Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:53:23.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Felt and “Tent Carts” in The Secret History of the Mongols

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2009

Michael Gervers  and
Wayne A. Schlepp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the final chapter of his novel, The First Circle, Alexander Solzhenitsyn extols the virtues of the felt boot: “A pair of felt boots are the two best friends a prisoner will ever have … Woe then to anyone whose feet are not shod in felt boots! … But the prisoner wearing his own felt boots has not a care in the world.” Solzhenitsyn writes for those unfamiliar with the extremes faced by the society he is describing. Similarly, but far removed in time, we are accustomed to learning a great deal more about the uses of felt among nomadic peoples from travellers who have purportedly visited them than we do from such rare accounts as The Secret History of the Mongols (SH) which emanate from sources close to the nomads themselves.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , April 1997 , pp. 93 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1997

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 The line numbers are those in de Rachewiltz, Igor, Index to the Secret History of the Mongols (Bloomington, 1972)Google Scholar.

2 Cleaves, Francis Woodman, The Secret History of the Mongols, i, (trans.) (Cambridge, Mass, and London, 1982) (hereafter Cleaves SH), p. 57Google Scholar.

3 Pelliot, Paul, Histoire secrète des Mongols (Paris, 1949) (hereafter Pelliot HS), p.157Google Scholar.

4 Menggu mishi cihui xuanshi, E-er-deng-tai, et al. eds. (Hohhot, 1980), (hereafter Cihui) p. 136Google Scholar; Mongol Kitad Toli [Mongol–Chinese Dictionary], ed. by Seminar of Mongolian Language, University of Inner Mongolia (Hohhot, 1977) (hereafter MKT), p. 367Google Scholar.

5 Felt, much sought after for warmth and comfort, has been widely used as bedding. The white felts of Yarkand were highly prized for this purpose in the western Himalayas until trade was halted between China and India in 1950. Haifa millennium earlier, in 1474, Barbara commented on the felt carpets exported from Adena (Turkey) to Cairo, which were “light and soft to sleep on” (see Wiet, Gaston, “Tapis égyptiens”, Arabica, Revue d’Études arabes, VI (1959), p. 21Google Scholar; see also Gervers, Michael, “Evidence for Ottoman influence on felt-making in Egypt”, Textile History, XX (1989), pp. 3–12 (p. 6))CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Cihui p. 203; MKT p. 621.

7 Eighteen Songs of a Nomad Flute: The Story of Lady Wen-Chi, a Fourteenth-Century Handscroll in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, ed. and trans. Rorex, Robert A. and Fong, Wen (New York, 1974), passimGoogle Scholar.

8 Olschki, Leonardo, The Myth of Felt (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1949), p. 14Google Scholar. Olschki gives no reference to his source, but Vladimirtsov, B. la. (Le Régime social des Mongols: le Féodalisme nomade, Paris, 1948, p. 40, n. 4)Google Scholar cites Pozdneev, A. (O drevnem kit.-mong. pamyatniké Yuan-tchao-mi-si, p. 18)Google Scholar, who recalls an unidentified phrase in the SH which Vladimirtsov translates as “lignées habitant les charrettes de feutre”, in which we have felt [covered] carts. Of the three occurrences in the SH of isgei, the third (para. 203 [Cleaves, pp. 143–4]) might be the reference in this case. Chinggis is talking to Šigi Qutuqu, requesting that he divide the entire people and give some to various members of the Chinggisids; he says: “Dividing those who have skirts of felt [which cover their tents as outward walls], making to separate themselves those who have doors of boards [on their tents].” This might suggest a designation for certain groups of subjects. However isgei in the SH does not occur modifying “cart” (tergen).

Pozdneev may be referring to the passage with “qara’utai tergen” in para. 24, which is significant to Vladimirtsov in his attempt to distinguish between forest tribes and nomads among the Mongols; he says: “Le texte qui décrit la transhumance du clan, séparé de la tribu forestière des Qori Tumat, observe que Qorilartaϊ-märgän possédait entre autres une ‘charrette couverte’, ‘qara’utaï tärgän,’ pareille à celles dont, à cette époque, se servaient les Mongols nomades … ” (p. 41; see also below, n. 43). This, of course, is a small cart. He goes on to explain in more detail later: “L’Histoire Secrète nous fait savoir que les Mongols connaissaient deux types de chariots, que Plan Carpin et Rubruck distinguent également; leurs classifications ne sont d’ailleurs pas concordante. [Here he notes Pelliot's review of Noëttes, Lefebvre des's “La force motrice animale à travers les âges” in T’oung Pao, XXIV (1926), pp. 263–4Google Scholar which discusses some obscurities in Rubruck's description.] Les charrettes servaient non seulement au transport des charges, mais aussi à celui des yourtes, qui ne se démontaient plus. A cette époque, les chars représentaient un des aspects coutumiers de la vie mongole; on s’en servait même dans des régions aussi peu accessibles et difficiles que les pays d’amont de l’Onon et du Kärülän. Mais l’usage des énormes charrettes supportant de grandes yourtes [dont parle Rubruck] était réservé aux steppes et aux pays plats ….” (pp. 50–1). In view of what follows (below p. 98 ff.), it is worthy of note that Carpini and Rubruck are cited as the only sources for the legend of the “énormes charrettes supportant de grandes yourtes”.

9 Cleaves, p. 168 n. 2, quoting Mostaert, Antoine, Sur Quelques Passages de l’Histoire secrète des Mongols (Cambridge, Mass., 1953). p. 137Google Scholar; and Cihui, p. 112. This is the qayaghabci, referred to as xayaawch in Chabros, Krystyna, “Quilted ornamentation on Mongol felts”, Central Asiatic Journal, XXXII (1988), pp, 34–60 (pp. 36, 48)Google Scholar. Irge is defined in Ramstedt, G. J., Kalmükisches Wörterbuch (Helsinki, 1935) (hereafter Ramstedt, KalmWb), p. 209Google Scholar, and in Tsoloo, J., BNMAU daxi Mongol xelnii nutgiin ayalguuni toli bicig [Dictionary of the dialects in the M.P.R.], ii: Oird ayalguu [The Oirat dialect] (Ulan Bator, 1988), p. 494Google Scholar, as geriin xayaa [the lower edge of the round tent]; in Russian: mesto styka resetcatoj steny i pola (jurty) [the place where the lattice wall and the side felt cover (of the round tent) join]; niznie koncy kosm jurty [the lower ends of the felt covers of the yurt]; etc. Oirat irgibc (written irgibtsi, p. 493) is defined by the Khalka word xayaawc (but given in Lessing, Ferdinand D., Mongolian English Dictionary (Bloomington, 1982)Google Scholar (the corrected reprint), p. 915, as XAJAГABCI: “a narrow band of felt or squares of wooden boards joined to form a belt for covering the bottom of the yurt in winter”; in Russian, niznij polog jurty; see also Ramstedt, , KalmWb, p. 161Google Scholar). We are indebted to Gy. Kara for the references to Ramstedt and Tsoloo.

10 Pp. 261–2; on the Turkish origin of the word, see Radloff, F. W., Versuch eines Wörterbuches der Turk-Dialecte, iii, (St Petersburg, 1905) (hereafter TD), p. 1467Google Scholar. Laufer, Berthold (“The early history of felt”, American Anthropologist, XXXII (1930), p. 15)Google Scholar, claims that “Among the Mongols, even of the present time, white felt is a material endowed with a sacred character … The women therefore, in speaking of felt, carefully avoid the common word for it (ishighei), which is a term of respect, but substitute for it the words dzulakhai or tolok.” A. Mostaert defines the Ordos tolok as “tapis de cérémonie en feutre blanc (p. ex. celui sur lequel on étale les cadeaux de manage, ou celui sur lequel on fait descendre de leur cheval un prince ou la nouvelle bru d'un noble quand, le jour de mariage, elle arrive chez ses beaux-parents) …” Dictionnaire ordos, 2nd ed. (New York, 1968), p. 666Google Scholar.

