here the inevitability of wolf attacks, to assert their own conflicting
agencies. Outcomes were nonetheless conditioned by this same structure
that neither side could alter because plausible wolf ravages continued.
Despite their 1675 uprising, the Pastoral Chakhar continued to
predominate in state pasture complexes as the best human resources
available to handle both culture and nature. Dynastic statutes themselves
indicate that the Chakhar made up the majority of state pastoral
Mongols, although the Chakhar’s own lands and the overlapping state
pasture complexes certainly included other Mongols as well.^63 A 1731
document on state relief for“Chakhar lands”breaks down their 14 , 934
eligible residents as 5 , 215 people of the Pastoral Chakhar, 6 , 845 people
of state herding households in the Shangdu/Dabsun Nuur pasture, and
2 , 874 people, mainly identified only as“Mongols who exist hand-to-
mouth”(Ma:angga sulfame banjire Monggoso). Here 1 , 204 of these
had appeared from the Khalkha innerjasagbanners.^64 As Chakhar lands
and state pasture complexes became havens for various displaced Mongol
pastoralists, Pastoral Chakhar banner identity, sometimes conferred not
inherited, became a main human embodiment of the imperial border-
land’s environmental interconnections.
The broader Qing Mongol identity, in both state andhoshuupastures,
was constantly confronted by harsh conditions that human intervention,
such as disaster relief or herder regulation, could only partially offset. The
Qing state’s inability to fully control steppe herd mortality and reproduc-
tion on what might be called an imperial scale led to compromises such as
grain aid. In turn, grain aid could alter banner Mongol identity away
from more pastoral and toward more agrarian forms or toward a greater
dependency on ethnic administrative structures that eroded the state’s
preferred version of pastoralism.
The Qianlong emperor expressed such a concerned preference in a
1741 edict:
TheLifanyuanhas investigated and memorialized to the effect that from 1681 to
1722 Mongolia has received disaster relief over forty times. From 1723 to 1735
the banner personnel of the innerjasaghave received disaster relieffifteen times;
the Khalkha, three times. From 1736 to 1741 , the innerjasagand Khalkha, have
received aid fourteen times. Mongol livelihood depends on abundant livestock.
They do not rely on silver and rice...There is now report of distress among the
banners, and although We grant aid without concern for the wealth of the state,
the outerjasaghave long been accustomed to have no pity at all for these tribes.
Ordering them to spend time breeding more livestock will increase their tax levies.
Yet, relying only on Our grants for a livelihood cannot be a permanent strategy,
and must result in the loss of their original way of life.^65