342 158. CINGHIS
true reading, not the ÿ ,At11, tortured so as to give the ' Ulyasutai' of BLOCHET'S edition) and the winter (qïslaq) at the a.G)5l *Uriingä (= the Urungu of our maps, the Ürünggü of the Secret History, §§ 158, 177; such again seems to be the correct reading for the a-C,j>\ of the mss., certainly not ` Uryânggat' as in BLOCHET) and... (the name is corrupt; BLOCHET'S *Qïrgïz, ` Kirghiz ', seems improbable here); the distance between both is a three days' route. Sol.) ogtani-bägi (or -bäki; the mother of Mongka, Qubilai, Hüiägü and Ariq-bögä; on the name, misread by BLOCHET, cf. TP, 1932, 43-54) had been there (but she died in 1252, many years before Arïq-bögä). Arïq-bögä was one month and six days in the service of [Qubiiai-]ga'an, and then died. They brought him to )5-63\ $.), Buda-ündür, which is the great ' forbidden precinct' () orûq-i buzurg) of Chinghiz-khan, in the vicinity of the Selenga River (4_(—a-, :6L—i5)); Sor; oqtani-bägi and the other princes have also been buried there, except (Y\ illa) Qubilai-qa'an ...» In the mss., the name I have read Budaündür is written )-\ 5.5,;,..1;.)),T..);,; and ,9-69\ tr,ÿ, which explains the «Nuda-undur» mentioned by
SCHMIDT.
b. (Bl, II, 576-577) : « Another [chief] was ff A,- Canggi-kûrägän (' the Imperial son-in-law Canggi'; he must be the Imperial son-in-law ' Canggi' often mentioned in the YS as K
Chang-chi, ~~ r Ch'ang-chi and V, Chang-chi; cf. WANG Hui-tsul, 19, 3 b; his name occurs
first in 1275; he was made a prince in 1287; for the name, cf. another Canggi in the Secret History, § 277) of the Jalair (not ` Calair' as in BLOCHET'S edition), emir of a chiliarchy (häzarü). This is the chiliarchy which was formerly that of an emir called )y\ Uqi, and this [Uqi], with a chiliarchy of Oirât (var. Urât), by the rule of yarlïy (i. e. on account of an Imperial order) kept guard at
Blida-i5ndür (var. Bûda-ûmür), which is the great ' forbidden precinct' (yorûq-i buzurg), and the bones (usthwânhâï) of the princes (sahzâdägân) are deposited there. When the princes who were under the orders of Nomoy'an rebelled (see ' Nomogan '), and the troops went with them, most of this chiliarchy joined the troops of Qaidu; [but] some remained there. Now, this chiliarchy belongs to the children of Uqi.» In view of the other passages, translated above, it is tempting to correct « Uqi » to «ÜUdaci» and «Oirät» (or « Urat ») to «Uryânggät». The place intended cannot be any other than the «Great qoriq », Yäkä-qoriq, of the Burgan-qaldun. On the other hand, the readings in the present passage are in favour of the correction «Buda-ündür» in the preceding one. This was already the solution adopted by QUATREMÉRE (Hist. des Mongols, 118), which BLOCHET accepted. QUATREMÉRE also said that «Buda» must render Buddha, of which Burqan is the Mongolian equivalent. I feed inclined to agree with him, though partly only with BLOCHET, who explains «Buda-ündür» as «the great Buddha» (Bl, II, 561) : ündür is a geographical term, and Buda-ündür can only mean «Buddha Height », «Buddha Hill ». One obscure point remains to be cleared up. QUATREMi: RE and BLOCHET found it quite natural that «Buda-ündür» should be in the vicinity of the Selenga. But the Selenga is in an entirely different region, west of the Tûla and the Orkhon. If Buda-ündür, as is practically certain, is but another name of Burqan-qaldun and of Burqatu-qan, the mention of the Selenga is a bad slip of the Persian historian.
The location of the Burgan-galdun, and consequently of the place where Chinghiz-khan was buried, which, according to Raidu-'d-Din, was at the source of the Onon, entails another important consequence. Several Mongol noblemen claiming descent from Chinghiz-khan told GAUBIL
IIIF Color HighRes