11 Cihui, pp. 261–2, citing d’Ohsson, Constantin Mouradgea, Histoire des Mongols, depuis Tchinguiz-Khan jusqu’ à Timour Beg ou Tamerlan, 4 vols., The Hague and Amsterdam, 1834–1835Google Scholar. This account stands in contrast to many others, from the sixth to the fourteenth century, in which the enthronement carpet in this Turko-Mongolian ritual is reported to have been black (Olschki, , Myth of Felt pp. 22–34Google Scholar). Black felt was used in earlier times by the Topa Wei people and continued in modified form by the Khitans (Liao); see Wittfogel, Karl A. and Chia-sheng, Feng, History of Chinese Society: Liao (907–1125) (Philadelphia, 1949), p. 275, n. 190Google Scholar.

12 Simon of St. Quentin (Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum historiale, bk. xxxi, ch. xxxii, 452a), trans. Rockhill, W. W., The Journey of William of Rubruck to the Eastern Parts of the World, 1253–55 (London, 1900), p. 21, n. 1Google Scholar; also cited in Olschki, , Myth of Felt, p. 25Google Scholar. For the Latin text see de Saint-Quentin, Simon, Histoire des Tartares, ed. Richard, J. (Paris, 1965), pp. 90–1Google Scholar. Another translation (without citation) appears in Laufer, Berthold, “The early history of felt”, American Anthropologist, XXXII (1930), pp. 1–18 (pp. 14–15)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 The gloss uses the Chinese character for the word mu, referring to woven wool material which has a design woven into it (Morohashi, Tetsuji, Dai kanwa jiten, 13 vols. (Tokyo, 1960), vi, pp. 830–1Google Scholar; hereafter Morohashi), and this refers to the örmege.

14 Translated as “grauen Filzmantel” by Taube, Manfred, Geheime Geschichte der Mongolen (Munich, 1989), p. 141Google Scholar.

15 The Cihui (pp. 127–8) glosses örmege from para. 95 of the SH, mao shan (“fur or wool mantle”), but does not refer to para. 205 where the same term is glossed mu shan (see note 13 above). It cites the TD (Radloff, i, 1242), in which örmök refers to material woven of camel's hair. The MKT (p. 295) has örmüg, “a course material woven of sheep's wool”. This suggests that örmege is woven material and not felt.

16 Exceptions occur in para. 24 and 28 where mention is made of an impromptu shelter (ger) covered with grass, and in para. 103 of one made of elm twigs.

17 Golden tents of kings are mentioned by Tamīm ibn Baḥr in the early ninth century (Minorsky, V., “Tamīm ibn Baḥr's journey to the Uyghurs”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, XII (1948), pp. 294–5)Google Scholar. Minorsky notes they are also cited in the (Hsin) Tang Shu (ibid, p. 295, n. 2).

18 For Mongol altan meaning “imperial”, see Serruys, Henry, Monumenta Serica, XXI (Nagoya, 1962), pp. 357–78Google Scholar. Terme is still used by the Oirats to mean “the lattice wall of the yurt”. We are grateful to Gy. Kara for these references.

19 Chinese sa zhang fang, with sa zhang modifying fang, rather than sa (spread) as a verb with the object zhang fang (tent dwelling). Note that in these two paragraphs the expression is part of the description of the Tanguts who were defeated by Chinggis at this time.

20 MKT, p. 1037.

21 Translation by Cleaves, p. 144.

22 de Rachewiltz, Igor, “The Secret History of the Mongols”, Papers in Far Eastern History (hereafter PFEH), X (1974), pp. 55–82 (pp. 62 and 76)Google Scholar.

23 Paris, Bibliothè;que Nationale, MS Supplement Persan, no. 1113, as cited in Olschki, , Myth of Felt, p. 17 and 55 n. 46Google Scholar.

24 Olschki, (Myth of Felt, p. 17 and pl. I)Google Scholar himself argues that this curtain is felt, when it appears by its folds to be of woven material, even silk. Silk could be raised in folds, as here, while felt would in all likelihood have had to be rolled.

25 Pelliot, , HS, p. 147Google Scholar; de Rachewiltz, , ch. 3, PFEH, V (1972), pp. 151, 167Google Scholar. See also Gy. Kara's reconstruction of gülimme glossed as “chabraque, housse” in his “Un vocabulaire sino-mongol des Yuan le Tche-yuan yi-yu” in Acta Orientalia (Budapest), XLIV (1990), p. 266Google Scholar.

