Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:23:58.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A case of murder in eighteenth-century Mongolia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

C. R. Bawden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In general outline the pattern of government in Outer Mongolia during the Manchu dyasty in not unfamiliar and it is a well-known fact that there was no judiciary as such, the administration of justice being only one of the various duties of local officials at various levels. A certain amount of work has been done on problems of law and justice, but there remain many problems of detail to be both raised and commented upon. Two lines of inquiry are open. On the one hand it is instructive to see how the processes of investigation and trial worked—how an alleged offence came to offical notice, who investigated, how evidence was recorded, what instances a case passed through, and how, and on what legal basis, it was disposed of. Other closely related technical questions concern the form and language of official documents. On the other hand, examination of criminal cases will afford insight into the social status, living conditions, and perhaps the psychology, of the persons concerned. It is in fact largely through the medium of legal and other official documents that we shall glean whatever information there is to be had about the day to day lives of individual persons in Mongolia under the Manchus, since other sources of information—journalism, biography, fiction, letters, memoirs, and so on—are non-existent. Apart from reports of criminal cases, some of which have been dealt with in model fashion by Klaus Sagaster, much information can be found in other types of official document, such as complaints submitted by ordinary people against officials, but in the present article we shall be concerned exclusively with the report of one criminal case dating from the late eighteenth century.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , February 1969 , pp. 71 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 A useful survey in the Mongol language of the administrative system is Sonomdagva, Ts., Manjiin zahirgaand baisan üeiin Ar Mongolyn zasag zahirgaany zohion baiguulalt (1691–1911), Ulan Bator, 1961.Google Scholar

2 Sagaster, Klaus, ‘ZwÖlf mongolische Strafprozessakten aus der Khalkha-Mongolei(Teil I)’, Zentralasiatische Studien, I, 1967, 79–135.Google Scholar

3 Bawden, C. R., ‘A joint petition of grievane submitted to the Ministr of Justice of automous Mongolia in 1919’, BSOAS, xxx, 3, 1967, 548–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A collection of documents concerning such petitions has recently appeared in Mongolia:Ardyn zargyn bichig(xviii-xx zuuny ehen)(Monumenta Historica, IV, I), Ulan Bator, 1968.

4 i.e. ‘The oppression of Mongol women in the period of Manchu domination, 1764–1833’, Ulan Bator, 1958.

5 The small amount of documentation available does not permit us to say if all documents inevitably followed the same route. Thus the case we are concerned with does not seem to have passed through the office of the Manchu amban at Urga, though the case dealt with in the second section of the book did.

6 On slavery see especially Natsagdorj, Sh, ‘Geriin hÜvÜÜdiin uchir’, BNMAU Shinjleh Uhaany Akademiin Medee, 1965, 2, 83–8.Google Scholar

7 Discussed briefly in Bawden, art. cit., 561.

8 Thus the first document in section 2 is dated in the middle, at the end of the actual report. The evidence given by individuals follows immediately after this, and is said to have been written on a separate piece of paper. However, item A.77 reproduced in facsimile by Sagaster, op. cit., 103, shows that evidence might also be added on the same sheet.

9 In what follows names and quotations will be taken from texts witten in both the traditional script and the modern Cyrillic alphabet and orthography. Generally the transcription will follow the orthography of the original, but with alternative versions added where it seems advisable.

