Tribute System and Rulership in Late Imperial China [1 ed.] 9783737014021, 9783847114024

Citation preview

Studien zu Macht und Herrschaft Schriftenreihe des SFB 1167 „Macht und Herrschaft – Vormoderne Konfigurationen in transkultureller Perspektive“

Band 9

Herausgegeben von Matthias Becher, Jan Bemmann und Konrad Vössing

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi (eds.)

Tribute System and Rulership in Late Imperial China

With 22 figures

V&R unipress Bonn University Press

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über https://dnb.de abrufbar. Veröffentlichungen der Bonn University Press erscheinen bei V&R unipress. Gedruckt mit freundlicher Unterstützung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. © 2022 V&R unipress, Theaterstraße 13, D-37073 Göttingen, ein Imprint der Brill-Gruppe (Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, Niederlande; Brill USA Inc., Boston MA, USA; Brill Asia Pte Ltd, Singapore; Brill Deutschland GmbH, Paderborn, Deutschland; Brill Österreich GmbH, Wien, Österreich) Koninklijke Brill NV umfasst die Imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau und V&R unipress. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Das Werk und seine Teile sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung in anderen als den gesetzlich zugelassenen Fällen bedarf der vorherigen schriftlichen Einwilligung des Verlages. Umschlagabbildung: Painting of a Lioness (Paliuwan Painting), late 15th c., Courtesy Rossi & Rossi Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Verlage | www.vandenhoeck-ruprecht-verlage.com ISSN 2626-4072 ISBN 978-3-7370-1402-1

Contents

Series Editors’ Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

The Basics of Tribute Li Wen 李文 The Origin of the Character gòng 貢 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

The System Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝 The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

He Xinhua 何新華 Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange under the Qing Tributary System . . . . . . . . . . . . .

61

Chia Ning The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty: From Mechanism of Empire-Building to Origins of the Dynastic Fall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

79

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

99

Zsombor Rajkai Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

. . . . . . . . . . . 117

6 Morris Rossabi Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

Contents

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

Britta-Maria Gruber Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Rui Manuel Loureiro Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System: From Tomé Pires (1516) to Juan González de Mendoza (1585) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Wan Ming 萬明 Focusing on the Indian Ocean: An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

The Tribute Sally K. Church 程思麗 A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠. Diplomatic Expeditions to Herat (1413–1420) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 Ralph Kauz Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

. . . . . . . . 223

Graeme Ford The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 James K. Chin Envoys, Brokers and Interpreters: Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 Roderich Ptak Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550). With Special Consideration of Selected Animal Products . . . . . . . . . . 273 Csaba Olah Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Contents

7

Ching-fei Shih A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’: Wooden Goblets with Nesting Cups in the Qing Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365

Series Editors’ Preface

Two phenomena of socialization lie at the heart of the Collaborative Research Centre (CRC) 1167 at the University of Bonn, ‘Macht and Herrschaft. Premodern Configurations in a Transcultural Perspective’. We place power and domination under the microscope and interrogate them with the tools of comparative research. Both phenomena have impacted human coexistence at all times and worldwide; as such, they are primary subjects of investigation for scholars in the humanities. Our multi-disciplinary research network aims to bring together the skills of many different participating fields as part of interdisciplinary cooperation, and to develop a transcultural approach to the understanding of power and domination. Our selection of case studies from a wide variety of regions provides a fresh perspective on both similarities and differences across the different regions. In this series, we present collections of essays, which stem from workshops organised by our subprojects, as well as monographs that reflect on the main interests and research within individual subprojects. It would not have been possible to publish the fruits of these important exchanges within this series without the generous financial support from the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) and the continued commitment of the University of Bonn, which provided the necessary research infrastructure. We would like to express our sincere thanks to both. Matthias Becher – Jan Bemmann – Konrad Vössing

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi

Introduction

Demanding and offering tribute is a most common feature in human societies and nothing special to China. In the course of the development of Neolithic societies social strata or classes have developed where persons who achieved superior positions first could demand ‘presents’ or tribute from neighboring societies they defeated and then, with the assistance of sturdy ‘servants’ from their own people. China was certainly no exception to that principle and one of the first terms for tax was thus gong 貢, tribute. In China’s early, ‘feudatory’ social system, tribute was demanded from lower political entities,1 and the mutual ‘political’ relations were already highly developed during the Zhou 周 dynasty (1045–256 BCE).2 This system of ‘inner Chinese’ relations became a sort of matrix when China expanded and achieved contact with countries which were more or less independent, and thus the ‘tribute system’ evolved, especially with the creation of the Chinese Empire by Qin Shi huangdi 秦始皇帝 in 221 BCE. Traditional China’s foreign relations have frequently intrigued foreign observers because the system differed from ‘Western’ diplomatic practice, but possibly not so much from those of the East Roman or the Sasanian empires. On the basis of the (mostly) culturally and administratively advanced Chinese dynasties, the matrix sketched above transformed into a ‘Chinese world order’, in which foreigners needed to acknowledge China’s superiority and to portray themselves as vassals. Diplomatic parity between China and foreign countries did not, in theory, exist. The ascending ‘Western’ imperial powers despised this attitude. According to John Fairbank, one of the most renowned historians of modern China, relations were hierarchical and non-egalitarian, with the Emperor, as the Son of Heaven, at the center.3 Fairbank also described the main characteristics of 1 Michael Loewe/Edward Shaughnessy (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China, From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B. C., Cambridge 1999, 281–282. 2 Robert H. Gassmann, Cheng-ming: Zu den Quellen eines Philosophems im antiken China, ein Beitrag zur Konfuzius-Forschung, Bern 1988, 170–188. 3 John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, Cambridge 1968, 2.

12

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi

Chinese foreign relations, which entailed assertion of cultural superiority, defense of the country trade, and a system of international relations and diplomacy.4 Cultural superiority was expressed through the dispatch of tribute goods and the arrival of foreign envoys and rulers in China and their performance of proper rituals at the court. Kneeling three times, the kowtow, which entailed nine knocks of the head on the ground, and a polite conversation with the Emperor signified foreigners’ acceptance of an inferior and submissive status. Fairbank described such ceremonies as often being a subterfuge for commerce. The court permitted trade primarily as tribute, allowing merchants who accompanied embassies to trade for three to five days with specially designated Chinese merchants. By Qing times (1644–1911), some States, such as Russia, developed a commercial and not a tribute trade relationship. Fairbank added that the tribute system also comprised a defense mechanism. The Emperors ensured that they provided gifts that were more valuable than the tribute goods offered by foreign envoys and rulers. In effect, the court bribed the foreigners to ingratiate itself and to dissuade foreigners from raiding or attacking China. Other specialists on Chinese foreign relations have challenged Fairbank’s interpretation. In his study of the British mission of 1793 led by George Macartney to China, James Hevia emphasized the significance of court rituals, which he believed that Fairbank had minimized. He asserted that the objectives of commerce and power ought not to diminish the role of court ceremonies, which shaped cosmological, spiritual, and philosophical views.5 By focusing on realpolitik, specialists had missed some of the roots of Chinese foreign relations. Peter Perdue, another specialist on modern Chinese history, asserts, based on his studies of China’s expansion westward in the eighteenth century, that the conquests and occupation were a lens from which to view Chinese foreign relations. Still other specialists have pointed out that marital alliances and hostage taking were as critical as the tribute system in China’s contacts with foreigners.6 Still others have argued that several dynasties and eras did not subscribe to the main features of the tribute system. Joseph Fletcher showed that the Yongle Emperor (r. 1403–1424) was willing to treat Shahrukh, the ruler of the Timurid empire in Central Asia, as an equal, undermining the tribute system perception that the Chinese ruler was superior to other khans, kings, or chieftains.7 The 4 John K. Fairbank/Ssu-yü Teng, On the Ch’ing Tributary System, in Ch’ing Administration: Three Studies, Cambridge 1960, 137. 5 James Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Guest Rituals and the Macartney Embassy of 1793, Durham 1995. 6 Armin Selbitschka, Early Chinese Diplomacy: Realpolitik versus the So-called Tribute System, Asia Major 1/28 (2015), 73–80. 7 Joseph Fletcher, China and Central Asia, 1368–1884, in: Fairbank 1968, 206–224, here 212– 214.

