The Nāṣirī Generations 252: VIII. KUBILAH KHAN.
Tabakat-i-Nasiri 252
- Language
- English
VIII. KUBILAH KHAN.
252.1
Kubilah—also written Kubilah—was a man of prodigious strength, immense stature, and great valour. "His voice would pierce the seventh heaven, and his grip was like that of a bear. He could take a strong man, and with both hands bend him like a twig until his back broke; and one author states that he delighted in amusing himself in this pleasant way! During the cold nights of winter he was wont to go to sleep naked before a great fire made of the trunks of trees. He used not to care for the sparks of fire which used to fly out and touch him, for, if he chanced to awake, he would fancy the fleas had disturbed him, and he would scratch himself and go off to sleep again!" In order to avenge the death of his brother, Ukin Barkak, whom the Tartars had carried off, and delivered over to the Altan Khan, who put him to death by having him mounted upon a wooden ass and nailed to it with iron spikes, and kept there until he expired, Kubilah led his forces against the Altan Khan, and the Tattars, overthrew them, and carried off immense booty. Kubilah Khan is not even named by Abu-l-Ghazi, whose work is much confused here; and, in several places, he relates events twice and even three times over, and differently each time.
252.2
This is the Katula of Beresine and Kutlah of Erdmann, derived from this IX. On the death of Kubilah Khan, his brother, Bartan succeeded to the authority. The title of Khan was dropped with respect to him, and the new one of Bahadur was introduced. It is said that there was no one among their rulers who was endowed with greater valour and wisdom, and hence that title was assigned him. During his reign Ka-juli died, and his son, Iradam-chi, succeeded his father in his hereditary offices. “In the Turkish language, iradam or Iridam they call a Mirza—a secretary or writer—to which chi—[the shortened form of chiz—is affixed, indicating the actor or instrument, when applied to Turkish words.” From this explanation, however, Iridam may mean writings not a writer. He used to be styled Barlas, by Bartan, because he had no equal in valour, and hence he is known as Iridam-chi, Barlas, but some say Barlas signifies a leader of troops. He had twenty-nine sons, and the tribe of that name are so called after Iridam-chi. The Bahadur, Bartan, had four sons, some say, several, one of whom succeeded him. Baghatur I beg to remark, is an utterly impossible title, and shows how those, who cannot “dig out the gold,” are apt to vitiate the metal—the pronunciation of names.
252.3
X. Yassuka the Bahadur, whose name is also written Yassuka and Yassukae and, erroneously, Tasuka the most competent and sagacious of Bartan’s sons, succeeded to the chieftain-ship of the Mughal tribes, and ruled over 40,000 families. This last statement shows plainly, however, that these persons, whom chroniclers make out to be such mighty sovereigns, could only have ruled over a few tribes, or their power must have dwindled considerably. The rulership over 40,000 families was not considerable, since the Jala-irs alone were previously computed at 70,000. Yassuka is the father of the Chingiz Khan, and, during his chieftain-ship, Iridam-chi, the Barlas, died, and his eldest son, Sughuj-chi whose name is also written Sughu-chijan signifying wise, succeeded to his late father’s offices. He is the fifth ancestor of Amir Timur, the statement of Mr. H. H. Howorth, in his “Mongols Proper,” notwithstanding. On account of the ancient enmity which had come down from one generation to another, and still more recent causes of hostility between the I-maks of the Tattar and Mughal Turks, the Bahadur, Yassuka, in concert with Sughu-chijan led an army against them, overthrew them, and made captive Tamu-chi, but more correctly, Tamur-chi, which is also written Tamur-chin—the meaning of which will be explained farther on in the account of the Chingiz Khan—and Karbuka or Karbugha, who were their rulers and chiefs, and plundered their property and effects.