10 A taiji Üurjinjav is known from Iledkel shastir, ch. lii, fol. 15a, and is identical with the present individual. He succeeded to his rank and appointment in the 36th year of Ch‘ien Lung (1771), and in the 46th year the rank was made hereditary in perpetuity by imperial order (ĵarliy-iyar Üye ularin tasural Ügei ĵalyamĵilayulbai). However, Ürjinjav laer offended by failing to report a case of horse-theft and dealing with it himself in an arbitrary manner, thus breaking the law, and for this his rank was cancelled (daraya inu mori qulayuysan qulayai-yin kereg-i oyto medegϋlϋgsen ϋgei qauli-i ĵÖriĵalyamĵilayulbai). However, Ürjinjav later offended by failing to report a case of horse-theft and dealing with it humself in an arbitray manner, thus breaking the law, and for this his rank was cancelled (daraya inu mori qulayuysan qulayai-yin kereg-i oyto medegülügsen ügei qauli-i ĵöriĵ00FC;eĵerken sidkegsen-ü uČir–tur ĵjerge bayilyabai). For meritorious service in succouring the people of his sumum during a period of disaster he was restored to his position zasag in the 56th year (tabin ĵiryuduyar on qobur ĵyd-un učar-a tegün-ü qariyatu summon-u arad-i teĵigeĵü Ľidaysan-u uĽir-tur kesig kËrtegeĵË ĵasat-i mŌn kË aquyulbai). Another document originated by Ürjinjav is found in the collection Mongolyn surguul’(1776—-1911), Ulan Bator, 1965, 14. In this the names of taijis and commoners who are learbubg to read are reported in response to a general inquiry from the League Head. Amount the taijis is one named Garvi, perhaps identical with the original lord of Dashjid: if so, it shows that Garvi died sometime between 1780, the date if this report, and 1789.

11 The document is cast in the form of a submission from a lower office to one of higher status. This form consists of the following framework.

Identification of the orginator: Zasgiin targüün zereg taij Ürjinjavyn bichig ‘Letter of the zasagand first rank taiji Ürjinjav’.

The names of the addressees, followed by the phrase tanaa ōrgōv ‘submitted to’: Chan chin mend yavah han uulyn chuulgany darga zasgiin hushuuny beis chuulgany ded darga tergüün zereg taij tanaa ōrgōv ‘Submitted to the Head of Han Uul League, now on duty at the Ch'ien Ch'ing Gate, zasayand beise, and to the Sub–head, first rank taiji’. The names of the addressees are not mentioned.

Statement of the subject of the report, introduced by the phrase medüülehiin uchir ‘subject of report’.

At the end of the letter, the phrase üünii tul ōrgōv ‘submitted for this reason’. In Manchu times documents were cast in different forms according to whether they were addressed to offices of superior, equal, or inferior rank. For the most common formulae sec especially Čebele, Mongyol alban bičig-ün ulamĵilal (Studia Mongolica, I, 22) Ulan Bator, 1959, reprinted ibid., II, 31–6, 1962. See also Sagaster, op.cit., 84–91.

The League Head concerned is Sündevdorj/Sündübdorji, a descendant of the Tusiyetü Qan Čaqundoji. His father Čebdendorji married the daughter of an imperial prince of the first rank in 1745 (qosirun-u gege) and became an imperial son-in-law (qosirun-u efu). In 1750 he became qosiurn-u beise/hoshuuny beis. In 1779 he was sent to attend the emperor-in official parlance, he was sent to the Ch'ien Ch'ing gate (jarliy-iyar Kian Čing Men-dür yaburulbai). He subsequently became Sub-head of his League and in 1783 became League Head. (Iledkel shastir, ch. vii, fol. 3v., and ch. xlviik, folios 24r-25r. He died in 1798 (Erdeni-yin erike Monumenta Historica, III, I, Ulan Bator, 1960, P. 148b).

The Sub-head of the League is named in a subsequent document as Hezeidorj. He is known from a document in section 2 to have died in or before 1791.

12 huyag/quyay, a term used to describe a male member of a banner who was of military age, i.e. between 18 and 60. See Natsagdorj, Halhyn tÜÜh, Ulan Bator, 1963, 152, and Ardyn zargyn bichig,207.

13 geriin boolger–Ün boyul. Natsagdorj, ‘Geriin hÜÜvÜÜdiin uchir’, notes the following ways in which a person might become a slave: by capture in war, by going as a bride-companion, by being given as a reward (this category seems, from a footnote, to consist of prisoners of war and criminals, so that it hardly forms a separate case), as punishment, or by being presented to a lama by a noble from the ranks of his own subjects (albal alba-tu). As appears from the case we are considering, slaves could be held not only by the nobility but by commoners as well, such as Orjin, who obtained Dashjid by purchase arranged oficially with a banner official.

