an insightful look into the role of loyalty in mongolian culture during chingis khan's reign along with its nuances and complexities.
Inside the Secret History, the authors use stories from Chingis Khan’s life to illuminate the values and ethics with which they hope to instill in future Mongol generations. Of these, the value of loyalty is the most overt and visible theme that flows throughout the book. In the text, we find that loyalty is based on a personal connection, is altruistic in nature, and should be strong among kin. These added complexities and nuances to the traditional sense of loyalty is a differentiating factor for Mongolian culture, and several examples from the text help illustrate the importance of these added dimensions.
While the early life of Chingis Khan includes multiple examples of loyalty, one of the first instances of it that we see is when his family is abandoned by the Tayichigud tribe. In the text, the author says that Mother Hoelun “took care of her sons” when they were children, and that once they had grown up, “they pledged to themselves: ‘Now we’ll feed our mother.’” In this situation, we can see how loyalty is emphasized in the familial setting. This idea of giving back to Mother Hoelun when the children are capable of doing so could be seen as a promotion of filial piety in the Mongol culture that the authors wish to convey. Although in this setting the “giving back” aspect of loyalty might seem transactional in nature, later on we’ll analyze how loyalty in most settings of Mongol culture is altruistic in nature. Thus, through the example of Hoelun’s children pledging to provide for her in the future, we can see how the authors tried to convey the important role that filial piety should play in Mongol culture, and how blood relationships necessitate important bonds of loyalty.
Adding complexity to this earlier definition of loyalty is the example of Sorkhan Shira protecting Temujin when he tries to escape from the Tayichigud after his capture. Sorkhan demonstrates a loyalty not to the abstract idea of his tribe, but rather to a person whom he has known for a long time and has developed a connection to. Through this story, the authors convey the importance of interpersonal loyalty, and describe how loyalty to a person should be valued higher than loyalty to one’s tribe. Put another way, being loyal to the concrete, fellow Mongol should outweigh any loyalty to the abstract, such as a tribe or religion. This interpretation is lent credence by the leadership system of the Mongols, in which people looked to a central figure at each level of government for guidance and authority. While there existed the legal framework of the Jasagh, the true power that those in the empire followed was that of the khan. All looked to Genghis Khan for unity and direction, not a document or idea like in other cultures. Thus, it is clear from this example and others later in the text that interpersonal loyalty was held to a higher degree of importance than loyalty to tribes and other abstract doctrine.
So far we’ve explored how the value of loyalty is conveyed by the authors to be both interpersonal and stronger amongst kin. But as Chingis’ life goes on, the authors add nuances and complexities to their definition of loyalty - demonstrating how the idea of loyalty shifts and evolves just as Chingis does in his early years. One such example of this shift comes from the time in which Borte is kidnapped by the Merkid, and Temujin sets out to bring her back. While the surface-level loyalty in this case is that of Temujin’s faithfulness to his love match, it is also important to analyze how he goes about rescuing Borte. We see that Temujin calls upon his anda, Jamukha, as well as his father’s anda, the Ong Khan, to help him rescue his wife. Both agree to help him, which seems surprising as the transactional nature of loyalty that we mentioned earlier is notably absent here. In its place seems to be an altruistic dimension of loyalty, especially due to the fact that at this time Temujin has no armies to speak of and few followers. Still, Jamukha and the Ong Khan bring the entirety of their forces to attack the Merkid, and Jamukha even says “let’s all die together fighting the Merkid”, demonstrating their extreme commitment to Temujin in an altruistic sense. While it can be argued that these relationships were somewhat transactional in nature, with Temujin initially providing the Ong Khan with a sable coat and Jamukha with his own blood, the difference in scale of these “gifts” indicates that these transactions are largely symbolic in nature. Thus, the authors of the Secret History use this example to convey the altruistic dimension which should play a central role in Mongolian interpersonal loyalties.
The text shows a final lesson in loyalty when Jamukha criticizes the Ong Khan and Temujin for being three days late prior to facing the Merkid. When Jamukha exclaims, “aren’t the Mongol a people whose word is sacred?”, the authors add a dimension of complexity to the previously discussed importance of interpersonal loyalty. While in this example the situation might seem minor, the authors use this point to drive home the fact that when a commitment is made to another Mongol, it must be kept. This comes as a result of the function of loyalty in Mongol culture - since loyalty is interpersonal, it is essential to establishing and maintaining relationships and alliances with others. But loyalty cannot come without trust, and adhering to one’s commitments is the most important step in building trust with others. Thus, the authors convey the importance of keeping one’s word as commitments form the building blocks to loyalties in Mongol culture.
During the time in which it was written, the ruling Mongol Dynasty had strong views on the values and ethics which it hoped to pass down to future generations to ensure the survival of their empire. Based on the Secret History, these values and ethics include an emphasis on interpersonal relationships above tribal allegiances, altruistic relationships over transactional ones, as well as both the ideas of filial piety and forming strong bonds with one’s kin. This set of values and ethics formed the foundation for a Mongol empire based on people rather than a document, and concrete families rather than abstract tribes. In all, this emphasis on interpersonal relationships formed the basis for the Mongol empire’s quick rise to power yet also set the stage for its demise.