Overview

The Great Yasa was the law code promulgated by Chinggis Khan (also known as “Genghis Khan” and spelled “Jenghiz Khan” in the document), who lived from 1162 to 1227 and was the founder of the Mongol Empire. At its height, the Mongol Empire was the largest contiguous kingdom in history, stretching from the Sea of Japan to the Carpathian Mountains in central and eastern Europe. Thus, the Mongols ruled an empire of extremely diverse cultures, religions, and ethnicities. To study the Mongols, one must use sources written in Mongolian, Chinese, Russian, Persian, Arabic, Japanese, Korean, Latin, Old French, Armenian, Turkic, Georgian, and Syriac. Fortunately, many of the primary sources have been translated, making it easier for English-speaking scholars and students of history to understand the Mongol Empire. Nonetheless, the Yasa remains one of the least understood aspects of the Mongol Empire.

Although the Mongols left many local rulers in place as they conquered various lands, they also paid great attention to the organization and running of the empire. Although government at the local level often remained unchanged, a Mongol-based and -managed government existed at the upper levels. For this they needed a law code. Chinggis Khan created a law system based on the customs of the steppe nomads of Mongolia, but he modified it and banned customs that threatened the stability of his unification of the Eurasian steppes. Many of the laws were suitable only for nomads. Unlike Hammurabi, the Babylonian ruler who is often credited with devising the first codified law (in the seventh century bce), Chinggis Khan did not have his laws carved onto stelae (inscribed stones erected throughout the empire) but rather kept them on scrolls that were viewed only by the Mongol nobility. Local laws remained in place as long as they did not run contrary to the desires of the Mongols. In many aspects, the Mongols ruled, but their subjects did not know what the law of the land was.

In addition to the Yasa, another source of governance came from Chinggis Khan himself. These were his own maxims or sayings, known in Mongolian as biligs or bileks. The maxims were not laws but were used to guide proper behavior and conduct. A person who did not follow or who strayed from them was often viewed in a negative light, while someone who adhered to them was considered a paragon of virtue. In many aspects the biligs are analogous to the hadiths in Islam. Islamic law is based primarily on two components. The first is the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam. The second are hadiths, which were the sayings and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad. Like Muhammad, Chinggis Khan served as a model of proper conduct, and people were encouraged to follow his example.

Context

The document reproduced is not the Yasa of Chinggis Khan, for there are no known surviving copies of it. Numerous primary sources call the Yasa a law code even if they do not make specific reference to a particular law. One of the major problems in studying the history of the Mongol Empire is that very few Mongolian sources survive. As the empire declined, the capitals of the four Mongol states into which the empires split after 1260 were often sacked and plundered. Also, climatic conditions often made it difficult for many documents to remain intact. In any case, the contents of the Mongolian imperial archives do not exist except in fragments.

Many historians who left chronicles of the Mongol Empire did not use sources from the imperial archives. Rather, they spoke with Mongolian princes and administrators to corroborate information. Although it is often said that history is written by the victors, for the Mongol Empire it was written by the conquered and by their enemies. The Mongolians did not have a writing system until around 1204, when Chinggis Khan ordered one to be adopted and adapted to the Mongolian language. He also directed that all of his sons and grandsons learn to read and write, even though he himself remained illiterate. Thus writing and the maintenance of documents was a relatively new concept from the onset of the empire. To ensure that it became an integral part of the court and the government, he appointed his adopted brother, Shigi-Qutuqtu, as the chief judge, with instructions to record the laws of the empire. Most documents were written in three languages, Mongolian, Persian, and Uighur (a Turkic language).

Nonetheless, most Mongols remained illiterate. In this light, it is not surprising that the Yasa was not promulgated across the empire. It was kept in the Kok Debter, or “Blue Book” (blue being a sacred and auspicious color for the Mongols) and locked away. Periodically, the Kok Debter was updated. The nomads, however, being a preliterate society, tended to memorize documents and thus had little need for written texts. Furthermore, many of the laws were based on timeless tradition, so the people adhered to them without any effort. The only changes that Chinggis Khan instituted were designed to promote unity among the nomadic tribes, which previously had been fractured and often engaged in seemingly endless cycles of war.

