¹ This paucity of references has created the impression that there was little evidence of suretyship in pre-Mongol Russia; see, for example, Szeftel, M., “The History of Suretyship in Old Russian Law,” Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin pour l'Histoire Comparative des Institutions, 29 (1971), 840–43.Google Scholar But see Dewey, H. W. and Kleimola, A. M., “Russian Collective Consciousness: The Kie van Roots,” The Slavonic and East European Review, 62:2 (04 1982), 181–82.Google Scholar

² We have surveyed these and other aspects of Russian poruka in Dewey, H. W. and Kleimola, A. M., “Suretyship and Collective Responsibility in pre-Petrine Russia,” Jahrbuecher fuer Geschichte Osteuropas, 18 (1970), 337–54Google Scholar. Categories of Russian suretyship corresponded fairly closely to the general types elsewhere outlined by Gilissen, J., “Esquisse d'une histoire comparee des suretes personelles;” Recueils de la Societe Jean Bodin pour VHistoire Comparative des Institutions, 38 (1974), 38–39, 41, 44–56.Google Scholar

³ Dewey and Kleimola, “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 181–83. Our four conditions form the basis for virtually all varieties of suretyship. Gilissen, “Esquisse,” 51, n. 30, after reviewing the various categories (“typologies”) of suretyship, notes that “in reality all sureties are sureties for performance (“execution”), for, with few exceptions, the surety's normal function consists in assuring the performance of an act by the principal or of conduct on the principal's Part”

⁴ Sun, Wei Kwei, ed. and trans., The Secret History of the Mongol Dynasty (Yuan-Ch'ao-PiShih) (Aligarh: Muslim University, 1957), 175; cfGoogle Scholar. Cleaves, F. W., ed. and trans., Yüan Ch'ao Pi Shih. The Secret History of the Mongols (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982), 211–14, par. 272.Google Scholar

⁵ AN SSSR, Institut istorii, Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei (cited hereafter as P.S.R.L.) (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo vostochnoi literatury, 1962), I, cols. 188–89Google Scholar; P.S.R.L. (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1965), X, 132.Google Scholar

⁶ AN SSSR, Institut vostokovedeniia, Rashid-ad-Din. Sbornik letopisei, trans. from Persian by Smimova, O. I. (cited hereafter as Rashid-ad-Din, Sbomik) (Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo AN SSSR, 1952), Vol. IGoogle Scholar, bk. 2, 211; ‘Ala-ad-Din 'Ata-Malik Juvaini, The History of the World Conqueror, trans. from the text of Qazvini, M. M. by Boyle, J. A. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1958), I, 25Google Scholar. Family and clan members could thus be the first to be held liable for the offender's actions. Such familial poruka was well known in pre-Mongol Rus’; see Dewey, H. W. and Kleimala, A. M., “From the Kinship Group to Every Man His Brother's Keeper: Collective Responsibility in Pre-Petrine Russia,” Jahrbuecher fuer Geschichte Osteuropas, 30 (1982), 322–35Google Scholar. For Chinese parallels, see Ch'en, Paul H. C.Chinese Legal Tradition under the Mongols. The Code of 1291 as Reconstructed (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), 53. Ch'en makes clear that the Yuan dynasty witnessed both Mongol modifications of Chinese law and Chinese modifications of Mongol traditions and practices. He also insists that, after their initial conquests, the Mongols were often lenient in conduct in judicial matters (pp. 44–45).Google Scholar

⁷ Rashid-ad-Din, , Sbornik, 217–18, 229Google Scholar; Juvaini, , Histor, I, 129.Google Scholar

⁸ Juvaini, , History, I, 132–33Google Scholar; Rashid-ad-Din, , Sbornik, 219.Google Scholar

⁹ Carpini, Johannes de Plano, “The Voyages of Johannes de Plano Carpini unto the Northeast Parts of the World in… 1246,” in The Travels of Sir John Mandeville (New York: Dover, 1964), 232.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Dewey, and Kleimola, , “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 188–89.Google Scholar

¹¹ Kargalov, V. V., Vneshnepoliticheskie faktory razvitiia feodar noi Rusi: Feodal' naia Rus' i kochevniki (Moscow: Vysshaia shkola, 1967), 168–72.Google Scholar

¹² E.g., Wei, Secret History, 140–41; cf. Cleaves, Yüan Ch'ao Pi Shih, 168–72.

