. 71 [note 4], 183. Charles R. Bawden (transl.), The Mongol chronicle Altan Tobči, pp. 85 [verso 90 note 30], 174.

115 Jia Jingyan 賈敬顏, “Wu Touxia de yimin: jian shuo Ta-bu-nang 五投下的遺民─兼說‘塔布囊’”, Minzu Yanjiu 民族研究, 1985:2, pp. 29–36. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, p. 333.

116 Igor de Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, p. 3.

117 Yi-lin-zhen 亦鄰真 (Irinchen), “Guanyu shi yi shi er shiji de Bei-wo-lei 關於十一十二世紀的孛斡勒” [On Bohol in the Eleventh and Twelfth Century], Yuan shi lun cong 元史論叢, vol. 3 (1986), pp. 23–30.

118 Yuan Shi, pp. 2757–2767. Zhao Qingzhi, Marriage as political strategy and cultural expression: Mongolian Royal Marriages from World Empire to Yuan Dynasty (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2008).

119 Louis Hambis, Le chapitre CVIII du Yuan che: les fiefs attribués aux membres de la famille impériale et aux ministres de la cour mongole d'après l'histoire chinoise officielle de la dynastie mongole (Leiden: Brill, 1954), pp. 17–21, 23–27, 29–34, 49–50.

120 The Oirat tribe also married into the royal family from Činggis Qan's reign. But Oirat was in opposition to Qubilai during the struggle for enthronement in 1260. After that, Qubilai's family seldom married with Oirats and only the royal family of Il-khanate in Persia continued doing so. On the other hand, the royal family of Koryŏ had always married the princesses of Yuan since the Qubilai's reign. But the Koryŏ never joined Yuan rule, its military affairs or administration. Its kings were not installed by the Mongols, if recognised. This was totally different from the other Ong in the Yuan Empire.

121 Louis Hambis, Le chapitre CVIII du Yuan che, pp. 130–137.

122 Yuan Shi, pp. 2925–2928. His name in Chinese is 闊里吉思 (Körgiz>Late Middle Chinese: ∗Kuo-li-gi-si > Mandarin: Kuo-li-ji-si). His son was promoted to the Prince of Zhao in 1309.

123 John A. Boyle (trans.), The Successors of Genghis Khan, p. 286.

124 Yuan Shi, pp. 2888–2893. Ĵinggim (真金<Old Mandarin: ∗zhen-gim > Modern Mandarin zhen-jin) died before Qubilai Qaγan. Ĵinggim's third son Temür became the next Yuan Qaγan-emperor.

125 Yoshida Junichi and Chimed Dorji, Harahoto shutsudo Mongoru monjo no kenkyū, pp. 72–77.

126 Peter Zieme, Buddhistische Stabreimdichtungen der Uiguren, pp, 170–172. The title Xung Tayzï (皇太子 Huang Tai-zi) is in the 13th sentences (line 23) of the colophon Sitātapatrādhāranī.

127 Yuan Shi, pp. 464, 467, 2729, 2873.

128 M. Raušan and M. Mūsavī ed., Jāmic al-Tawārīkh (Tehran, 1373/1994), p. 946; John A. Boyle (transl.), The Successors of Genghis Khan, p. 319. Zhou Liangxiao, Chengjisi Han de jichengzhe, p. 395.

129 Peter Zieme, Buddhistische Stabreimdichtungen der Uiguren, pp, 121–126. According to the colophon, the Sutra was donated by the wife of the Senior Vice Councillor Yiučing (右丞 You-cheng) Yol Tämür in the 8th lunar month of 1330 for blessing her husband and the royal family of the 8th Yuan Emperor Tuγ Temür.

130 Yuan Emperor Tuγ Temür's son Aratnadara 阿剌忒納答剌 A-la-te-na-da-la was made the Prince of Yan (燕王 Yan Wang) in the 3rd lunar month of 1330 (Yuan Shi, p. 754). He was made Heir Apparent 皇太子 Huang Tai-zi in the 12th lunar month of the same year (i.e., Jan 1331. Yuan Shi, p. 770). In the colophon, 70th sentence (line 69), he was recorded as Yin Wang Taysi (燕王太子 Yan Wang Tai-zi). He had not yet been given the title Heir Apparent when the sutra was printed.