It appears that the Yasa was primarily applied to the nomadic population. Indeed, it remained a valid source of law for the Mongol world long after civil war split the empire into four powerful states in 1260. These four divisions included the empire of the Great Khan in East Asia, the Ilkhanate in the Middle East, the Jochid Khanate (popularly known as the Golden Horde but named after Chinggis Khan’s eldest son) in the Eurasian steppes north of the Black and Caspian seas, and the Chaghatayid Khanate (named after Chinggis Khan’s second son) in central Asia. In truth, the Mongols had very little concern for the vast majority of their subjects. The empire was viewed as the patrimony of the altan uruk, or Golden Family—that is, the family of Chinggis Khan—and a source of wealth for the ruling family. As long as rulers paid taxes, sent tribute and troops when requested, and did not rebel, the Mongols more or less left them to their own devices. If they did not do these things, the Mongols retaliated with the utmost violence. Typically, an area had only one attempt at rebelling, for the Mongols were not opposed to massacring entire populations.

The passages reproduced are not the Yasa as the Mongols knew it but rather the Yasa as viewed and interpreted by outsiders—both sedentary subjects in the empire and also populations beyond the borders of the Mongol Empire. Those authors who wrote from outside the empire needed to understand their enemy, while those who wrote from within the empire wrote to comprehend their masters. Those who wrote from a later period, after the empire had split, tried to understand the nature of empire at its height.

Time Line

About the Author

The document as we have it is written by several authors: al-Makrizi (called simply “Makrizi” in the document), Mīrkhwānd (“Mirhond”), Ibn Battūtah (“ibn Batuta”), Vardan (“Vartang”), Mahakia, and, of course, Chinggis Khan (“Jenghiz Khan”).

Taqi al-din Ahmad al-Makrizi (1364-1442) was a writer from the Mamluk Sultanate in Egypt and Syria. Although the Ilkhanate disappeared well before al-Makrizi was born, the Yasa remained an important topic. In addition to being the enemy of the Ilkhanate, the Mamluk Sultanate had long been an ally and (at least from the Golden Horde’s perspective) vassal of the Golden Horde. Thus, an understanding of Mongol law was necessary. In addition, deserters from the Ilkhanate who could not flee to the Golden Horde took refuge in Mamluk territories, where they were received with honor. According to al-Makrizi, Chinggis Khan had the Yasa engraved onto steel tablets, although al-Makrizi drew most of his knowledge of the Yasa from Ata Malik Juvaini, a Persian who served in the Ilkhanate under Hülugü, including a period as governor of Baghdad. Although Juvaini worked for the Mongols, most of what he wrote concerning the Yasa consisted of some decrees and more maxims intended as guides rather than as absolute laws. Al-Makrizi interpreted Juvaini’s writings differently.

Muḥammad ibn Kavand-Shāh ibn Mīrkhwānd (1433-1498) did not live under Mongol rule. Born in Bukhara in modern-day Uzbekistan, Mīrkhwānd lived and wrote in Balkh, in present-day Afghanistan. He enjoyed the patronage of various Timurid princes, the descendents of Emir Timur. The Yasa remained important in the Timurid Empire, although the Timurid prince Shah Rukh attempted to banish its use in 1411. Nonetheless, it remained the primary instrument of law among the nomadic soldiery of the Timurids. Mīrkhwānd eventually ended up in the employ of Sultan Ḥusayn Bayqarah (r. 1469-1506), the last ruler of Timurid Persia and eastern Afghanistan. Mīrkhwānd wrote a six-volume history known as the Rowzat oṣ ṣafāl (Garden of Purity), although there is some discussion about whether he wrote all of it or whether his grandson, Khwāndamīr, completed it.

Ibn Battūtah (1304-1368) traveled through much of the Mongol world, including all four of the khanates, in his many journeys. He spent considerable time in each of the khanates and had contact with high-ranking officials. He was thus in a good position to observe many details, though he wrote very little about Mongol legal proceedings.

Vartang is more properly known as Vardan (d. 1271), an Armenian monk and writer. Vardan wrote his thirteenth historical compilation around 1267, which is approximately when the chronicle ends. Most of the focus is on Armenia from the biblical era to the death of Hülegü in 1265. Vardan lived during the time of the Mongol conquest of Armenia in the 1230s and the subsequent rule of the Mongols. Vardan does not avoid describing the atrocities of the conquests, but he also recognized the security and practical rule of the Mongols.

