¹ In recent years a lively discussion has been carried on among Soviet scholars on the character of feudal relations among nomadic peoples. The materials of the discussion were printed in the journal Voprosy Istorii (Historical Questions), No. 6. of 1954, Nos. 1 and 4 of 1955. Among Soviet authors, in connexion with this question the following should be noted:Google Scholar

Zlatkin, I. Ya., Novaya i noveishaya istoriya Mongolii (Modern and recent history of Mongolia), Moscow, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1957;Google ScholarBatarin, G. P., Istorya agrarnykh otnoshenii v Yakutii (History of agrarian relations in Yakutia, from the 1760's to the middle of the nineteenth century), Moscow, Acad. Sci., USSR, 1956;Google ScholarBumanov, C. Z., Obshchestvennii stroi Kazakhov pervoi poloviny XIX veka (Social structure of the Kazakhs of the first half of the nineteenth century), Alma-Ata, 1958.Google Scholar

Among Mongol authors one may point to the work of Professor Jagmanal, N., Zemelnye otnoshenzya v MNR, 1955 (Land relations in the Mongolian People's Republic). Among the works of foreign scholars one may point to the works of the well-known American scholar and orientalist,Google ScholarLattimore, O.: The social History of Mongol nomadism, (in Historians of China and Japan, ed. Beasley, W. C. and Pulleybank, E. G.), London, 1961;Google Scholar

Studies in frontier history, Collected papers 1928–58, Paris, 1962. [To these could be added the review-article, ‘Feudalism in History’, which appeared in Past and Present, No. 12, November 1957]. Also the works of the Japanese scholarGoogle Scholar

Shigeru, Tayama, The social structure of the Mongols in the period of the Ch'ing Dynasty, Tokyo, 1955 (in Japanese).Google Scholar

² Natsagdorj, Sh., Aratskoe osvoboditel'noe dvijenie v Khobdoskom raione (The arat liberation movement in the Khobdo region), Moscow, 1954.Google Scholar

³ Natsagdorj, Sh., Iz istorii aratskogo dvijeniya vo uneshnei Mongolii (From the history of the arat movement in Outer Mongolia), Moscow. Acad. Sci., USSR, 1958.Google Scholar

⁴ State archives, 1–13–53.Google Scholar

⁵ State archives, 1–13–40 and 1–13–19.Google Scholar

⁶ Ibid., Proceedings of the hoshun of Prince Urinjav of Sain-Noen Khan aimag, for the year 1877.

⁷ As examples we may cite the wording on signs posted on the pastures of the Bogd-gegeen [‘Urga Living Buddha’] and of monasteries: ‘Notice of the pasture of the horse-herd of His Highness the Javzandamba Hutukhtu’ (State archives, 2–22–2) and ‘Notice of the pastures for the horses, camels, cattle, and sheep of the monastery Sharavpilje, posted by order of His Holiness Ochir-Dar gegeen’ (State archives, 2–22–2).Google Scholar

⁸ Historical Institute, Acad. of Sci., MPR, MS. collection.Google Scholar

⁹ In the Manchu Code of Laws it is indicated that for each 15 men in Mongolia a strip of land was set aside, of a width of 1 li and a length of 20 li (Ch'ing, Ta, Dynastic Laws, Vol. 140, p. 97).Google Scholar

Some scholars consider this is a measure of land set aside for ploughing, which is quite probable, since it is inconceivable that on such a patch of land 15 families could live entirely by their livestock. If we take into consideration the lands that were allocated to the frontier posts [on the Siberian frontier] out of hoshun land, it is possible to establish approximate measures for the land assigned to them. For example, the 13 frontier posts east of Kyakhta had land assigned to them. Out of these the 30 families of the post of Bur had an allotment 35 li wide, 14 long, and 110 in circumference. Dividing this by 30, each family would have 5·4 sq. km. But the measures used for land allocated to frontier posts were not standardized, but depended on the geographical peculiarities of the district.Google Scholar

¹⁰ In the hoshun of Khebei-beil of Sain-noen aimag, in 1843, a code was worked out for punishments to be applied to taij and to arat guilty of migrating independently [i.e. not in accordance with hoshun regulations]. The penalty for a taij was five head of stock; for an arat, 40 lashes of the whip. (Library of Övör-Khangai aimag, copies of documents of the administration of the hoshun of Khebei-beil, Sain-noen aimag.)Google Scholar

¹¹ Lamjav. Review of conditions in the former Tsetsen Sartuul hoshun of Zasagtkhan aimag.Google Scholar

