Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History by Charles J.HalperinReview by: Daniel H. KaiserThe American Historical Review, Vol. 91, No. 2 (Apr., 1986), p. 380Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1858169 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 09:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:49:13 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

380 Reviews of Books

office as iudices. This power and prominence contin- ued through Manasse Badoer (in the late twelfth century) and his descendants, especially Marco Badoer, who forged marriage ties with the Ziani, a clan that died out leaving their fortune to the Badoer. Marco, who invested in land and finance rather than in trade, failed to realize the ambition to be doge that Pozza attributes to him. Later, Badoer fell victim for his part in the Querini-Tiepolo con- spiracy of 1310. Not surprisingly, thereafter the family's fortunes declined, and, although some Badoer remained prominent to a degree, Pozza does not follow them past their glory days. Rather, he remains content with the mundane conclusion that the Badoer were fairly typical of Venetian patrician families, building their fortunes on a com- bination of land, commerce, political office, and marriage alliances; he does concede, however, that Marco's quasi-feudal landlordship around Padua was a departure from usual Venetian fashion.

Pozza and, to a lesser extent, Zago do not insert their work into an historiographical context. It is disappointing that Pozza does not relate his work to that of historians like James Davis, and Zago notably fails to relate his work in a consistent fashion to that of his mentor, Cozzi, much less to that of Brian Pullan, Frederic Lane, and others. Their maiden efforts thus suffer from an overly fetishistic ap- proach to the documents. Entranced by the minu- tiae of their discoveries, and respectful of their pre- decessors, they have lost sight-and so the reader loses sight-of the framework of meaning and de- bate in which their documents truly become part of history.

THOMAS KUEHN

Clemson University

CHARLES J. HALPERIN. Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1985. Pp. ix, 180. $22.50.

The thirteenth-century Mongol conquest of Russia has long drawn the attention of historians, who have generally blamed the Mongols for all the ills that later emerged in Russian history. Autocracy, serf- dom, mutilation, and much else has been attributed to the two-hundred-year Mongol dominion over Russia. The present study attempts a fresh reap- praisal of a difficult theme. Charles J. Halperin, influenced by studies of Inner Asian history, argues that "nationalistic prejudices, cultural condescen- sion, and scholarly ignorance have contributed to the continued neglect of the impact of the Golden Horde on Russian history," and he proposes to remedy the inattention by "using the paradigm of the medieval ethno-religious frontier as a compara-

tive framework" (p. viii). Halperin then surveys medieval interaction between the Rus' settlements and various other peoples along the steppe and suggests a "fluid mosaic" of mutual benefit between the sedentary Slavic and nomadic Turkic peoples. He then examines the operation of the Golden Horde, its administration of Rus', the portrayal of the Mongols in medieval Russian sources, and the demographic, economic, political, and cultural re- sults of Mongol rule.

Halperin does not mention, however, that the greatest problem is not prejudice, condescension, or ignorance, although each deserves some blame for current conceptions of Russo-Mongol relations, but a lack of sources. Almost no primary materials survive from Mongol administrators in Rus', and the Rus' texts themselves identify only the depredations of the Golden Horde. Halperin somewhat surpris- ingly proposes to make a virtue out of necessity, arguing that Russian bookmen consciously and con- sistently adopted an "ideology of silence" in treating Mongol affairs in order to avoid admitting beneficial interaction between the Mongols and Rus'. There- fore, Halperin suggests that we "read between the lines" so as to enlarge our perception of Russo- Mongol interaction. Such a technique is hazardous at best; at worst it resembles an argument from silence and obliges Halperin regularly to adopt the subjunctive mood and qualify his conclusions with "probably" or "perhaps." The result is far from satisfying. Even when treating the primary sources, Halperin assumes that all medieval Russian book- men for more than two centuries uniformly adopted a hostile "ideology of silence" toward the steppe peoples and that the sources therefore con- sistently camouflage cultural interaction. But he nowhere introduces any proof for this counterintui- tive proposition.

Halperin's findings constitute much less than the "pathbreaking reinterpretation" advertised on the dust jacket. He agrees that the conquest was a "catastrophe," but one without permanent effects. He lauds Mongol contributions to Russo-Asian trade; on balance, the Mongols did assist Moscow in its struggle with rivals, but he correctly attributes most of the credit to Moscow itself. Mongol institu- tions had some influence on Muscovite governmen- tal and commercial institutions, but Halperin points out how thin was the veneer of Mongol influence, especially on Muscovite culture (the latter theme receiving a total of five and a half pages).

The greatest virtue of the book is the literate intro- duction of a novel perspective on Russo-Mongol affairs. His brief survey of Mongol influence, how- ever, makes clear that the Mongol conquest did little to shape Muscovite society and culture.

DANIEL H. KAISER

Grinnell College

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:49:13 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions