The Tibetan History Reader

The events of 1349–1354 had laid the foundations for Pakmodrupa rule over both Ü and Tsang. From the point of view of Realpolitik, however, it was neither secure nor final. Looking at it under the constitutional angle, it had no legal existence, as the imperial authority remained unquestioned, the Ü-Tsang xuanwei si [Pacification Office] was still functioning, at least on paper, and above all the new strong man continued to pay lip service to the authority of the Sakya lamas.1 The new structure was still inchoate and only its main outlines were taking shape. Jangchup Gyeltsen’s basic conception was the undermining of the power of the various tripön [myriarchs] and the establishment of a net of local stewardships (gzhis kha) based on forts (rdzong; but this term is never used in Situ’s Testament), held by his old trusted servants.² In the long run these stewardships became hereditary, thus giving origin to a new aristocracy existing alongside with those trikor that made their submission in time. The new Pakmodrupa policy, however, cannot be dealt with here, as it lies beyond the scope of the present work.

Our main (and almost exclusive) source continues to be Situ’s Testament by Jangchup Gyeltsen, which grows more and more detailed and discursive as it draws nearer to the time of writing (ca. 1361). It also assumes some special features, such as an increasing preoccupation with matters of etiquette and of precedence during the official conferences. It is also pointedly silent about the relations with the imperial court of abbots and scholars not belonging to the Sakya school. To give an example, the name of the Karmapa Rölpé Dorjé (1340–1383), who in 1358/9 traveled to the Court on the invitation of the emperor, never appears in the text.

In 1356³ a serious incident took place, viz. the sudden imprisonment of the pönchen [great officer, the temporal administrator (of Sakya)] Gyelwa Zangpo by Chökyi Gyeltsen (1332–1359) and his half-brother, the nominal chief abbot Lodrö Gyeltsen (1332–1364), the sons of the di shi [imperial preceptor] Künga Gyeltsen. Our text informs us of the fact in a single sentence.⁴

This coup was actually the work of an influential combination between the Lhakhang Labrang [of Sakya monastery], to which the two brothers belonged (and therefore often called the Lhakhangpa) and the lords of Latö Jang. The head of the latter family was Namkha Tenpé Gyeltsen or Namkha Tenpa, usually called Jangpa or (by anticipation) Jangpa pönchen. He was the youngest son of Dorjé Gönpo and thus a grandson of the pönchen Yöntsün. Already as a young man he received the rank of Situ with the tiger-head button of the third rank and was appointed judge (janghochi) of Ü-Tsang. Later he received the title of guogong and the gold seal with the rock-crystal button. He appears for the first time in 1352, probably upon his appointment as judge, and at once showed himself hostile to Pakmodru and closely associated with prince Aratnaśiri.5 The connecting link between the two families was represented by Lama Künchangpa, a cousin of Dorjé Gönpo and a maternal uncle of Lama Lodrö Gyeltsen.

The sources afford not the slightest clue to the reasons and aims of Gyelwa Zangpo’s imprisonment. We can only suppose that, since the pönchen had completely veered over to the side of Jangchup Gyeltsen and had become his supporter, his capture was an attempt to stem Pakmodrupa rise by laying hold of his main prop within the Sakya administration.

Jangchup Gyeltsen handled the new situation cautiously. Of course he was obliged to procure the liberation of the pönchen, if only in order to uphold his own prestige. His first concern was to get hold of the official seal of the pönchen, which was in the keeping of the latter’s son Drakpa Gyeltsen, at that time residing at Dzongkha. He was summoned to Rinpung, where he arrived safely. Then Jangchup Gyeltsen started leisurely to collect his troops. His slow and prudent action, clearly aimed at avoiding an armed clash, was, however, disturbed by the rash activities of the nephews of the prisoner, who at the head of their buta started raiding the border tracts of the Sakya domain. The Lhakhangpa and Jangpa tried to buy them off by offering the cession of some estates, but to no avail. Later Jangchup Gyeltsen himself intervened, placing these mischief makers under a bland arrest.⁶

The imperial officers found themselves in an awkward situation. Zhünnu Gyeltsen, the most prominent member of the xuanwei si,⁷ who apparently did not know how he and his office should cope with this emergency, proceeded to Rinpung together with the commanders of the military mail stations of the North. Being thus assured at least of the benevolent neutrality of the imperial officials, Jangchup Gyeltsen convened a conference of the foremost political leaders, including Lama Künchangpa, the Lhakhangpa brothers, and Jangpa. The crafty Künchangpa offered to appoint as pönchen Pakpa Pelzang, the chief of Gyantsé, subject of course to the approval of the emperor; but the offer was summarily rejected.⁸

