Chapter LXIV: Moguls, Ottoman Turks.—Part I

Conquests Of Zingis Khan And The Moguls From China To
Poland.—Escape Of Constantinople And The Greeks.—Origin Of The
Ottoman Turks In Bithynia.—Reigns And Victories Of Othman, Orchan,
Amurath The First, And Bajazet The First.— Foundation And Progress
Of The Turkish Monarchy In Asia And Europe.—Danger Of
Constantinople And The Greek Empire.

From the petty quarrels of a city and her suburbs, from the
cowardice and discord of the falling Greeks, I shall now ascend
to the victorious Turks; whose domestic slavery was ennobled by
martial discipline, religious enthusiasm, and the energy of the
national character. The rise and progress of the Ottomans, the
present sovereigns of Constantinople, are connected with the most
important scenes of modern history; but they are founded on a
previous knowledge of the great eruption of the Moguls 100 and
Tartars; whose rapid conquests may be compared with the primitive
convulsions of nature, which have agitated and altered the
surface of the globe. I have long since asserted my claim to
introduce the nations, the immediate or remote authors of the
fall of the Roman empire; nor can I refuse myself to those
events, which, from their uncommon magnitude, will interest a
philosophic mind in the history of blood. 1

100 (return) [ Mongol seems to approach the nearest to the proper
name of this race. The Chinese call them Mong-kou; the Mondchoux,
their neighbors, Monggo or Monggou. They called themselves also
Beda. This fact seems to have been proved by M. Schmidt against
the French Orientalists. See De Brosset. Note on Le Beau, tom.
xxii p. 402.]

1 (return) [ The reader is invited to review chapters xxii. to
xxvi., and xxiii. to xxxviii., the manners of pastoral nations,
the conquests of Attila and the Huns, which were composed at a
time when I entertained the wish, rather than the hope, of
concluding my history.]

From the spacious highlands between China, Siberia, and the
Caspian Sea, the tide of emigration and war has repeatedly been
poured. These ancient seats of the Huns and Turks were occupied
in the twelfth century by many pastoral tribes, of the same
descent and similar manners, which were united and led to
conquest by the formidable Zingis. 101 In his ascent to
greatness, that Barbarian (whose private appellation was Temugin)
had trampled on the necks of his equals. His birth was noble; but
it was the pride of victory, that the prince or people deduced
his seventh ancestor from the immaculate conception of a virgin.
His father had reigned over thirteen hordes, which composed about
thirty or forty thousand families: above two thirds refused to
pay tithes or obedience to his infant son; and at the age of
thirteen, Temugin fought a battle against his rebellious
subjects. The future conqueror of Asia was reduced to fly and to
obey; but he rose superior to his fortune, and in his fortieth
year he had established his fame and dominion over the
circumjacent tribes. In a state of society, in which policy is
rude and valor is universal, the ascendant of one man must be
founded on his power and resolution to punish his enemies and
recompense his friends. His first military league was ratified by
the simple rites of sacrificing a horse and tasting of a running
stream: Temugin pledged himself to divide with his followers the
sweets and the bitters of life; and when he had shared among them
his horses and apparel, he was rich in their gratitude and his
own hopes. After his first victory, he placed seventy caldrons on
the fire, and seventy of the most guilty rebels were cast
headlong into the boiling water. The sphere of his attraction was
continually enlarged by the ruin of the proud and the submission
of the prudent; and the boldest chieftains might tremble, when
they beheld, enchased in silver, the skull of the khan of
Keraites; 2 who, under the name of Prester John, had corresponded
with the Roman pontiff and the princes of Europe. The ambition of
Temugin condescended to employ the arts of superstition; and it
was from a naked prophet, who could ascend to heaven on a white
horse, that he accepted the title of Zingis, 3 the _most great_;
and a divine right to the conquest and dominion of the earth. In
a general _couroultai_, or diet, he was seated on a felt, which
was long afterwards revered as a relic, and solemnly proclaimed
great khan, or emperor of the Moguls 4 and Tartars. 5 Of these
kindred, though rival, names, the former had given birth to the
imperial race; and the latter has been extended by accident or
error over the spacious wilderness of the north.

101 (return) [ On the traditions of the early life of Zingis, see
D’Ohson, Hist des Mongols; Histoire des Mongols, Paris, 1824.
Schmidt, Geschichte des Ost-Mongolen, p. 66, &c., and Notes.—M.]