¹³ See an analysis of Genghiz Khan's social “pyramid” by Markov, G. E., Kochevniki Azii. Struktura khoziaistva i obshchestvennoi organizatsii (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1976), 87.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Vernadskii, G. V.. O sostave velikoi iasy Chingisa Khana (Brussels: Petropolis, 1939), 44Google Scholar. For a recent textological and historiographic analysis of the iasa, see Ayalon, D., “The Great Yāsa of Chingis Khan: A Reexamination,” Studia Islamica, 33 (1971), 97–140; 34 (1971), 15180; 36 (1972) 113–56; 38 (1973), 107–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Vernadskii, O sostave, 20. The Chinese had long known this principle. A bronze inscription dating from about 900 B.C. quotes a royal official's words to a subordinate: “Control your men! If you cannot, you will be punished severely!” Creel, H. G., “Legal Institutions and Procedures during the Chou Dynasty,” in Essays on China's Legal Tradition, Cohen, J. A. et al., eds. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), 33.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Lattimore, O., “Chingis Khan and the Mongol Conquests,” Scientific American, 209:2 (08 1963), 59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Wei, Secret History, 133; Cleaves, Yüan Ch'ao Pi Shih, 162 (par. 224), 163 (par. 225).

¹⁸ Lattimore, “Chingis Khan and the Mongol Conquests,” 64. See also Munkuev, N. Ts., “Zametki O drevnikh mongolakh,” in Tataro-Mongoly v Azii i Evrope, Tikhvinskii, S. L., ed. (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1970), 359, pointing out that China and Central Asia had long known the practice of holding hostages to prevent “treason.”Google Scholar

¹⁹ For chronicle passages referring to Russian princes held as hostages at the Golden Horde, see Poluboiarinova, M. D., Russkie liudi v zolotoi orde (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1978), 13–15. For pre-Mongol Kievan practice, see Dewey and Kleimala, “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 187–88. The hostage system was widely used in Western Europe; see Gilissen, “Esquisse,” 52–61.Google Scholar

²⁰ de Plano Carpini, “Voyages,” 235.

²¹ Vernadskii, , O sostave, 49–50. Wei's Secret History of the Mongols, however, appears to ascribe the adoption of the iam system to Genghiz Khan's son Ogotai (Ugudey); see also Cleaves, Yuan Ch' ao Pi Shih, 225–27 (pars. 279–81); Ayalon, “Great Ydsa,” 33 (1971), 137–38. A similar arrangement provided “archer police” (gong shou) to assist Chinese police commissioners in maintaining order: Each hundred households in a given district had to furnish one adult male for service as gong shou; the archer came from one household, of course, and the other ninety-nine households assumed the corvée obligations of that household (Ch'en, Chinese Legal Tradition, 71–72); for collective responsibility to report robbers, see p. 151.Google Scholar

²² Rashid-ad-Din, , Sbornik, 259Google Scholar; Vladimirtsov, V. Ia., Obshchestvennyi stroi mongolov (Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo AN SSSR, 1934), 62.Google Scholar

²³ Vernadskii, O Sostave, 26.

²⁴ Rashid-ad-Din, , Sbornik, 260Google Scholar; Markov, , Kochevniki Azii, 88.Google Scholar

²⁵ Juvaini, , History, I, 272.Google Scholar

²⁶ Ibid., 246–47, 709.