The conference assembled at Zhudrok, with the participation of the officials of the xuanwei si⁹ and of the respected Lama Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen (1332–1362) of the Düchö branch [of the Sakya]. There was much wrangling about petty ceremonial questions, such as who should bow and take off his bonnet to whom. When business began in earnest, the assembled leaders of Ü left no doubt about their unanimous request of an unconditional liberation of the pönchen. Künchangpa, having failed in all his attempts to obtain at least a delay, returned to Sakya to report, and the conference adjourned.¹⁰

Then another round of negotiations was started by Lama Sharpa (no personal name is given), who banked on the record of his family, of which two members had been Imperial Preceptors; he was seconded by Lama Nyammepa, the old teacher of the Pakmodrupa leader. The lengthy discourses supposed to have been delivered on this occasion are interesting in so far as they show how the history of the Sakya-Yuan period was viewed by its actors and their epigones. But once more the discussions led to no results. Jangchup Gyeltsen took the stand that the Lhakhangpa brothers were rebels in the eyes of Mongol law and as such were to be punished under the terms of the imperial jasa brought to Sakya by Qipcaqtai and by Darma Gyeltsen.11

Sharpa brought this uncompromising answer to Sakya, where it was discussed in the council, both Lhakhangpa brothers being present, but in the absence of Jangpa, who was becoming suspicious of the intentions of his relatives and feared they would use him as scapegoat. The council decided to send out once more Lama Künchangpa to arrange a compromise. The Lama negotiated skillfully and for a long time with the Pakmodrupa. To lessen the tension, he even proposed that Gyelwa Zangpo’s son Drakpa Gyeltsen should take the place of his father as a hostage at Sakya. The suggestion was flatly refused, but the idea was picked up by the Pakmodru officials in the opposite sense; and Jangchup Gyeltsen had to use his authority to save Künchangpa from being arrested and held as pawn. In the end Künchangpa was sent back to Sakya as the bearer of a formal letter (chahu, Chin. zhafu), countersigned by him, which amounted to an ultimatum requesting the immediate release of the pönchen, the request being backed by a forward move of the troops under the command of chenpo Rinchen Zangpo.¹²

The game was up, as Sakya clearly had not the means to oppose armed resistance; so the Lhakhang Labrang had to bow to the inevitable. Gyelwa Zangpo was brought to the Pakmodru camp by Lama Künchangpa. He was received there with great solemnity and with ostentatious rejoicings, of course intended to emphasize the triumph of Pakmodru. The matter had ended with the humiliation of the Sakyapa, whose last attempt at opposition had failed completely. Jangchup Gyeltsen had obtained this success without shedding blood, thanks to his consummate diplomacy backed by an adequate display of military force. The whole proceedings were capped by a memorial sent to the emperor to inform him of the events.¹³ It seems, however, that the Lhakhang brothers obtained immunity for their deed, although this is not mentioned expressly in Situ’s Testament, but only alluded to obliquely in another context. Lodrö Gyeltsen may have kept his empty title of chief abbot, although he was not considered as such by the Pakmodrupa. Chökyi Gyeltsen, who perhaps had committed himself deeper than his half-brother, left in the same year 1356 for Beijing, where he was appointed teacher of the heir-apparent prince Ayuśiridara with the title of Da Yuan guoshi; he died in China in 1359.¹⁴

As to Gyelwa Zangpo, by now a broken reed, he tendered a solemn act of submission to Pakmodru, including a written pledge of loyalty and the surrender of some of his estates. Even his seal of office was handed over to the custody of Jangchup Gyeltsen. Still he kept (at least so it appears) the empty title of pönchen, shorn of any vestige of power.15 He retired to Tongmön in Shang, where he received initiation from Karmapa Rölpé Dorjé.¹⁶ His nephew Könchok Rinchen was considered by some as the acting pönchen; but since the imperial decree granting him the tiger-head seal as fushi du yuanshuai [vice commander-in-chief] had never been officially promulgated in Tibet, his character of pönchen was disavowed;¹⁷ and indeed, he is not included in the official list of the pönchen.

Pakmodru military control was secured by the permanent occupation of Chumik, although it was formally an estate belonging to the Zhitok Labrang [of Sakya]; it was heavily garrisoned and placed in the charge of Dorjé Gyeltsen as steward (gnyer).¹⁸

During the New Year’s festival of 1357 an imperial envoy called Yilao (possibly a title and not a name) arrived in Tibet. He was the bearer of an imperial decree granting to Jangchup Gyeltsen the rank and seal of Taisitu (da situ). Although this title was not quite rare, in this case it implied the recognition by the emperor of his outstanding position in Central Tibet, and the Tibetans seem to have considered this act as the legalization of the new regime. Along with Yilao but independently from him, another envoy called Lugyel ta shri gön (Chin. dashi guan) brought an edict inviting Lama Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen to court.¹⁹ These imperial messengers, however high-ranking, were no longer empowered to supervise and interfere with Tibetan administration like Qipcaqtai and Darma Gyeltsen one generation earlier; they were limited to the ceremonial task of inviting to court high lamas. The Yuan government, fully occupied with the mounting revolt in Central China, tacitly gave up trying to reassert its direct authority in Tibet.