131 Peter Zieme, “Bemerkungen zur Datierung uigurischer Blockdrucke”, Journal Asiatique, vol. 269 (1981), pp. 385–399.

132 Geng Shimin 耿世民 and Zhang Baoxi 張寶璽, “Yuan Huihu wen chongxiu Wenshu Si bei chu shi 元回鶻文《重修文殊寺碑》初釋” [Sino-Uigur Inscription in Memory of the Reconstruction of Wen-shu-si Temple], Kaogu Xuebao 考古學報, 1986:2, pp. 253–263, 2 pls.

133 Charles R. Bawden (transl.), The Mongol chronicle Altan Tobči, pp. 69–71, 157–159; Zhu Feng and Jia Jingyan (eds.), Han yi Menggu huang jin shi gang, pp. 51–52, 168–170. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 265–267, 290–291, 620–624 [50v-52r]. Baoyin Delige 寶音德力根 (Buyandelger), “15 shiji zhong ye qian de bei-yuan kehan shixi ji zhengju 15世紀中葉前的北元可汗世系及政局 ” [Genealogy of Northern Yuan Khans before the mid-15th century and political situation in their reigns], Menggu shi yaniju 蒙古史研究 [Studia Historica Mongolica] (Köke Qota/Hohhot: Nei Menggu daxue chubanshe 內蒙古大學出版社, 2000), vol. 6, pp. 131–155 (pp. 135–136).

134 Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 279–281, 336, 641–644 [59v-60v].

135 Qu Jiusi 瞿九思. (1546–1617), Wanli wugong lu 萬曆武功錄, chapter 7. See: Bo-yin-hu and Wang Xiong ed., Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 4 (2007), p. 47.

136 Ming Shi, pp. 2193–2228.

137 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, p. 21, 248–269. Ming Shi, pp. 29, 37–38. It was a short form for a group of posts such as General Commander 都指揮使 Du zhi-hui Shi, Commander 指揮使 zhi-hui Shi, Associate Commander 指揮同知 zhi-hui tong-zhi, etc.

138 Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2004), pp. 408, 564. The Ming Empire used the so-called “Jimi 羈縻” Guard to rule ethnic tribes which submitted to the Ming Empire. It was a self-ruled administrative and political organisation system. They were to provide annual tribute, follow its foreign policy and be superintended by the Ming court. On the other hand, they kept their original status, and passed on their duty to their heirs. Li Dongyang (李東陽 1477–1516), Da Ming Hui Dian 大明會典 (Taipei: Dong nan shu bao, 1963), chapter 125, pp. 1791–1791. Ming Shi, p. 222.

139 Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire, pp. 535–536.

140 Antoine Mostaert, Le matériel mongol du Houa i i iu de Houng-ou (1389) (Bruxelles: Institut belge des hautes études chinoises, 1977; 1995), vol. I, pp. 1–2; vol. II, p. 1. Henry Serruys, “The Dates of the Mongolian Documents in the Hua-i i-yu”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 17:3/4 (1954), pp. 419–427 (pp. 419–420).

141 Wuyun Goawa 烏雲高娃 (Oyan Ghuwa∼Uyungua), “Yongle ben Hua-yi yiyu dada guan lai wen xiao yi 永樂本《華夷譯語》韃靼館 “來文″ 校譯” [The Tribute-letters of the Tartar Institute in Yongle Edition of the “Huan-yi Yiyu”: a collated Text with notes], Ou Ya Xue Kan 歐亞學刊 [Eurasian Studies] (Beijing: Zhong hua shu ju, 1999), vol. 5 (2005), pp. 257–286. Original copies in: Beijing tu shu guan gu ji zhen ben cong kan: Jing bu 北京圖書館古籍珍本叢刊: 經部, (Beijing: Shu mu wen xian chu ban she, 1988), vol. 6, pp. 325–364.

