OCR Specification focus:
‘Provincial administration; legal code; religious policies and interaction with Buddhists, Confucians, Nestorians and Daoists.’
Introduction
Khubilai Khan’s reign (1264–1294) reshaped Mongol governance in China through innovative provincial administration, development of a legal code, and strategic religious policies fostering legitimacy and stability.
Provincial Administration
Establishment of Administrative Structures
Khubilai Khan created a centralised system modelled partly on Chinese traditions but adapted to Mongol rule.
He divided the empire into provinces (xing sheng), a system that became the foundation of later Chinese governance.
Each province was governed by officials with delegated powers over taxation, justice, military recruitment, and infrastructure.
While the Great Khan retained supreme authority, provincial governors had significant autonomy, especially in frontier regions.
This arrangement balanced central control with local flexibility, ensuring effective governance across vast and diverse territories.
Khubilai created Branch Secretariats (xing zhongshu sheng) as provincial administrations to extend central control across conquered Song territories.
Provinces (Branch Secretariats) of the Yuan dynasty circa 1330 CE. The map shows the geographic spread of provincial jurisdictions under Dadu, contextualising the administrative structure established by Khubilai. Labels focus on provincial names used in the period. Source
Appointment of Officials
Khubilai implemented a hierarchical bureaucracy, yet restricted the highest offices to trusted Mongols and non-Han allies:
Mongols and Central Asians occupied senior posts to prevent Chinese domination.
Han Chinese were often employed in lower- to mid-level administrative roles, particularly where local knowledge was essential.
Foreigners, including Persians and Turks, were brought in for specialised positions such as finance and trade.
This deliberate ethnic hierarchy maintained Mongol supremacy while exploiting the expertise of local populations.
Taxation and Revenue Collection
The Mongol administration required an efficient system of revenue collection to sustain the empire:
Taxes were levied in both kind (grain, livestock) and money (silver, paper currency).
Provincial officials supervised local collection, reducing corruption but also creating resentment due to perceived foreign dominance.
The use of paper money (chao), backed by precious metals, helped streamline transactions across provinces, though inflation remained a challenge.
The Yuan chao (state paper money) circulated empire-wide under central oversight; counterfeiting was a capital offence and notes carried explicit legal warnings.
Yuan dynasty banknote with its bronze printing plate, as used under Khubilai Khan. The note depicts strings of cash coins to indicate value and carries a warning that counterfeiters would be punished by death. This exemplifies how fiscal measures and legal sanctions were integrated in Yuan governance. Source
Legal Code
Development of Mongol Law
Khubilai codified aspects of Mongol customary law into a more formalised legal code.
The law upheld Mongol privileges, ensuring they remained exempt from certain taxes and punishments.
It criminalised corruption, rebellion, and disobedience to the khan’s authority.
Harsh punishments such as execution or exile were common, reflecting steppe traditions of strict discipline.
Yassa: The semi-mythical body of Mongol law, attributed to Genghis Khan, which shaped legal codes under later khans, including Khubilai.
Although Khubilai’s system evolved, it retained the Yassa’s emphasis on loyalty, order, and control, blending Mongol and Chinese traditions.
Judicial Administration
Courts were set up at both central and provincial levels.
Mongols enjoyed preferential treatment, while Chinese defendants often faced harsher penalties.
Legal disputes involving taxation, land rights, and commerce were overseen by provincial officials, reducing reliance on local aristocracies.
Use of Written Law
By formalising laws in written Chinese and Mongolian, Khubilai strengthened the perception of legitimacy and ensured consistency across provinces. This was a significant shift from oral steppe traditions.
Religious Policies and Interaction
Religious Tolerance as Policy
Khubilai recognised that religion was a tool for consolidating rule over a multi-ethnic empire. He promoted religious pluralism to maintain loyalty:
Buddhists were patronised heavily, particularly Tibetan Buddhism, which offered ideological support to Mongol rulers.
Confucians were respected for their bureaucratic traditions, but Khubilai limited their political power, fearing they might undermine Mongol authority.
Nestorian Christians benefited from Mongol openness, gaining privileges within the empire.
Daoists, though influential, faced periodic suppression when they clashed with Buddhists favoured by the court.
Patronage of Tibetan Buddhism (via ’Phags-pa and the Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs) sat alongside pragmatic engagement with Confucians, Nestorians and Daoists.