A partial exception was represented by an edict addressed to Jangchup Gyeltsen. The Drigungpa had appealed to the emperor and had obtained from him an order to the Pakmodrupa enjoining the restitution of Ön and Ölkha. They followed up this theoretical success by claiming also possession of Gyama, where the local tripön had resigned his office. Jangchup Gyeltsen ignored the imperial command and refused every one of these requests. The consequence was serious fighting, chiefly around Gyama. There was also some untoward meddling by the Pakmodru abbot. In the end Jangchup Gyeltsen got his own way and no territorial change took place.²⁰

In another field he complied more or less gracefully with the imperial decree which had charged him with providing the means and making the arrangements for the journey of Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen to Dadu [Beijing]. This gave rise to frictions and small bickerings with the future dishi, who had a personal dislike for the Pakmodrupa; consequently, the actual departure was long delayed.

Things at Sakya had remained unsettled; the party struggle there continued and reached its climax with the murder of Lama Künchangpa. The circumstances are obscure and the reasons for the deed are not apparent; we are only told that Jangchup Gyeltsen asked the Jangpa pönchen not to interfere and requested a written engagement in this sense, perhaps in order to prevent a private vengeance.21 When the Pakmodrupa ruler betook himself to Chumik in order to investigate, this affair receded in the background as an even more serious piece of news reached him there: the pönchen Gyelwa Zangpo, who in the meantime had delegated his judicial work to Wangtsön, had suddenly died at Lhatsé, where he had been invited by the Lhasa authorities for a conference. The cause of his death was rumored to be either assassination by Wangtsön and his son, or excessive drinking of strong liquor;²² the first alternative seems to have been generally believed. The event took place at the end of 1357 or in January 1358.

After performing the funeral rites for the deceased, Jangchup Gyeltsen summoned to Chumik the councilors of Sakya, presided over by Lama Dampa Sönam Gyeltsen. The first days after their arrival were occupied by the New Year’s festival of 1358, held in the presence of the imperial envoy; on that occasion the latter presented solemnly to the Pakmodrupa the seal of Taisitu. Then the conference adjourned to Sakya itself, where several pending questions were dealt with.²³

The seal of the pönchen had remained in the hands of his son Drakpa Gyeltsen, whom Situ’s Testament up to this point calls by the title lopön. He had been adopted as son by Jangchup Gyeltsen after his reconciliation with Gyelwa Zangpo. At an unknown moment the latter procured for him the office of nangso, soon enhanced to nangchenpa, by which title he was later known. He inherited the Shang estate.²⁴ Now he handed over the seal of his father to the conference, which was sitting at the administrative headquarters in the Lhakhang Chenmo. Even the great official seal (dam kha) of the Sakya see was abandoned by Lama Dampa to the keeping of Jangchup Gyeltsen, as a sign that the temporalities of Sakya were henceforward to be supervised by him. To give a practical backing to this formal act, the Lhakhang Chenmo itself was opened to Jangchup Gyeltsen, who garrisoned it with about 200 men, of which 130 were retainers (bza’ pa) of Pakmodru. Khetsün’s son Künga Rinchen (1331–1399), who resided at Chumik under Pakmodrupa protection, received from the emperor the title of guanding guoshi with the great crystal seal and took up the office of abbot of Zhitok; he was guaranteed the necessary means for the upkeep of his dignity.²⁵

Jangchup Gyeltsen, who was in indifferent health, returned to Yarlung. There he settled finally the old question of the Three Valleys (Ön, Ölkha, Dora), which had become acute after the imperial decree on this subject. Eventually the valleys were left in his possession in exchange for an almost complete autonomy for Drigung.²⁶

In the meantime the opposition elements within Sakya had gathered at Lhatsé under the leadership of the local chief. Pending the arrival of reinforcements for the Jangpa, they attacked the new monastery of Namring and marched through Latö as far as Zangzang. Jangchup Gyeltsen sent a strong force under chenpo Rinchen Zangpo. Before their arrival, the Lhatsé levies under the command of Wangtsön had reached Sakya and laid siege to the Lhakhang Chenmo. But the Pakmodru troops were timely re-directed toward Sakya and apparently took the besiegers in the back. Their victory was complete and final. It was followed by stern reprisals: Wangtsön was taken and thrown into jail, many of his men fell fighting and the prisoners (464 men in all) were blinded.27 This ruthless act, the only one of this kind in Jangchup Gyeltsen’s long career,²⁸ stamped out the last embers of opposition in Tsang.

Lhatsé was taken and entrusted in judicial custody to the Lama Dampa and to Butön; this was one of the very few instances in which that great scholar played a half-political role.

At the end of 1358 the yuanshi [imperial envoy] Dharmakirti,²⁹ whom the emperor had sent to bring the formal rescript of invitation to Lama Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen and to escort him to the capital, had reached Dam. After the New Year’s festival of 1359 the usual ceremonies for the state reception of the envoy and of the edict were staged.³⁰ In the meantime the Imperial Preceptor Künga Gyeltsen had died at the end of 1358.³¹ As a consequence, the invitation to Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen was changed into a nomination as dishi, the decree being brought to Tibet by Dharmakirti and by the yuanshi Ebu. On the same occasion the di shi’s brother Drakpa Gyeltsen received the title of Bailan wang and an imperial decree confirmed his possession of Taktsang Dzongkha.³² Perhaps because of his new status, the traveling preparations for Sönam Lodrö Gyeltsen took a very long time. The caravan gathering in the train of the lama consisted of about 800 men. As they were slowly approaching Pakmodru, Jangchup Gyeltsen stopped them en route, remarking dryly that “if they are soldiers, they are too few; and if they are envoys, they are too many.” Things turned well eventually, and the lama visited Samyé and Densatel, Jangchup Gyeltsen offering a lavish hospitality. Then further unpleasantness arose, and the lama returned in high dudgeon to Sakya, where he had trouble with the Jangpa pönchen, who permitted the Jé estate to be raided by his men.³³

Gradually the last questions left open by the tragic events of the preceding years were settled. Wangtsön was spared his life and was placed under custody in Ön. Lama Lodrö Gyeltsen and pönchen Jangpa, who had quarreled during the last stages of Gyelwa Zangpo’s imprisonment, were compelled to make peace, under a sealed document drawn up in the presence of witnesses. A new commander was appointed to the Lhakhang Chenmo. In 1360 Jangchup Gyeltsen hardened his grip on Sakya by granting, with the concurrence of the Lamas, the title and office of nyené chenpo (chief attendant) of the Zhitok to a man he could trust: chenpo Pakpa Pelzang of Gyantsé.³⁴ Then the new Imperial Preceptor and his companions finally departed, being accompanied by Sanghaśrī du yuanshuai, whom the emperor had sent to escort them to Dadu.³⁵

The most important event of 1360 (at least in Pakmodrupa eyes) was the death of the Pakmodru hierarch Tsezhipa Drakpa Gyeltsen. Jangchup Gyeltsen appointed as his successor his own half-brother Chunyi Sarma Drakpa Sherap (1310–1370). He caused a great kumbum [stūpa] to be erected at Densatel in honor of the deceased, a complicated affair because of the difficulties in the geomantical determination of the site.36

The funeral rites had been long and expensive; they also afforded a pretext to the imperial preceptor, who seemed most unwilling to go to the disturbed imperial capital, for turning back on his way, in order to be present at them. Eventually he had to be invited kindly but firmly to proceed at last on his voyage.³⁷ He arrived at the capital early in 1362, only to die there in the tenth month of the same year; he was the last imperial preceptor at the Mongol court.³⁸

On this occasion Jangchup Gyeltsen clarified his position in front of the permanent imperial representatives in Tibet. The officials of the xuanwei si were informed that “you continue to say that, since lopön Situwa (i.e., Jangchup Gyeltsen) has the greater power, there is no scope for your activity. If things are so, you should give back to the yuanshi (the imperial envoy) your tiger-head [button] and your seal; I myself by virtue of my black hand-sign (thel rtse nag pos) having arranged for the postal personnel as far as Sok, shall take care that there should be no hindrance whatever. If things are not so, as to the official duties that are in your resort concerning the service to the yuanshi, you must perform them with no harm ensuing to ecclesiastical and lay subjects. This was intimated exactly and widely to all.”³⁹ This somewhat contemptuous emphasis on the irrelevance of the normal routine duties of the Yuan officialdom in Tibet, as compared with the effective power of Pakmodru, shows that by 1360 actual authority of the Mongol government in Central Tibet had waned. Henceforward the outward trappings of the xuanwei si were maintained, but that body became an empty shell without real contents, although the titles of its members were used by Tibetan noblemen for many years to come.

The Pakmodrupa regime was the expression of a conscious return to the purely Tibetan tradition. An outward sign of this policy was the forcible expulsion of all the “quasi-Mongols” (hor ’dra’, i.e., Tibetans who had accepted Mongol dress, customs and language) residing in Sakya and elsewhere.⁴⁰ We cannot, however, expatiate here on Jangchup Gyeltsen’s reforms.