Introduction

13

Song 宋, a lesser empire, adopted a similar policy by treating two of its neighbors as equals. In correspondence with the rulers of the Khitans (or Liao 遼 dynasty) and the Tanguts (or Xixia 西夏 dynasty), the Song Emperors did not address these foreigners as vassals.8 Realpolitik, not an idealized conception of the tribute system or to the rites associated with tribute, determined its policies. Bearing in mind these different perspectives, the Department of Sinology at the University of Bonn convened a conference on ‘Tribute System and Rulership in Late Imperial China’ on July 6 and 7, 2018. This conference was part of the subproject ‘Reception of Delegations as an Instrument of Legitimization and Expression of Herrschaft’ in the frame of Collaborative Research Centre 1167 ‘Macht and Herrschaft – Premodern Configurations in a Transcultural Perspective’. The papers that were presented dealt with the specifics of the so-called tribute system during the Ming (1368–1644) and Qing (1644–1911) dynasties and were designed to increase knowledge of China’s foreign relations. The contributors focused both on China’s traditional ‘tributaries’, but also dealt with the Western countries which reached China in the port of Guangzhou, as well as the Russians who maintained relations with Qing China in Beijing and, via a treaty in 1727, in the border town of Kyakhta. These essays have been edited and are collected in this book. One group of essays describes the tribute system in detail. Li Wen’s contribution researches the origins of the term gong 貢 in early Chinese history, signifying ‘taxes’ to ‘tribute’ during the Shang and later dynasties. Her study frames the basis of the following articles as it shows their historical and linguistic roots. Liu Yingsheng lists the demands made by the Mongol Yuan dynasty on groups it subjugated. These requirements went beyond the provision of tribute to include supply of food, service in the military, conducting censuses, establishment of postal stations, and acceptance of a darugha or governor. He Xinhua abides by the stated intent of the tribute system and asserts that “the main driving force behind the tribute system in the Qing dynasty was the principle of tribute.” It was not a cover for trade; even the Canton system with the Western powers and the Kyakhta trade with Russia ought not to be construed as exclusively commerce. He states that Qing foreign relations were based on politics and rituals. The tribute goods were a byproduct of Qing rituals, etiquette, and culture. Chia Ning deviates somewhat from He’s interpretation and describes different responses and expectations from foreign lands, which is a less rigid policy. The Lifanyuan 理藩院 supervised the Inner Asian regions that had been (re-)occupied and were under China’s administration. The Board of Rites managed Korea, 8 Wang Gung-wu, The Rhetoric of a Lesser Empire, in: Morris Rossabi, China Among Equals, Berkeley 1983, 47–65.

14

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi

the Southeast Asian countries, and other tributaries which accepted court rituals, and the Zongli yamen 總理衙門, a body that resembled the Western countries’ foreign offices, dealt with Russia and the Western states. Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli goes further and notes that the Qing court did not base its relations with the Kazakhs on the tribute system. Instead, it used the precedent of Chinggis Khan in its dealings relating to its need for horses from the Kazakhs. Chia Ning’s analysis of the tripartite division in the Qing’s relations with foreign countries reflects a realism that often characterizes traditional China’s foreign policy. Zsombor Rajkai continues and emphasizes a realistic court policy and suggests that negotiations between foreign countries and the Ming court could alter facets of the tribute system. The system was not intractable, and foreigners could have an influence on the nature and extent of relations, which challenges the view of the court as inflexible in its demands and requirements of foreign envoys and rulers. Morris Rossabi’s discussion of the Yongle Emperor (r. 1403–1424) reveals that pragmatism pervaded the early Ming court. Seeking legitimacy, the Yongle Emperor sent far flung missions both by sea and land to stimulate other countries to offer tribute and to bolster his position as the ruler. He also presented gifts to foreign envoys and rulers based on his perception of their status. Moreover, like many other Chinese rulers and unlike the view that the court and the Emperors were ill-informed about foreigners, he sought information about foreigners. Although he insisted that foreigners perform proper rituals, his foreign policies were based upon a realistic assessment of different States and not upon assertions of superiority. By examining Manchu documents, Britta-Maria Gruber shows that Hong Taiji 皇太極, the Manchu ruler before the founding of the Qing dynasty, was insecure in his control over various Mongol groups and used gifts, not the tribute system, to bind them to him. Studying the reports of Iberian travelers to China in the sixteenth century, Rui Manuel Loureiro finds the Spanish and Portuguese fascinated but unwilling to abide by the tribute system. Instead, the Portuguese established a base in Macao and focused on trade rather than diplomacy with China. Wan Ming stresses the importance of the voyages of Zheng He 鄭和 as the largest-scale historical incident with direct contacts between China and the overseas world. Contrary to the later European endeavors, these voyages showed a basically peaceful intention. The other group of essays rather focusses on the material side of these exchanges between China and the outside world, as the desire for goods and commerce were vital elements in the so-called tribute system. Sally Church writes about the great effort of Shahrukh, Tamerlane’s son, to transport a lion to the Yongle Emperor to cement relations and perhaps to increase trade. She emphasizes the importance of goods or animals which showed prestigious characteristics. A lion is also the topic of Ralph Kauz’ article, as a huge painting exists which shows a lion and two Central Asian envoys, one of whom, a person called

Introduction

15

Paliuwan 怕六灣, created many difficulties for the Chinese administration. This embassy shows again that rituals at court prevailed over any considerations of Chinese superiority. By translating a Persian letter to the Ming court, Graeme Ford shows the significance of products in foreign relations. The letter requests such specific Ming gifts as wine, porcelain, silk, paper, and gold armor. Following on this theme of the significance of commerce, James Chin points out that merchants played vital roles as envoys, brokers, and interpreters in China’s relations with Korea, Southeast Asia, India, and Japan, a challenge to the view that the Chinese court accorded traders low social status and perceived itself to be self-sufficient and showed scant interest in foreign goods. Roderich Ptak adds that the Ming dynasty banned private trade overseas, as part of the tribute system, but the merchants of Xiangshan 香山, a site near Guangzhou, were interested in trade and evaded the regulations, partly to fulfill court demands. The tugong 土貢 system required the dispatch of products to the court, and Xiangshan may have obtained many such goods from illegal trade with Japan, Southeast Asia, the Ryukyu islands, and other areas. Another instance of the paramount importance of commerce is found in Csaba Olah’s essay, in which he writes that in the Ming dynasty “Tribute missions increasingly became simple contrivances for foreigners to enter and trade in China.” He notes also that the court “regarded trade as harmful and suppressed domestic consumption, but later on the court’s opinion changed”, in large part because it wanted to “encourage foreigners to continue paying tribute.” Thus, it tolerated private legal trade with, for example, Japanese merchants, and such commerce, on occasion, verged on illegal trade. The court also used the tribute system as a defense mechanism by not permitting trade if its neighbors engaged in raids or attacks. Finally, Ching-fei Shih describes a stunning tribute item: wooden goblets with nesting cups which are found in European and Chinese collections. She shows once more the global common interest in certain objects of art, which are not at least an important stimulus for international exchange. Europe could and can also be exotic! The varied conclusions in these papers are inspiring and not frustrating. The Kyakhta Treaty of 1727 with Russia, which mentioned trade and not the tribute system, reveals that traditional Chinese foreign relations were more flexible than conventional wisdom would have us believe. Rituals associated with foreign arrivals in China were of value for the Ming and Qing courts, which attempted, through well laid-out ceremonies, to impress its neighbors and even far distant foreign embassies. Foreign acknowledgement, even if contrived and spurious, bolstered the status of the Emperor and indeed of China as a superior culture. Yet such foreign acceptance of Chinese cultural superiority was often in name only. Foreigners frequently used the tribute system as a cover for trade. Commerce was a vital part of the tribute system and ought not to be discounted. Foreign mer-