26 The Geography of Strabo, ed. and trans. Jones, H.L., iii, The Loeb Classical Library (London, 1917), p. 223Google Scholar.

27 i.e. willow poles; see Faegre, Torvald, Tents: Architecture of the Nomads (London, 1979), pp. 79–94Google Scholar.

28 Patchwork is common among Turkic peoples; Mongols would use quilting (see also note 54 below).

29 Jackson, Peter, trans and ed. (with Morgan, David), The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: his journey to the court of the Great Khan Möngke (London, 1990), pp. 72–3Google Scholar: ed. Wyngaert, A. van den, Sinica Franciscana, i (Quaracchi-Florence, 1929), pp. 172–3Google Scholar. An account so similar that it can only have been borrowed from Rubruck was published nearly 400 years later, in 1630, by the English mercenary, Captain John Smith. In 1602, Smith was captured by the Turks and sent off as a slave to Tartary. He describes the homes of his captors as being “very artificially wrought, both the foundation, sides, and roofe of wickers, ascending round to the top like a dove-coat; this they cover with white felt, sometimes with blacke felt, curiously painted with vines, trees, birds and beasts; the breadth of the carts are eighteene or twenty foot, but the house stretcheth foure or five foot over each side, and is drawne with ten or twelve, or for more state, twenty camels and oxen” (Smith, John, The True Travels, Adventures and Observations of Captaine John Smith in Europe, Africa and America from Anno Domini 1593 to 1629 (London, 1630, rpt. Amsterdam/New York, 1968), p. 26)Google Scholar.

30 Dawson, Christopher, ed., Mission to Asia (New York, 1966, rpt. Toronto,, 1980), p. 8Google Scholar: ed. Wyngaert, , op. cit., p. 35Google Scholar. We surmise that Carpini may well have seen examples of the felt-covered single ox-cart, but only heard of or speculated about the others.

31 Chinese qionglu glossed in the text as zhanzhang, or “felt tent”.

32 i.e. the Dada.

33 Chinese: che shang shi; the term shi, “cabin”, here suggests something smaller than fang, “dwelling”.

34 Chinese: zhang-yu (tent vehicle); yu can be a literary term with figurative senses, but its definition as “vehicle” tends to refer to ones that are covered. Erich Haenisch translates the expression as Jurten-Wagen (Haenisch, Erich and Ts'ung-wu, Yao, Meng-Ta Pei-Lu und Hei-Ta Shih-Lüeh, Chinesische Gesandtenberichte über die frühen Mongolen 1221 und 1237, German trans, by Olbricht, Peter and Pinks, Elisabeth, with an introduction by Banck, Werner (Wiesbaden, 1980), p. 104Google Scholar), and he equates it (see n. 4, ibid. p. 106) with ger tergen in the SH. His translation implies that the text refers to two kinds of cart, Jurten-Wagen and Speisekarren. But the Chinese passage seems clearly to say that these zhang-yu, which one can sit and lie in, may have poles at the four comers or sometimes boards connecting them and will have weather-proof covering, are called yin-shi-che (provisions-carts) and it is most likely that both terms refer to the same thing. It is unlikely that these would be used to transport removable yurts, whether folded up or not. The description of the zhang-yu given here is very much like the two-wheeled cart described by Marco Polo (see below and nn. 34, 41). As to the size of these covered carts, we have the brief remark by Zhou Hui of the Song dynasty: “On the road [between Handan and Xingzhou near the western boundary of modern day Hebei Province] we encountered a light cart (qing che) which was covered with black felt; it was a head family” Hui, Zhou, “Bei yuan lu” in Shuofu, ch. 54 (Shangwu, 1927, p. 838Google Scholar). This reference suggests that these covered carts were usually the lighter vehicles and, if one had them, were used for personal conveyance, as opposed to the larger wagons which were probably less frequently used and then mainly for heavy loads of goods or equipment during seasonal migrations.

