The supreme leadership of the Golden Horde Empire, as in other Mongol states, was in the hands of the ruler, the khan, who in his actions was guided theoretically only by the prescriptions of Genghis Khan – yasa. In fact, everything depended on the strength of the ruler’s personality and foreign policy circumstances. The idea of any restrictions on the rights of the khan in relation to his subjects simply could not enter the minds of the then inhabitants of the Mongol world. This created conditions for the arbitrariness of the rulers, numerous acts of which are known to us not only in the Mongolian states. However, sources are silent about such cases in the Golden Horde itself.
After all, the Golden Horde was part of the common Mongol empire, and the khan’s will was subordinated to the will of the great Khan, to whom the rulers of Kipchak communicated their opinion in various ways. While Genghis Khan was alive, his word was the law for everyone, even in the remote corners of the Mongol empire. After the death of his eldest son, Jochi, to whom, according to the Mongol laws of inheritance, he transferred the lands of Kipchak to the administration, Genghis Khan, contrary to the rules established by him, appointed his son Batu as ruler there, subordinating his elder brother to him.
Batu, as a representative of the senior branch of the house of Genghis Khan, was a definite exception to the rules of inheritance [306], but he himself did not violate the laws of his grandfather, redirecting, as prescribed, the envoys who came to him to Karakorum. This rule also applied to William von Rubruck in 1253, in respect of whom there were clear instructions from the great Khan, as well as the ambassadors who arrived in Sarai from the Caucasus, which then belonged to the Kipchak Empire.
The ambassadors, who were notified of Georgia’s subordination to Kipchak, and the son of the Georgian queen Rusudan were transported further to Karakorum. Giyas ed-Din, who arrived from Rum, also had to go to the East, because, according to the Georgian chronicles, «it was the custom that all subordinate princes should first come to Batu, and from him go to the Monk.» (Here, as in other cases related to that time, Monke was mistakenly called the Great Khan in the sources.)
Despite the correct position on this issue, Batu’s relations with the central government during the reign of the great Khan Guyuk escalated to such an extent that even then there was a real danger of civil war. The election of the new great Khan Monke took place with the active participation of Batu, who personally rejected another proposed candidate. Therefore, it is not surprising that his relationship with Monk was very friendly. The gratitude of the great khan for his help in his election was expressed in his instruction to transfer to Batu, as the eldest in the house of Genghisids, a fifth of all the spoils of war from the upcoming Hulagu military campaign.
Wilhelm von Rubruck even claims that Batu’s subjects looked down on Monke’s subjects and therefore did not show the prescribed respect to his envoys. It is now impossible to establish whether such a statement is true. It is very likely that the Franciscan made generalizing conclusions based on a single random fact that was presented to him as typical.
Shortly before his death, Kipchak Khan sent his son Sartak to the Monk, who did not seek to be confirmed by the great khan as heir to the throne after his father’s death.
Berke’s clash with Hulagu, which took place in parallel with Kublai’s struggle (since 1259) against Aryk-Buga, brought with it some alienation from the central government, since Berke recognized Aryk-Buga as the great khan, not Kublai. At that time, even coins with his name appeared in Kipchak. The changed state of affairs is clearly demonstrated by the fact that in 1258-1259, Berke limited himself to inviting the Georgian king David V to his court, without sending him, as prescribed by the rules, to the East.
Nevertheless, an opportunity soon presented itself for reconciliation between Berke and the great Khan, when Kublai’s son fell into the hands of the khan of the Golden Horde and he sent him home. In addition, the struggle for the throne of the great Khan in the Mongol Empire ended with the defeat of Aryk-Bugi. But Kublai’s name did not appear on the Kipchak coins, unlike his predecessor Monke. Nevertheless, the khans of Kipchak, Mengu-Timur in 1267 and Tud-Mengu in 1283, were still approved by Kublai Khan. Moreover, it was there that Mengu, together with Nogai, proposed to Kublai to hold a kurultai [307]. However, the Kipchak representatives did not appear on it.
The death in 1294 of Kublai Khan, the respected head of the united Mongol Empire, shook the foundations of the unity of the state in both Persia and Kipchak. And although the Iranian empire of the Mongols continued to maintain rather lively ties with China for personal and family reasons, contacts with it from the Golden Horde became noticeably cooler. As a matter of fact, only Uzbek Khan, following Berke’s example, sent gifts to Beijing (precious stones, falcons and camels).
On the advice of his entourage, Uzbek Khan did not succumb to attempts by Transoxany, which claimed that he did not agree with Uzbek’s election, to set him against the great khan. But if Kipchak Khan called the great khan «the shadow of heaven» at the same time, it was only because it corresponded to the hierarchical views adopted in the unified Mongolian state and corresponded to the medieval «rules of good taste.»