16

Ralph Kauz / Morris Rossabi

chants were not the only beneficiaries of such trade. Chinese merchants profited from both legal private trade as well as illegal trade or smuggling. The court itself benefited from trade and not simply from goods submitted as tribute. The Western countries often did not abide by the tribute system. The Treaty of Nerchinsk of 1689 and the Treaty of Kyakhta of 1727 offered Russians a special arrangement for trade, with no obligation for tribute. Other countries found the tribute system irksome and traded with the Chinese without performing the tribute system rituals. The Westerners who were limited to the city of Guangzhou from 1754 until the Opium Wars engaged in commerce and did not approve the concept of a tribute system. In sum, the so-called tribute system was a complicated arrangement with a substantial history, and it involved diplomacy, culture, commerce (and taxes), and defense, and no single motivation offers a complete explanation of its implementation or lack thereof. Thus, the name ‘tribute system’ may be at all a misnomer for China’s historical international relations.

The Basics of Tribute

Li Wen 李文

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢 Translated by Hong Kunlyu 洪堃綠

1.

Introduction

The first appearance of the word cháogòng 朝貢 is found in Hanshu 漢書 (History of [Former] Han), in which it appears twice.1 The first one in juan 99 A, ‘Wang Mang zhuan’ 王莽傳 (The Biography of Wang Mang):2 如使子女誠能奉稱聖德，臣莽國邑足以共朝貢，不須復加益地之寵。 “If my daughter is really capable of supporting and according with your sage virtue, the estate of your subject Mang is [yet] sufficient to make offerings for the tribute at the court; it is not necessary again to give me the favor of added territory.”3

The second one comes from juan 100 B, ‘Xuzhuan’ 敘傳 (Afterword and Family History):4 昭、宣承業，都護是立，總督城郭，三十有六，修奉朝貢，各以其職。 “The Emperor Zhao and the Emperor Xuan continued the work [of the former emperors], protectorates were established, [they] governed 36 states of the Western Regions. These states served the Han Dynasty and came to the court to present tribute according to their duties.” 1 The counts of Hanshu 漢書 (History of [Former] Han) and Hou Hanshu後漢書 (History of Later Han) are based on the database Scripta Sinica. Search results of Shisan jing zhushu 十三 經注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Thirteen Classics) show that this word can be found ten times in Zhouli zhushu 周禮注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Rites of Zhou), Yili zhushu 儀禮注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Etiquette and Rites), Liji zhengyi 禮記正義 (Record of Rites, with Corrected Meanings) and Mengzi zhushu 孟子注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Master Meng). However, all ten examples are from commentaries or sub-commentaries composed later than Hanshu. 2 Ban Gu 班固, Hanshu 漢書 (History of [Former] Han), Beijing 1962, 4052. 3 Ban Gu 班固, The History of the Former Han Dynasty, vol. 3, Imperial Annals XI and XII and the Memoir of Wang Mang, trans. by Homer H. Dubs, Baltimore 1955, 161. 4 Ban Gu 1962, 4268.

20

Li Wen 李文

In Hou Hanshu 後漢書 (History of Later Han), the word 朝貢 appears nine times. For example juan 86, ‘Nanman Xinan yi liezhuan’ 南蠻西南夷列傳 (Biographies of the Southern Barbarians and Southwestern Barbarians) records: 及 楚子稱霸，朝貢百越5 (“When the King of Chu became hegemon, [he] let the Baiyue come to the court to present tribute”). Cháo 朝 and gòng 貢 have different meanings: 朝 stands for cháojiàn 朝見 “to come to the court”, whereas 貢 stands for gòngnà 貢納 “to present tribute”. This paper focuses on the origin of the character 貢. The tribute system has an early origin. As the oracle-bone inscriptions prove, it was formed as early as the Shang Dynasty. At that time, tribute activities became institutionalized; non-Shang allies and subordinates were required to present tribute to the Shang Dynasty, and lower noblemen were also required to present tribute to higher noblemen. Oracle-bone characters related to the tribute system can be categorized into three groups related to their meanings: 1) Tribute offerings of lower to higher bodies 2) Tribute collection from lower by higher bodies 3) Rewards from higher to lower bodies. These three groups of characters reveal the substance of the tribute system from different aspects; words related to tribute offerings belong to the first group. However, the character 貢 cannot be found among the identified oracle-bone characters, nor can it be found in bronze inscriptions of the Yin and the Zhou dynasties. Previous research shows that the meaning “to present tribute” was represented by other characters. In addition to Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, who argues that rù 入, lái 來 and zhì 氏 are characters related to tribute offerings,6 Yang Shengnan 楊升南 (1999), Zhang Xiuxia 章秀霞 (2008), Wu Zhenyu 武振玉 and Zhou Xiaofeng 周曉鳳 (2013) and Xu Hong 徐紅 (2018) 7 especially studied this 5 Fan Ye 范曄, Hou Hanshu 後漢書 (History of Later Han), Beijing 1965, 2835. 6 Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, Wu Ding shi wuzhong jishi keci kao 武丁時五種記事刻辭考 (Examination of Five Kinds of Notation Inscriptions of the Wu Ding Era), in: Hu Houxuan, Jiaguxue Shangshi luncong chuji 甲骨學商史論叢初集 (Collection of Essays on the Shang History on the Basis of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions, Part 1), vol. 3, Beijing 1944, 467–611. Regarding the pronunciation of 氏, Hu Houxuan writes: “氏 is supposed to be read as zhì 致”, ibid., 54. 7 Related papers are Yang Shengnan 楊升南, Jiaguwen zhong suo jian Shangdai de nagong zhidu 甲骨文中所見商代的貢納制度 (The Tribute System of the Shang Dynasty in OracleBone Inscriptions), in: Yindu xuekan 殷都學刊 (Journal of Yindu) 2 (1999), 27–32; Zhang Xiuxia 章秀霞, Yinshang houqi de nagong zhengqiu yu shangci, yi Huadong buci wei li 殷商後 期的貢納、徵求與賞賜——以花東卜辭為例 (Tribute Offerings, Levies and Rewards in the Late Yin-Shang Period, Exemplified by Huadong Oracle-Bone Divinations), in: Zhongzhou xuekan 中州學刊 (Academic Journal of Zhongzhou) 5 (2008), 190–194; Wu Zhenyu 武振玉, Zhou Xiaofeng 周曉鳳, Yinzhou jinwen “xianna” yi dongci shilun 殷周 金文“獻納”義動詞釋論 (Verbs Indicating Offertory in the Bronze Inscriptions of Yin and Zhou Dynasties), in: Shenzhen daxue xuebao (renwen shehui kexue ban) 深圳大學

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

21

topic and identified a series of related oracle-bone characters. Based on this research, further categorization is suggested here: 入, 來, xiàn 獻/ jiàn 見, yıˇ 以/ dıˇ 氏8, go¯ng 工still belong to group 1) (here named ‘group 工’). Gòng 共, zhe¯ng 蒸, zu¯n 尊, jia¯ng 將, xiu¯ 羞, che¯ng 爯 are excluded from this paper since they refer to concrete actions or procedures–for instance, offering sacrifices in religious ceremonies. They differ to some extent from characters referring to general tribute activities. Another difference lies in their constructions, which often contain components representing the hand. In oracle-bone inscriptions 共 the other five characters above are written as , , , , and ; all of them contain one of the following components: , , . Therefore, they should be considered an independent research category. In the following text, the origin of the character 貢 will be discussed in two parts. In the first part, characters of the group 工 will be briefly introduced and then compared to the character 共, whereby the protoform character of 貢 can be determined. The second part determines the development from 工 to 貢 by examining various texts.