252.4
After this the Bahadur, Yassuka, set out in great pomp, for Dilun-Yuldak which is also written Dilun-Yulduz and, on reaching that place [which Petis de la Croix, in his innocency, says—Life of “Genghizcan the Great,” page 13—was “his Country-House, where he commonly resided”], Yassuka’s Khatun, who was named Ulun-Ankah or Angah but whom the Fanakati and Fasih-i call Ulun-Kujin of the tribe of Olkunut, who was pregnant, gave birth to a son, on the 20th of Zi-Ka’dah, 549 H. [25th January, 1167 A.D.], and to commemorate his victory over the Tattars, by Sughu-chijan’s advice, he named that son Tamur-chi, afterwards the Chingiz Khan. Yassuka, the Bahadur, besides this son, had, by the same Khatun, three other sons—Juji Khasar— time, he will be [considered worthy to be] remembered with pious benediction, and, after his death, with invocation—Kajbun—or Kajfun—or Onchi——also written Utighkin——said to mean the youngest son, and also called U-tigin or Aw-Tigin—and, by a second Khatun, a fifth son, who was named Bilkuti——likewise written Bilkutl——by others, who constantly attended Tamur-chi. When Yassuka died in 562 H., his son Tamur-chi was in his thirteenth year. About the same time Sughu-jijan also died, and the Nu-yan, Karachar, his son, was also young in years, and the Nurun or Nairun tribe—their own—forsook them and went over to the Taijiut, and other tribes.
252.5
At this period the tribes of the Mughals, Tattars, and Turks, were ruled by seventy-one chiefs or hakims, each of whom ruled over one or two tribes; and this shows very clearly what I have before stated, that the chiefs I have been here giving an account of were not supreme rulers over the whole of the Mughal tribes even, but only over a certain portion of them, and that only a portion of the Nurun or Nairun division of them were under the sway of the Bahadur, Yassuka.
252.6
I have now brought down, in an abstract form, an account of the Turks, and the Tattar and Mughal I-maks, according to the accounts compiled by command of the Mughal sovereigns, and contained in the Histories I have named at page 869, to the point where our author begins his account of Tamur-chi, afterwards the Chingiz Khan. I have done it chiefly because he has confused events, and with respect to their earliest history he is in some error, and states contrary to all other authors who have written on the Mughals; but I also do so because European writers go on floundering and blundering with respect to these people, the descendants of Yafis, while, at the same time, the matter lies in a nutshell. One of the latest specimens of this kind is contained in the “Times,” whose special correspondent, writing from “Therapia,” Nov. 7th, 1876, says: “The conglomeration of Eastern races, the Turks and Arabs, detest their enforced unity with their Turanian oppressors, their very existence culminating with a common feeling of unextinguishable hatred for the Osmanli.” So the writer appears to have made the wonderful discovery that the ’Usmanli Turks are not Turks but Turanians, and so, by the same logic, these Turks are not Turanians. Who knows? perhaps he has discovered that they are Aryans, or even “Tartars,” as some of the newspaper philosophers have lately discovered.
252.7
The Yarkand Mission [to the ruler of the State of Kashghar] made some similar ethnological discoveries in that part of Central Asia, of which the following is one specimen out of many. At page 81 of the “Report,” we are told respecting “the urban population,” that they consist of “two typical forms,” one of which, “the Mongolian,” contains “the Manjhu, the Moghol or Mongol, the Kalmak, the Kirghiz, the Noghay, the Kapchak, and the Uzbak. All of whom are designated Tartar, together with the Kara Khitay, the Khitay, and the Tungani, who are excluded from the catalogue though of the same stock.” This may be termed, confusion worse confounded, but two pages farther on we are informed that “all that can be distinctly stated is that Tartar blood predominates with a greater or less admixture of the Turk element,” &c., &c. The monkish travellers found, centuries ago, how incorrect it was to style Mughals by the name of Tartars. De Plano Carpini [A.D. 1246] says he and of pardon, in the world-illumining opinion of the Sovereign of the people of Islam — Nasir-ud-Din, Mahmud Shah — and other readers of his work.