In the Chinese sense, this meant that the Khan still considered himself a subject of the Chinese emperor. The fact is that the Khans of the Golden Horde, like other Mongol rulers, had their own territories in China even before the middle of the 14th century. Therefore, in 1336, Uzbek sent a delegation to China to pay his respects and remind them of their rights.
The khan’s true position within Kipchak, especially after Kublai’s death, no longer depended on the will of the great khan. We are informed only by Chinese sources about the latest contacts and attitudes of both rulers towards each other. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that these sources pursued their interests in order to maximize the power of their emperor. But since the middle of the 14th century, they have also fallen silent, as well as the writers of the Near East, who stopped writing about it since 1283-1284. After the fall of the Mongol Yuan dynasty in China[308] in 1368, the last ties of Kipchak with this state were severed, even if they still remained.
Since the middle of the 13th century, relations with Egypt have become much more important for the Khans of the Golden Horde than relations with the East. Therefore, it is not surprising that the close ties between the two countries are reflected at the state level.
After converting to Islam, most likely before taking the khan’s throne, Berke, on the advice of his spiritual adviser al-Baharzi[309], established relations with Caliph al-Mustasim Billah[310] from Baghdad (1242-1258) and began exchanging envoys and gifts with him. After Hulagu occupied the residence of the Abbasid ruling house in 1258, its representatives found refuge in Egypt, which allowed them to find ideological points of contact with Kipchak.
Therefore, after the adoption of Islam in 1283-1284, Tammengu accepted the banner (alam [311]) from the caliphs, although he requested it from the sultan. There was nothing humiliating about it, and now he could raise him at the head of his army in the fight against the infidel Buddhist Ilkhans. Relations with Egypt became so close that the Mamluk Sultan ordered the Khan of the Golden Horde to be pronounced in khutbs[312] after his own in Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem and Cairo. In turn, in 1287, the sultan received permission to erect a mosque in the Old Crimea, named after him[313]. The Sultan did not remain in debt – the name Berke was given to the Egyptian prince, and the square in Cairo still bears the name of Khan Uzbek (Ezbekiya).
With the adoption of the caliphal banner, Tam-Mengu to a certain extent became a vassal of the caliphs in Egypt. Naturally, due to his position, he could not be a subject of the sultan. Therefore, the inscription «an-Nazir li-din Allah» on a coin minted in Kipchak in 1293-1294 (692-693 AH) cannot be considered a mention of the name of the Egyptian sultan, whose name was al-Malik an-Nasir. In addition, the coin has the inscription «Amir al-Muminin» and the designation «dinar», although it is minted from silver, not gold, as it should be. Most likely, there is an attempt to perpetuate the caliphs of 1180-1225, whose motto is also on the coin.
However, the Uzbek Khan’s order in 1320-1321 looks quite different, so that the Mamluk sultan should also be mentioned in sermons after his name, and mosques in Crimea should be named after him. But in this matter, the Nile sultans were ahead of him. If al-Maqrizi[314] does not exaggerate in his desire to embellish his homeland, then the Uzbek even went so far as to instruct his ambassadors to swear allegiance to the Egyptian ruler in 1316-1317. Soon after (in 1330-1331), Sultan al-Malik an-Nasir sent a sword and a banner to the Volga-Bulgar (Tatar) ruler in response to his request, nominally turning him into his vassal.
When the political relations between Sarai and Cairo cooled down, the symbols of interstate relations disappeared. With the collapse of the Persian Mongol Empire in 1335, which made the alliance between Kipchak and Egypt unnecessary, the ties came to an end, according to which one could say that the khans of Kipchak considered themselves, to a certain extent, vassals of the great khans and the Egyptian «caliphs» at the same time. This duality alone speaks to how little weight these obligations actually had in the Barn, which never had legal consequences.
The weakening state power of the khans led to the fact that in the XV century they began to look for a new political foothold in foreign countries. The political situation has now again affected the development of the State and legal system. Only this time in relations with the north. In 1412, the ambassadors of Khan Jalal ed-Din offered tribute to the Polish king Vladislav II Jagiello as his suzerain, and in 1428 it was actually paid to the Grand Duke of Lithuania by Khan Ulu-Mohammed, supported by Vytautas, sending an embassy to Smolensk.
In this decade, Vytautas, shortly before his death in 1430, was the rightful owner of Kipchak. In 1421, he even issued Gilbert de Lannoa[315] a security certificate for travel through the territory of the Golden Horde in Tatar, Russian and Latin, allocating a military detachment to protect and accompany the traveler. However, the claims that the images of Vytautas were minted on Tatar coins as a sign of his supreme authority over Kipchak have no basis in fact.
The payment of tribute to Vytautas differed from previous signs of state-legal dependence of this kind in that it actually meant subordination of the will of the khans to Lithuanian influence, which took place without the vassalage oath by the rulers of Kipchak. The khans remained dependent on the whims of foreign rulers until the end of the Great Horde.