Mahakia was another Armenian chronicler. We do not know much of his life other than that he wrote his chronicle in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

Chinggis Khan was born in about 1162 in Mongolia, not far from today’s capital of Ulaanbaatar. His family belonged to a nomad tribe, and he came to power by uniting various nomad tribes of northeastern Mongolia, beginning with an alliance formed with his father’s blood brother Toghrul (also known as Wang Khan). By 1206 he had unified or subdued the Merkits, Naimans, Mongols, Keraits, Tatars, Uighurs, and several other tribes under his rule. When he set out to create the Mongol Empire, he realized the need for a rational legal system to maintain order. Beginning in 1202 the Mongolian sources refer to the Yasa, although it was not written down at that time, primarily because the Mongols were a preliterate society. Not until 1204 did Chinggis Khan order his scribes to adapt the Uighur writing system (a form of Syriac) to the Mongolian language. When he was crowned, he also decreed that his adopted brother, Shiqi-Qutuqtu, should be the chief judge of the empire and that he should record the decrees of the empire. In the ensuing years, Chinggis Khan consolidated his authority and pushed the empire westward to what is today Iran, Iraq, and part of Russia, among other lands. He died in 1227 during a military campaign against the Tangut people.

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

Although Chinggis Khan died in 1227, Shiqi-Qutuqtu continued to record his laws and completed his work in 1228. In 1229 the Yasa was officially promulgated at the coronation of Chinggis Khan’s third son, Ögödei. While the laws had been recorded in the previous year, promulgating them at the coronation reaffirmed their validity and indicated that all rulers coming after Chinggis Khan had to abide by his Yasa. It is unclear whether Chinggis Khan intended for the Yasa to be used for non-nomadic populations. In any case, his successors did use it, and the nomadic elite referred to it frequently. However, it was never published and disseminated broadly, and no single copy has been found. Thus, outsiders (non-Mongols) who lived in the empire or neighboring regions were left to deduce what the Yasa was and what it said. Indeed, the document reproduced here is not that of Chinggis Khan but represents instead the observations of non-Mongols, interpretations of the Yasa from the perspective of outsiders in terms not only of geography and culture but also of time.

That no copy of the Yasa exists makes an explanation of the laws difficult. Nonetheless, we can learn much from what others wrote of the Yasa, for these writings provide context for our understanding of how outsiders viewed the Mongols and their society. Indeed, many of the entries are not intended to provide a holistic view of the Mongols but rather what would be of interest to the authors’ respective audiences. In all of the excerpts, “he” always refers to Chinggis Khan.

In addition to the royal decrees, Shiqi-Qutuqtu and others wrote down many of the sayings and advice of Chinggis Khan. These biligs (or “maxims”) were not laws but rather pieces of what he considered commonsensical advice or rules for proper behavior. It remains unclear how many maxims Chinggis Khan actually uttered. Still, after he died, his shadow grew larger until he was venerated not only as an ancestor but also as a demigod who could intercede on behalf of his heirs, at least indirectly. Thus, like any hero, what he said and did and what others claimed he said and did began to blend. Whether or not Chinggis Khan actually spoke these words matters little, for they give insight into what the Mongols as a collective society, particularly the upper levels of society, viewed as important. Indeed, for many outside observers, the line between the Yasa and the maxims was blurred, particularly because much of their information about both came to them indirectly.

“From Makrizi”

Al-Makrizi’s fragments tend to focus on issues that would be of interest to his patrons, the Mamluk sultans and the educated Islamic public—primarily the ulema, or scholars, clergy, and jurists. It must be remembered that several Mongols dwelled in the Mamluk Sultanate and served in their military in high positions, so the Mamluks were not unfamiliar with Mongols. The first three entries correspond largely with Islamic law, while the next two are matters that speak to the Mongols’ sense of pragmatism. As evidence in items 4 and 14, the purity of water was always crucial for the nomads because their livelihood depended on it; tainted water could cause massive loss among their herds and flocks.

Several sections take up social decorum. The sixth point refers specifically to hospitality. If an outsider was shown hospitality—given food, drink, or gifts no matter how innocuous—it meant they were protected. This was a trend that stretched across all of Eurasia among nomadic and seminomadic societies. The Mamluks, being of nomadic origin themselves, recognized it, as did Arabs. Other sections covering these issues include 7 and 12 through 16.

Many of the fragments also concern religion. Item 8 deals with the slaughtering of animals. Muslims, like Jews, slaughtered animals by cutting the jugular vein across the neck and allowing the blood to run out, whereas the Mongols stilled the heart with a hand or ripped the aorta by inserting a hand inside the animal’s body. For Muslims, animals killed in the Mongol fashion were not considered safe to eat. The Mongols prepared meat on this way in order to save the blood for use in sausages and other foods. The threat of execution for slaughtering animals in the Muslim manner is found in other Muslim sources, intended to show that the Mongols were oppressive in their rule. It is possible that execution of Muslims for not slaughtering animals in the Mongol fashion did occur on occasion. For the Mongols, Muslims and Christians were generally viewed as nationalities based on their customs and were not considered in light of their individual religious practices. Thus, slaughtering animals signaled that one was abandoning the Mongol heritage. Still, sections 10, 11, and 17 reflect the Mongols’ religious tolerance, for example, in saying that Chinggis Khan “ordered that all religions were to be respected and that no preference was to be shown to any of them.” (Although section 10 emphasizes Muslim religious leaders in exempting them from taxation, it applied to clerics and devout members of all religions.) In this light, one would expect the death penalty to have applied only to nomads who slaughtered animals in the Muslim fashion.