Just before the departure of the imperial preceptor another prominent person appeared at Densatel and Neudong. As usual, our text gives no name, but employs only the double title of lopön chenpo and of wang. He was received with adequate honors, both because he was the bearer of an imperial jasa and because he was a “scion of the illustrious Sakya family.”41 This helps us in identifying him with Drakpa Gyeltsen (1336–1376),⁴² the second son of the Bailan prince Künga Lekpé Jhungné Gyeltsen and younger brother of the new imperial preceptor; we know from other sources that he wore those very titles of lopön chenpo and wang, because of his origin and because he was famous as a great master of yoga. Since 1354 he had lived with his brother in the new castle of Taktsang Dzongkha, which the emperor in 1360 granted to him in sole ownership. The same imperial edict of 1360 appointed him as the fourth (and last) prince of Bailan and gave him the customary title of dongzhi of the right and left, the golden seal, the tuoshu of delegation and the mandate that placed him in authority “in the regions where the sun sets.” Drakpa Gyeltsen was most emphatically resolved never to go abroad, because conditions in China had become too disturbed, alluding probably to the conflict between the Mongol factions which in 1359 had led to the sack and wholesale destruction of the summer capital Shangdu. As to his role after 1360, we are told very vaguely that he displayed great activity in the field of both ecclesiastical and civil law (khrims gnyis). But his political influence was practically nil, in spite of his high connections (he had married the sister of the Jangpa pönchen Namkha Tenpa). He lived at Sakya and at Taktsang Dzongkha, in which latter place he died.⁴³

We may also add that his third son Namsé Gyeltsen (1360–1408), although he never left Tibet, became at once a special protegé of the last Yuan emperor. When the boy was preparing to take his first monastic vows, Toghan Temür declared him to be equal to his eldest son (bu’o che or sras che ba) and granted him titles and ranks much higher than those usually pertaining to the Bailan princedom, including the establishment (wangfu) reserved to the princes of the blood. But he never met his adoptive father and died at Mönkhang Tsedong Dzong forty years after the end of the Yuan dynasty.⁴⁴ Indeed the Bailan princes never played that role of props of the Mongol domination which may have been expected of them.

The office of pönchen had become vacant either after the liberation or upon the death of Gyelwa Zangpo. His succession presents a knotty problem, as Situ’s Testament pointedly avoids giving us clear information. In most of our other texts the third term of office of Gyelwa Zangpo is ignored, and after Wangtsön the list includes the following names: Namkha Tenpé Gyeltsen, Drakpa Gyeltsen, Pelbum, Lochen.⁴⁵ The sequence in Chinese and Tibetan Documents is different: after Sönampel we find Gyelwa Zangpo for a second time as substitute (tshab) for Namkha Tenpé, then Drakpa Gyeltsen, Lochen, Pelbum.⁴⁶ It seems at present impossible to unravel the tangle and I shall merely present the scanty bits of information available on these persons, Lochen excepted.

The career of Namkha Tenpé Gyeltsen down to 1356 has been sketched out above. He is said to have been appointed pönchen of Ü-Tsang at the age of thirty, and then in the wood-bird year 1345 he received the rank of Da Yuan guoshi [dynastic preceptor of the great Yuan] and the crystal seal.47 It is possible that wood-bird may be a mistake for fire-bird 1357, but the fact remains that Butön, who in 1351 imparted him religious tuition and gave him the religious name Rinchen Pelzangpo, calls him a pönchen.⁴⁸ He was a disciple of Dolpopa Sherap Gyeltsen (1292–1361), on whose advice he completed and endowed the monastery of Jang Namring, and invited the famous scholar Bodong Choklé Namgyel (1306–1386) to become its abbot.⁴⁹ Jangchup Gyeltsen had a poor opinion of him, and some verses of his sungchem attribute to him the responsibility for the downfall of Sakya power.⁵⁰ In 1364, still bearing the title of pönchen, he took part in the funeral ceremonies for Butön,⁵¹ and in 1373 he tendered allegiance to the new Ming dynasty, as we shall see later.

Gyelwa Zangpo’s son Drakpa Gyeltsen is a pale figure, mentioned only in connection with the checkered career of his father. He was at first a secretary (nang so), then he was promoted chief secretary (nang chen). His action during his father’s imprisonment was not particularly effective. After the end of that affair, Jangchup Gyeltsen adopted him as his son, a purely formal gesture. In 1358 he inherited the estate of Shang Tongmön, where he died at an unknown date.⁵² Drakpa Gyeltsen is always styled lopön, implying that he was a monk, at least in his early years. In Situ’s Testament we find no trace of his appointment as pönchen. Only Takshangpa’s Chinese and Tibetan Documents informs us that the lopön Drakpa Gyeltsen received the courtesy title (ming) of pönchen.