2.

Characters of the group 工 in oracle-bone inscriptions and the character 貢

Each character of the group 工 has several meanings; however, among these meanings, there is always one related to tribute offerings. The protoform character of 貢 comes from the group 工.

2.1

Rù 入

In oracle-bone inscriptions, 入 is written as and means “to enter” or “to submit tribute.” In the latter case, it can particularly refer to tribute offerings of turtle shells, as the examples below show:

學報(人文社會科學版) (Journal of Shenzhen University, Humanities & Social Sciences) 1 (2013), 141–147; Xu Hong 徐紅, Huadong buci zhong de jiyu dongci 花東卜辭中的給 予動詞 (A Study on the Give-Type Verbs in Huadong Oracle), in: Liaoning daxue xuebao (zhexue shehui kexue ban) 遼寧大學學報(哲學社會科學版) (Journal of Liaoning University, Philosophy and Social Sciences) 3 (2018), 138–145. 8 According to Yu Xingwu 于省吾, the pronunciation of 氏 is here transcribed as dıˇ. See Yu Xingwu 于省吾, Jiagu wenzi gulin 甲骨文字詁林 (Collected Explanations of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), vol. 1, Beijing 1996, 60. In this text, this book is abbreviated as JGWZGL.

22

Li Wen 李文

(1) 雀入。 ( jiaqiao keci 甲橋刻辭 “shell-bridge inscription”) (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 44, v. 585)9 “Que雀submitted [turtle shells].”10 (2) 奠入十。 (shell-bridge inscription) (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 8, v. 110 [1]) “Dian奠 submitted ten [turtle shells].” When expressions such as “subject + 入” or “subject + 入 + number” are carved on turtle shells, this means that turtle shells are submitted as tribute. However, objects of 入 can be many kinds of tribute objects, as the examples below show: (3) 乙酉卜：入肉。 (YHDJL, 284, 490.8)11 “Divining on the yiyou day: Will meat be submitted?” (4) 己卯，媚子 入宜羌十。 (JGWHJ, vol. 2, 558, r. 10405 [2]) “On the jimao day, Guang ，the patriarch of family Mei 媚, submitted ten Qiang tribesmen for Yi 宜-sacrifice.” (5) 丁亥卜， 入七虎于祖乙。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 117, 1606) “Divining on the dinghai day: Will X submit seven tigers to Zu Yi?” (6) 己未卜，貞，翌庚申告亞其入于丁一牛。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 312, r. 5685) “Divining on the jiwei day, tested: Will the official Ya 亞, submit one bovine to Ding when we make a Gao 告-sacrifice on the next gengshen day [tomorrow]?” 9 Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, Jiaguwen heji shiwen 甲骨文合集釋文 (Translations of the Complete Set of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), vol. 1, Beijing 2009, 44, the divination cited here is from the reverse side of the piece no. 585. This book is abbreviated as JGWHJ. When a piece of oracle bone has only one divination on its obverse or reverse side, the divination is not numbered; when a piece has inscriptions on both sides, the obverse side is abbreviated as “r.” (recto) and the reverse side as “v.” (verso). In the following, when examples come from that book, instead of adding footnotes, the reference will be shown in the main text using the abbreviations above. Examples from other books will be noted in the same way; only the first appearance of a reference book will be noted in a footnote. 10 Examples from oracle-bone inscriptions are translated by the author. Reference books used for the translation are: Ken-ichi Takashima, A Little Primer of Chinese Oracle-Bone Inscriptions with Some Exercises, Wiesbaden 2015; Liu Zhiji 劉志基 et al., Han Ying duizhao jiaguwen jinyi leijian 漢英對照甲骨文今譯類檢 (Selection Catalogs of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions with Present English Translations), Nanning 2005. Proper names such as names of people and places are transcribed into Pinyin according to their pronunciations in modern Chinese. When a pronunciation is undeterminable, the transcription will be represented as “X”. When characters are missing or unidentifiable, they will be represented as □. All examples are checked and compared with rubbings of the oracle-bone inscriptions. The interpretations are based on widely recognized research results. If scholars have different opinions, the author has chosen one interpretation after careful comparisons. In this paper, names of sacrifices are transcribed into Pinyin according to their pronunciations; their meanings will not be interpreted. 11 Hong Yang 洪颺, Yinxu Huayuanzhuang dongdi jiaguwen leizuan 殷墟花園莊東地甲骨文 類纂 (Classification and Compilation of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions in East of Huayuanzhuang in the Yin Ruins), Fuzhou 2016, 284, no. 490.8. In this text, this book is abbreviated as YHDJL.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

2.2

23

Lái 來

In oracle-bone inscriptions, 來 is written as and . Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂 takes the view that “in divinations 來 meaning ‘grain’ and 來 meaning ‘to come’ are already two differentiated characters, they are not conflated with each other” (JGWZGL, vol. 2, 1456). 來 meaning “to come” can also mean “to present tribute” and “future”. In the examples below, 來 means “to present tribute”: (1) 我來三十。 (shell-bridge inscription) (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 19, v. 248 [6]) “Wo 我 brought thirty turtle shells.” (2) 貞： 來舟。 不其來舟。 (JGWHJ, vol. 2, 606, r. 11462 [3], [4]) “Tested: Will Qin bring boats? Will Qin not bring boats?” Example (2) is a paired testing statement. (3) 甲戌卜：其来于黽羊百、辛牛百、黄璧五？ (YXCCJ, vol. 2, 707, 364 [1])12 “Divining on the jiaxu day: Will one hundred bovines be brought from Min 黽, one hundred bovines and five yellow jade annulus from Xin辛?” (4) □貞， 來羌其用于父丁。 (XNJK, 112, 725 [2])13 “Tested: As for the Qiang tribesmen brought from X , should we use them as offering to Fu Ding?”

2.3

Xiàn 獻/ jiàn 見

Xu Zhongshu 徐中舒 transcribes the oracle-bone graphs and as xiàn 獻 and identifies its meaning as “to offer, to bring” (JGWZD, 1101).14 As the example below shows: (1) 乙卯卜， 貞：獻羌，其用妣辛 。 (JGWHJ, vol. 3, 1342, 26954 [2]) “Divining on the yimao day, X tested: As for the Qiang tribesmen brought, should we use them in Bi Xin’s Temple?”

12 Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中國社會科學院考古研究所 (Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences), Yinxu Xiaotun cun zhong cun nan jiagu 殷墟小屯村中村南甲骨 (Oracle-Bones from the Center and South of the Xiaotun Village in the Yin Ruins), Kunming 2012, 707, no. 364 (1). In this text, this book is abbreviated as YXCCJ. Regarding this example, there are different opinions about the character order and transcriptions in the cereal script; the author chooses the opinion of YXCCJ. 13 Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂, Xiao Ding 肖丁, Xiaotun nandi jiagu kaoshi 小屯南地甲骨考釋 (A Philological Study of the Oracle-Bones at Xiaotun South), Beijing 1985, 112, no. 725 (2). In this text, this book is abbreviated as XNJK. 14 Xu Zhongshu 徐中舒, Jiaguwen zidian 甲骨文字典 (A Dictionary of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), Shanghai 1988, 1101. In this text, this book is abbreviated as JGWZD.