142 E.g. Sino-Mongolian letters no. 53 and 81. Wuyun Goawa, “Yongle ben Hua-yi yiyu dada guan lai wen xiao yi”, pp. 271, 279; Beijing tu shu guan gu ji zhen ben cong kan: Jing bu, vol. 6, pp. 331, 359.

143 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 127 note 198, 249 note 194. The post was granted by the Ming court to Daičing Neĵei Taiĵi (Baγa Naĵi), Altan Qan's grandson, who had sought shelter from the Ming after his return and the establishment of the peaceful treaty between the Ming and the Mongols.

144 Wulan (Ulaγan) proposed that the Chinese title zhi-hui was, in Mongolian, ∗ĵiküi which finally changed to čükegür. Čükegür was the name of a descendant of Dayan Qaγan recorded in Erdeni-yin Tobči. Wulan, Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 414–415 note 79. I cannot agree with her assumption. The noun čükügel (čükegül∼čükegür∼čüküger) means “despair” and it is from the verb čüke-∼čükü- “lose hope” and verb čüküge- “to put someone in a difficult position”. Ferdinand D. Lessing, Mongolian-English Dictionary (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1960), p. 201.

145 Henry Serruys, “Pei-lou Fong-sou 北虜風俗: Les coutumes des esclaves septentrionaux de Siao Ta-heng 蕭大亨” Monumenta Serica, vol. X (1945), pp. 117–208.

146 The title zhi-hui 指揮 was translated as Ĵiγui, using Mongolian script /γ/ to represent the Chinese phonetic value /h/. In Mongolian practice, the word ĵiγui would be also pronounced ĵi'ui. While the Chinese wei 衛 “Guard” was translated as the Mongolian ui, the Chinese word wei 威 ought to be the same as Mongolian ui (Wuyun Goawa, “Yongle ben Hua-yi yiyu dada guan lai wen xiao yi”, pp. 271, 279). Therefore, the term Zhi-wei 至威 should be translated from the Mongolian ĵi'ui∼ĵγui.

147 The posts of Guards for submitted tribe leaders were, from higher to lower ranking, Military Commissioner 都督 du-du, Associate Military Commissioner 都督同知 du-du tong-zhi, Junior Associate Military Commissioner 都督僉事 du-du qian-shi, General Commander 都指揮使 Du zhi-hui Shi, Associate General Commander 都指揮同知 zhi-hui tong-zhi, Junior Associate General Commander 都指揮僉事 zhi-hui qian-shi, Commander 指揮使 zhi-hui Shi, Associate Commander 指揮同知 zhi-hui tong-zhi, Junior Associate Commander 指揮僉事 zhi-hui qian-shi, Senior Chiliarch 正千戶 zheng qian-hu, Assistant Chiliarch 副千戶 fu qian-hu, Centurion 百戶 Bai-hu, Command Office 鎮撫 zheng-fu etc. Ming Shi, pp. 2193–2195, 2222. Da Ming Hui Dian 大明會典, chapter 118 (pp. 1705–1706), chapter 125 (p. 1791).

148 Wu lanjie 烏蘭杰 and Wulan 烏蘭, “Duo-yin wen-dou-er xiao kao 朵因溫都兒小考” [A Preliminary Inspection of the Duo-yin wen-du-er], Nei Menggu daxue yishu xueyuan xuebao 內蒙古大學藝術學院學報 [Journal of the Art College of Inner Mongolia University], vol. 8:3 (2011), pp. 5–9. E-de 額德, “Ming dai duo-yan-wei yuan kao 明代朵顏衛源考” [Textual Research in Origin of Tuyanwei in Ming Dynasty], Nei Menggu Minzu daxue xuebao (shehui kexue ban) 內蒙古民族大學學報 (社會科學版) [Journal of Inner Mongolia University for Nationalities (Social Sciences)], vol. 27:3 (2001), pp. 51–57. These three names are contained in the Sino-Mongolian letters in the Dada guan lai wen 達靼館來文 [The Tribute-letters of the Tartar Institute], for example, letter No. 53, 78, 81, 83, 85, 86. Wuyun Goawa, “Yongle ben Hua-yi yiyu dada guan lai wen xiao yi”, pp. 271, 278–281; Beijing tu shu guan gu ji zhen ben cong kan: Jing bu, vol. 6, pp. 331, 359, 361, 363–364.