Pelbum (his family name is unknown) was an official in the imperial government. In 1346/7 he was posted in Tibet as a zhaotao. Then he went to Beijing, from where he returned to Tibet in 1354 as a darughači. In 1357 he was a nyené chenpo.⁵³ In 1359 he asked Karmapa Rölpé Dorjé to bring to Tibet the bones of the imperial preceptor who had died the year before. On this occasion he is termed Sakya pönchen.⁵⁴ This was apparently an appointment on a caretaker basis, and in 1360 the matter came up for a final decision. The new dishi and the imperial yuanshi on the eve of their final departure had a meeting near Lhasa with Jangchup Gyeltsen and other officials. They intimated that, upon their own responsibility, they intended to confirm Pelbum as pönchen by handing out to him the official seal. They deemed the proposal quite safe, since Pelbum had delivered his son as hostage and taken a pledge to act according to the Pakmodrupa’s instructions. Jangchup Gyeltsen’s reply is interesting from various points of view:

“Since you lama and your nephew, the councilors of Sakya and the whole xuanwei si have signed a letter of agreement (kha ’cham gyi bca’ rtse), you cannot act against its terms. Pelbum cannot be a pönchen because he is not issued from the class (gyü) of the disciples (nye-né) of Sakya; originally he was the tea-brewer (soljawa) of Wangtsön; he is a partisan of the Drigungpa and is the man of the gompa; in his innermost heart he belongs to them. In the same manner as a minister of the Tö Hor (Chaghatai) cannot become a minister (chyingsang, Chin. zhengxiang) of the King of the East (the Yuan), so a disciple (nye-né) of the Sakyapa cannot be subservient to the Drigungpa. Pelbum shall not become a pönchen. This being the state of fact, choose between me and Pelbum.” And they answered: “We choose you.” Thus it was decided not to effect the transfer of the seal (dam rtags) of pönchen, and all those present, starting with the yuanshi, were witness to this.⁵⁵

At some time in 1361 he sent Sherap Trashi as his special envoy to the imperial court. His first (but not his main) task was to counter the hostile influence and pernicious slanders of Dharmakirti and of the attendants of the dishi, who accused Jangchup Gyeltsen of being a rebel and an enemy of the Sakypa and to have ravaged the Lhakhang Chenmo, turning it into a horse stable. Sherap Trashi proved to be an able negotiator. He interviewed the prime minister and then was received in audience by the emperor, dispelled his suspicions and obtained a favorable decree; the sovereign issued a jasa appointing Shakya Rinchen, the second of Jangchup Gyeltsen’s three nephews, as the new tripön of Pakmodru and confirming all the estates, old and new, belonging to the myriarchy. As a personal reward, Sherap Trashi was granted the estate of Drakkar. Upon his return home, the jasa was formally proclaimed at Tel, and Jangchup Gyeltsen prepared to retire from the office of tripön after a tenure of almost forty years (1322–1361/2).56 Almost immediately, however, he reversed his decision. He had found out that Shakya Rinchen had an uncontrollable temper and that his succession would cause opposition and confusion; apparently he had misjudged his nephew’s fitness for such a heavy responsibility. Passing over the imperial decree, he decided to keep the office of tripön for himself, as long as his health permitted it.⁵⁷ Jangchup Gyeltsen retained power in his hands until his death on the 27th day of the tenth month of the wood-dragon year, corresponding to 20th November, 1364.⁵⁸ He was succeeded as tripön and as ruler of Central Tibet (lhatsün) by his eldest nephew Shakya Gyeltsen (1341–1373), hitherto abbot of Tsetang.

The autobiography of Jangchup Gyeltsen closes with a kind of comparative list of the most prominent persons, families, and monasteries, together with short hints to his successor on how to deal with them. It is worthwhile to quote the words by which this cool and shrewd politician judged the shortcomings and the causes of the decay of the Sakyapa and of the Drigungpa, the two main factors of Tibetan history in the Yuan period. “Formerly the prestige of the Drigungpa had expanded in the times of gompa Shākya Rinchen; but later the decay of their influence was a consequence of their manifold signs of greed and lawlessness. With the Sakyapa too, the disciples (nye-né) were more powerful than the lamas, the state servants (pönkya) were more powerful than the high officials (pön) and the women were the most powerful of all. Since the prestige of the Sakyapa is now in such a ruinous state, you should take heed of its causes; and if you wish this community of ours to remain intact and happy, all of you must avoid evil actions.”59

In 1354 the risings in Central China had started, and fourteen years later the dynasty collapsed and the last emperor fled to Mongolia. It is difficult to guess how these events were viewed in Tibet. Although the lamas must have realized that the golden days of lavish Mongol patronage had passed forever, we find nowhere a word of regret. The Tibetan texts merely state the bald fact that the last Yuan emperor had fled and that the new Ming dynasty had seized the throne. At the utmost, there was some fear (soon dispelled) that the war in China could lead to an invasion of Tibet by Ming armies.⁶⁰

