95. CAIDU 127
Great-khan in Mongolia, and Qaidu sided of course with Ariq-bögä, only too glad of an internecine quarrel which was likely to bring to ruin the house of Tului (Bl, II, 7). But Ariq-bögä was defeated and had to surrender to his brother (1264). Somewhat later, Qubilai tried to ensure his free intercourse with his brother Hülägü in Persia by installing as head of the house of Cayatai a man on whom he thought be could rely, the prince Baraq (see «Barac »). This was too much for Qaidu, who soon opened hostilities against Baraq; defeated at first, he later took a decisive revenge, and for more than thirty years the branches of Cayatai and Ögödäi worked hand in hand under the supremacy of Qaidu. In 1269, Qaidu convened a diet on the bank of the Talas river, where the princes pledged themselves to keep to nomad life and Mongol habits (BARTHOLD, 12 Vorlesungen, 185-186). Qubilai had long cherished the hope of bringing the dissensions with the princes in Mongolia to a peaceful solution. Still in 1265, when attributing to four great princely houses the revenues of the cities of the province of Nan-ching (= K'ai-fêng; see « Namchin »), he gave those of 1 'J Jjj Ts'ai-chou to Qaidu ( YS, 6, 1 b) ; and more than once he ordered Qaidu to appear at the Court. But Qaidu had greater ambitions than mere revenues and a position of attendance on a Great-khan whose title he always challenged. War was therefore inevitable. Already in 1266, Qubilai's son Nomoyan had received the ominous title of Pei-p'ingwang, « Prince of the Pacification of the North », and finally, in 1271, he was sent with an army to Almaliq in the Iii region (north-west of Qulja, our « Kuija ») to ward off Qaidu and his allies of the Cayatai branch (see «Nomogan »). This implies that Almaliq, near which Cayatai lived his latter years (see « Ciagatai ») and which is given by YS, 63, 15 b, as Qaidu's appanage, had been captured for the Great-khan (the future Mâr Yahbalaha III and Rabban Çauma, at a date which has not yet been established satisfactorily, found Qaidu at Talas; cf. CHABOT, Hist. de Mar Jabalaha III, 25). Nevertheless, Qaidu's attitude was, for some years to come, more one of sullen opposition than of open rebellion. Nothing supports the note of YS, 63, 2 a, according to which Qaidu revolted in 1268, unless we see there an allusion to Qaidu's fight against Qubilai's liege man Baraq (cf. T'u chi, 74, 7 a-b). In the beginning of 1275, Qubilai claimed back the thirty-four gold and silver tablets formerly granted to Qaidu and Baraq (see «Barac »); this is a token of at least very strained relations. All references to military difficulties towards 1274 also point to Chinese Turkistan as being then the main seat of trouble (cf. T'u Chi, 74, 7 a), and we may safely conclude that the Cayatai princes, not Qaidu, were most concerned in the case. It is generally said, on the faith of GAUBIL (Hist. de Gentchiscan, 168-169), that open war with Qaidu began in 1275, when he and Dua, leading more than 100,000 men, besieged the Uigur idiqut in his capital Qara-boêo (Oh, II, 451-452; Pa, 718; HOWORTH, I, 176; Y, II, 462; for this attack on Qara-boêo, see the references to Raidu-'d-Din under « Cibai and Caban »). GAUBIL's account is based, directly or indirectly, on the biography of the ïdiqut in YS, 122, 1 b, where it is said that « in the 12th year chip yüan (1275), Dua and Pu-ssû-pa (the Busma of other texts, Buzma in Raid, Baraq's fifth son; cf. Bl, II, 168), with 120,000 men, besieged [Qara]-lboêo ». But T'u Chi (36, 9 a) has made it probable that «12» in that text is a mistake for « 22 » (=1285), which is given in Bayan's biography ( YS, 127, 7 a) for what seems to be the same event. I cannot find any direct confirmation in Chinese texts for GAUBIL's other statement that in 1275 Qubilai wanted Bayan to abandon the campaign against the Sung and fight in the north; T'u Chi, 90, 6 a, alludes to the
IIIF Color HighRes