2 (return) [ The khans of the Keraites were most probably
incapable of reading the pompous epistles composed in their name
by the Nestorian missionaries, who endowed them with the fabulous
wonders of an Indian kingdom. Perhaps these Tartars (the
Presbyter or Priest John) had submitted to the rites of baptism
and ordination, (Asseman, Bibliot Orient tom. iii. p. ii. p.
487—503.)]

3 (return) [ Since the history and tragedy of Voltaire, Gengis,
at least in French, seems to be the more fashionable spelling;
but Abulghazi Khan must have known the true name of his ancestor.
His etymology appears just: _Zin_, in the Mogul tongue, signifies
_great_, and _gis_ is the superlative termination, (Hist.
Généalogique des Tatars, part iii. p. 194, 195.) From the same
idea of magnitude, the appellation of _Zingis_ is bestowed on the
ocean.]

4 (return) [ The name of Moguls has prevailed among the
Orientals, and still adheres to the titular sovereign, the Great
Mogul of Hindastan. * Note: M. Remusat (sur les Langues Tartares,
p. 233) justly observes, that Timour was a Turk, not a Mogul,
and, p. 242, that probably there was not Mogul in the army of
Baber, who established the Indian throne of the “Great
Mogul.”—M.]

5 (return) [ The Tartars (more properly Tatars) were descended
from Tatar Khan, the brother of Mogul Khan, (see Abulghazi, part
i. and ii.,) and once formed a horde of 70,000 families on the
borders of Kitay, (p. 103—112.) In the great invasion of Europe
(A.D. 1238) they seem to have led the vanguard; and the
similitude of the name of _Tartarei_, recommended that of Tartars
to the Latins, (Matt. Paris, p. 398, &c.) * Note: This
relationship, according to M. Klaproth, is fabulous, and invented
by the Mahometan writers, who, from religious zeal, endeavored to
connect the traditions of the nomads of Central Asia with those
of the Old Testament, as preserved in the Koran. There is no
trace of it in the Chinese writers. Tabl. de l’Asie, p. 156.—M.]

The code of laws which Zingis dictated to his subjects was
adapted to the preservation of a domestic peace, and the exercise
of foreign hostility. The punishment of death was inflicted on
the crimes of adultery, murder, perjury, and the capital thefts
of a horse or ox; and the fiercest of men were mild and just in
their intercourse with each other. The future election of the
great khan was vested in the princes of his family and the heads
of the tribes; and the regulations of the chase were essential to
the pleasures and plenty of a Tartar camp. The victorious nation
was held sacred from all servile labors, which were abandoned to
slaves and strangers; and every labor was servile except the
profession of arms. The service and discipline of the troops, who
were armed with bows, cimeters, and iron maces, and divided by
hundreds, thousands, and ten thousands, were the institutions of
a veteran commander. Each officer and soldier was made
responsible, under pain of death, for the safety and honor of his
companions; and the spirit of conquest breathed in the law, that
peace should never be granted unless to a vanquished and
suppliant enemy. But it is the religion of Zingis that best
deserves our wonder and applause. 501 The Catholic inquisitors of
Europe, who defended nonsense by cruelty, might have been
confounded by the example of a Barbarian, who anticipated the
lessons of philosophy, 6 and established by his laws a system of
pure theism and perfect toleration. His first and only article of
faith was the existence of one God, the Author of all good; who
fills by his presence the heavens and earth, which he has created
by his power. The Tartars and Moguls were addicted to the idols
of their peculiar tribes; and many of them had been converted by
the foreign missionaries to the religions of Moses, of Mahomet,
and of Christ. These various systems in freedom and concord were
taught and practised within the precincts of the same camp; and
the Bonze, the Imam, the Rabbi, the Nestorian, and the Latin
priest, enjoyed the same honorable exemption from service and
tribute: in the mosque of Bochara, the insolent victor might
trample the Koran under his horse’s feet, but the calm legislator
respected the prophets and pontiffs of the most hostile sects.
The reason of Zingis was not informed by books: the khan could
neither read nor write; and, except the tribe of the Igours, the
greatest part of the Moguls and Tartars were as illiterate as
their sovereign. 601 The memory of their exploits was preserved
by tradition: sixty-eight years after the death of Zingis, these
traditions were collected and transcribed; 7 the brevity of their
domestic annals may be supplied by the Chinese, 8 Persians, 9
Armenians, 10 Syrians, 11 Arabians, 12 Greeks, 13 Russians, 14
Poles, 15 Hungarians, 16 and Latins; 17 and each nation will
deserve credit in the relation of their own disasters and
defeats. 18

501 (return) [ Before his armies entered Thibet, he sent an
embassy to Bogdosottnam-Dsimmo, a Lama high priest, with a letter
to this effect: “I have chosen thee as high priest for myself and
my empire. Repair then to me, and promote the present and future
happiness of man: I will be thy supporter and protector: let us
establish a system of religion, and unite it with the monarchy,”
&c. The high priest accepted the invitation; and the Mongol
history literally terms this step the _period of the first
respect for religion_; because the monarch, by his public
profession, made it the religion of the state. Klaproth. “Travels
in Caucasus,” ch. 7, Eng. Trans. p. 92. Neither Dshingis nor his
son and successor Oegodah had, on account of their continual
wars, much leisure for the propagation of the religion of the
Lama. By religion they understand a distinct, independent, sacred
moral code, which has but one origin, one source, and one object.
This notion they universally propagate, and even believe that the
brutes, and all created beings, have a religion adapted to their
sphere of action. The different forms of the various religions
they ascribe to the difference of individuals, nations, and
legislators. Never do you hear of their inveighing against any
creed, even against the obviously absurd Schaman paganism, or of
their persecuting others on that account. They themselves, on the
other hand, endure every hardship, and even persecutions, with
perfect resignation, and indulgently excuse the follies of
others, nay, consider them as a motive for increased ardor in
prayer, ch. ix. p. 109.—M.]

6 (return) [ A singular conformity may be found between the
religious laws of Zingis Khan and of Mr. Locke, (Constitutions of
Carolina, in his works, vol. iv. p. 535, 4to. edition, 1777.)]

601 (return) [ See the notice on Tha-tha-toung-o, the Ouogour
minister of Tchingis, in Abel Remusat’s 2d series of Recherch.
Asiat. vol. ii. p. 61. He taught the son of Tchingis to write:
“He was the instructor of the Moguls in writing, of which they
were before ignorant;” and hence the application of the Ouigour
characters to the Mogul language cannot be placed earlier than
the year 1204 or 1205, nor so late as the time of Pà-sse-pa, who
lived under Khubilai. A new alphabet, approaching to that of
Thibet, was introduced under Khubilai.—M.]

7 (return) [ In the year 1294, by the command of Cazan, khan of
Persia, the fourth in descent from Zingis. From these traditions,
his vizier Fadlallah composed a Mogul history in the Persian
language, which has been used by Petit de la Croix, (Hist. de
Genghizcan, p. 537—539.) The Histoire Généalogique des Tatars (à
Leyde, 1726, in 12mo., 2 tomes) was translated by the Swedish
prisoners in Siberia from the Mogul MS. of Abulgasi Bahadur Khan,
a descendant of Zingis, who reigned over the Usbeks of Charasm,
or Carizme, (A.D. 1644—1663.) He is of most value and credit for
the names, pedigrees, and manners of his nation. Of his nine
parts, the ist descends from Adam to Mogul Khan; the iid, from
Mogul to Zingis; the iiid is the life of Zingis; the ivth, vth,
vith, and viith, the general history of his four sons and their
posterity; the viiith and ixth, the particular history of the
descendants of Sheibani Khan, who reigned in Maurenahar and
Charasm.]

8 (return) [ Histoire de Gentchiscan, et de toute la Dinastie des
Mongous ses Successeurs, Conquerans de la Chine; tirée de
l’Histoire de la Chine par le R. P. Gaubil, de la Société de
Jesus, Missionaire à Peking; à Paris, 1739, in 4to. This
translation is stamped with the Chinese character of domestic
accuracy and foreign ignorance.]

9 (return) [ See the Histoire du Grand Genghizcan, premier
Empereur des Moguls et Tartares, par M. Petit de la Croix, à
Paris, 1710, in 12mo.; a work of ten years’ labor, chiefly drawn
from the Persian writers, among whom Nisavi, the secretary of
Sultan Gelaleddin, has the merit and prejudices of a
contemporary. A slight air of romance is the fault of the
originals, or the compiler. See likewise the articles of
_Genghizcan_, _Mohammed_, _Gelaleddin_, &c., in the Bibliothèque
Orientale of D’Herbelot. * Note: The preface to the Hist. des
Mongols, (Paris, 1824) gives a catalogue of the Arabic and
Persian authorities.—M.]

