d already in the time of Yang-shao.

p. 21: Kuo Mo-jo believes, that the Shang already used a real plough
drawn by animals. The main discussion on ploughs in China is by Hsue
Chung-shu; for general anthropological discussion see E. Werth and H.
Kothe.

p. 22: For the discussion of the T'ao-t'ieh see the research by B.
Karlgren and C. Hentze.

p. 23: I follow here mainly Ch'en Meng-chia, but work by B. Schindler,
C. Hentze, H. Maspero and also my own research has been considered.

p. 24: I am accepting here a narrow definition of feudalism (see my
_Conquerors and Rulers_, Leiden 1952).--The division of armies into
"right" and "left" is interesting in the light of the theories
concerning the importance of systems of orientation (Fr. Roeck and
others).

p. 25: Here, the work by W. Koppers, O. Spengler, F. Hancar, V. G. Childe
and many others, concerning the domestication of the horse and the
introduction of the war-chariot in general, and work by Shih Chang-ju,
Ch'en Meng-chia, O. Maenchen, Uchida Gimpu and others concerning
horses, riding and chariots in China has been used, in addition to my
own research.

p. 26: Concerning the wild animals, I have relied upon Ch'en Meng-chia,
Hsue Chung-shu and Tung Tso-pin.--The discussion as to whether there was
a period of "slave society" (as postulated by Marxist theory) in China,
and when it florished, is still going on under the leadership of Kuo
Mo-jo and his group. I prefer to differentiate between slaves and serfs,
and relied for factual data upon texts from oracle bones, not upon
historical texts.--The problem of Shang chronology is still not solved,
in spite of extensive work by Liu Ch'ao-yang, Tung Tso-pin and many
Japanese and Western scholars. The old chronology, however, seems to be
rejected by most scholars now.

_Chapter Three_

p. 29: Discussing the early script and language, I refer to the great
number of unidentified Shang characters and, especially, to the
composite characters which have been mentioned often by C. Hentze in his
research; on the other hand, the original language of the Chou may have
been different from classical Chinese, if we can judge from the form of
the names of the earliest Chou ancestors. Problems of substrata
languages enter at this stage. Our first understanding of Chou language
and dialects seems to come through the method applied by P. Serruys,
rather than through the more generally accepted theories and methods of
B. Karlgren