¹² For example, the taij Sonom, of the hoshun of the gün Luvsandash of Tsetsen-khan aimag, had for many years cured hay at a place called Khustai. When, once, the arat of this hoshun cut hay in the plot fenced off by Sonom, he took them to court and the hoshun administration handed down a ruling that the hay which had been cut should be returned to the taij Sonom. The grounds for the decision followed the rule that the hay had been on land previously fenced off—in this case, by the taij Sonom.Google Scholar

¹³ Qalqa-Jirum (The Khalka Code). Traduit en russe par Zamcarano, , Bator, Ulan, Studia Mongolica, Tomus I, Fasc. I, p. 45.Google Scholar

¹⁴ The örtöö [post stations or courier stations] organized in most of the hoshun of Mongolia by the Manchus were allocated territories with a breadth of 33–40 and a length of 50–70 li, and for each sub-station there was allotted from 30 to 100 li of land. Besides the main Manchu örtöö, there were suman örtöö within the hoshun, which were allocated territories measuring from 28 to 32 li on one side.Google Scholar

¹⁵ In the North of Khalkha, along the frontier [frontier posts] with settled populations, for which large parts of the territory of many hoshun were set aside. For the 13 karaul stretching to the east of Kyakhta, there were set aside lands measuring [each] from 200 to 600 li in circumference. Into these lands the livestock not only of arat, but even of noen [nobles and officials] were not allowed to enter.Google Scholar

¹⁶ A great quantity of livestock of the Manchu emperor was to be found in the territory of Khalkha, and the entire region of Dariganga was turned over to the sürüg [flocks and herds] of the Manchu emperor. His camel-herds were distributed over many hoshun of the Gobi. Apart from that, a great number of the so-called State herds were to be found in almost all hoshun, and they were allotted the best pastures. A clear picture of the regulations for the distribution of land in those times is given by a letter sent by the hoshun ruler Urinjav of Tushetu-khan aimag in 1785 to the head of the League [aimag], in which it is stated that the territory of the hoshun consists of five sum, rather thickly populated, and that for a long time the population of the hoshun has been short of pasture, inasmuch as it is crowded on all sides by shav' and by other hoshun, and moreover part of its territory is occupied by pastures for the camel herds of the Manchu emperor and by the allotments auxiliary to three örtöö, which in turn have an area of 60 to 70 li each. (State archives, 1–13–115.)Google Scholar

¹⁷ State archives, Transactions of the hoshun prince Tsedensodnom of Sain-noen khan aimag for the year 1876.Google Scholar

¹⁸ State archives, copies of documents of prince Avirmid of Slain-noen khan aimag for the year 1878.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Sokrovennoe Skazanie (Secret History [of the Mongols]), Kozin, S. A., Moscow-Leningrad, 1941, p. 197.Google Scholar

²⁰ Code of the Chinese Office of Foreign Affairs, Book 27.Google Scholar

²¹ Maiskii, I., Mongoliya nakanune revolyutsii (Mongolia on the eve of revolution), 1959, pp. 302–3.Google Scholar

²² Materials on the numbers of the herds of the princes of Tsetsen-khan aimag for the year 1841. State archives. Fund No. 5, serial Nos. 534–536. Maiskii, Cf. I., Appendix pp. 300–3.Google Scholar

²³ In Professor Shirendyv's, book Narodnaya revolyutslyiya i provozglashenie MNR (The people's revolution and the proclamation of the Mongolist People's Republic), Moscow. Acad. Sci. USSR., the revolutionary measures put into effect by the Party and Government in the period 1921–24 are reviewed in detail.Google Scholar

²⁴ The book ‘Dörvöu aimgiin alba tegshitgesen dans’ (Register of the equalization of the dues of the four aimag) contains the basic data for the chief Manchu feudal obligations for the years from 1739 to 1904. This book was edited by Natsagdorj, Sh. and Khasanbaljir, Ts..Google Scholar

²⁵ The levy for the use of pasture was called ebesün tsuvun [‘assessment for the grass’] from the Manchu word tsyfun, ‘assessment’ [which in turn is a borrowing, with some change of meaning, of the Chinese tse-feng, ‘personal expenditure’].Google Scholar

²⁶ State archives, 1–13–33, 1–13–45, 1–73–69, 1–13–81, 1–13–100, 1–13–102, 1–13–115.Google Scholar

²⁷ Natsagdorj, Cf. Sh., Iz istorii aratskogo dvijeniya vo Vneshnei Mongolii (From the history of the arat movement in Outer Mongolia), and the same, Khalkhyn tüükh (History of Khalkha), Ulan Bator, Acad. Sci. Mongolian People's Republic, 1963.Google Scholar