14 butats hÜÜbutači kōbegÜn. The social implications of the term butatsare not clear from our text. Dashjid herself seems, from the way she later refers to them, to have considered all three of her children as bastards, though they were presumably born of one or other of the unions into which she was sold as a ‘wife’, gergiigergei.

15 A zangi was the officer in charge of a sumunand was supposed to be of noble rank. However, as Sonomdagva points out, it was often impossible to fill the post from the nobiity, and commoners would be appointed, as was provided for in the Regulations of the Li Fan YÜan. A boshgois defined in Ardyn zargyn bickig, 200, as equivalent to a hōōgch, a subordinate officer in a sumun.

16 Apparently by Ürjinjav and his senior assistat or tusalauČi: Ürjinjav minii gazraas tuslagch tüshmediig avch yalt em Dashjided asuuval.

17 Evidence is introduced by the fixed pharas ōchih n'/ōČikü inu preceded by the ame of the person interrgated, placed in either the dative-locative or the ablative case, e.g. Dashjided asuuval ōchih n’, or boshgo Bordoigoos asuuval ōchih n’, or boshgo Bordoigoos assuuval ōchih n’n, The evidence of the meiren Amindoo is introduced by an alternative tern medüüleh n’ on its first occurrence. This does not seem to denote ay significat difference in attitude towards a senior official: subsequently the term ōchih n’ is used also for Amindoo.

18 har'yaat/qariyatu. It is not clear what precise relationship this term implies between Nomon and the taiji Garvi, whether he was a member of a sub-unit of the banner of which Garvi might have been in charge, or whether he was a retainer, qamĵilya, of the taiji.

19 neg üher tōlōōn ōgch avaad, literally ‘got me by giving one ox as equivalent’. In later evidence Dashjid uses the word zol’jinstead of tōōlōn.

20 The shabi estate, that is the estate formed by those persons who were the direct subject of high lamas, especially, as in the present instance, of the Jebtsundamba Khutuktu, were organized primarily into otogs, and also into a sub-unit, the bag. Otog was a pre-Manchu organizational term surviving in this church context and also, accoding to Sonomdagva, 86, in the organization of some groups of qamĵilya who were formed into otogsand bags.

The text at this point runs: minii bieiig gegeenii shav’ Enethg dargyn gerrin hün Bayart gergii bolgoj hudaldan ōgōō sold me as wife to Bayar, tent-slave of the head of the Enetheg (-otog) of the Gegen’s shabi’. Gegen refers here to the Jebtsundamba Khutuktu. Enetheg is said in a footnote to be the name of an otog. Sonomdagva, op. cit., 107, lists 17 otogs of the Jebtsundamba’s shabiby name, and says later that by the beginning of the twentieth century there were 17 large otogs, 93 small ones, and 30 special bags. Enetheg may be the permanent name of the otog, or the name of the head of it, the darga. D. Tsedev,Ih shav’ (Studia Hostorica, VI, 2), Ulan Bator, 1964, 69, quotes a document of 1772 in which several orogs and bags are listed, some of them under the name of a darga as here, e.g. Chimid zaisan darga, Gombojav hicheengü, etc. The name Enetheg does not figure in this list.

Maiskii, Mongoliya nakanune revolutsii, Moscow, 1960, 218 is in error in saying that the shabiwere organized on otogs and not in bays. The nature of the bag is difficult to define. Maiskii, writing just before the revolution, that is when the old forms of administration still survived, describes the bag as a sub-unit of the banner. He says that in some banners the bags was called otog. Sonomdagva, however, gives the impression that the sumun was the basic unit of national administration in Mongolia, being subdivided only into groups of 10 househlds, (p. 84), and mentions the bag only as a shabi and a qamĵilya organizational term.