The White Stupa (Miaoying Temple) in Beijing, completed under Khubilai’s patronage in the late 1270s, symbolised the Yuan court’s alliance with Tibetan Buddhism. Its prominent form in the capital underscores religion’s role in legitimation and policy. Source
Patronage and Control
Temples, monasteries, and shrines were exempt from certain taxes, ensuring religious institutions supported Mongol rule.
Khubilai used Buddhist monks as advisers and legitimised his rule by adopting titles and rituals associated with Buddhist kingship.
He maintained Mongol traditions of shamanism, integrating them alongside other faiths to create a diverse religious framework.
Managing Tensions
Despite tolerance, tensions arose:
Confucians objected to foreign domination and criticised Buddhism’s privileged status.
Daoists resisted Buddhist influence, leading to Khubilai’s suppression of their texts in 1281.
Nevertheless, his pluralist stance ensured that no single group dominated, maintaining fragile stability.
Integration of Administration, Law, and Religion
Khubilai’s policies were interconnected, each reinforcing Mongol authority:
Provincial administration allowed control of diverse populations through efficient governance.
Legal codes ensured obedience, enshrining Mongol privilege and loyalty to the khan.
Religious policies legitimised his rule, reduced resistance, and encouraged cultural exchange across the empire.
By balancing Mongol steppe traditions with Chinese imperial practices, Khubilai forged a system that consolidated his control while leaving a lasting institutional legacy in China.
FAQ
The Song dynasty had relied heavily on centralised bureaucrats with strong Confucian scholarly influence.
Under Khubilai, the Yuan provinces (Branch Secretariats) operated with a dual identity: they imitated Chinese structures but were staffed by Mongols, Central Asians, and select Han Chinese. This reduced the dominance of Confucian elites and reinforced Mongol oversight.
The Yuan model became influential, shaping later Ming provincial administration.
Tibetan Buddhism offered political legitimacy by presenting the khan as a Chakravartin (universal Buddhist ruler).
Khubilai cultivated ties with the Tibetan monk ’Phags-pa, who became a spiritual adviser and developed the ’Phags-pa script to unify communication across the empire.
This patronage gave the Yuan court both spiritual authority and stronger connections to Tibet, a strategically valuable region.
The Bureau was established to oversee Buddhist and Tibetan religious institutions.
It supervised monasteries, ensuring loyalty to the khan.
It controlled temple finances and land, integrating religious wealth into the state system.
It reinforced Khubilai’s alliance with Tibetan lamas by placing them in positions of influence.
This bureau illustrates how religious policy was directly tied to administration.
Mongol law created a hierarchical justice system.
Mongols were usually judged more leniently, reflecting their privileged status.
Chinese faced stricter penalties, even for similar crimes.
Mixed cases were adjudicated by officials who applied different legal standards depending on ethnicity.
This reinforced Mongol dominance but also fuelled resentment among Chinese subjects.
The ’Phags-pa script was an alphabet designed to represent multiple languages of the empire, including Chinese, Mongolian, and Tibetan.
It aimed to unify administrative records and inscriptions across diverse populations.
Although it was not widely adopted, its creation symbolised Khubilai’s ambition to integrate cultural diversity into a single imperial identity.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Name one religious group that Khubilai Khan patronised and one that faced suppression under his rule
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for identifying a group patronised: e.g. Buddhists (particularly Tibetan Buddhists) / Nestorian Christians.
1 mark for identifying a group suppressed: e.g. Daoists (notably their texts suppressed in 1281).
(Maximum 2 marks)
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain two ways in which Khubilai Khan’s provincial administration helped him maintain control of the Yuan dynasty.
Mark Scheme:
Up to 3 marks per explanation (x2 = 6 marks).
Award 1 mark for a valid point, 1 mark for development, and 1 mark for precise contextual detail or example.
Examples:
Division into provinces (xing sheng): Gave central government oversight across vast territory (1), with provincial governors responsible for taxation, justice, and recruitment (1), showing continuity in Chinese-style governance (1).
Appointment of officials by ethnicity: Ensured Mongol supremacy with Mongols and Central Asians in high posts (1), while still using Han Chinese for lower positions (1), which balanced authority with local expertise (1).
Tax collection system: Provincial officials supervised revenue collection (1), reducing reliance on local elites (1), strengthening central control despite resentment (1).
(Maximum 6 marks)
_C.jpg){kind=link}