Still, we have adequate information on the switching of Sakyapa and Pakmodrupa allegiance (if this term is at all justified) to the new rulers of China. When the Yuan rule vanished, there was in Tibet an “acting dishi” called Namkha Pelzangpo. On 16th January, 1373, his envoys arrived at Nanjing bearing tribute, whereupon he was granted the title of Zhisheng Fobao Guoshi. He died at some time before 1381.⁶¹ We do not know who had appointed him nor to which clan or sect he belonged; he was certainly not a member of the Khön family, because the genealogical tree of Sakya contains no member bearing the name Namkha during those years.⁶²

The Sakya secular administration recognized the new regime in China when on 23rd February, 1373, Namkha Tenpé Gyeltsen, a former guogong of the Yuan, came personally to the court at Nanjing to beg for a fresh title.⁶³ Thus we meet for a last time with the Jangpa pönchen. Whether he had remained in office during all those years, or was out of office but still a prominent person in the government, is a question which must remain open; the Tibetan sources know nothing of his relations with the Ming.

The Khön family followed suit. On 27 October, 1373, the Lama Dampa Sönam Gyeltsen and his nephew Künga Gyeltsen (1344–1420) sent envoys to apply for a new jade seal; but they met with a refusal, because such a seal had already been conferred upon Namkha Pelzangpo. It appears that Künga Gyeltsen had tried to go personally to Nanjing, but stopped in Kham on account of local disturbances.64 On 23rd August, 1374, envoys from him were received once more at court; this time he was granted the jade seal together with the title of yuanshi.⁶⁵

The Pakmodrupa, i.e., Jangchup Gyeltsen’s successor Shākya Gyeltsen, had been confirmed by the Yuan emperor (1365) in the titles of Taisitu, chang guogong and guanding guoshi with power over the three chölkha.⁶⁶ In 1372 his political importance was recognized and brought to the notice of the emperor by a Ming general engaged in the pacification of Amdo. The sovereign took the initiative of sending him an envoy, confirming his title of guanding guoshi and granting him the jade seal.⁶⁷ The Pakmodru ruler reciprocated by sending to court his own father Sönam Zangpo carrying suitable presents of religious objects.⁶⁸

Some nobles, who used to receive their titles from the Mongols, carried out the switch-over during the four or five years following the downfall of the Yuan.⁶⁹

Henceforward the international relations of the rulers of Central Tibet were almost exclusively with the Ming, till in the late sixteenth century the Mongols reappeared on the scene in different circumstances but with similar final results.

4. Byang chub rgyal mtshan, Ta’i Si tu, Si tu bka’ chems [Situ’s Testament], in Lha rig rlangs kyi rnam thar (New Delhi: T. Tsepal Taikhang, 1974), 533. Cf. Rgyal mtshan dpal bzang, ’Ba ra ba, Rje btsun ’Bar ra ba Rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i rnam thar mgur ’bum dang bcas pa [Biography of Gyeltsen Pelzangpo], in A Tibetan Encyclopedia of Buddhist Scholasticism: The Collected Writings of ’Ba’ ra ba Rgyal mtshan dpal bzang, vol. 14 (Dehradun: Ngawang Gyaltsen and Ngawang Lungtok, 1970), 104b.

7. As no Mongol du yuanshuai [commander-in-chief] was resident in Tibet at that time, Gzhon nu rgyal mtshan, in his character as san du yuanshuai and as bearer of the tiger-head button of the third rank and keeper of the six-cornered seal of the xuanwei si, was for practical purpose the highest official in the permanent imperial organization in Tibet; Byang chub rgyal mtshan, Situ’s Testament, 553. No holder of the regular xuanwei shi [pacification commissioner] title appears in Byang chub rgyal mtshan, Situ’s Testament, which mentions only the dben we si pa or the mi dpon of the dben we si, always in the plural. Probably the office of shi was vacant or had even fallen in abeyance.

14. Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams grags pa rgyal mtshan, ’Dzam gling byang phyogs kyi thub pa’i rgyal tshab chen po dpal ldan Sa skya pa’i gdung rabs rin po che ji ltar byong pa’i tshul gyi rnam par thar pa ngo tshar rin po che’i bang mdzod dgos ’dod kun byung [A History of the Khön Lineage of Prince-Abbots of Sakya], woodblock print in the Library of the Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome, 154a.

16. Chos kyi ’byung gnas, Si tu Pan chen, History of the Karma Bka ’brgyud pa Sect: Being the Text of Sgrub brgyud Karma Kaṃ tshang brgyud pa rin po che’i rnam par thar pa Rab ’byams nor bu zla ba chu sel gyi phreṅ ba [History of the Karma Kagyüpa Sect] (New Delhi: D. Gyaltsan and Kesang Legshay, 1972), 175a; Gtsug lag ’phreng ba, Dpa’ bo, Dam pa’i chos kyi ’khor los bsgyur ba rnams kyi byung ba’i gsal byed pa mkhas pa’i dga’ ston [Feast for Scholars: The Development of the Promoters of Buddhism] (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1959–1962), 488.