21 gurvaad üher bogtlon avav. A verb boytalaqu boytulaqu is registered in dictionaries from the time of the ‘Secret history’ on. Haenisch offers the meanings: ‘den Kopf kämmen, den Bohtah, Frauenkrone, aufsetzen’ on. Haenisch offers the meanings: ‘den Kopfkämmen, den Bohtah, Frauenkrone, aufsetzen’ for the ‘Secret history’. For modern Ordos Mostaert has: ‘coiffer une jeune fille, le jour de son mariage, à la maniére des femmes mariées; donner sa fille en mariage’. Tsevel, 1966, lists it as archaic and meaning a mutual agreement to marry. The one hint of a more technical meaning is given by Kowalewski, boytulaqu mal ‘quantité convenue de bétail’, which is perhaps the basis of the entry in Lessing: ‘animals or dowry given when entering a marriage contract’ In our text it is clearly stated that Dashjid was sold to Bayar as a wife (Bayart gergii bolgoj hudaldan ōgōōd) and that her mother got three oxen for her. Hence it may be correct to translate bogtlon avavas ‘got as a bridge-price’. Dashjid was repudiated by Bayar (Bayart geegdej), and went back to her mother, as she did after her two subsequent ventures. It is not stated what happened to the bridge-price paid on the first two occasions, whether or not it was paid back. On the third occasion no price was received (üünd minii ch mal bogtlon avsangüi). (The custom of marriage by sale bo gtlon ōgōh) was abolished by government decree in 1925.)

22 Dechingranpil became zasag and hoshuuny beis in 1778 but was reduced to ulsyn tüshee gün ulus-un tüsiye güng in 1792 for failing in the investigation of the case of a man who had been beaten to death. He died in the same year. (Iledkel shstir, ch. li, folios 8r-9r).

23 negen hushuuny Jaival, presumably, that is, of her own original banner, not of Dechingranpil’s a second time. The question of whether sale took place inside or outside the banner was of some importance, as will be seen.

24 A meiren was the officer in charge of milirary matters in a banner.

25 taij Tsevvnd yald bar’pj ōgōōd ‘ given to the taiji Tseveen as a penalty’.

26 üldsen hüü hüühen bid gurvuulyg har’yaat bagt niilüülj yavsan bilee For bag see p. 75, n.20. I am inclined to think that bag here means a hamjilga unit. It may be significant that, as appears below, the price obtained for Dashjid was not kept by the banner authorities who arranged the sale, but was handed over the family of Garvi, her late lord.

27 sul emsula eme.

28 har’yaat as above.

29 geriin hün ger–ün kümün.

30 Interesting only in that in parts their evidence is word for word identical. Perhaps a summary made by the banner office was submitted, not the actual words of the witnesses.

31 Referred to as chavgants or old nun.

32 The Manchu herds at Uliasutai are referred to in Ts. Nasanbaljir, Ar Mongoloos Manj Chin ulsad zalguulj baisan alba, Ulan Bator, 1964, 107, and in the Regulations of the Li Fan Yüan, ch. viii.

33 togtooson huul’d. This phrase occurs also in Sagaster, op. cit., pp.94 and 118, and commentary, pp. 100 and 123. Sagaster translates as ‘Gesetztes Recht’, with capital letter for the adjective, and with the whole expression inside quotation marks, on p. 123, as if this were as actual title. It may perhaps refer to the Regulations of the Li Fan Yüan, but it is interesting that document 2 of section 2 of our book contains the phrase Mongol tsaazny bichigt ogt togtooson huul’ ügüub tyk ‘ because there is no fixed law in the Mongol Code’ The Li Fan Yüan was asked in this case to give a ruling: Yavdlyn Yaasnaas togtooh ajaamuu. Again, in the same section we find the expression Halh dōrvō aimgiin tuslah janjny togtoosan huul’ yosoor ‘in accordance with the law fixed by the assistant generals of the four aimaks of Khalkha’, which suggests for the phrase togtooson huul’ a meaning such as ‘precedent established’ or ‘ruling given’. Whatever the truth of the matter, the one relevant passage I have found in the Regulations is difficult to interpret. Ch. xli, forbidding the sale of Mongols who have been entered on the banner registers, says that it is, however, permissible to sell ĵangdur, who have not been entered, within their original banner (uul qosiyun-dur qarilČan qudaldun abubasu qudaldubasu bolumui). The regulations for entering what are there termed ĵungdur on the registers as soldiers are given in ch. ix, folios 2v and 29r, in a section following that dealing with tent-slaves, ger-ün boyul, but I do not know what is meant by ĵungdur.

