¹ They indicated its early appearance by occasionally referring to it as “old” Asiatic society. See Marx, Karl, Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Okonomie, 3 vols. (Hamburg: Otto Meissner, 1919), I, pp. 45, 297Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Marx, DK); cf. idem, Zur Kritik der politischen Okonomie (Stuttgart: 8th ed. 1921), pp. 124, 133, 161 (hereafter cited as Marx, ZK).Google Scholar

² Marx, Karl, Grundrisse der Kritik der Politischen Okonomie (Rohentwurf) 1857–1858 (Berlin: Dietz, 1953)Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Marx, GK), pp. 392 et seq.; idem, DK II, p. 455; Engels, Friedrich, Herrn Eugen Dührings Unwälzung der Wissenschaft. Dialektik der Natur 1873–1882 (Moscow: Marx-Engels-Verlag, 1935), pp. 184et seq. 395Google Scholar; idem, Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staats (Stuttgart: 20th ed., 1921), p. 162.Google Scholar

³ Marx, GK, pp. 371, 377; idem, DK I, pp. 103, 298, 322; III, 1, pp. 310, 315, 318; III, 2, p. 324; idem, Theorien über den Mehrwert, 3 vols. (Stuttgart: Dietz, 1921), (hereafter cited as Marx, TMW), III, pp. 453, 479, 501.Google Scholar

⁴ Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich, Historisch-Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Werke-Schriften-Briefe (Moscow-Berlin: Marx-Engels-Institut, 1927 et seq.) (hereafter cited as MEGA), I, 2 p. 248.Google Scholar

⁵ Ritter, 1834, pp. 723et seq.Google Scholar

⁶ See his letter of March 10, 1853, to Engels (MEGA III, 1, p. 455).

⁷ See Marx, and Engels, , “Die Deutsche Ideologie,” MEGA I, 5, pp. 145, 147, 151.Google Scholar

⁸ Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, ed. by Lassen, Georg, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Meiner, 1920) (hereafter cited as Hegel 1920), II, p. 297.Google Scholar

⁹ MEGA I, 6, pp. 507et seq.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Hegel, 1920, II, p. 275.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ibid. I, pp. 136 et seq.

¹² Fourier, Charles, Oeuvres Complètes. Vol. VI: Le Nouveau Monde Industriel et Sociétaire (Paris: À la Librairie Sociétaire, 2nd ed. 1845), p. xi.Google Scholar Marx and Engels had been showing a preference for Fourier's scheme which, by the way, comprises many phases, since the mid-forties. See Marx-Engels Werke, 16 vols. (Berlin: Dietz, 1957–1962), II, pp. 207Google Scholaret seq. (1845, written in 1844); op. cit., p. 607 (1846, written in 1845).

¹³ MEGA I, 6, pp. 529et seq.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Werke, Marx-Engels, I, 6, p. 530.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Ibid., VII, p. 222. This passage appears at the end of a “Revue” written by Marx and Engels for their Neue Rheinische Zeitung; it is dated “London, 01 31, 1850.”Google Scholar

¹⁶ Marx, Karl, “Articles” in New York Daily Tribune, 06 14, 1853Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Marx, NYDT). For the date of writing see Karl Marx, Chronik Seines Lebens in Einzeldaten (Moscow: Marx-Engels-Lenin-Institut, 1934), p. 139.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Marx, NYDT, 06 25, 1853.Google Scholar

¹⁸ NYDT, 08 5, 1853.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Torr, Dona, Marx on China 1853–1860 (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1951) (hereafter cited as Marx 1951), pp. 45et seq.Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid. p. 55.

²¹ Ibid. pp. 87 et seq.

²² Ibid. p. 56.

²³ Ibid. pp. 56, 73.

²⁴ Ibid. p. 64 (NYDT, 10 5, 1858), pp. 87, 90Google Scholaret seq., 91 et seq. (NYDT, 12 3, 1859).Google Scholar

²⁵ Marx, , “Die Deutsche Ideologie”Google Scholar (MEGA I, 5, p. 27Google Scholar; cf. Wittfogel, Karl A., “Die natürlichen Ursachen der Wirtschaftsgeschichte,” Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, 67, pp. 476et seq.Google Scholar

²⁶ So Marx in his most famous theoretical pronunciamento which he made in 1859 at the close of the period under discussion (Marx, , ZK, p. lv).Google Scholar

²⁷ Mane's letter of June 14, 1853, to Engels (MEGA III, 1, p. 487).Google Scholar

²⁸ Marx, , GK, p. 383.Google Scholar

²⁹ Marx, 1951, p. 91.Google Scholar

³⁰ Ibid. p. 91.