22. Stag tshang pa, Chinese and Tibetan Documents, 2:78a; Byang chub rgyal mtshan, Situ’s Testament, 668–669. Dbang brtson had led a rather effaced life after his dismissal. We know only that in 1352 he had obtained instruction from Bu ston; David Seyfort Ruegg, Life of Bu ston Rin po che (Rome: Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1966), 139.

28. The man immediately responsible for the atrocious deed was chen po Rin chen bzang po; Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, Gangs can yul gyi sa la spyod pa’i mtho ris kyi rgyal blon gtso bor brjod pa’i deb ther rdzogs ldan gzhun nu’i dga’ ston dpyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs [History of Tibet], in the xylograph edition Fifth Dalai Lama’s Collected Works, vol. dza (Lhasa), 98b (= Giuseppe Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls [Rome: Libreria dello Stato, 1949], 645).

34. ’Jigs med grags pa, Rgyal rtse chos rgyal gyi rnam par thar pa dad pa’i lo thog dngos grub gyi char ’bebs [Lives of the Kings of Gyantsé], wood-block print in the library of the Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 12a–b (= Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 663). The appointment as nye gnas chen po (colloquially nang chen) was confirmed by the emperor in 1364.

38. Stag tshang pa, Chinese and Tibetan Documents, 2:28a–29a. Nearing the capital, he encountered the Karma pa, who was returning home; Chos kyi ’byung gnas, History of the Karma Kagyüpa Sect, 181b; Kun dga’ rdo rje, Tshal pa, Deb ther dmar po rnams kyi dang po Hu lan deb ther [The Red Book], ed. Dung dkar Blo bzang ’phrin las (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1981), 120. After his death the emperor invited to court Bla ma dam pa Bsod nams rgyal mtshan, perhaps with the intention of appointing him Imperial Preceptor; but the Bla ma turned down the invitation; Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams grags pa rgyal mtshan, A History of the Khön Lineage of Prince-Abbots of Sakya, 120a.

45. Kun dga’ rdo rje, The Red Book (1961); George N. Roerich, trans., The Blue Annals (translation of ’Gos lo tsa ba Gzhon nu dpal, Deb ther sngon po, 1476–1478), 2 vols. (Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1948–1953); Tucci, Tibetan Chronicles by Bsod nams grags pa. The name Drakpa Gyeltsen is omitted in Tucci, Tibetan Chronicles by Bsod nams grags pa.

49. Roerich, The Blue Annals, 778; Dpal bzang chos kyi bzang po, Royal Genealogy of Yeru Jang, 6b; Dkon mchog lhun grub, Ngor chen, and Sangs rgyas phun tshogs, Ngor chen, A History of Buddhism: Being the Text of Dam pa’i chos kyi byung tshul legs par bshad pa bstan pa rgya mtshor ’jug pa’i gru chen zhes bya ba rtsom ’phro kha skong bcas (New Delhi: Ngawang Topgey, 1973), 148b.

51. Ruegg, Life of Bu ston Rin po che, 168. I do not think he can be identified with the lha btsun Rin chen dpal on whose request the Bla ma dam pa compiled the Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me long [The Clear Mirror of Royal Genealogies], as maintained by Per K. Sørensen in A Fourteenth-Century Tibetan Historical Work: Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me long: Author, Date, and Sources: A Case Study (København: Akademisk Forlag, 1986), 63. The title lha btsun was normally reserved to the monks descending from the old Tibetan kings, and not from other royal families. The Byang pa claimed descent from the Mi nyag rulers, not from the ancient Tibetan dynasty.

58. Tucci, Tibetan Chronicles by Bsod nams grags pa, 210; ’Jigs med grags pa, Lives of the Kings of Gyantsé, 14b (= Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 664). According to Stag tshang pa, Chinese and Tibetan Documents, 2:173a, he died in his 63rd year fire-dragon, a palpable mistake for wood-dragon. The date of 1373, found in Roerich, The Blue Annals, 218, and too often followed by Western scholars, is due to a misunderstanding by the translator. The Tibetan text (Gzhon nu dpal, ’Gos lo tsa ba, Deb ther sngon po [Blue Annals] [New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1974], 7a) actually refers to the death of Gushri ba, i.e., of Byang chub rgyal mtshan’s successor Gushri Shākya rgyal mtshan. But the risk of a misunderstanding is so high that Tucci (Tibetan Chronicles by Bsod nams grags pa, 210) felt bound to caution the reader against it.