149 Ming Yingzong Shilu, chapter 138, 11th Zheng-tong year (1446), day ren-shen 壬申, 1st lunar month (Ming Shi lu, p. 3051), ∗Daidu (歹都 dai-du), the Junior Associate General Commander 都指揮僉事 zhi-hui qian-shi of the Guard Wuyur asked the Ming court to grant the title Chiliarch 正千戶 Zheng Qian-hu to his brother.

150 Ming Yingzong Shilu, chapter 283, 1st year of Tian-shun (1457), day ji-you 己酉, 10th lunar month (Ming Shi lu, p. 3891).

151 Henry Serruys, “Pei-lou Fong-sou 北虜風俗: Les coutumes des esclaves septentrionaux de Siao Ta-heng 蕭大亨” Monumenta Serica, vol. X (1945), pp. 117–208.

152 Henry Serruys, “Uighur čigši –Mongol čigčin”, Monumenta Serica, vol. XXVII (1968), pp. 381–384. Henry Serruys thought that the Mongolian title Sigeĵin was from the Turk title čigši in the 8th century which was originally the title Ci-shi 刺史 (Prefecture Governor) of the Tang Dynasty of China. But his assumption was wrong.

153 Gombojab Hangin, “The Mongolian Titles Ĵinong and Sigeĵin”, pp. 260–266.

154 In the Yuan era, the Chinese honorific “Madam” fu-ren 夫人 was transliterated as wusin. Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362”, pp. 86, 110, note 76. The Erdeni-yin Tobči written in mid-17th century preserved an early record which used the term wusin to name Činggis Qan's wife Börte. Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 149, 190–191, 567 [28r]. In 15th century, the Mongols used a Chinese term “Lady Grandmother” tai-fu-ren 太夫人 to refer to the foster mother of the father of Dayan Qan. The term was translated in Mongolian as Taibuĵin. Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 277, 639 [58r]. Sechin Jagchid, Menggu huang jin shi yi zhu, pp. 228–229. Čoiĵi ed., Altan Tobči, pp. 631–632.

155 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, p. 174.

156 Gombojab Hangin, “The Mongolian Titles Ĵinong and Sigeĵin”, pp. 263–264.

157 Da Ming Hui Dian 大明會典, chapter 111, p. 1650.

158 Ming Shi, p. 1856.

159 Ibidem, pp. 2185, 2194. The first son and second son of of Duke (公 Gong), Marquis (侯 Hou), Earl (伯 Bo), Military Commissioner (都督 du-du), General Commander (都指揮 Du zhi-hui), and Commander (指揮 zhi-hui) would be promoted to be San-qi she-ren 散騎舍人 and Can-shi she-ren 參侍舍人, respectively. As Prince Consort, the Chief Commandant 駙馬都尉 Fu-ma Du-wei was higher than Earl, his sons would be also promoted as she-ren too.

160 Gombojab Hangin, “The Mongolian Titles Ĵinong and Sigeĵin”, p. 262.

161 Henry Serruys, “Chinese in Southern Mongolia during the Sixteenth century”, Monumenta Serica, vol. XVIII (1959), pp. 1–95.

162 Wang Shiqi 王士琦 (1551–1618), San-Yuan chou-zu kao 三雲籌俎考 [Plans for Defense of the Three Yuan (i.e. Northern Shansi province)], Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 2 (2000), p. 425.