24

Li Wen 李文

Xu Zhongshu transcribes the of the graphs and as sacrificial vessels yàn ˇ 鬳 and yan 甗 (JGWZD, 258), as the following example shows: (2) 甲寅貞， 來丁巳尊鬳（ ）于父丁， 宜卅牛。 (JGWHJ, vol. 3, 1572, 32125 [1]) “Tested on the jiayin day: On the coming dingsi day, should we present 鬳 ( ) as a sacrificial object to Fu Ding, and display meat-offerings of thirty bovines?” Nevertheless, Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂 considers that these three graphs are in fact one: “ should be the character 鬳, sometimes the component 虍 is added to it, and it is then written as . is the elaborated form of ” and that “originally 鬳, 甗 and 獻 were one, 獻, whose semantic component is 犬, is a deformation of 甗”. As for of example (2), Yao Xiaosui considers that it also refers to 獻 of the word jìnxiàn 進獻 (JGWZGL, vol. 3, 2718). 見 is regarded as related to 獻; one of its meanings refers to 獻. There are different transcriptions and interpretations of the oracle-bone graphs and among researchers; Yao Xiaosui transcribes both of them as 見. He points out that “the forms of and in the divinations are different, as are their usages. can be used as 獻, but cannot. But as for their other [meanings], they are interchangeable. Divinations indicate a trend of consolidation” (JGWZGL, vol. 1, 609). One example is: (3) □戌卜，貞， 見百牛， 用自上示。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 7, 102 [2]) “Divining on the □ xu day, tested: As for the one hundred bovines that X brought here, should we offer a Ji -sacrifice to the ancestors starting from Shangshi-ancestors group?” Zhang Yachu 張亞初 points out that, in bronze inscriptions, 見工 has the same meaning as 獻工: “In divinations, jiàn niú 見牛 also means xiàn niú 獻牛 ‘to present bovines’” (JGWZGL, vol. 1, 608). In YHDJL, is also transcribed as 見 (獻), as the following example shows: (4) 甲卜：在 ，鬯見（献）于丁。 (YHDJL, 92, 249.20) “Divining on the jia day: at Dui , should sacrificial wine be offered to Ding?” Xu Zhongshu transcribes both and as 見, but, in his opinion, 見 does not have the meaning of 獻. He argues that 見 “is read as zhaˇn 展 and has the meaning of ‘to view’. 見牛 has the same meaning as zhaˇn she¯ng 展牲 in ‘Chongren’ 充人 (The Fattener) of ‘Diguan 地官’ (Earthly Offices) in Zhouli 周禮 (The Rites of Zhou)” (JGWZD, 978). 展牲 means to view the sacrificial offerings before sacrifice.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

2.4

25

Yıˇ 以/ dıˇ 氏

The oracle-bones graphs and are one: the former is a simplified form of the latter. Some researchers transcribe it as 以, whereas others transcribe it as 氏. There is also research in which is transcribed as 以 (㠯) and as 氏, for example in JGWHJ. In all cases, these two graphs both contain the meaning of “to present tribute”. Jin Xiangheng 金祥恒 transcribes them as 以, which means yòng 用 “to use”. In the following examples, he considers that 以 refers to tribute offerings (JGWZGL, vol. 1, 55): (1) 㞢來自南以龟。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 393, r. 7076 [30]) “There are turtle shells sent from the south.” (2) 貞， 不其以龟。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 484, r. 8998 [1]) “Tested: Will X not send turtle shells?” Yu Xingwu transcribes and as 氏. He considers that the character 氏 in divinations should be read as dıˇ 厎, which has the same meaning as zhì 致: “letting something from other places to arrive here, this is called as 致” (JGWZGL, vol. 1, 60). Chen Weizhan 陳煒湛 agrees with this opinion and categorizes 氏, 來 and 入 as one group. He argues that “these three characters are synonyms related to tribute offerings. In a few cases, they are found in divinations, in most cases in narrative inscriptions on shell-bridge and bone socket. Both their forms and their pronunciations differ from each other, they have the same meaning only because of phonetic loan or semantic extension” (JGWZGL, vol. 1, 61). These considerations can be read as a summary of some characters of the group工. In the following examples, 以/氏 means “to present tribute”: (3) 貞：氏牛五十。 (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 482, 8967 [1]) “Tested: Will fifty bovines be brought here?” (4) 丁卯貞： 以羌，其用自上甲 至于父丁？ (JGWHJ, vol. 3, 1566, 32028 [1]) “Tested on the dingmao day: As for the Qiang tribesmen that X brought here, should we use them to be offered to ancestors starting from Shang Jia down to Fu Ding in the Ji -sacrifice ?” (5) 庚午卜：子其以磬妾于婦好，若。 (YHDJL, 607, 265.3) “Divining on the gengwu day: Zi will send female slaves from Qing 磬 to Fu Hao. Will Di approve?”

26 2.5

Li Wen 李文

Go¯ng 工

In oracle-bone inscriptions, 工 is written as or . No final conclusion has yet been drawn about the derivation of the form. Chen Weizhan argues that “in the early phase, the character 工 was usually written as which represents the form of a right angle square. This is an instrument, therefore its meaning was extended to ‘work’, ‘dexterity’ and ‘skillfulness’. However, Zu Geng 祖庚 and Zu Jia 祖甲 note that the graph 工 was simplified to ” (JGWZGL, vol. 4, 2916). Yu Xingwu summarizes four usages of the character 工; this summary is also the most important argument about the origin of the character 貢. Yu Xingwu considers that “in early times 工 and 貢 were interchangeable, however, 工 can be found in oracle-bone inscriptions, but 貢 cannot, 貢 is a differentiated character that arose later”. As for go¯ng diaˇn 工典, in oracle-bone inscriptions, Yu Xingwu argues that it has the same meaning as gòng diaˇn 貢典, namely “to present a booklet of canons in the sacrifice in order to submit prayers” (JGWZSL, 71).15 Moreover, Yu Xingwu summarizes the usages of 工 referring to offering in sacrifices (JGWZSL, 72–73). Two examples are (1) 工乙䝅。 (JGWHJ, vol. 3, 1122, 22467 [1]) “We presented swines to Yi as offering.” (2) 其祝，工父甲三牛。 (JGWHJ, vol. 3, 1367, 27462) “[Kang Ding] prayed to Fu Jia and presented three bovines to him.” These two usages of 工 are very close to 貢, which arose later. More examples of this kind can be found in texts such as (3) 工三伐。 (YXCCJ, vol. 2, 728, 455 [1]) “We presented three human sacrifices.” Yu Xingwu argues that 工 has two meanings as a noun: “a person who offers tribute” and “an officer”. The word baˇigo¯ng 百工 can already be found in oraclebone inscriptions. Researchers have different opinions about the identity of 工: some regard it as an officer, some as a craftsman, some as a slave craftsman. However, although the interpretations are different, 工 as a noun has apparently a distinct relation to 貢 of later times. All characters of the group 工contain the meaning of tribute offering, and they are all maintained in modern Chinese as morphemes. However, the meaning is only one aspect of investigating the origin of 貢. Other aspects such as pronunciation and form should also be taken into account. Taking all aspects into consideration, the protoform character of 貢 should be determined as 工, not as 15 Yu Xingwu 于省吾, Jiagu wenzi shilin 甲骨文字釋林 (Collected Interpretations of OracleBone Inscriptions), Beijing 1979, 71. In this text, this book is abbreviated as JGWZSL.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