34 tavin dōrōvdügeer ony zurgaan saryn.

35 The introductory formulae, appropriate to a letter sent to an office of inferior status, are:

Da beis ded daagiin bichig ‘Letter of the League Head and beise, and the Sub-head’.

Zasag Ürjinjav tamgyn tuslagch Dashdondov nart hamtaar tushaan ilgeev ‘Sent as instructions jointly to the banner prince Ürjinjav and the banner tusalagch Dashdondov’.

Nariivchlan baitsaahaar yavuulahyn uchir‘ Subject—to carry out a close investigation’. The closing formula is Üünii tul tushaan ilgeev ‘Sent as instructions for this reason’.

36 Mōnōōhōn manai gazraas zarsan meiren Gombojavyn ōrgōsōn bichigt medüülehiin uchir ‘Subject or report in the letter submitted by the meiren Gombojav, detailed recently by our office’.

37 zalan, an officer dealing with military affairs in a banner.

38 Dashjid is referred to here as geriin em ‘tent-woman’.

39 Tüüniig avch idsen bilee. It appears however from Hüvhüü’s evidence in document 3 that Tseveen recovered the flesh of the sheep. Hence either Dashjid did not have time to eat it all up, or the verb ideh ‘to eat ’ is to be taken, as is quite permissble, in the meaning ‘to take over, appropriate’ Cf. Chingünjavaar udirduulsan Ar Mongol dah’, Ulan Bator, 1963, 48: zuu orchim hümüüs yavahyg üzeed duudaj asuuval bid Hiagtyg id’ye gej yavna ‘We saw about 100 men going along and called to them and questioned them and they said We’re going to “eat” Khiakta’.

40 The confiscation of the cow is mentioned now for the first time.

41 Mōnh-ovoo gedeg gazraa suulgaj saal’ ōg gev gej huurch. The phrase saal’ ōgōh, meaning ‘to give milking animals’, must have a technical meaning unknown to me. Probably Dshjid would be expected to live on a share of the milk she obtained from Amindoo’s animals.

42 Orjingiin üüdend yavtal ‘while I was at Orjin’s door’.

43 The report closes with the formula baitsaaval ōōr sejigleh met züilgüig medüülj üünii tul ōrgōv ‘reporting that in my opinion there are no further grounds for suspicion, I make this submission for this reason’.

44 The League Office’s opinion is introduced by the phrase gesniig baitsaaval ‘reviewing what has been said’.

45 This document, in from of a submission in response to the precious one containing instructions, adapts its opening formula to the latter. The statement of the subject is thus in the form: nariivchlan baitsaasan yavdlyg medüüleh uchir ‘Subject of report-close investigation’.

46 The calf now enters the story for the first time.

47 hoyor zuun dalan chainaas⃛hudaldsan. The word chai is the name of the ‘currency unit’ usually known as shar lsai. Around 1900 such shar tsai, each of about 40 grammes weight of tea leaf, were considered the equivalent of ont brick of Chinese tea. (hyatad zyzaan isai). In money terms the value varied at different times between about 150 and 220 shar isai to an ounce of silver (lan). See S. pürevjav, Huv’sgalyn ōmnōh Ih Hüree, Ulan Bator, 1961, 68, and Övgön Jambalyn Yaria, Ulan Bator, 1959, 5.

48 büliin hün ats gej medüülsend.

49 The original of which this is a paraphrase is: chi Dashjided ochij saal’ tataj ōgnō geh negen ügeer huurch nüülgan avaachaad ‘You go to Dashjid, take her in by saying you’ll get her some milking animals, and get her to move’. The animals were in fact to be collected from a place called Hartogoi and moved to the south side of Möhn-ovoo.

50 gelen.

51 ōōiin geriin negen hōvüün.

