Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Christopher Kaplonski, D. Sneath (2010)
Atwood, C. (2006) ‘Titles, Appanages, Marriages and Officials: A Comparison of Political Forms in the Zünghar and Thirteenthcentury Mongol Empires’
H. Serruys (1958)
A Note on Arrows and Oaths among the MongolsJournal of the American Oriental Society, 78
N. Cosmo (1998)
Qing Colonial Administration in Inner AsiaInternational History Review, 20
Atwood (2006a)
Ulus emirs, keshig elders, signatures and marriage partners: the evolution of a classic Mongol institution
Ayusheev (2010)
‘ Okin—pervyi taisha selenginskikh buryat-mongolov’
R. Stasch (2009)
Society of Others: Kinship and Mourning in a West Papuan Place
Atwood (2006b)
‘Titles, appanages, marriages, and officials: a comparison of political forms in the Zhungar and thirteenth-century Mongol empires,’
S. Namsaraeva (2010)
The Metaphorical Use of Avuncular Terminology in Buriad Diaspora Relationships with Homeland and Host Society, 12
D. Sneath (2007)
The Headless State: Aristocratic Orders, Kinship Society, and Misrepresentations of Nomadic Inner Asia
H. Serruys (1977)
The Office of Tayisi in Mongolia in the Fifteenth CenturyHarvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 37
This paper concerns the formation of detachable political groups among the Mongols in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and the process of their reattachment to larger polities within the Russian and Qing empires. It traces the case of Okin Taisha, who split off from the Abaga Mongols in present-day Inner Mongolia, became a subject of the Russians, then of a Khalkha Mongolian noble, and finally returned to Russia. The paper argues that kinship relations were a crucial means for conceptualising these attachments and detachments. Kinship should not be assumed invariably to imply solidarity, but rather also encodes division, inequality of status, and uncertainty in personal relations. The paper also aims to contribute to understanding of the internal composition of such split-away polities, which were not initially based on kinship, even though their aristocratic leaders expressed their relations with other leaders in kin terms.
Inner Asia – Brill
Published: Aug 19, 2014
Keywords: border; Russian empire; Qing empire; Mongolian political groups; kinship
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.