27

other characters of the group 工. As Yao Xiaosui comments: “the usages of 工 are very comprehensively explained by Yu Xingwu, his interpretation of 工 as 貢 is indeed unchangeable, in examples it is clear when 工 should be read as 貢” (JGWZGL, vol. 4, 2918). Since some researchers regard 共 as the protoform character of 貢, for the sake of completeness, the character 共 will be briefly introduced in the following. The oracle-bone graph looks like two hands holding something for presenting. In lìshu¯ 隸書 (chancery script), it is transcribed as goˇng and gòng 共. According to research, its primary meaning is “to gather”. Goˇng rén 人 “to gather persons” and goˇng zhòng 众 “to gather many persons” are common expressions in divinations; they mean “to gather and mobilize people to fight”, as in the following example: 貞：勿共人伐土[方] (JGWHJ, vol. 1, 351, 6414 [1]) (“Tested: Should we not mobilize men to attack Tu[fang]?”). According to Yao Xiaosui, Chen Weizhan and other researchers, means “to levy” in expressions such as goˇng niú 牛 “to levy bovines”, goˇng yang 羊 “to levy sheep” and goˇng maˇ 馬 “to levy horses”. 共 was also used as gòng 供. Yao Xiaosui argues that, in the following sentence “it seems that the character means ‘to offer sacrifice’” (JGWZGL, vol. 2, 946): 戊申卜，王 父乙，庚戌歺 ，八月16 (“Divining on the wushen day: Should the King offer a Yu -sacrifice to present animals to Fu Yi, and display these offerings on the gengxu day? August”). Xu Zhongshu interprets of 牛 and 羊 as 供, which means “to offer animals in a sacrifice” (JGWZD, 236–237). Another oracle-bone graph is also transcribed into 共 in the cereal script. Taking this transcription into account, the usage as 供 is one of the basic usages of 共. This usage of 共 has been maintained till the present. In bronze inscriptions, 共 is written as and . It represents two hands submitting something and has two meanings: “to hold something respectfully”, or “shè 設 (to display) or geˇi 給 (to offer), which is written as 供 in the later canons and books” (JWXYTJ, 567–568).17 As for the character 供 of later times, its meanings such as to display, to offer sacrifice or to sacrifice can be seen as a continuation of the original usage of 供, for example, shànggòng 上供 (to place joss sticks, candles etc. in front of pictures or memorial tablets of gods or ancestors to show worship), gòngzhuàn 供饌 (to arrange sacrificial foods) etc. 張羽 旗，設供具，以禮神君18 (a flag decorated with feathers is hanged, daily life utensils are displayed, it serves as a living room for the deity). In this sentence 16 JGWHJ, vol. 2, 998, 19933. is yù 禦, a kind of sacrifice. Yu Xingwu (see JGWZSL, 370) regards 歺 as the protoform character of liè 列, whereas Xu Zhongshu (see JGWZD, 461) considers that 歺 here means “to arrange”. 17 Zhang Shichao 張世超 et al., Jinwen xingyi tongjie 金文形義通解 (Explanation of Form and Meaning of the Bronze Graphs), Kyoto 1996, 567–568. In this text, this book is abbreviated as JWXYTJ. 18 Sima Qian 司馬遷, Shiji 史記 (Records of the Grand Historian), Beijing 1959,1388.

28

Li Wen 李文

from “Fengshan shu” 封禪書 (Treatise on the Feng and Shan Sacrifices) in Shiji 史記 (Records of the Grand Historian), shè gòngjù 設供具 means to display tableware, food and wine to worship the deity. In conclusion, 共 means “to gather” and “to present sacrifice”. These meanings obviously differ from 貢. Moreover, these two characters were spoken differently both in Old and Middle Chinese. Therefore, 共 should not be regarded as the protoform character of 貢. It can be confirmed that 工 is the protoform character of 貢. However, the differentiation should be explained more comprehensively. Taking texts as examples, these ways will now be shown in two aspects: the character form and the meaning.

3.

The differentiation from 工 to 貢

In the Shuowen jiezi, the character 貢 is explained as follows: 貢，獻功也。从貝 工聲。19 (“貢 means to present achievements. 貝 is the semantic component, 工 is the phonetic component”). In the Shouwen jiezi xizhuan, the character 貢 is interpreted as the verb 獻 “to present”, but here 貢 is also considered as having 貝 as a semantic component and 工 as a phonetic component.20 As a phono-semantic compound character, 貢 belongs to the section of 貝. The semantic component 貝 indicates that this character is related to money and treasures; 工 is its phonetic component. However, oracle-bone inscriptions show that 工 is the origin of 貢. Accordingly, 工 should also function as a semantic component and co-determine the meaning of 貢. In SWJZ, 貢 is interpreted as xiàngo¯ng 獻功 “to present achievements”. This interpretation shows a close semantic relation between 功 and 貢. In the following, the relations between 工 and 貢 will be further disclosed by having a closer look at the character 功.

3.1

Relations between 工 and 功

In SWJZ, the character 功 is explained as follows: 功，以勞定國也。从力从 工，工亦聲。 (SWJZ, 293) (“功 means to stabilize the country through labor. It takes 力 and 工 as semantic components, 工 is also a phonetic component”). It belongs to the section of 力, but 工 is also its semantic component. SWJZ describes the form of 力 as follows: 象人筋之形 (SWJZ, 293) (“[力] represents 19 Xu Shen 許慎, Shuowen jiezi 説文解字 (Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Beijing 2013, 126. In this text, this book is abbreviated as SWJZ. 20 Xu Kai 徐鍇, Shouwen jiezi xizhuan 説文解字繋傳 (Commentary on Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Beijing 1987, 126.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

29

human tendons”). However, the oracle-bone inscriptions show that this interpretation of the form is wrong. In oracle-bone inscriptions, 力 is written as , Xu Zhongshu and Yu Xingwu consider that it looks like the farm tool leˇi 耒, whereas Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭 considers as the protoform graph of the farm tool sì 耜 (JGWZGL, vol. 4, 3303–3304). In bronze inscriptions, the meaning of 力 is extended to “power” or “achievements” (JWXYTJ, 3223–3224). The relation between the character 功 and the semantic component 力 is clearly explained by Dai Tong 戴侗 of the Song Dynasty in Liushu gu 六書故 (Origins of the Six Types of Chinese Characters): 功，庸也。若所謂康功、田功、土功，凡力役之所 施是也。功力既施，厥有成績，因謂之功。21 (“功 means achievements. Site formation, farming work, irrigation work and building work are labor expended. Since labor is expended, there must be achievements, therefore this is called 功”). In SWJZ, 工 is considered as a pictogram: 象人有規榘也 (SWJZ, 95) (“[工] represents a person with guı¯ 規 and juˇ 榘”). 規 and 榘 are instruments to correct circles and squares. This interpretation is not only related to several meanings of 工 in bronze inscriptions such as “craftsmen”, “achievements” and “engineering” but also to 工 of the word 百工 in oracle-bone inscriptions. In bronze inscriptions, chénggo¯ng 成工 means “to accomplish”. The inscription on the Zhongshan Wang Cuo hu 中山王 壶 (the Jar of the Zhongshan King Cuo) “休 又成工” means magnificent achievements. Xiu¯ 休 means “magnificent”. Rong Geng 容庚 annotates 工 as: 功：不从力22 (“[It is the same as] 功, but without the component 力”). Another sentence in the inscription on the Zhongshan Wang Cuo hu reads: 以追庸先王之工剌 (“to memorize and praise the achievements of the former king”). Yo¯ng 庸 is interpreted as “to praise”, 工剌 as go¯ngliè 功烈 “achievements” (JWXYTJ, 1096). The character 功, which arose later, took on the meaning “achievement” from 工. Regarding the semantic aspect, the development from 工 to 功 can be seen as a semantic extension, and, regarding the aspect of form, as a differentiation. Ancient texts also provide a clear clue of the development from 工 to 功. The elementary meanings of 工 are “craftsman” and “manufacture officer”. “Quli” 曲 禮 (Minute Rites) in Liji records: 天子之六工，曰土工、金工、石工、木工、 獸工、草工，典制六材。23 (“The six manufactures of the son of Heaven are under the care of (the superintendents of) the workers in earth; the workers in metal; the workers in stone; the workers in wood; the workers in (the skins of) animals; and the workers in twigs. These preside over the six departments of 21 Dai Tong戴侗, Liushu gu 六書故 (Origins of the Six Types of Chinese Characters), Shanghai 2006, 398. 22 Rong Geng 容庚, Jinwen bian 金文編 (Collection of Bronze Inscriptions), Beijing 1985, 901. 23 Shisan jing zhushu 十三經注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Thirteen Classics), vol. 1, ed. Ruan Yuan 阮元, Beijing 1980, 1261. In this text, this book is abbreviated as SSJZS.