163 Henry Serruys, “Siülengge∼šülengge”.

164 Wanli wugong lu, chapter 8, 9th lunar month of the 6th year of Longqing (隆慶; 1572), Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 4 (2007), p. 115. San-Yuan chou-zu kao, chapter 1, 37th year of Jiajing (嘉靖), Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 2 (2000), p. 425. Dalizhabu 達力扎布, Ming-dai mo-nan Menggu li-shi yan-jiu 明代漠南蒙古歷史研究 [A Study of the Mongols South of the Gobi Desert in the Ming Dynasty] (Hailar, Inner Mongolia: Neimenggu wenhua chuban she, 1997), pp. 164–166.

165 One of the important envoys who represented Altan Qan at the Ming court was Darqan siülengge, a Chinese working for and trusted by Altan Qan. His name was rendered in Ming records as both da-er-han shou ling ge 打兒漢守領哥 and da-er-han shou ling 打兒漢守領. Temule 特木勒) (Temür), “Ming Meng jiaoshe zhong de Menggu shichen da-er-han shou-ling-ge明蒙交涉中的蒙古使臣打兒漢守領哥” [A Mongolian Emissary named Darqan-Si'ülengge in Sino-Mongol intercourses], Minzu Yanjiu 民族研究 [Ethno-National Studies], 2012:2, pp. 76–85.

166 The term shou-ling ge 首領哥 is still in use in Taiwan. For example, a passage written on 17 July 2008 in a blog http://blog.yam.com/evagino/article/16248968 (20/09/2013); another passage written on 26 Jan. 2009 http://www.wretch.cc/blog/linda163596/23375353 (20/09/2013).

167 David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 171, 223 note 19. In the Yuan era, the term zai-xiang had already been translated as Mongolian saisang but it was informal. There is a bilingual poem in a Sino-Mongolian inscription which used the Mongolian transliteration saisang (< zaixiang 宰相) to translate the Chinese term zhizheng 執政 (who holds the government). Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian inscription of 1362”, pp. 92, 131 note 23.

168 Temule (Temür), “Ming Meng jiaoshe zhong de Menggu shichen da-er-han shou-ling-ge”. Darqan siülengge, the reliable officer of Altan Qan, was promoted Üiĵeng ĵaisang due to his contribution. It was clear that ĵaisang was ranked higher than siülengge.

169 Fuheng 傅恒 (-1770), Xiyu Tu zhi 西域圖志, chapter 29, page 23–24.

170 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 429, 685–686 [77r].

171 In the book History of the Altan Qan [Erdeni tunumal-un šastir], a figure called Kitadai was granted the title Üiĵeng sečen qonĵin to be the first among ministers. Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 162, 272. In Erdeni-yin Tobči, Wčir Tümei who was a Tibetan Buddhist family member from Qinghai, was employed as the head of officers with the title Güi ong qonĵin. He also acted as the interpreter between the Mongols and the Tibetan monks. Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 365–366, 427–430, 670–671 [71r], 681–687 [75r-77v].

172 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 470, 716–717 [90v]. Tustu sečen was an officer kiya “the leader; the guard”. He was granted sečen qonĵin.

173 Sechin Jagchid and Paul Hyer, Mongolia's Culture and Society (Boulder: Westview Press, 1979), pp. 272–273. Zhaqisiqin 札奇斯欽 (Sechin Jagchid), Menggu wen hua yu she hui 蒙古文化與社會 (Taipei: Taiwan Shang wu yin shu guan, 1987), pp. 258–260.

174 Saisiyal, “16-duγar ĵaγun ača nasiki Mongγol Oirat teüke-yin surbulĵi bičig du γardaq kedün neres-i sine bar tailburilaqu ni”, Weilate shi lun wen ji [衛拉特史論文集 Essays of the history of the Oirat] (Hohhot: Nei Menggu shi fan da xue xue, 1990), pp. 251–264. Dai Hong-yi 戴鴻義 and Baoyin 鮑音 (Bayan), “Bai-shi Huan-jin kao shu” 《白史》歡津考述 [The study of qonĵin in the White History], Nei Menggu min zu shi yuan xue bao (Zhe xue she hui ke xue ban) 內蒙古民族師院學報 (哲學社會科學版) [Journal of Inner Mongolia National Teachers' College: Social sciences edition], 1991:2, pp. 24–28, 34.