52 The alignment of the heading is as follows:

Which I reconstruct as follows: Da beis sü ded da Hegiin bichig

Ih zurgaanaa ōrgōn medüülehiin uchir

Beis Dechingranpil zasag Ütjinjavt tushaan ilgeev. Yavuulahyn uchir, The next line reads: Manai ih zurgaany ōrgōsōn bichigt. seeing that what follows is a quotation from a letter from the League Office lo the Li Fan Yüan (or Ih zurgaan Yeke ĵuryan), zurgaany must be translated as if it were zurgaand, i.e. dative-locative for genitive case. A more ambitious but more accptable emendation would be to correct ih zurgaany as whole to gazraas, so that the phrase would read: ‘in the letter submitted by our office’. For manai gazraas used by the League Office to identify itself, cf. p. 85, n. 64. (In tbis connexion, though it is irrelevant to the present case, we see from several documents in the collection Manjiin daranguillyn üeiin Mongolyn surguul’, Ulan Bator, 1965, that the office of the Manchu amban in Urga, when writing to a League Office, made use of a mixed formula, by which it appeared to ‘submit’ ‘instructions’. For example, no. 166 Tamgyn gazryn ōrgōsōn n’: Tushaan uavuulah uchir.)

53 Very probably a justifiable fear on her part. There were nine thpes of torture permissible in Mongolia at this time to assist in eliciting the truth, varying from beatings of different sorts, to being made to assist in eliciting the truth, varying from beatings of different sorts, to being made to kneel under pressure on sharp wood, being hung up by the thumbs, having the limbs squeezed, and so on. Detail may be found (in Mongol) in Dendev, Mongyol-un erte edüge-yin qauli Čayaĵin-u teüke-yin sedüb debter, Ulan Bator, 1936, 39–40, and in J. Sambuu, Shashin ba lam naryn asuudald, Ulan Bator, 1961, 54–5.

54 sanaany duraar.

55 sanaany zorigoor.

56 Zohihyg üzej. No reference is made here to any code in assessing the penalty. This was altered when the Li Fan Yüan reviewed the case, and an appropriate reference was found.

57 Curt Alinge, Mongolische Gesetze, Leipzig, 1934, 70, notes that the meaning of a ‘nine’ of cattle varies according to the codes concerned. On pp. 104–-5 he shows that in the Khalkha Code (Qalqa ĵirum) it consisted of 4 head of large beasts and 5 three-year sheep, while for the Regulations of the Li Fan Yüan he quotes the figures of 2 horses, 2 full-grown bulls, 2 cows, 2 three-year and I two-year bulls (p. 155).

58 The original of the phrase ‘without making a case against her’ is hereg gargahgüi bolgon. The translation is uncertain.

59 ug hudaldaag hoish olgovol zohih auch. A note explains hudaldaag as hudaldsan yumyg. For (hoish) olgoh ‘refund, restore’ cf. below taij Tseveend yald avsan ühriig mōn hōōj gargaad moōnhüü Dashjided olgosugai ‘The beast received as a fine by the raiji Tseveen we propose to repossess and restore also to Dashjid’.

60 A sttange decision: the sale was illegal and the purchaser a lama.

61 heleltseh yavdalgüi bolgoyo. For this technical term see also Bawden, ‘A joint petition’, 562.

62 toony yosoor ‘according to the number’. See also the last document: Darjaas avsan yumyg toony yosoor hōōn avch ’ repossessing in full the items taken from Darjaa’.

63 ene hergiig shüüj todorhoilson.

64 Ene negen hergiig sii⃛ He⃛ manai gazraas iinhüü togtoon shiitgesen n’ zohildoh, ül zohildoh yavdlyg ih zurgaanaas togtoon shiitgen zaan hürch irsen tsagt dagaj shiitgeye gej üünii tul ōrgōv gej medüülsniig züi n ’ beis Dechingranpil zasag Ürjinjact mediügei gej yavuul’ya üünii tul tushaan ilgeev. The league Head and sub-head refer to themselves here by abbreviated forms of their names.

65 Zasgiin tergüün zereg taij Ürjinjavyn bichig. Chan chin mend yavah han uulyn chuulgany darga zasgiin hushuuy beis chuulgany ded darga tergüün zereg taij tanaa ōrgōv. cf. p. 73, n. 11.

