Ariq Boke is a controversial figure in the Mongol Empire, and is portrayed negatively through the works of historians during his era, especially Rashid Al-Din. This is the result of his avocation for traditional steppe values, rather than the new integration of foreign influence represented by his brother Khubulai. This contrast in beliefs led to the division in the four uluses, and ultimately the fragmentation of the Empire. Overwhelmingly, the Mongol Empire was divided by the two uluses that supported traditional beliefs, and the other two uluses that craved the integration and affluence of foreign cultures. These opposing ideas were then heightened after the death of Mongke and the succession of a new Khan. Each faction wished to have a
…show more content…
These methods of tanistry were normally effective enough when pertaining to rival clans, but in the context of an empire, tanistry only highlighted the contrasting interests among the Mongol people (Fletcher, 1980, page 239). Thus, because both brothers were able to claim a right to the throne as a result of their heritage, tanistry became only way to resolve the issue of Khanship, and ultimately led them to engaged in a civil war. Moreover, within their lifetime, Khubulai and Ariq Boke had witnessed tanistry in politics when Mongke took the Great Khanate from the Ogedid branch. This process of tanistry therefore was not unique, but rather a repetitive occurrence, that even continued to occur after the war between the two Toluid brothers. Since both Ariq Boke and Khubulai were eligible in broad terms to rule the country as a result of tanistry, they both were able to deem themselves as worthy of the title Khan. The problem with this lies in the fact that tanistry is not an effective way to determine a leader. Tanistry allows for the fractionalization of an empire because it determines the ruler on the basis of strength, and ultimately leads to violence between two or more competing interests. Tanistry permitted any claimant to declare himself Khan, and therefore, each time succession arises, it …show more content…
These opposing interests between nomadic and sedentary life led to the inevitable fragmentation of the empire, and tanistry only heightened the issue. Overwhelmingly, this issue of competing cultures did not subside until after the defeat of Ariq Boke, and overall did not lessen until the Mongol Empire broke up after the death of Khubulai. Therefore, the war between Ariq Boke and Khubulai demonstrates the ineffectiveness of tanistry as a means to determine succession because it only provides further fragmentation over disputed issues. The war overwhelmingly displays how tanistry can lead to the disassembling of an empire, and how even if this method of succession was viable before the empire, it became inefficient after its establishment. All in all, the ultimate division of the Empire was irreversible as a result of tanistry and the conflicting interests of steppe and sown life, which was demonstrated by the war between Ariq Boke and his older brother
These methods of tanistry were normally effective enough when pertaining to rival clans, but in the context of an empire, tanistry only highlighted the contrasting interests among the Mongol people (Fletcher, 1980, page 239). Thus, because both brothers were able to claim a right to the throne as a result of their heritage, tanistry became only way to resolve the issue of Khanship, and ultimately led them to engaged in a civil war. Moreover, within their lifetime, Khubulai and Ariq Boke had witnessed tanistry in politics when Mongke took the Great Khanate from the Ogedid branch. This process of tanistry therefore was not unique, but rather a repetitive occurrence, that even continued to occur after the war between the two Toluid brothers. Since both Ariq Boke and Khubulai were eligible in broad terms to rule the country as a result of tanistry, they both were able to deem themselves as worthy of the title Khan. The problem with this lies in the fact that tanistry is not an effective way to determine a leader. Tanistry allows for the fractionalization of an empire because it determines the ruler on the basis of strength, and ultimately leads to violence between two or more competing interests. Tanistry permitted any claimant to declare himself Khan, and therefore, each time succession arises, it …show more content…
These opposing interests between nomadic and sedentary life led to the inevitable fragmentation of the empire, and tanistry only heightened the issue. Overwhelmingly, this issue of competing cultures did not subside until after the defeat of Ariq Boke, and overall did not lessen until the Mongol Empire broke up after the death of Khubulai. Therefore, the war between Ariq Boke and Khubulai demonstrates the ineffectiveness of tanistry as a means to determine succession because it only provides further fragmentation over disputed issues. The war overwhelmingly displays how tanistry can lead to the disassembling of an empire, and how even if this method of succession was viable before the empire, it became inefficient after its establishment. All in all, the ultimate division of the Empire was irreversible as a result of tanistry and the conflicting interests of steppe and sown life, which was demonstrated by the war between Ariq Boke and his older brother