175 In the Sino-Mongolian glossary book Zhi Yuan Yi Yu, the Chinese term guan-ren 官人 was used to explain the Mongolian term ∗noyan (那延 na-yan). Shi Lin Guang Ji, pp. 188–190, 454–457. In the Sino-Mongolian glossary book Hua-yi yi-yu 華夷譯語 edited by the Ming court, the Chinese term guan-ren 官人 was again used to explain the Mongolian term ∗noyan (那顏 na-yan). Antoine Mostaert, Le matériel mongol du Houa i i iu de Houng-ou (1389), vol. I, p. 80.

176 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 472, 720 [91v].

177 The Erdeni-yin Tobči did not record any title for Muqali. The anonymous Altan Tobči describes Muqali with the title Goo-a (Gowa, “beauty”) which was a distortion of the title Güi-ong (> Güyeng). Zhu Feng and Jia Jingyan (eds), Han yi Menggu huang jin shi gang, pp. 22 [note 1], 151. Charles R. Bawden (transl.), The Mongol chronicle Altan Tobči, pp. 51 [verso 31 note 3], 134.

178 Mengguleihu 蒙古勒呼 (Mongolkhuu), “Menggu we wenxian zhong Gu-ying chenghao zhi kaoshi 蒙古文文獻中古英稱號之考釋” [Textual Criticisms of the title “Güyeng” occurred in the Mongolian Literatures], Menggu shi yaniju 蒙古史研究 [Studia Historica Mongolica], vol. 9 (2006), pp. 120–129.

179 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 470, 717 [90v].

180 Ibidem, pp. 471, 718 [91r].

181 Ibidem, pp. 429, 684 [76r]; pp. 430, 687 [77v].

182 Henry Serruys, “Pei-lou Fong-sou 北虜風俗: Les coutumes des esclaves septentrionaux de Siao Ta-heng 蕭大亨”, p. 158.

183 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 436, 698 [82v]. Güiši was transliterated from Chinese Guo-shi 國師 “National Preceptor”. David M. Farquhar, The Government of China under Mongolian Rule, pp. 30, 153.

184 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 204, 304.

185 Ibidem, pp. 125, 247. Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 364, 717 [70r-70v].

186 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 234, 256, 606 [44v]. Luciano Petech, Central Tibet and the Mongols: The Yüan Sa-Skya period of Tibetan history, p. 17. The provinces of the Yuan and Ming Dynasties were referred to as sheng 省 The term was used to translate the Tibetan term khams “region”.

187 Ibidem, pp. 438, 701 [83v]. The Mongolian term Güüsiri was rendered from the Tibetan term Gu Shri,derived from the Chinese Guo-shi 國師 “National Preceptor” in the Yuan era. Another Mongolian term Güiši∼ Güüši was directly translated from the Chinese term Guo-shi.

188 Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 470, 472, 716, 720 [90r, 92r]. The term Günding Güiši was used by the Yuan and Ming courts for granting to the Tibetan monks, ultimately derived from Guan ding Guo shi 灌頂國師 “National Preceptor of abhişeka rite”. The term Dai Wang was used as an amplifier to increase the honour. Henry Serruys, “On some Titles in the Mongol Kanĵur”, Monumenta Serica, vol. XXXIII (1977–1978), pp. 424–430.

189 Ibidem, pp. 355, 358, 654, 658 [64r, 66r]. Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, p. 127, 162–163, 248, 273.

190 Type A, down to the establishment of the Great Mongol Empire by Činggis Qan (∼1206); type B, the Yuan era (1206–1368); type C, native Mongolian post or new changes of old posts during the post-Yuan era (1368–1550s); type D, titles from military offices of Ming China (1368–1550s); type E, popular official titles from the Chinese public in the post-Yuan era (1368–1550s).