Medüülehiin uchir, da beis ded da tanai tushaan ilgeesen bichight yavuulahya uchir ‘Subject of report: as instructed in the letter sent down by the League Head and Sub-head’.

Ih zurgaanaas tushaan hürch irsen bichigt ‘in the letter sent down by the Li Fan Yüan’.

Manai zurgaanaas ailtgasan n’, said bid shüüh yavdlyn yaamtai niilj hagalsun n’ ‘This yüan submitted (to the Throne):“We ministers come to a decision (as follows) jointly with the Board of punishments”’.

Tüsheet han aimgiin chuulgany darga beis sündevdorj naryn gazraas ōrgōn hürgej irsen bichigt‘ in the letter submitted by the office of the league Head, zasag and beise, SÜndevdorj, of the Tüsiyetü Qan aimak’, A résumeé of the evidence as given in document 4 begins at this point.

The copy of the Li Fan Yüan ’s submission to the Throne ends with the formula Said manai goyochoor avaachih yavdal busyn tul hicheengüilen ailtgav ‘As this is a matter which we ministers may not decide arbitearily, we earnestly report it’. The meaning of goyochoor ‘with partiality’ is fixed by a similar phrase in a document in section 2 of this book: Said manai zorigoor bolgoh yavdal bus tul hicheengüilen ailtgav, where zorigoor bolgoh ‘to effect on one’s own initiative’ corresponds to goyochoor avaachih. Though it is nowhere stated to be so, it is safe to assume that the Li Fan Yüan ’s submission was not drawn up originally in Mongol.

The submission to the Throne having been copied, our document reverts to the letter sent by the Li Fan Yüan to the League Office. The next short section, reporting the receipt of the Imperial Order, ends with the formula gesniig hicheengüilen dagaj üüii lul tushaan ilgeev ‘obediently following what was said (by the Throne) we have thereford sent this letter to you ’.

Now follows quotation of the League’s letter to the two zasags, regerring to the instructions received from the Yüan and inteoduced by the formula gej tushaan hÜrch irsen üüniig…nart tushaan yavuulaad ‘which order having arrived, we sent it to…’. The League's letter ends with the usual closing formula üünii tul tushaan ilgeev ’sent down for this reasen ’, and Ürjinjav’s report back to the league begins with the phrase gej tushaasanyh dagaj ‘, in obedience to these instructions’ and ends with the usual closing formula üünii tul tushaan ilgeev ‘sent down for this reason’, and Ürjinjav’s report back to the League begins with the phrase gej tushaasanyg dagaj ‘in obedince to these instructions’ and ends with the usual closing formula üünii tul ōrgÖv ‘submitted for this reason’.

To sum up then, we have in this complex document references to the progress of an affair from the League Office up to the Li Fan Yüan, thence to the Throne, thence dowmwards to the Yüan, the League Office, and the banner office, and thence back again once more to the League Office, with the appropriate opening and closing formulae for each stage.

66 Mongol tsaazny bichigt. As suggested in Bawden, ‘A joint petition’, 561, this appears to refer to the Li Fan Li Fan Yüan. (We may note here that the quotation given in that article does in fact occur in the Regulations, ch. xlii. Cf. microfilm copy, SOAS.)

67 Shüüh tsaazny bichig. A study of the code bearing this name by our Mongol commeagues would be useful. Copies are listed in the 1937 catalogue of the State Library of Mongolia, pp. 71 ff.

68 alivaa laij nar muu samuunaar yavbal darui taijiin zergiig evd. This appears to be a version of an entry in the Regulations of Li Fan Yüan, ch. xxxviii, in a section on theft: aliba taili mayu samayun qulayai bolun yabubasu taiĵi-yin ĵerge-yi ebdeĵü qaraču kümün bolya ‘If any taiji, with great depravity, becomes a thief, concel his rank and make him a commoner’.

69 huul’d. No more exact reference is given.

70 sharyg horhlood ‘to strip off the yellow’.