30

Li Wen 李文

stores”24). Liù go¯ng 六工 refers to six different kinds of craftsmen or manufacture officers. And “Zongxu” 總敘 (Summary) of “Dongguan” 冬官 (Office of Winter) in Zhouli25 records 審曲面埶，以飭五材，以辨民器，謂之百工 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 905) (“The ones who examine the curvature, the shape, the quality (of raw materials) in order to process the five materials, and thus to provide the tools needed by the people, are called the hundred artisans”26). 百工 refers to officers who control building work. With a semantic extension, 工 can refer to responsibilities, efficiencies and successes. Two further examples are from “Gaoyao mo” 皋陶謨 (The Counsels of Gaoyao) in Shangshu 尚書 (The Book of Documents) and “Wudu” 五蠹 (Five Vermin) in Han Feizi 韓非子 (Master Han Fei): 無曠庶官，天工人其代之。 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 139) “Do not empty the various offices (sc. by placing worthless men in them). The works of Heaven, it is man who carries them out on its behalf.”27 鄙諺曰：“長袖善舞，多錢善賈。”此言多資之易為工也。28 “There is a common saying: ‘Wearers of long sleeves are skillful in dancing; possessors of much money are skillful in trading.’ It means that people who are resourceful acquire skill very easily.”29

Based on this semantic extension, the semantic component 力 was added to the character 工, whereby the phono-semantic compound character 功 arose. It is possible that in texts 工 is then replaced by 功 in some places, as the following example from “Sishi” 肆師 (The Master of Sacrifice) of “Chunguan” 春官 (Office of Spring) in Zhouli shows: 凡師不功，則助牽主車 (“Whenever the troops fail to be successful [bù go¯ng 不功], [the Master of the Sacrifices] helps to pull the cart carrying the spirit tablets [of the deceased]”30). The classics scholar of the

24 Confucius 孔子, The Sacred Books of China, the Texts of Confucianism, Part III: The Li Ki, 1–10, trans. by James Legge, ed. F. Max Müller (The Sacred Books of the East 27), Oxford 1885 (Reprint Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1966), 110. 25 Citations from Zhouli 周禮 (The Rites of Zhou) are translated by Susanne Adamski. These translations follow Édouard Biot, Le Tcheou-Li ou Rites des Tcheou, 2 vols., Paris 1851; titles translated in line with Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China, Stanford 1985. 26 Compare Biot 1851, vol. 2, 251, whose translation differs only slightly. 27 Coufucius 孔子, The Book of Documents (Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 22), trans. by Bernhard Karlgren, Stockholm 1950, 9. 28 Wang Xianshen, 王先慎, Han Feizi jijie 韓非子集解 (Works of Master Han Fei, with Collected Commentaries) (Xinbian zhuzi jicheng 新編諸子集成 [New Edition of the Masters Collection]), Beijing 1998, 496. 29 Han Feizi 韓非子, The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu˘ (Probsthain’s Oriental Series 25), vol. 2, trans. by W. K. Liao, London 1959, 294. 30 Cf. also Biot 1851, 283.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

31

East Han Dynasty Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 annotates: 故書“功”為“工”。鄭司農：“工 讀為功。”古者工與功同字 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 770) (“In early times 功 was written as 工, Zheng Sinong says: ‘工 is 功’. In early times 工 and 功 were one”). From the perspective of the development of Chinese characters, a scholar of the Qing Dynasty, Wang Yun 王筠, points out that these are two different characters: 功乃 工之分别文。31 (“功 is a differentiated character of 工”). Wang Li 王力 summarizes the development from 工 to 功 as follows: “Wang Yun speaks of differentiated characters (fe¯nbié zì 分别字) and increased characters (leˇize¯ng zì 纍 增字), Xu Hao徐灝 speaks of ancient and modern characters (guˇjı¯n zì古今字). In fact they are cognate characters (tóngyuán zì 同源字)”.32 No matter which term is used, the relations between 功 and 工 can be summarized as follows: 功 arose by complicating the form of 工, namely the addition of the semantic component 力; this new character took over some meanings from 工.

3.2

Relations between 貢 and 功

Ancient texts also show a very close relation between 貢 and 功. In Duanju shisan jing jingwen 斷句十三經經文 (The Punctuated Texts of the Thirteen Classics) published by Taiwan kaiming shudian 臺灣開明書店 in 1973, there are altogether 92 valid examples of 貢: 13 in Shangshu, 45 in Zhouli, 4 in Liji 禮記 (The Book of Rites), 20 in Chunqiu zuozhuan 春秋左傳 (The Spring and Autumn Annals with Zuo’s Commentaries), 4 in Chunqiu guliang zhuan 春秋穀梁傳 (The Spring and Autumn Annals with Guliang’s Commentaries), 1 in Erya 爾雅 (Approaching the Correct) and 5 in Mengzi 孟子 (Master Meng).33 These examples show two specificities of the usage of 貢. The first specificity is the combination with characters fù 賦, zhí 職 and shuì 税: 貢 began to appear in disyllabic structures. The characters 賦, 職 and 税 have different origins and different meanings. 賦 originally mainly referred to the levy of military taxes and later mainly referred to the levy of land taxes. 税 originally referred to charges or goods levied according to the quality of agricultural land and the type of business. Later it usually referred to commercial taxes. 職 originally referred to occupations or positions; later it also referred to the presentation of tribute by other countries. Both of them are important characters of the tax system; they indicate different sources of financial revenues. The combination of 貢 and these characters indicates that tribute had the nature of 31 Wang Yun 王筠, Shuowen jiezi judou 說文解字句讀 (Periods and Commas of the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Beijing 2016, 557. 32 Wang Li 王力, Tongyuan zidian 同源字典 (A Dictionary of Cognate Characters) (Wang Li quanji 王力全集 [Complete Works of Wang Li] 13), Beijing 2014, preface. 33 Counts are based on the database Scripta Sinica.