²⁷ See Dewey, and Kleimola, “From the Kinship Group,” 321–23, 329. Cf. Gilissen, “Esquisse,” 44–45. Unfortunately for our purposes, M. van der Valk's “Suretyship in China,” Recueils de la Societe Jean Bodin pour I'Histoire Comparative des Institutions, 28 (1974), 423 71, focusses almost exclusively on legal provisions in modem China (since 1912).Google Scholar

²⁸ Wittfogel, K. A. and Chia-Sheng, Feng, History of Chinese Society (907–1125), Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, n.s. 36 (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1946), 3, 198, 310, 312.Google Scholar

²⁹ Bodde, D., China's First Unifier: A Study of the Chin Dynasty as Seen in the Life of Li Ssti (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1967), 166–67Google Scholar, 270; Perelomov, L. S., Imperiia Tsin'-pervoe tsentralizovannoe gosudarstvo v Kitae (221–202 gg. do n.e.) (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo vostochnoi literatury, 1962), 131Google Scholar. Even earlier, the “legalist” minister of state Shang Yang (d. 338 B.c.) had made groups of households (five or ten) jointly responsible for the conduct of each individual member (Meskill, J., “Ancient Times and Classical Period,” in An Introduction to Chinese Civilization, Meskill, J., ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1973), 22). The Yuan code of 1291 (Section III, Article 2) decrees that “in the village, all households and neighbors shall, in accordance with the old precedents, supervise one another and shall not commit any misdeeds” (text in Ch'en, Chinese Legal Tradition, 121).Google Scholar

³⁰ Perelomov, Imperiia Thin', 132, 137–38.

³¹ Ibid., 118, 193; on krugovaia poruka, see Dewey and Kleimola, “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 185.

³² Duman, L. I., “Nekotorye problemy sotsial'no-ekonomicheskii politiki v Kitae v XIII-XIV vv.,” Tataro-Mongoly v Azii i Evrope, 314; Perelomov, Imperiia Tsin', 134.Google Scholar

³³ This “pao-chia” (bao-jia) system is briefly discussed in J. Meskill, “The Second Imperial Period: Phase II,” in Introduction to Chinese Civilization, Meskill, ed., 131–33. See also Williamson, H. R., Wang An Shih. A Chinese Statesman and Educationalist (London: Probsthain, 1935, 1937), I, 191Google Scholar, 265–66, and II, 183; references in Hsiao, Kung-chuan, Rural China: Imperial Control in the Nineteenth Century (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1960), 26–27Google Scholar; Schurmann, H. F., “Mongolian Tributary Practices of the Thirteenth Century,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 19:3–4 (1956), 318, 367–68. For Liao parallels, see Wittfogel and Feng, History of Chinese Society, 198, 412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ Munkuev, N. Ts., Kitaiskii istochnik o pervykh mongol' skikh khanakh (Nadgrobnaia nadpis' na mogile Eliui Chu-Tsaia) (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1965), 14–23, 36–37, 73. This study includes Russian translations of the stela inscription in question (pp. 68–91) and Ye Lü Chu Cai's biography in the Yuan Shi (pp. 185–202). We should bear in mind that Ye Lü Chu Cai had served Genghiz Khan since 1218 and had accompanied him on his Central Asian campaigns.Google Scholar

³⁵ Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 7, 77.Google Scholar

³⁶ Ibid., 77, 82.

³⁷ See the anecdotes assembled in Juvaini, History, I, 201–36, attesting to Ogotai's fairness and generosity.Google Scholar

³⁸ Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 44, 46–47, 77–78.Google Scholar

³⁹ Perelomov, Imperiia Tsin', 132. A perfect example of fiscal poruka in China shortly before the Mongols' arrival is described in Schurmann, “Mongolian Tributary Practices,” 318: “Because many households had fled the region, the remaining households each had to bear a proportionately larger share of the tax burden.”

⁴⁰ Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 45, 78, 193.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid., 84.