71 All three mentioned for the first time.

72 sul tergüÜn zereg taij. A sula taiĵi was one without official employment and salary

73 The Li Fan Yϋan's submission continues and closes with what appears to be a standard formula: Jich ene herey Gadaad Mongolyn Tōriig Zasah Yavdlyn Yaamnaas dagaj eh togtooson yavdlyy zϋi n' hamataar todorhoilon gargaval zohino. Said manai goyochoor, etc., as abovem, p. 85, n. 65; then: zarligiig guina gej, followed by the full date: tengeriin tetgesnii tavin dōvdϋgeer on ōvliin tergϋϋn sarya shiniin yōsnōō ailtagsand. For a parallel to the first sentence see the document in section 2 already quoted, which has a similar text except for: hϋleej (for dagaj) and jas (Manchu jise, for eh). I suggest the following translation: ‘Further, in this matter, it is proper for the Li Fan Yϋan concurrently to explain the obedient preparation of the draft’. I am not sure what process is referred to here. The term hamtaar, here translated ‘concurrently’, is regularlu used in Mongol official documents of the period to qualify the performance of some action additional to those already mentioned. See for example the second document in section 2 of our collection in which Sϋndevdorj, having submitted a report on a case he has been investgating, adds an additional remark which is introduced by the word jich –further’ and closes with ϋϋ hamtaar todorhoilon garav ‘I have explained (this) concurrently with it’. See also the collection of documents concerning schools already quoted above, p. 82, n. 52, for several instances of which the following is typical. In item 44 a banner prince namesd Ürjinjav, probably identical with the Ürjinjav of the present text, though the letter dates from much later, 1820, receives instructions from his League Office to send a certain boy to the official school. He is further instructed to make a report on how the things the by needs have been provided, and these instructions are qualified with hamtaar: wany saidyn gazraas ner zaaj tushaasan yosor tϋϋnii alivaa heregsliig mōdōrl yaamny gazraa hϋϋlj mani ϋseg surgaj suulgasugai. Jich tϋϋnii alivaa heregsliig mōn yaahan garguulsan yavdlyy hamtaar gargaj medϋϋleer irsϋgei ‘You are to dispatch him as designated and ordered by the office of the Wang-amban, get him to the Office on the appointed day and have him stay there and study Manchu writing. Further, you are concurrently to report how his various needs have been provided for’. THe phrase todorhoilon gargah, which is translated here ‘to explain’ and may also be taken as ‘to set out clearly’ appears later on in the variant form lodorhoi garah. Calling for a report from the banner as to how the orders of the Li Fan Yϋan have been carried out, the bleague Office writes: zereg yavdlyg tsōm ih zurgaanaas ailtgaad hϋrch irsen yosoor dagaj shiitgϋϋleed jich herhen dagaj shiitgesen yavdlyy zϋil daraalan negen negneer todorhoi gargaj tamgat bicheer medϋϋleheer irϋϋlev ‘Now that I have ordered these matters to be disposed of as instructed by the Li Fan Yϋan after it had made its submission, I have called for a report ona stamped document setting out clearly, one after the other in order, how they have been disposed of’.

The text from said to aillgan has been translated above, p. 85, n. 65. The remainder offers no problem: ‘submitted requestin an (imperial) order on the ninth day of the first month of winter of the 54th year of CH‘ien Lung’.

74 The penalties imposed on the two banner princes are mentioned specifically, though the imperial order does not alter them. All other decisions are approved en bloc. A similar procedure is to be found in the document in section 2 already quoted, where penalties imposed on Ürjinjav and Sϋndevdorj in another case are mentioned specifically.

75 Amindoogiin orond ōōr meiren tavih hϋniig huun’ yosoor hunchny dotroo songoj begiig tuhailan negiig tashluulan De janjin nar manai gazraa medϋϋlen irϋϋlj bieiig ϋzϋϋlen meiren taviulsugai For tashluulan cf.dasilayulqui, caus. od dasilaqu ‘to be designated for a post in advance before it is vacated’ (lessing, 236).

76 The erdene shanzav was the officer at the head of the Erdene shanzavyn yaam in Urga, the office controlling the Jebtsundamba's shabi-estate. For the organization of this office see Sonomdagva, 100 ff.

77 Mentioned by name for the first time.