191 Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke), pp. 89–90, 93–94. Liu Jin-suo, Arban buyantu nom-un čaγan teüke (Kökeqota: Öbür mongγol-un arad-un keblel-ün qoriy-a, 1981), pp. 84–85, 90–91.

192 Luciano Petech, Central Tibet and the Mongols, pp. 16–17, 36–37.

193 Ibidem, pp. 136–137.

194 Ibidem, p. 17.

195 The Tibetan Khams-gsum chos-kyi rgyal-po (King of the Dharma in the three regions) was badly translated in Chinese pronunciation as Sing šing dai wang (< ∗San sheng dai wang 三省大王 Great King of three provinces). Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke), pp. 85, 265–267. The Chinese term dai wang 大王 was surely an informal short form of the Three King of the Dharma granted by the Ming Dynasty towards the leaders of the three leading sects of Tibetan Buddhism. The bKa'-brgyud sect was Dai Bao Fang Wang 大寶法王 (“the Great Precious Religious King”; Tibetan: rin-chen chos-rje). The Sa-skya sect was Dai Sheng Fang Wang 大乘法王 (“the Great Vehicle Religious King”; Tibtean: thegchen chos-rje). The dGe-lugs sect was Dai Ci Fang Wang 大慈法王 (“the Great Compassion Religious King”; Tibetan: Byams-chen chos-rje). The short form Dai Wang 大王 (the Great King) for these three Religious King (Tibetan: Chos-kyi rgyal-po), I guess, was made by unprofessional translators employed by the Mongols during the late 16th century. It is bad and inaccurate becaused they used the title of the Ming era to translate Yuan terminology.

196 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, pp. 355–358.

197 Ibidem, pp. 374–375. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 355, 653–654 [64r].

198 Wang Shiqi, San-Yuan chou-zu kao, Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 2 (2000), p. 425: “Tai-shi 台實 (< ∗Taiši) are trusted servants under the Taiĵi (the Prince)”.

199 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, pp. 379–380.

200 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 108–111.

201 Ibidem, pp. 114–117.

202 Akos B. Apatoczky, Yiyu-an indexed critical edition of a sixteenth century Sino-Mongolian glossary (Leiden: Brill, 2009).

203 Igor de Rachewiltz, The Secret History of the Mongols (Leiden: Brill, 2004), pp. 445–446, 690–691.

204 György Kara, “Zhiyuan yiyu. Index alphabetique des mots mongols”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 44, no. 3 (1990), p. 288. Louis Ligeti and G. Kara, “Un Vocabulaire Sino-Mongol des Yuan le Tche-Yuan Yi-yu”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 44, no. 3 (1990), p. 263. In this dictionary Zhiyuan yiyu 至元譯語, the term Čerbi was recorded in the chapter Human Affairs instead of the chapter Officials. Therefore, it was a social status for high ranking officials.

205 Elisabetta Chiodo, “History and Legend: the Nine Paladins of Činggis (Yisün Örlüg) according to the “Great Prayer”(Yeke öčig)”, Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher, vol. 13 (1994), pp. 221–222.

206 Wang Shiqi, San-Yuan chou-zu kao, Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 2 (2000), p. 426. The title was recorded as “Er-lu” 耳六 (< ∗Erlög∼Örlög).

207 The White History mentions that there were eight posts which carried the right to hold a banquet. They are Taiĵi (the Prince), Tabunang (the Prince Consort), Ong (the Prince from the lineages of Činggis Qan's brothers), Šigeĵin (Son of the Princess), Taiši (Grand Preceptor), Örlög (the Competent), and Kökeltüs (foster brother of royal family).

208 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, pp. 374–375. Wulan (烏蘭), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 355, 653–654 [64r].

209 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 127–128, 248–249 [500–505]

210 Sechin Jagchid and Paul Hyer, Mongolia's Culture and Society, pp. 163–175. Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire, pp. 494–497.

