This file is a single-author scholarly study with an appended critical document collection. Voegelin examines Mongol letters and edicts from 1245–1255—addressed to the papacy and to Louis IX—as sources for the Mongol idea of world empire. His thesis is that these texts reveal not mere “arrogance,” but a juridically rationalized ritual of conquest: cosmic analogy is literalized into a program of universal rule.
Die mongolischen Dokumente haben ihren besonderen Wert für die Philosophie der Politik, weil sie das Ritual des Literalismus in paradigmatischer Reinheit präsentieren und rational durcharbeiten.
English translation: The Mongol documents have their particular value for the philosophy of politics because they present the ritual of literalism in paradigmatic purity and work it out rationally.
The essay first reconstructs the embassies of Plano Carpini, Ascelin, André de Longjumeau, and Rubruk, then surveys the neglect and partial publication of the texts. Its second part identifies the documents by their preambles, separating khanal letters, khanal edicts, and commanders’ letters. This philological work is essential to Voegelin’s conceptual argument: the texts are formal legal acts of submission, not ordinary diplomatic correspondence.
The decisive conceptual move comes in the third part. Ancient Near Eastern empire symbolized political order as an analogy of cosmic order; Mongol imperial symbolism, Voegelin argues, converts analogy into literal world-expansion. The existing empire is only a seed of the future universal empire.
Im mongolischen Ritual dagegen wird zwar auch eine Reichsordnung als bestehend vorausgesetzt, aber nur als der Kernbestand, der durch Eroberung auf das in der Zukunft liegende Weltreich auszuweiten ist.
English translation: In the Mongol ritual, by contrast, an imperial order is likewise presupposed as existing, but only as the core that is to be extended by conquest to the world empire lying in the future.
The “command of God” is formulated as a parallel dogma: one God in heaven, one lord on earth. Voegelin cites the edictal formula as the theological-juridical core of Mongol expansion.
Deus excelsus super omnia ipse Deus immortalis
et super terram chingischam solus dominus.English translation: God, exalted above all things, God himself immortal, / and upon the earth Chingis alone is lord.
From this dogma follows a distinctive legal construction. Foreign rulers are not equal sovereigns; they are potential members of an empire whose actuality must be enforced. Voegelin names this structure with precision:
Im Falle des Mongolenreiches haben wir es weder mit einem Reich im Sinne des Alten Orients noch mit einem modernen Staat unter Staaten zu tun, sondern mit einem imperium mundi in statu nascendi, mit einem Weltreich-im-Werden.
English translation: In the case of the Mongol Empire we are dealing neither with an empire in the sense of the Ancient Orient nor with a modern state among states, but with an imperium mundi in statu nascendi, a world-empire-in-the-making.
Thus the letters demand submission, tribute, homage, and acknowledgement of the Yassa; refusal becomes rebellion, and war becomes “execution” of imperial law. The papal and French recipients misunderstood the Mongol demand as diplomatic aggression, but within Mongol legal symbolism the aggression lay with anyone who resisted incorporation.
Voegelin’s relevance lies in his refusal to treat the documents as exotic curiosities. They expose a recurring political form: immanentized universal order legitimating expansion as peace. This is why he compares Mongol oikumenism with modern ideological empires, especially communism. His conclusion is that the documents are highly formalized acts of political theology and law.
Unter allen uns erhaltenen Dokumenten von oikumenischen Reichsunternehmen sind die mongolischen die juristisch am besten durchgearbeiteten.
English translation: Among all the documents preserved to us of ecumenical imperial undertakings, the Mongol ones are the most thoroughly worked out juristically.
The final document section prints the Persian and Latin forms of Kujuk’s letter, Baitschu’s letter and edict, Aldschigiddai’s letter, Ogul-Gaimisch’s reply, and Mangu’s edict and letter. Together they show how “peace” is redefined as submission to the bearer of universal truth. Voegelin’s sharpest formulation of the mechanism is also his bridge to modern ideology:
Das Opfer der Aggression ist der Aggressor.
English translation: The victim of aggression is the aggressor.
This work was divided into 24 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 24 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian