Foreign Relations The Tributary System
The
Qing state had no Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Relations with
non-Chinese peoples were instead conducted by a variety of bureaus and
agencies that, in different ways, implied or stated the cultural
inferiority and geographical marginality of foreigners, while also
defending the state against them. (SMC, 115)
Interaction
with non-Chinese peoples in Korea and
on the southern crescent of China’s coastal land frontiers, in
countries such as Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, and the Ryukyu Islands, was
supervised by officials in the Ministry of Rituals. Some of these
countries, such as Korea, Vietnam, and the Ryukus — and formerly Japan
—
shared many of the basic values of Chinese culture, such as a
Chinese-style
calendrical system, some form of script adapted from Chinese models,
similar types of food and dress, the practice of Confucianism and
Buddhism, and the outlines of Chinese bureaucratic organization.
Others, such as Burma and Thailand, had developed in their own ways,
often under the influence of Indian culture and religion, and were more
distant in cultural terms. By
freighting its international relations with the weight of custom and
symbol prescribed by this ministry, China tried to control these states
without excessive military expenditures.
Emissaries from these
countries were
expected to make a formal acknowledgment of China’s cultural and
political prestige by employing a language of humility in diplomatic
documents and by making the ritual prostrations (kowtow) before the Chinese emperor in royal audiences. In return these
countries were allowed to conduct a controlled volume of trade with
China, mainly through special delegations, termed “tribute
missions” by the Chinese, which the countries were permitted to
send on a fixed annual schedule to Peking. After ritual gifts had been
offered to the emperor, both the diplomatic personnel and the merchants
accompanying these embassies to Peking were allowed to trade, although
all of them had to live in hostels managed by the Ministry of Rituals
and had to leave China with their goods at the end of each stipulated
visit. (SMC, 116)
 The
Ming and Qing “established specific regulations per contact regarding
the frequency of tribute missions and the number of people who could
attend each mission.” For example, sixteenth-century Choson Korea was
allowed annual missions and during the Choson dynasty sent an average
of three to seven tribute missions to China every year. Vietnam was
initially allowed annual missions in the fifteenth century, which
eventually became one every three years; Japan was allowed one mission
every ten years. ... In practice, however, this was flexible, and some
states managed to avoid or modify the number of missions they were
allowed to send. .... During
the one and a half centuries that Ashikaga Japan was a formal tributary
of the Ming, the Shogun sent a total of 20 embassies with accompanying
personnel numbering in the hundreds. The Shogunal representatives were
staffed by an official ambassador of the Shogun, and included other
court officials as well as the occasional domain representative. The
missions engaged in tally trade, returned captured pirates, and
exchanged news about each country. Yet the Japanese had a visceral
resistance to the subordinating rituals required by the formal
tributary conditions that China laid down, and internal criticism along
those lines forced the Ashikaga shoguns to discontinue tribute
relations after 150 years. (East Asia Before the West, 59-61)
|
What were the pros and cons of the "Tributary System"?
|
The British East India Company, founded in 1600
and granted a monopoly of East Indian trade by the British government,
was now rising rapidly from a small operation to a position of global
significance as it attracted sizable new investments and started to
conquer territories in the subcontinent of India. During the
Qianlong reign, its directors began to chafe at Qing restrictions, as
did the British government itself. ...
All European trade was restricted to Canton
[a.k.a. Guangzhou] after 1760, and foreigners were forbidden residence there except during
the trading season, which ran each year from October to March. The
Europeans now had to deal exclusively with the licensed Chinese Hong
merchants — of whom there were normally around ten — despite
the indulgence of many in sharp business practices and the considerable
number who went bankrupt by overextending their
resources. Westerners could communicate their grievances or
petitions only to these Hong merchants, who in turn forwarded any
written materials to the Hoppo, the court-appointed trade
official. ... The Hoppo, if he chose, might then communicate with the
provincial governor or with Peking; or he might, on a myriad grounds of
procedure or impropriety, refuse to forward the documents at all.
It was a complex and exasperating system, far
from the kind of diplomatic and commercial equality among nations that
Western powers were beginning to take for granted. Tensions on both
sides increased after the 1770s as British traders in particular,
worried by the trade deficits that forced them to offer hundreds of
thousands of pounds’ worth of silver bullion each year in
exchange for Chinese silks, porcelains, and teas, began to ship opium
grown in India to southern Chinese ports and to exchange it there for
Chinese manufactures and produce. The stakes became higher each year as
the passion for tea drinking grew in both Britain and America: by 1800,
the East India Company was buying over 23 million pounds of China tea
at a cost of £3.6 million [or approximately $320 million in contemporary currency]. (SMC, 118-120)
|
 |
It
was near the end of Qianlong’s reign that the British East India
Company, acting in agreement with King George II’s government, decided
to try to rectify the situation in a direction they believed was
consonant with the new dignity of Britain as a world power. They
selected as their emissary to China Lord George Macartney, a
politically well-connected peer from Northern Ireland who had had
diplomatic experience at the court of Russia’s Catherine the Great.
Macartney had also gained practical experience as governor of Grenada
in the Caribbean and administrator of the region of Madras in eastern
India. The Brisith embassy traveled in a man-of-war of sixty-six guns,
with two support vessels, each loaded with expensive gifts designed to
show the finest aspects of British manufacturing technology. Macartney
was accompanied by a retinue of almost 100, including scientists,
artists, guards, valets, and Chinese language teachers from the
Catholic college in Naples.