The rest of al-Makrizi’s Yasa fragments are concerned with military matters, which would be of the greatest interest to the Mamluks, although nothing described was a military secret. Indeed, the Mamluks had adopted many similar measures, most likely for pragmatic reasons rather than through Mongol influence. It is notable that al-Makrizi included sections about women and how they were expected to fight and perform the duties of men when the men were away. Sections 18 through 26 show the extent of Mongol discipline and the control that the Mongol khans had over their army, perhaps as a polite rebuttal of the situation in the Mamluk Sultanate, where the sultan was often chosen in a coup by disgruntled military officers.

“From Mirhond”

The two entries of Mīrkhwānd, deal only with criminal justice. The first one concerns discipline for the army. Chinggis Khan imposed strict discipline on his army. The reference concerning the “community hunt” in section 27, in fact, applied to the military, as it was also a military exercise known as the nerge. Such punishments as are described here (beating with sticks and execution) are recorded elsewhere and are plausible; when compared with their mention in other sources, they appear here to be guidelines or advice given on how to maintain discipline rather than an actual law.

Item 28 deals with murder. The Mongols did allow the paying of a fine, most of which went to compensate the family of the victim. Although Mīrkhwānd indicates otherwise, payments were made either in cash or in kind, usually livestock. It is not surprising that Mīrkhwānd, a Muslim, placed a higher value on a Muslim than on a Chinese. The price for the life of a Chinese—a donkey—may have been less than one gold coin. That being said, the Mongols generally held the Chinese in low regard—in part, because there were so many of them and they feared being assimilated by the Chinese.

“From ibn Batuta”

The compensation cited in section 29, written by Ibn Battūtah, also appears in a few other sources. It is probable that a person found in possession of a stolen horse had to repay the owner with additional horses, but the rest appears to be simply confirmation of the barbarity and draconian spirit of the Mongols. What is interesting about this passage is that it further demonstrates that the Yasa was intended for use among the nomads. Only nomads and rich sedentary people could possibly have nine horses. An average nomad would have at least five horses, while a noble could have hundreds if not thousands. Determining ownership of a horse was simple enough, for horses often were marked with the owner’s brand or symbol. That nine horses would be given in addition to the stolen horse is significant, for Mongols considered the number nine auspicious.

“From Vartang” and “From Mahakia”

The fragments included from Vardan and Mahakia are infused with Christian religious overtones. Vardan and Mahakia were both monks. Although the Mongols did kill many in their invasion of Armenia, their later rule was fairly tolerant. Many of the Armenian nobles found favor in the Mongol court, and Mongol religious toleration allowed the Armenians to practice their faith without oppression from Muslims, whose kingdoms surrounded them, or the Orthodox Byzantines, who viewed the Armenian Church as heretical. The reign of Hülegü was seen as a particularly beneficial period by Armenian Christians because Hülegü’s wife was also a Christian. She helped finance the building of some churches, and Hülegü’s rule was thus often considered a golden period. (Hülegü’s wife also funded the building of mosques and Buddhist temples.) It is not surprising that parts of Vardan’s and Mahakia’s Yasa fragments resemble the Ten Commandments.

Most of the laws cited here are universal. Murder, theft, and adultery tend to be disruptive to society. The Mongols, like every other government, preferred a peaceful society, if only because it was more conducive to collection of taxes. From the perspective of Vardan and Mahakia, the fact that Mongol law seemed similar to the Ten Commandments help legitimate their rule and demonstrated that they were just and not infidels.

“The Maxims of Jenghiz Khan”

The additional maxims of Chinggis Khan were used to advise subsequent rulers and princes descended from Chinggis Khan on proper behavior and conduct. The division in this document between what is considered the Yasa and what are maxims appears to be based on the nature of the entry. If it was linked to a punishment or phrased as a decree, the recorders deemed it to be part of the Yasa, whereas other pieces were considered simply advice or sayings from Chinggis Khan.