⁴² Wittfogel, and Feng, , History of Chinese Society, 161–62.Google Scholar

⁴³ Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 81, 196.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ This phrase was retained in the thirteenth- and fourteenth-century grants to monasteries and religious groups. The grants were translated from the Mongol (in Uighur script) to Chinese and inscribed in stone; see texts (with Russian translations) inZograf, I. T., Mongol' sko-kitaiskaia interferentsiia. lazyk mongol' skoi kantseliarii v Kitae (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1984Google Scholar), 91ff. On ecclesiastical immunities under the Mongols, see Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 53–54Google Scholar, and Juvaini, , History, I, 26.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 80–81.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ibid., 80, 196. For similar abuses of the collective responsibility system in Russia, see Dewey, and Kleimola, , “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 184.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ It is possible that another census was taken in 1247, ordered not by Batu but by the Grand Khan; see Allsen, T. T., “Mongol Census Taking in Rus', 1245–1275,” Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 5:1 (03 1981), 36–37.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Vernadsky, G., The Mongols and Russia (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953), 215Google Scholar. G. A. Fedorov-Davydov, in an excellent chapter on the Mongols' relations to the newly subjugated peoples of Eastern Europe, points out that “in Rus', Mongol rule in the thirteenth century boiled down to the collection of tribute.” Obshchestvennyi stroi zolotoi ordy (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Moskovskogo universiteta, 1973), 26. Allsen's article, “Mongol Census Taking,” also contains up-to-date material on the subject.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ The Mongol system is described in Juvaini, History, I, 31, and P.S.R.L., X, 141Google Scholar. Kievan Rus' had known a decimal system of sorts (Vemadsky, G., Kievan Russia (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948), 187–88), but nothing as ambitious and extensive as that of the Mongols. Allsen cautions that figures like 10,000 were sometimes inflated (“Mongol Census Taking,” 52).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Dewey, and Kleimola, , “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 185–86.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Nasonov, A., ed., Novgorodskaia pervaia letopis' (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo AN SSSR, 1950), 82–83.Google Scholar For English translation, see Mitchell, R. and Forbes, N., trans., The Chronicle of Novgorod, 1016–1471 (New York: AMS Press, 1970), 95–96.Google Scholar

⁵² Vemadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 216, 222–23Google Scholar;

⁵³ Nasonov, , ed., Novgorodskaia pervaia letopis', 82–83.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Pokrovskii, M. N., History of Russia from the Earliest Times to the Rise of Commercial Capitalism, Clarkson, J. and Griffiths, M., trans. (New York: International Publishers, 1930), 72.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Vemadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 217Google Scholar; Shipova, E. N., Slovar' tiurkizmov v russkom iazyke (Alma-Ata: “Nauka,” 1976), 305–6.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Roublev, M., “The Periodicity of the Mongol Tribute as Paid by the Russian Princes during the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries,” Forschungen zur Osteuropäischen Geschichte, 15 (1970), 9Google Scholar; Grekov, B. D. and lakubovskii, A. lu., Zolotaia Orda i ee padenie (Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo AN SSSR, 1950), 170–71.Google Scholar But see Kargalov, , Vneshnepoliticheskie faktory, 185–86.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Carpini, de Plano, “Voyages,” 231Google Scholar. Cf. Rubruquis, William de, “The Journal of Friar William de Rubruquis,” in Travels of Sir John Mandeville, 290–91, 312Google Scholar; Grekov, and Iakubovskii, , Zolotaia Orda, 173. On povoz, see Pamiatniki russkogo prava (cited hereafter as P.R.P.) (Moscow: Gosizdat iuridicheskoi literatury, 1953), II, 138Google Scholar, 140, 254. Byzantium had had such a system from the time of Constantine the Great, who adapted the old Roman model (Dvomik, F., Origins of Intelligence Services (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1974), 122–29.Google Scholar For the Turkic origins of the Russian terms iam and iamshchik, see Vasmer, M., Etimologicheskii slovar' russkogo iazyka (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Progress,” 1973), IV, 555.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Pokrovskii, , History of Russia, 98.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ P.R.P., III, 463–89Google Scholar; Schurmann, “Mongolian Tributary Practices,” 342–59. The varlvki issued to the Russian church are similar, but by no means identical to those issued in China at roughly the same time; see Chinese texts (with Russian translations) in Zograf, Mongol' skokitaiskaia interferentsiaa, 91ff.

⁶⁰ Schurmann, , “Mongolian Tributary Practices,” 309.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Allsen, , “Mongol Census Taking,” 45.Google Scholar

⁶² P.R.P., III, 468–69Google Scholar; Nasonov, A. N., Mongoly i Rus'. lstoriia tatarskoi politiki na Rusi (Moscow–Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo AN SSSR, 1940), 98–99Google Scholar; Vernadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 219.Google Scholar

⁶³ Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 106, 137.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ P.S.R.L., V, 5Google Scholar; Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 53, 55.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ P.S.R.L., X, 147, 151, 162–64.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 50–52, 147Google Scholar, and sources cited; Fedorov-Davydov, , Obshchestvennyi stroi zolotoi ordy, 28Google Scholar; Vernadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 220.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ P.S.R.L., V, 143Google Scholar; Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 4, 51–54Google Scholar; Cherepnin, L. V., “MongolyTatary na Rusi (XIII v.),” Tataro-Mongoly v Azii i Evrope, 191–98.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Roublev, , “Periodicity,” 3Google Scholar; Dictionary of Russian Historical Terms from the Eleventh Century to 1917, Pushkarev, S., comp.; Vernadsky, G. and Fisher, R. J., Jr., eds. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1970Google Scholar), 1983; but cf. AN SSSR, Institut russkogo iazyka, Slovar' russkogo iazyka X1-X VII vv., Vol. III (Moscow: “Nauka,” 1976), 27.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ These non-Russian agents of the Imperial Khan wielded great power, but scholars differ on just how they exercised their authority. See, for example, P.R.P., III, 463Google Scholar; Nasonov, , Mongols. i Rus', 17, 21Google Scholar, 59, 61, 146; Kargalov, , Vneshnepoliticheskie faktory, 158–60, 162Google Scholar; FedorovDavydov, , Obshchestvennyi stroi zolotoi ordy, 30–32, 45.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Vemadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 199, 228Google Scholar; Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 151.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Quoted in Nasonov, Mongoly i Rus', 111, n. 2; for a summary of Ivan's tactics in various cities, see pp. 106–7, 109, 111–14. Cf. Fennell, J. L. I., The Emergence of Moscow, 1304–1359 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 109, 150–52, 176–77.Google Scholar

⁷² Roublev, M., “The Mongol Tribute According to the Wills and Agreements of the Russian Princes,” in The Structure of Russian History: Interpretive Essays, Cherniaysky, M., ed. (New York: Random House, 1970), 29–64Google Scholar; Nasonov, , Mongoly i Rus', 103–4, 150Google Scholar. For additional round (or “global”) figures, see Roublev, , “Mongol Tribute,” 49, 56.Google Scholar

⁷³ Carpini, de Plano, “Voyages,” 230.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Vernadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 365.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ P.R.P., II, 195Google Scholar (text of judgment charter from the early 1400s). Cf. Vernadsky, , Mongols and Russia, 374Google Scholar: “The Mongol system of taxation and conscription was [the] starting point” of “regimentation and enserfment of East Russian peasants.” For a discussion of the various theories that seek to account for the later formalization of serfdom in Russia, see Nellie, R., Enserfment and Military Change in Muscovy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), 116.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Nasonov, , ed., Novgorodskaia pervaia letopis', 67Google Scholar; Dewey, and Kleimola, , “Russian Collective Consciousness,” 187.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ For examples, see P.S.R.L., XI, 90Google Scholar; P.S.R.L., XV, bk. 1, 148–49, 154, and bk. 2, 444.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ This is, of course, a well-known process. Vernadsky, summarizes it in Mongols and Russia, 369–370.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Russia, , Arkheograficheskaia kommissiia, Akty, otnosiashchiesia k istorii iuzhnoi i zapadnoi Rossii (St. Petersburg: Prats, 1863), I, 2.Google Scholar This text is translated in Russian Private Law in the XIV-XVII Centuries, Dewey, H. W. and Kleimola, A. M., Comps. and eds., Michigan Slavic Materials, no. 9 (Ann Arbor: Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of Michigan, 1973), 236–37.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ We have translated several surety bonds for political poruka in Russian Private Law, 237–245.

⁸¹ P.R.P., III, 470, 479.Google Scholar

⁸² Pre-Mongol, sources cited in I. I. Sreznevskii, Materialy dlia slovariia drevnerusskago iazyka (St. Petersburg: tipografiia imperatorskoi akademiia nauk, 1903), III, col. 1563.Google Scholar

⁸³ Perelomov, Imperiia Tsin', 157–58. But Munkuev, Kitaiskii istochnik, 46, points out that slaveowners might have to pay taxes for slaves amounting to half the tax for free men.

⁸⁴ See Sreznevskii, , Materialy, III, col. 1563, for these citations (all post-Kievan for this meaning).Google Scholar

⁸⁵ For a discussion of chelobitnaia style, see Dewey, H. W. and Kleimola, A. M., “The Petition (Chelobitnaia) as an Old Russian Literary Genre,” The Slavic and East European Journal, 14:3 (1970), 284–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁶ Carpini, de Plano, “Voyages,” 242, 244, 252.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Rubruquis, de, “Journal,” 30.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Juvaini, , History, I, 330; II, 684.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Odoric, Friar, “The Journal of Friar Odoric,” in Travels of Sir John Mandeville, 353.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ To our knowledge, the earliest Russian document to include the forehead-beating phrase is a recently excavated birchbark chapter from Novgorod, tentatively dated from the late 1200s or early 1300s (Artsikhovskii, A. V. and Borkovskii, V. I., Novgorodskie gramoty na bereste (iz raskopok 1956–57 gg.) (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1963), 119Google Scholar (charter no. 290). In China the custom dated at least from 500 B.C., although the requirement that one “hit the ground nine times with the forehead when approaching the emperor” must have come later. See, for example, Fitzgerald, C. P., The Horizon History of China (New York: American Heritage Publishing Company, 1969), 93, 184–85 (with ancient paintings); (anon.), “Le Koteou en Russie,” T'oung Pao ou archives, (n.p.:n.p., 1893), IV, 114. Cf. Munkuev, Kitaiskii istochnik, 84. As any student of Confucianism realizes, kowtowing played a role in social etiquette as well. In court ceremonial, however, it clearly signified political submission.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Poluboiarinova, Russkie luidi v zolotoi order, 37, and sources cited.

⁹² Fletcher, G., Of the Rus Commonwealth, Schmidt, A., ed. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1966), 72.Google Scholar

⁹³ Maksimov, S., Krylatye slova (Moscow: Gosizdat khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1955), 157–58.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ See Dewey, W. H. and Kleimola, A. M., “Coercion by Righter (Pravezh in Old Russian Administration,” Canadian-American Slavic Studies, 9:2 (Summer 1975), 164–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁵ Certain passages in Juvaini apparently refer to this practice (History, I, 223–24Google Scholar; II, 53335). See also Munkuev, , Kitaiskii istochnik, 72Google Scholar; Grosier, J. B., The World of Ancient China (Geneve: Minerva, 1972), 15, 17–19Google Scholar. The device was called a bán zi, meaning “bamboo or birch for corporal punishment” (The Pin Yin Chinese-English Dictionary [Peking: The Commercial Press, 1979], 17). Charles Hucker has noted that “beating on the haunches with a bamboo rod” was “the commonest official punishment” in Old China, and that victims sometimes died from the beatings (“Political Institutions,” in Introduction to Chinese Civilization, Meskill, ed., 571). That the Russians used “clubs” or “rods” rather than bamboo is hardly surprising, since no bamboo grew in Muscovy. Ch'en reminds us that the Chinese used “light sticks” and “heavy sticks” for beating offenders (Chinese Legal Tradition, xvi, 71–72 et passim).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Bloch, M.. Feudal Society, Manyan, L., trans. (Chicago: University or Chicago Press, 1964), I, 171Google Scholar; II, 413–20. See also Gilissen, , “Equisse,” 63.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ For some of these other areas, see sources named in notes 2, 19, and 27, and particularly Gilissen's comparative study.