Leaving
London in September 1792, Macartney’s ships touched briefly at Canton
in June 1793, but were allowed to proceed directly to Tianjin and land
there since they claimed to be saluting Qianlong on his eightieth
birthday. Once ashore, the embassy was escorted to Peking with much
pomp but with the official status of “tribute emissaries.” Macartney
managed to persist in his refusal to prostrate himself full-length on
the ground before the emperor in the ritual kowtow, agreeing instead to
kneel on one knee and make a series of bows. This compromise satisfied
the Qing, and Macartney was courteously received in September 1793 by
Heshen and by the emperor at the northern summer palace of Rehe
(Jehol). (SMC, 120)
 |
Macartney’s Audience
The
order and regularity in serving and removing the dinner was wonderfully
exact, and every function of the ceremony performed with such silence
and solemnity as in some measure to resemble the celebration of a
religious mystery. ... The materials and distribution of the furniture
within at once displayed grandeur and elegance. The tapestry, the
curtains, the carpets, the lanterns, the fringes, the tassels were
disposed with such harmony, the colours so artfully varied, and the
light and shades so judiciously managed, that the whole assemblage
filled the eye with delight, and diffused over the mind a pleasing
serenity and repose undisturbed by glitter or affected embellishments.
The commanding feature of the ceremony was the calm dignity, that sober
pomp of Asiatic greatness, which European refinements have not yet
attained. ... Thus, then, have I
seen
‘King Solomon in all his glory’. I use this
expression, as the
scene recalled perfectly to my memory a puppet show of that name which
I recollect to have seen in my childhood, and which made so strong an
impression on my mind that I then thought it a true representation of
the highest pitch of human greatness and felicity.” (DC, 84)
|
Edict to King George III
September, 1793
You, O King
from afar, have yearned after the blessings of our civilization, and in
your eagerness to come into touch with our converting influence have
sent an Embassy across the sea bearing a memorial. I have already taken
note of your respectful
spirit of submission, have treated your mission with extreme favour and
loaded it with gifts, besides issuing a mandate to you, O King, and
honouring you with the bestowal of valuable presents. Thus has my
indulgence been manifested. ...
- Your Ambassador requests facilities for
ships of your nation to call at Ningpo, Chusan, Tientsin, and other
places for purposes of trade. ... For the future, as in the past, I
decree that your request is refused and that you shall be limited to
Macao.
- The request that your merchants may
establish a repository in the capital of my Empire for the storing and
sale of your produce, in accordance with the precedent granted to
Russia, is even more impracticable than the last. ... This request is
also refused.
- Your request for a small island near
Chusan, where your merchants may reside and goods be warehoused ... is a
flagrant violation of the usage of my Empire and cannot possibly be
entertained.
- [With regard to your request] for a small
site in the vicinity of Canton city, where your barbarian merchants may
lodge or, alternatively, that there be no longer any restrictions over
their movements at Macao ... it is best that the regulations now in force
should continue unchanged.
- Regarding your request for remission or
reduction of duties on merchandise discharged by your British barbarian
merchants at Macao and distributed throughout the interior, there is a
regular tariff in force for barbarian merchants’ goods, which applies equally to all European nations. ...
- As to your request that your ships shall
pay the duties leviable by tariff, there are regular rules in force at
the Canton Custom house respecting the amounts payable, and since I
have refused your request to be allowed to trade at other ports, this
duty will naturally continue to be paid at Canton as heretofore.
- Regarding your nation’s
worship of the Lord of Heaven ... sage Emperors and wise rulers have
bestowed on China a moral system and inculcated a code, which from time
immemorial has been religiously observed by the myriads of my
subjects. ... The distinction between Chinese and barbarian is most
strict, and your Ambassador’s request that barbarians shall be given full liberty to disseminate their religion is utterly unreasonable.
It may be, O King, that the the above proposals
have been wantonly made by your Ambassador on his own responsibility or
peradventure you yourself are ignorant of our dynastic regulations and
had no intention of transgressing them when you expressed these wild
ideas and hopes. I have ever shown the greatest condescension to the tribute
missions of all States which sincerely yearn after the blessings of
civilization, so as to manifest my kindly indulgence. I have even gone
out of my way to grant any requests which were in any way consistent
with Chinese usage. Above all, upon you, who live in a remote and
inaccessible region, far across the spaces of ocean, but who have shown
your submissive loyalty by sending this tribute mission, I have heaped
benefits far in excess of those accorded to other nations. But the
demands presented by your Embassy are not only a contravention of
dynastic tradition, but would be utterly unproductive of good result to
yourself, besides being quite impracticable. ... Tremblingly obey and show no negligence! A special mandate! (DC, 90-3)
Swaying the wide world, I have but one
aim in view, namely, to maintain a perfect governance and to fulfill the
duties of the State; strange and costly objects do not interest me. If
I have commanded that the tribute offerings sent by you, O King, are to
be accepted, this was solely in consideration for the spirit which
prompted you to dispatch them from afar. Our dynasty’s
majestic virtue has penetrated unto every country under Heaven, and
Kings of nations have offered their costly tribute by land and sea. As
your Ambassador can see for himself, we possess all things. I set no
value on objects strange or ingenious, and have no use for your country’s manufactures. (DC, 89)
The entire venture had cost the East India Company a small fortune, for which the company had received no return. (SMC, 123) |
|
|
|