The maxims deal with a variety of topics. Several have to do with the leadership skills of a “Bek,” or master, and his ability to command a tümen, or an army unit consisting of ten thousand men. The maxims prescribe behavior in times of war, enjoining proper deference to seniors and calling on soldiers to be “as a hungry falcon.” The maxims also require the wives of soldiers to maintain a well-ordered household. Standards of heroism are also held up, with reference made to Yesun-Bey, a ruler of the Mongol Empire in the early fourteenth century. Nevertheless, Chinggis Khan was critical of Yesun-Bey, for he did not experience the hardships and fatigue of his men, so he was not fit to rule.

Many maxims are nostalgic in character, as Chinggis Khan reflects on past events as signposts pointing to proper and heroic behavior. Thus, in item 27, for example, he reflects on a previous battle and how he responded when he and his men were ambushed. He narrates a similar story in item 28. At times he seems to miss the sting of battle and the thrill of conquest. He sees his graying hair as a sign of seniority, but he can still look back to times when he and his multitudes could “conquer and extirpate his enemies, to take all they possess,” and to “make the bellies and navels of their wives his bed and bedding.” The Mongols were a harsh people, living in harsh conditions. Chinggis Khan was able to forge an empire and hold it together by adhering to the truth of the first maxim: “From the goodness of severity the stability of the government.”

Audience

The audience for these writings varied considerably. As most, if not all, of al-Makrizi’s work derives from Juvaini, an administrator in the Mongol Empire, there is some complexity to the question of the audience. Juvaini’s work was written primarily for other Persians, although he received patronage from the Mongol court, and thus it is likely that the Mongol nobility also read it. Al-Makrizi wrote his work after the collapse of the Mongol Ilkhanate in Persia, and his audience was primarily intended to be the officials of the Mamluk Sultanate. Nonetheless, others also cribbed or plagiarized extensively from Juvaini, and Juvaini probably did the same, particularly with respect to the maxims. The maxims were intended exclusively for the nobility, to serve as foundational wisdom and standards of character.

Mīrkhwānd, also writing in a later period, had a different audience in the Timurid Dynasty. The Timurid, successors to the Mongols in central Asia and Iran, still held Chinggis Khan’s legacy in high esteem. Mīrkhwānd’s discussion of the Yasa was important to the Timurids’ understanding of the past and the Mongol legacy that endured in the region. Indeed, Timur, the founder of the Timurid Dynasty, used the Yasa as he saw fit, for many Turko-Mongol nomads in the region, even as Muslims, still referred to it. Also, toward the end of Sultan Ḥusayn Bayqarah’s reign, the realm was constantly threatened by invading Uzbeks, another successor to the Mongol Empire. Although many of the successors to the Mongols were Muslims and thus employed Islamic law, the Yasa still influenced their states. And in many areas of central Asia, where Muslims and non-Muslims intermixed, the Yasa was often the only legal code upon which both groups could agree.

Ibn Battūtah, Vardan, and Mahakia wrote for non-Mongol audiences. Ibn Battūtah wrote his work in North Africa, well away from the Mongol court, whereas Vardan and Mahakia wrote their works in Armenia. Other Armenians, primarily monks and priests, read them during the Middle Ages, so the audience was very narrow.

Impact

The impact of the Yasa and the maxims of Chinggis Khan is profound. Although no copy of the Yasa has been found, it was clearly the guiding beacon for the Mongol nobility in ruling their empire. Diverting from the Yasa sometimes led to conflict, and even the most ardent Muslim ruler often found ways to defer to the Yasa, in some cases to maintain the loyalty of the Turko-Mongol commanders. In addition, the maxims of Chinggis Khan remained an important litmus test for judging a person’s character, particularly because over the centuries his legend outgrew the historic reality. Indeed, in some areas of the Eurasian steppes his image became that of an infallible leader, so that it would be reasonable to ask: “What would Chinggis do?”

The observations of outsiders concerning Mongol laws also demonstrate their impact outside the Mongol Empire. Neighboring states and travelers were curious about the Mongols and attempted to understand how they viewed the world. Furthermore, they also used what they could find to justify their various agendas—to determine whether the Mongols were infidels, to promote a belief that the Mongols supported Islam or Christianity, or even to assert that the Mongols were a punishment from God.

Many directives of the Yasa and the maxims continued to be obeyed in Mongolia and other parts of the steppe. Indeed, in later periods numerous cultural practices or laws were simply justified as having been introduced by Chinggis Khan. Even though it is questionable whether Chinggis Khan created the law code or maxims attributed to him, in many ways they are largely responsible for the way in which he and the Mongol Empire is envisioned in the popular imagination.

Further Reading

Questions for Further Study