32

Li Wen 李文

taxation in its beginning, as the following words show: 賦貢/貢賦 (the presentation of local products from provinces or vassal states and taxes), 貢職/職貢 (taxes and the presentation of tribute objects by other countries) and 貢税 (taxes and tribute objects). However, to determine the concrete meanings of these words, the sentences in which the words occur also have to be examined. The second specificity is the wide variety of 貢 tribute objects: they are either local products or goods related to occupations. In the following, relations between 貢 and 功 and the role 貢 played in the tax system in the relevant periods will be disclosed by examples from “Yugong” 禹貢 (Tribute of Yu), Zhouli and Chunqiu zuozhuan. 禹別九州，隨山濬川，任土作貢 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 146) (“Yu divided [the world into] nine provinces, dredged the rivers according to [features of] mountains, formulated [types and amounts of] tribute according to [qualities of] agricultural lands”). This sentence from “Yugong” in Shangshu provides a general framework for understanding 貢. 任土作貢 means that Yu formulated types and amounts of tribute according to the quality of agricultural lands. This kind of 貢 was apparently stable and compulsory; it can be seen as taxes at the early stage. As “Xia benji” 夏本紀 (Main Records of the Xia Dynasty) in Shiji points out, 自虞夏時， 貢賦備矣 (Shiji, 89) (“Since the Yu-Xia Dynasty, the system of tribute and tax is already complete”). In “Yugong”, the character 貢 is almost always combined with tribute objects. In the nine provinces, all provinces offered tributes except for the province Ji 冀. The tribute objects included local products such as silk, wood, jade, lacquer, salt, metal and fur. The following example describes tribute from the province Yan 兖: 厥貢漆絲，厥篚織文 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 147) (“Its tribute is lacquer and silk, in its baskets [presented] there are patterned woven stuffs”34). Without doubt, these local products were also produced with human labor. In Zhouli, the most important concepts related to 貢 are jiuˇ gòng 九貢 “nine tributes”, ba¯ngguó zhı¯ gòng 邦國之貢 “tribute from vassal states” and wànmín zhı¯ gòng 万民之貢 “tribute from people”. Huang Tianhua 黃天華 considers that “the tribute from vassal states was the primary form of land taxes, whereas the tribute from people was still evolving, the system of land taxes or the system of commercial taxes may have arisen from it, it is also possible that the system of contribution arose from it”.35 Obviously, many types of financial revenues arose from貢. In Zhouli, the term 九貢 in “Dazai” 大宰 (Great Steward) of “Tianguan” 天官 (Office of Heaven) refers to tribute objects presented to the king by the vassal states. There were nine different types of tribute objects, including sìgòng 祀貢 “goods for sacrifices”, bı¯ngòng 嬪貢 “goods for guest receptions”, qìgòng 器 34 Confucius 1950, 14. 35 Huang Tianhua 黃天華, Zhongguo caizheng zhidu shi 中國財政制度史 (The History of China’s Financial System), vol. 1, Shanghai 2017, 38.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

33

貢 “ritual equipment for ancestral temples”, bìgòng 幣貢 “gifts for foreign missions”, cáigòng 材貢 “all kinds of bamboo and wood materials”, huògòng 貨 貢 “gold, jade, turtle shells and seashells”, fúgòng 服貢 “textiles for producing clothes”, yóugòng 斿貢 “goods for amusement”, wùgòng 物貢 “local products” (SSJZS, vol. 1, 648). However, in “Lüshi” 閭師 (Supervisor of Villages) of “Diguan” 地官 (Office of Earth), the term 九貢 refers to tribute from people, to be specific, goods presented by people of nine occupations. They are called the jiuˇ go¯ng 九功 “nine achievements”. The supervisor of villages assigned work to the people, who had to present different products according to their work. The principle was 任農以耕事，貢九穀；任圃以樹事，貢草木；任工以飭材事，貢器物；任商以市 事，貢貨賄；任牧以畜事，貢鳥獸；任嬪以女事，貢布帛；任衡以山事，貢其物； 任虞以澤事，貢其物。凡無職者，出夫布。 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 727) “He employs peasants for ploughing, and those pay levies using the nine sorts of grain; he employs horticulturists for gardening, and those pay levies using plants and fruits; he employs artisans for manufacture, and those pay levies using various objects and instruments; he employs merchants for trading, and those pay levies using commodities and articles of trade; he employs herdsmen to breed livestock, and those pay levies using birds and animals; he employs women for female tasks, and those pay levies using fabrics and textiles; he employs mountain people to gather goods from the mountain forests, and those pay levies using their goods and products; he employs river and water people to gather goods from the bodies of water, and those pay levies using their goods and products. Those without a specific work assigned pay a capitation tax.”36

When an occupation is performed, there must be tribute. These are products of the work, the so-called功 “achievements”. People without an occupation paid a capitation tax. In his annotation of the paragraph above, Jia Gongyan 賈公彦 of the Tang Dynasty mentions the sentence 以九職任萬民 (“[the Great Steward] employs the people for nine occupations”) in “Dazai”. He writes: 任使萬民各有 職事，有職事必有功，有功即有貢。故此論貢之法也 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 727) (“Employ people and let them have their own work, work brings certainly achievements, achievements bring tribute. This is an explanation of the method of levying tribute”). This annotation clearly indicates the relation between 職 “occupation”, 功 “achievement” and 貢 “tribute”. Several annotations of Zhouli and Liji also show that 貢 “tribute” is based on 功 “achievement”. “Dazai” records: 以八則治都鄙。 […]五曰賦貢，以馭其用 (“By means of the eight statutes, [the Grand Steward] regulates the privileges and local areas of land which are assigned for maintenance of the offices. […] The fifth is called taxation and tributes (fùgòng 賦貢), by which he controls their

36 Compare also Biot 1851, vol. 1, 199.

34

Li Wen 李文

expenditures”37). Zheng Xuan annotates this as follows: 賦，口率出泉也。 貢，功也，九職之功所税也 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 646) (“賦 ‘taxation’ is a payment according to the population. 貢 means 功 and refers to taxes paid by nine different occupations”). “Quli” in Liji records: 五官致貢曰享 (“When the five officers give in their contributions, they are said to ‘present their offerings’”38). Zheng Xuan annotates this as follows: 貢，功也。享，獻也。致其歲終之功 於王謂之獻也 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 1261) (“貢 means 功, 享 means 獻. 獻 means to present work achievement to the king at the end of a year”). In SWJZ, 貢 is interpreted as xiàngo¯ng 獻功 (SWJZ, 126). The word 獻功 can also be found in texts. It has the same nature as 貢and means “to present military achievements” or “to present grains, fabrics and textiles”. An example of the first case is from “Xiang Gong ba nian” 襄公八年 (The Eighth Year of the Reign of Duke Xiang) in Zuozhuan: 城濮之役，我先君文公獻功于衡雍，受彤弓于襄 王 (SSJZS, vol. 2, 1940) (“After the battle of Shing-puh, our former ruler, duke Waˇn, presented [the trophies of] his success in Haˇng-yung, and received the red bow from king Sëang, to be preserved by his descendants”39). The background is the covenant of Jiantu 踐土 after the state Jin晉won in the Battle of Chengpu 城 濮 in 632 BCE. The Duke Wen of Jin (晉文公, r. 636–628 BCE) presented his military achievements to King Xiang of Zhou (周襄王, r. 652–619 BCE). A relatively detailed description of this event is from the “Xi Gong ershiba nian” 僖公 二十八年 (The Twenty-eighth Year of the Reign of Duke Xi): 丁未，獻楚俘于 王，駟介百乘，徒兵千 (SSJZS, vol. 2, 1825) (“On Ting-we, the marquis presented the spoils and prisoners of Ts’oo to the king, – 100 chariots with their horses all in mail, and 1000 foot-soldiers.”40). From this example, it appears that ju¯ngo¯ng 軍功 “military achievements” were war trophies. The King Xiang of Zhou rewarded him with many treasures, including a red bow. Another kind of 獻功 is to present grains, fabrics and textiles. There are also some examples from texts. In Zhouli, “Ranren” 染人 (Dyers) of “Tianguan” records: 凡染，春暴練，夏纁玄，秋染夏，冬獻功 (SSJZS, vol. 1, 692) (“For every dye, in spring [the dyers] boil and expose raw silk to the sun, in summer they dye in deep red and dark colours/black, in autumn they dye in the five colours, in winter they present the products of their labour [xiàngo¯ng 獻功]”41). 獻功 here means “to present silk products”. Another example is from “Luyu xia” 魯語下 (The Second Part of Speeches of Lu) in Guoyu 國語 (Speeches of the States): 社而賦事，烝而獻功 (“In the sacrifice ceremony for the kitchen, 37 Compare also Biot 1851, vol. 1, p. 82. 38 Confucius 1966, 110. 39 Zuo Qiuming 左丘明, The Ch’un Ts’ew, with The Tso Chuen (The Chinese Classics 5), trans. by James Legge, 2nd, revised edition, Hongkong 1872 (Reprint Oxford 1895), 436. 40 Ibid., 210. 41 Cf. