122. CARAUNAS 193
and consequently would carry no weight in so far as the true form of the name, Nägüdär or Tägüdär, is concerned. The confusion was moreover too easy. Only a dot differentiates the two names; both princes had their name followed by the epithet « oyul » or « oylan »; even in their history there are some common points. Abmad-Tägüdär also does not seem to have always been on good terms with his brother Abaya; and just as Cayatai's grandson sought refuge in Georgia, Ahmad-Tägüdär, on Abaya's death in 1281, came to the Imperial camp straight from Georgia (cf. Rasidu-'d-Din's unpublished account of Abmad's reign). In some cases, I suspect that texts which have been taken as referring to Cayatai's grandson really concern Abmad-Tägüdär. We should have a somewhat safer basis in this respect if it were true that as HAMMER has it (Hai, I, 322) Abmad-Tägüdär had remained in Mongolia and was sent to Persia by Qubilai under Abaya's reign, that is to say after 1265; but although we know that Hüiägü had only taken with him, when he started for the West, his two elder sons Abaya and Yo"smut (QuATREMÈRE, Hist. des Mongols, 147), I cannot trace the origin of HAMMER'S statement about Qubilai and Abaya.
Apart from occasional confusions between Ahmad-Tägüdär and the grandson of Cayatai in late Persian texts and among Western scholars, the form of the name of Cayatai's grandson requires further investigation. While Ahmad-Tägüdär's name is generally written Nägüdär in Persian sources, the name of Cayatai's grandson occurs twice in Juwaini, and the readings of the best mss. are once )4; Tägüdâr (iii, 91) and once »1 Tägüdär (iii, 107); and it is also Tägüdär which we find in a parallel passage of Abû'l-Faraj, drawing in fact from Juwaini (Hist. Dynast., ed. POCOCKE, text, 503; transi., 329). But there is something more, which has been overlooked by YULE and others. Cayatai's grandson, when he revolted against Abaya, went to Georgia, where he fought long enough to become well known to the Georgians; the Georgian chronicle has a long account of all these events, with many details not to be found elsewhere, and the name of the prince is always written « Thaguthar » or « Theguthar » (cf. BROSSET, Hist. de la Géorgie, I, I, 575-583; the note on p. 576 teems with confused statements). « Thakudar » is also the only reading in the Armenian account of Malakia, an author of the late 13th cent. (BROSSET, ibid. I, Add., 455, 465-466; PATKANOV, Ist. Mongolov Magakii, 31-32, 52-54). Now Armenian transcriptions have been accepted as decisive for «Tägüdär » against « Nägüdär » in the case of AhmadTägüdär. Similarly, the conclusion seems inevitable that, for Cayatai's grandson, Georgian and Armenian transcriptions must prevail, and that his name was Tägüdär, not Nägüdär.
But what then about Polo's «Negodar»? Of the various individuals who could be considered, only one remains, and it is one whose case is still mysterious. In the course of his note, YULE ( Y, I, 103) has quoted a general Nägüdär who, according to n'OxssoN, was in command of some of the troops of the house of Jöci sent by Mongka with Hüiägü. When war broke out in 1262 between Hüiägü and Barka (then the head of the house of Jai; see «Berca »), Nägüdär and his colleague « Onguja» escaped to Horàsân, pursued by the troops of Hüiägü, and thence eastward, where they seized upon Ghazni and other districts bordering on India (cf. Oh, III, 379). Unfortunately, D'OHSSON does not mention his source. This Nägüdär cannot of course be the prince, grandson of Cayatai, who was still in Georgia in 1268-1269. But I have not succeeded in tracing him, no more than his colleague « Onguja », although « Onguja » (cf. Mong. ongyoca, « boat ») is probably the same man whose name has been altered in Abu'l-Faraj's text
IIIF Color HighRes