10 (return) [ Haithonus, or Aithonus, an Armenian prince, and
afterwards a monk of Premontré, (Fabric, Bibliot. Lat. Medii Ævi,
tom. i. p. 34,) dictated in the French language, his book _de
Tartaris_, his old fellow-soldiers. It was immediately translated
into Latin, and is inserted in the Novus Orbis of Simon Grynæus,
(Basil, 1555, in folio.) * Note: A précis at the end of the new
edition of Le Beau, Hist. des Empereurs, vol. xvii., by M.
Brosset, gives large extracts from the accounts of the Armenian
historians relating to the Mogul conquests.—M.]

11 (return) [ Zingis Khan, and his first successors, occupy the
conclusion of the ixth Dynasty of Abulpharagius, (vers. Pocock,
Oxon. 1663, in 4to.;) and his xth Dynasty is that of the Moguls
of Persia. Assemannus (Bibliot. Orient. tom. ii.) has extracted
some facts from his Syriac writings, and the lives of the
Jacobite maphrians, or primates of the East.]

12 (return) [ Among the Arabians, in language and religion, we
may distinguish Abulfeda, sultan of Hamah in Syria, who fought in
person, under the Mamaluke standard, against the Moguls.]

13 (return) [ Nicephorus Gregoras (l. ii. c. 5, 6) has felt the
necessity of connecting the Scythian and Byzantine histories. He
describes with truth and elegance the settlement and manners of
the Moguls of Persia, but he is ignorant of their origin, and
corrupts the names of Zingis and his sons.]

14 (return) [ M. Levesque (Histoire de Russie, tom. ii.) has
described the conquest of Russia by the Tartars, from the
patriarch Nicon, and the old chronicles.]

15 (return) [ For Poland, I am content with the Sarmatia Asiatica
et Europæa of Matthew à Michou, or De Michoviâ, a canon and
physician of Cracow, (A.D. 1506,) inserted in the Novus Orbis of
Grynæus. Fabric Bibliot. Latin. Mediæ et Infimæ Ætatis, tom. v.
p. 56.]

16 (return) [ I should quote Thuroczius, the oldest general
historian (pars ii. c. 74, p. 150) in the 1st volume of the
Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum, did not the same volume contain
the original narrative of a contemporary, an eye-witness, and a
sufferer, (M. Rogerii, Hungari, Varadiensis Capituli Canonici,
Carmen miserabile, seu Historia super Destructione Regni Hungariæ
Temporibus Belæ IV. Regis per Tartaros facta, p. 292—321;) the
best picture that I have ever seen of all the circumstances of a
Barbaric invasion.]

17 (return) [ Matthew Paris has represented, from authentic
documents, the danger and distress of Europe, (consult the word
_Tartari_ in his copious Index.) From motives of zeal and
curiosity, the court of the great khan in the xiiith century was
visited by two friars, John de Plano Carpini, and William
Rubruquis, and by Marco Polo, a Venetian gentleman. The Latin
relations of the two former are inserted in the 1st volume of
Hackluyt; the Italian original or version of the third (Fabric.
Bibliot. Latin. Medii Ævi, tom. ii. p. 198, tom. v. p. 25) may be
found in the second tome of Ramusio.]

18 (return) [ In his great History of the Huns, M. de Guignes has
most amply treated of Zingis Khan and his successors. See tom.
iii. l. xv.—xix., and in the collateral articles of the
Seljukians of Roum, tom. ii. l. xi., the Carizmians, l. xiv., and
the Mamalukes, tom. iv. l. xxi.; consult likewise the tables of
the 1st volume. He is ever learned and accurate; yet I am only
indebted to him for a general view, and some passages of
Abulfeda, which are still latent in the Arabic text. * Note: To
this catalogue of the historians of the Moguls may be added
D’Ohson, Histoire des Mongols; Histoire des Mongols, (from Arabic
and Persian authorities,) Paris, 1824. Schmidt, Geschichte der
Ost Mongolen, St. Petersburgh, 1829. This curious work, by
Ssanang Ssetsen Chungtaidschi, published in the original Mongol,
was written after the conversion of the nation to Buddhism: it is
enriched with very valuable notes by the editor and translator;
but, unfortunately, is very barren of information about the
European and even the western Asiatic conquests of the
Mongols.—M.]