211 Johan Elverskog, The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 111–112. Wulan (Ulaγan), Menggu yuanliu yanjiu, pp. 367, 674 [72v].

212 Henry Serruys, “The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth Century”, p. 355. Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke), pp. 102, 164–167.

213 Ferdinand D. Lessing, Mongolian-English Dictionary, p. 857.

214 Wang Shiqi, San-Yuan chou-zu kao, Ming dai Menggu Han ji shi liao hui bian, vol. 2 (2000), pp. 425–426. Compared to the purely internal function “an able manager of tribal affairs in the household of a nobleman Taĵi” of the post Siülengge, the Ĵayaγači must be of a higher ranking as he could be in charge of external affair of tribes. And it seems that only the Qaγan-Emperor could appoint Ĵayaγači but Taiĵi could not.

215 B. Ia. Vladimirtsov, trans. Michel Carsow, Le régime social des Mongols, p. 237.

216 Ferdinand D. Lessing, Mongolian-English Dictionary, p. 1028.

217 Pavel Rykin, “On the principles of Chinese Transcription of Mongolian Sounds in the Sino-Mongolian Glossary DADA YU/BEILU YIYU (late 16th-early 17th century)”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung, vol. 65:3 (2012), pp. 323–334.

218 Francis W. Cleaves, “The Sino-Mongolian edict of 1453 in The Topkapi Sarayi Müzesị”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol. 13, no. 3/4 (1950), pp. 431–446.

219 Charles R. Bawden (transl.), The Mongol chronicle Altan Tobči, pp. 68, 156.

220 Johan Elverskog (trans.), The Jewel Translucent Sutra, pp. 125, 247 [15v; 480]. Jürong-a 珠榮嘎 (trans.), A-lei-tan Han Chuan 阿勒坦汗傳 [The Biography of Altan Qaγan] (Köke Qota/Hohhot: Nei Menggu daxue chubanshe 內蒙古大學出版社, 2014), pp. 71, 269 [15b: line 18].

221 Old Mandarin: ∗Jiang-kun>Mongolian: Ĵanggun∼Ĵanggin. For the change between -u- and -i-, consider the Chinese term Prince. Old Mandarin: Gong-zhu>Mongolian: Gungĵu (14th century)>Günĵi (16th century).

222 Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke), pp. 101, 162–163.

223 Ferdinand D. Lessing, Mongolian-English Dictionary, p. 1035.

224 Ho Kai-lung 何啟龍, “Cóng wǔ sè sì yí yǔ shíliù dà guó kàn bái shǐ de lìshǐ céngcì bǐjiào zàng wén běn yǔ ménggǔ wén běn zhāng suǒ zhī lùn 從五色四夷與十六大國看 《白史》 的歷史層次比較藏文本與蒙古文本 《彰所知論》” [Investigating the Historical Layers in the Mongolian White History by the Five-Coloured Nations and the Sixteen Great Realm: via the comparison with the Tibetan origin and the Mongolian translation of Phags-pa's Explanation of the Knowable], Yuánshǐ jí mínzú yǔ biānjiāng yánjiū 元史及民族與邊疆研究 [Studies on the Mongol-Yuan and China's Bordering Area], vol. 26 (2013), pp. 296–317. By using historical phonology to compare the translated names of foreign nations in different eras, this article proves that most contents of the White History were from the 16th century. The few names clearly from the 14th century were probably borrowed from the preserved Buddhism Sutras translated during the Yuan era (13th to 14th century). The initial paragraph of the White History mentions that this text was revised from an old sutra translated by Uighur monk Brana-Siri who is a famous monk of the Yuan Dynasty (Yuan Shi, “Bi-lan-na-shi-li 必蘭納識里, pp. 4519–4520). Klaus Sagaster, Die Weisse Geschichte (čaγan teüke), p. 83. However, in the White History, the title of Brana-Siri is Üiĵeng Güüsiri. This title Üiĵeng never appeared in the 13th and 14th century.

Share


Export Citation