^30a Marx, Karl, “Things Chinese” [Chinesisches], Die Presse, Vienna, 07 7, 1862Google Scholar, in Marx and Engels Werke, XV (Berlin: 1951), pp. 514et seq.Google Scholar

³¹ Marx completed Volume I in 1866 and published it in 1867. He finished working on Volume II by 1870, Volume III by 1865 (Engels' Preface to Das Kapital II, p. vGoogle Scholar), and Volume IV, later published as Theorien über den Mehrwert, by 1863 (Kautsky, Preface to Marx, TMW, I, p. vii). According to Engels' letter of March 5, 1885, to Laura Lafargue, the greater part of the manuscript of Das Kapital III was written between 1860 and 1862 (Friedrich Engels, Paul et Laura Lafargue, Correspondence (Paris: Editions Sociales, 1956), I (1868–1886), p. 272.Google Scholar

³² Marx, , DK, I, p. 345.Google Scholar

³³ Ibid. p. 322.

³⁴ Ibid. p. 323.

³⁵ Marx and Engels insisted that the outer world, in which man operated, was not a constant phenomenon, but a “historical product,” that is, something that changed with the activity of man (Marx, and Engels, , “Die Deutsche Ideologie,”Google ScholarMEGA I, 5, pp. 32et seq.).Google Scholar

³⁶ Marx, , DK, I, p. 478.Google Scholar For regressive elements in these formulations—regressive compared with Marx's position in the fifties—see Wittfogel, Karl A., Oriental Despotism (Yale Un. Press, 1957) (hereafter cited as Wittfogel 1957), pp. 381et seq.Google Scholar

³⁷ Marx, , DK, II, p. 12.Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid. p. 82.

³⁹ See Marx, , NYDT, 08 5, 1853.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Baden-Powell, B. H., The Land-Systems of British India, 3 vols. (London and New York: 1892), III, p. 621.Google Scholar This system existed among other places in the Madras area (ibid. I, pp. 293 et seq.).

⁴¹ Arbeiten der Kaiserlich russischen Gesandtschaft zu Peking über China, sein Volk, seine Religion, seine Institutionen, socialen Verhältnisse, Erster Band (Berlin: 1858).Google Scholar The first essay, “Über das Grundeigentum in China von J. Sacharoff,” is presented in pp. 1–43.Google Scholar For references to irrigation canals as an essential part of China's traditional agriculture see Sacharoff, , 1858, pp. 6, 13, 39Google Scholar; for a description of the old communal land system see op. cit., pp. 5 et seq.; for later attempts to reinstitute this system see op. cit., pp. 15 et seq.; for the ultimate establishment of private land-ownership, which, according to the author, had prevailed during the preceding thousand years, see op. cit., pp. 20 et seq.

⁴² Manuscript of Das Kapital, Volume III, NM, 282.Google Scholar For help in deciphering this sentence I am indebted to Dr. W. Blumenberg of the Amsterdam International Institute of Social History, which possesses the bulk of Marx's and Engels' manuscripts.

⁴³ Marx, , DK III, 1, p. 318.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ibid. III, 2, p. 324.

⁴⁵ Marx, , TMW, III, p. 452.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ibid. pp. 499–501.

⁴⁷ Ibid. p. 453.

⁴⁸ Cf. Max Weber's remark about this singular heuristic significance of Marx's ideal-typical “laws” and developmental constructs (Weber, Max, Gesammelte Aufsatze zur Wissenschaftslehre (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1922), p. 205).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Engels found even Kautsky and Bernstein wanting in this respect. See “Talks with A. Voden,” Reminiscences of Marx and Engels (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, no date), p. 331.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Kautsky, Karl, Aus der Frühzeit des Marxismus, Engels Briefwechsel mit Kautsky (Prague: 1935) (hereafter cited as Kautsky 1935), p. 255.Google Scholar

⁵¹ See Kautsky's editorial note to Plekhanov's Mechnikov article (Plechanoff, G., “Die Zivilization und die grossen historischen Flüsse,” Die Neue Zeit, No. 14, 1890–1891, (hereafter cited as Plekhanov 1890/91), p. 447.Google Scholar

⁵² Kautsky, Karl, “Die moderne Nationalität,” Die Neue Zelt, V (1887), pp. 395, 396.Google Scholar

⁵³ Ibid. p. 395. For this translation of Mencius see Legge, James, The Chinese Classics, 7 vols. (Oxford: 1893–1895), II, pp. 250et seq.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Note to Plekhanov 1890/91, p. 447.

⁵⁵ Kautsky, Karl, Die Materialistische Geschichtsauffassung, 2 vols. (Berlin: 1929), II, pp. 94et seq., 204, 206 et seq., 213, 226, 247 et seq.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Ibid. pp. 207–210.

⁵⁷ See Wittfogel, 1957, pp. 16Google Scholaret seq., 414 et seq.

⁵⁸ Plekhanov, G. V., Sochinenia, II, p. 236.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Ibid. p. 317.

⁶⁰ Ibid. p. 81.