One may note that 1) the Chinese term for yurt, qionglu (Haenisch's Kuppelzelt), at the opening of this passage is different from that used for tent-cart, zhang-yu (Haenisch's Jurten-Wagen, 2 zhang-yu is never used in the SH to translate ger tergen, and 3) zhang is most often used to designate a structure different from a felt yurt (SH 80, 118, 184, 185, 187, 245, 246Google Scholar), and only seldom used to translate ger (SH 256, 266). The term ger has a wide range of meanings; it can refer to dwellings in general, and is then usually glossed in Chinese as fang or fanzi. It very often signifies something less concrete, like household or home, when it is glossed as jia, jia nei, jia li. Almost as frequendy its meaning remains open and then may be glossed interchangeably by fang or jia. When it refers to a dwelling in the ordo (camp), it is often glossed with shi (room, house). Specific reference to the physical structure yields wu (house, room) as the gloss. It is also used to refer to an impromptu shelter (see note 16 above). While there is no reason why Peng Daya should have used the same terms as did the scribes for the SH, this comparison allows a better notion of what the words can mean.

35 Daya, Peng, Heida Shilue (ChangSha, 1937, p. 3)Google Scholar. Jagchid, Sechin and Hyer, Paul (Mongolia's Culture and Society (Boulder, Colorado and Folkestone, 1979), p. 63Google Scholar, with bibliographical information on p. 391) have conflated text and commentary from Peng Daya (5ab) to read as follows: “The Mongols live in a felt yurt which has no heavy or permanent walls, ceilings or rooms … They use a tented cart on which they may sit and sleep … There are two types of yurts – in the type common in the area of Yenching [Beijing] willows are used to form a frame or lattice work for the yurt … This framework forms a wall and may be expanded or collapsed. There is a door in the front and the ceiling is also formed of a framework like an umbrella; in the center is a hole spoken of as t’ien ch’uang [sky-window]. The whole framework of the yurt is covered with felt. It is possible to transport the yurts on horseback. In the steppe grazing areas, yurts are formed of willow stakes which are not collapsible and the whole yurt is transported on a cart”.

36 Marcellinus, Ammianus, book XXXI, chapters 13, 16, 18, trans. Rolfe, John C., Loeb edition, iii (London and Cambridge, Mass., 1939), pp. 388–91Google Scholar.

37 Polo, Marco, The Description of the World, ed. and trans. Moule, A. C. and Pelliot, Paul, i (London, 1938), pp. 168–9Google Scholar. This edition is based on 120 MSS, “of which … no two are exactly alike … and no single copy is known “to be either complete or correct” (p. 40). The reference to “four-wheeled waggons” derives from the ‘R’ text, a printed Italian version of 1559 prepared by Giovan Battista Ramusio for which no MS survives (p. 43). No mention is made of these wagons in the edition of Yule, Henry and Cordier, Henri (The Book of Ser Marco Polo the Venetian, Concerning the Kingdoms and Marvels of the East, 3rd ed., i (London, 1903, rpt. London, 1975), p. 252)Google Scholar. Masefield, John's edition (The Travels of Marco Polo the Venetian (London, Toronto and New York, 1908, rpt. 1929), pp. 123–4)Google Scholar reproduces word for word the text of Thomas Wright (1810–77), who revises the translation and notes of William Marsden (1754–1836). See also the re-edition of Ramusio's work by Renato Giani: Polo, Marco, Il Milione (Rome, 1954), p. 60Google Scholar.

38 This phrase is translated as “une espèce de pavilion” in Batoutah, Ibn, Voyages d’Ibn Batoutah, ed. and trans, by Defrémery, C. and Sanguinetti, B. R., ii (Paris, 1877), p. 361Google Scholar.

39 Baṭṭūṭa, Ibn, The Travels of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, A.D. 1325–1354, trans, with revisions and notes from the Arabic text edited by Defrémery, C. and Sanguinetti, B. R., by Gibb, H.A.R., ii (Cambridge, 1962), pp. 472–3Google Scholar. An English translation is cited in Laufer, , “The early history of felt”, p. 14, and Yule, i, p. 221 n. 2Google Scholar.

40 This interpretation of ger tergen is suggested by Cleaves, F. W. in “The Bodistw-a Čari-a Awatar-un Tayilbur of 1312”, HJAS, XVII (1954), pp. 1–129 (pp. 78, 102 n. 129)Google Scholar, although in “An early Mongolian loan contract from Qara Qoto”, HJAS, XVIII (1955), pp. 1–49 (pp. 37–8 n. 26, 102 n. 129)Google Scholar he feels it should be translated “tent-cart”. See also the modem dictionary, MKT, in which the meaning “household” or “home” is given as well (p. 757).

41 This suggestion was proposed in a personal communication from Gy. Kara to W. Schlepp, dated 24 March 1992. See also fig. 14 below.

42 Cleaves, SH, p. 53Google Scholar; Haenisch, Erich, Die Geheime Geschichte der Mongolen (Leipzig, 1948, hereafter: Haenisch GG), p. 32Google Scholar; Pelliot, HS, p. 155Google Scholar; de Rachewiltz, , ch. 3, PFEH, V (1972), p. 162Google Scholar; Taube, , Geheime Geschichte, p. 53Google Scholar.

43 This is probably also the explanation of “black cart” in SH para. 6. Vladimirtsov reckons the word qara’utai does not mean “black”, but rather is from the word qaraghu, which refers to guarding or protecting (see also above, n. 7). This is one of the meanings given in MKT (p. 585), but it has a specialized sense of guarding one's own flock or herd and may not be used as generally as Vladimirtsov thought. From this he translates “charrette couverte” (p. 41 and n. 4). Following the Chinese gloss, Cleaves translates the expression “black cart” (SH, p. 2). The Cihui (p. 170), takes the term qara’u to be qara “black” combined with ’u, “the ribs of a yurt over which the felt is drawn”, citing Radloff, i, 1591 (no. 4 under the second entry for ‘y’). They add that qara’u is a peng che (canopied or covered cart) that has black staves.

44 Although the terms for the four references in the SH to “black carts” (qara’u, qara’utai terge; para. 6, 55, 100, 244) are somewhat ambiguous, it seems clear that these are the type of cart used for personal transport and are probably the ones referred to by Marco Polo and Ibn Baṭṭūṭa.

45 Directed by Zhan Xiangchi and produced by the Inner Mongolia Film Studio in cooperation with the Youth Film Studio.

46 Montell, Gösta, “As ethnographer in China and Mongolia, 1929–1932”, in Hedin, Sven Anders, History of the Expedition in Asia, 1927–1935, pt. IV (Stockholm, 1945), pp. 327–448 (p. 396)Google Scholar.

47 The MS, no. 34.5.30 in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St Petersburg, has been published in facsimile: Radzivilovskaia ili Kenigsbergskaia Letopis, 2 vols. (St Petersburg, 1902)Google Scholar (reproduced on microfilm in 1977 by University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan and London, England). The figs. appearing here are derived from vol. 1, fos. 232v, 237v, and 242v. We are indebted to Professor Richard Pope of York University (Toronto) for confirming the location and shelf no. of the Chronicle. The miniatures in question are also reproduced in Pletneva, S. A., “Pechenegi, Torki i Polovtsy v Yuzhnorusskikh Stepiakh”, in Artamonov, M. I., ed., Trudy Votgo-Donskoi Arkheologicheskoi Ekspeditsii, i, Materialy i Issledovaniia po Arkheologii SSSR (Institut Istorii Materialnoi Kultury, Akademia Nauk SSSR), 62 (1958) (Moscow–Leningrad), pp. 202–3 (figs. 25–7)Google Scholar.

48 The Russian Primary Chronicle, Laurentian Text, trans. & ed. Cross, Samuel Hazzard and Sherbowitz-Wetzor, Olgerd P. (Cambridge, Mass., n.d. [1953], hereafter RPC), pp. 4, 18–21Google Scholar.

49 The dates correspond to the period between the first attack by the Polovtsians, (RPC, p. 143)Google Scholar and the death of Vsevolod, Prince (RPC, p. 174)Google Scholar, who is mentioned in the text associated with fig. 3 (see also note 50 below).

50 Fig. 1, fo. 232v: “The Polovtsians were defeated and [the Russians] beat them back as far as the tents; and they took many prisoners, women and children, and they stayed in the tents for three days making merry.”

Fig. 2, fo. 237v: “Prince Roman went against the Polovtsians and he captured the tents of the Polovtsians and he brought home many prisoners.”

Fig. 3, fo. 242v: “Prince Vsevolod son of Georgii and grandson of Vladimir Monomakh went against the Polovtsians with his son, Constantine. The Polovtsians heard of his approach and they fled along with their tents.”