⁶¹ Plechanow, G. W., Kunst und Litteratur, trans, by Harhammer, Joseph (Berlin: Dietz, 1955) (hereafter cited as Plekhanov 1955), p. 574 Russia, of course, was no river valley despotism.Google Scholar

⁶² Plekhanov, G., Selected Philosophical Works, 5 vols. (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, no date), I, pp. 441Google Scholaret seq. In a speech he made a few months after the publication of the just-cited article he criticised certain eager and well-meaning writers who viewed Russia as “a kind of European China, whose economic structure has nothing in common with that of Western Europe.” They overlooked that “the old economic foundations of Russia are now undergoing a process of complete disintegration” (Ibid. pp. 451, 453).

⁶³ Plekhanov 1890/91, pp. 440 et seq.

⁶⁴ Ibid. p. 447.

⁶⁵ Plechanow, G., “Zu Hegel's Sechzigstem Todestag,” Die Neue Zeit, X (1892), p. 240.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Ibid. pp. 241 et seq.

⁶⁷ Kautsky, 1935, p. 283.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Ibid. p. 301.

⁶⁹ Plekhanov, G., The Development of the Monist View of History (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1956), p. 199.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Ibid. p. 160.

⁷¹ Plekhanov, 1955, p. 690.Google Scholar Following Marx and Engels, Plekhanov considered the Crimean War and the Emancipation of the serfs the starting point in Russia's economic “European” development.

⁷² Lenin, V. J., Sochinenia, 4th ed., 35 vols. (Moscow: 1941–1950) (hereafter cited as Lenin, S.), X, p. 58.Google Scholar

⁷³ Lenin, V. I., Collected Works, 3 vols. (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1960), I, pp. 160, 299.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ For occasional references to the issue see ibid. I, p. 235; idem, Samtliche Werke, 25 vols. (Vienna-Berlin, later Moscow-Leningrad: 1930 et seq.) (hereafter cited as Lenin, SWG), III, pp. 44, 164.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Lenin, V. I., Selected Works, 12 vols. (New York: International Publishers, 1943) (hereafter cited as Lenin, SW), III, p. 233; idem, SWG, VIII, p. 72.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Lenin, , SWG, VII, p. 249; VIII, pp. 70, 84, 203, 453, 557.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Ibid. IV, 1, p. 65.

⁷⁸ Lenin, W. I., Werke (Berlin: Dietz, 1956–1960), X, p. 173, note.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Plekhanov, G. V., Dnevnik Sotsial-Demokrata (Diary of a Social Democrat), No. 5, 03 1906, p. 12 (hereafter cited as Plekhanov 1906).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Ibid. pp. 12 et seq. In the context of his argument, which is historically faulty, Plekhanov referred to the account of these actions given by the anarchist geographer Reclus, who, he believed, had based himself on Sakharov. Plekhanov's assumption is not confirmed by Reclus' bibliography, but it suggests that Plekhanov knew Sakharov's account of Chinese land tenure, which we mentioned above.

⁸¹ Plekhanov, 1906, p. 14.Google Scholar

⁸² Cf. Marx's thesis that Peter “generalised” the policy of Tatarised Muscovy (Marx, Karl, “Revelations of the Diplomatic History of the 18th Century,” The Free Press, 02 25 and 04 1, 1857).Google Scholar

⁸³ Plekhanov, 1906, pp. 14et seq.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Ibid. p. 17.

⁸⁵ Ibid.

⁸⁶ Protokoly Obyedinitelnago Syezda Rossyskoi Sotsialdemokraticheskoi Rabochei Partii (Protocols of the Unification Congress of the R.S.D.R.P. held in Stockholm, 1906), Moscow, 1907, p. 44.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Ibid. p. 43.

⁸⁸ Ibid. p. 44.

⁸⁹ Ibid. p. 116.

⁹⁰ Lenin, , Werke, X, p. 332.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Occasionally Lenin referred to Martynov's usage (SW, III, p. 241Google Scholar), but generally he gave no such warning.

⁹² Lenin, , SW, IV, p. 303.Google Scholar

⁹³ Ibid. IV, p. 300.

⁹⁴ Ibid. IV, pp. 305 et seq.

⁹⁵ Ibid. IV, p. 308.

⁹⁶ Ibid. IV, p. 308, italics in original

⁹⁷ Ibid. IV, p. 306, italics added.

⁹⁸ Ibid. IV, p. 307, italics added.

⁹⁹ Lenin, V. I., The National Liberation Movement in the East (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1957), p. 53.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Ibid. pp. 59 et seq.

¹⁰¹ Ibid. p. 76.

¹⁰² Ibid. p. 73.

¹⁰³ Lenin, , S, XXXVIII, p. 306.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Ibid. XXXVIII, p. 306.

¹⁰⁵ Trush, M., “Lenin's Abstract of Marx's and Engels' Correspondence,” Kommunist (Moscow), No. 2, 1960, p. 50.Google Scholar