The authors are grateful to Professor David J. Huntley of the University of Toronto for providing the foregoing translations.

51 i, (The Hague, hereafter De Bergeron, , Voyages), pt. IVGoogle Scholar: Voyage remarquable de Guillaume de Rubruquis … en Tartarie et à la Chine, l’an de nôtre Seigneur M.CC.LIII (hereafter, Rubruquis), cols. 7–8. De Bergeron, 's work was first published in Paris in 1634 under the title Relation des voyages en Tartarie de Fr. Cvillavme de Rvbrvqvis, Fr. Iean dv Plan Carpin, Fr. Ascelin, & autres religieux de S. François & S. Dominique, qui y furent enuoyez par le pape Innocent IV. & le roy S. Louys …Google Scholar Incredibly, this engraving has been attributed to the hand of Rubruck himself in two more recent publications: Rice, Tamara Talbot, The Seljuks in Asia Minor (London, 1961), p. 263 (re pl. 33)Google Scholar; Burkett, Mary E., The Art of the Felt Maker (Kendall, 1979), p. 15Google Scholar.

52 ed. Wyngaert, , op. cit., p. 172Google Scholar.

53 De Bergeron, , Voyages, pt. IVGoogle Scholar: Rubruquis, col. 6.

54 The embroidering of felt is common among Turkic peoples; the Mongols use quilting techniques instead (see also note 28 above).

55 Jackson, , Rubruck, pp. 73–4Google Scholar. The reference to “two rows of wagons” (“duos ordines bigarum” (Wyngaert, , op. cit., p. 173Google Scholar)) makes little sense in a context where “two wagons” would seem far more appropriate for a circle consisting of alternating carts and tents (see also above p. 22 and n. 41). This interpretation would make the reference to a camp as “tents and carts” (ger tergen) even more plausible and give further evidence of Rubruck's poor observation encumbered by an obscure style. For a contemporary layout of “the wagons with the chests half a stone's throw away from the dwelling on either side”, see fig. 14, below.

56 Jackson, , Rubruck, pp. 131–2Google Scholar. The engraving is from De Bergeron, , Voyages, pt. IVGoogle Scholar: Rubruquis, cols. 41–2.

57 De Bergeron, , Voyages, pt. IIIGoogle Scholar: Voyages très curieux fails et écrits par les RR. PP. Jean du Plan Carpin, Cordelier, et N. Ascelin, Jacobin … vers les Tartares et autres peuples orientaux (hereafter, Carpin), cols. 27–8.

58 De Bergeron, , Voyages, pt. IIIGoogle Scholar: Carpin, cols. 53–4; cf. Dawson, , Mission to Asia, pp. 35–6Google Scholar.

59 Another excellent photograph of the contemporary transport of the circular tent is to be found in the exhibition catalogue The Turcoman of Iran (Kendal, 1971), pl. 3Google Scholar.

60 The Book of Ser Marco Polo, the Venetian, concerning the Kingdoms and Marvels of the East, i (London), 1871, p. 223Google Scholar; also in Yule, and Cordier, , i, p. 255Google Scholar.

61 Yule, and Cordier, , i, p. 254, n. 2.Google Scholar

62 Mongoliin Nuuts Tovchoo (Secret History of the Mongols), ed. Gadamba, Sh. (Ulaanbaatar, 1975)Google Scholar.

63 See note 54 above.

64 Jisl, Lumír, Mongolian Journey, trans. Gottheiner, Till (London, 1960), pl. 119Google Scholar. The caption to this plate reads: “A family on the move to fresh pastures. The wagons, tergen, hold all their worldly possessions, among them the yurt which can be taken down and folded up.”

65 Lattimore, Owen, Mongal Journeys (London, 1942: hereafter: Lattimore), p. 45 (see also pp. 43–4)Google Scholar. The volume is without illustrations. Fig. 15 is reproduced with the kind permission of Dr David Lattimore. The negative is in the Peabody Museum, Harvard University. We are grateful to Paul Kahn for drawing our attention to the existence of this photograph.

66 Lattimore, , p. 49Google Scholar.

67 Lattimore, , p. 56Google Scholar.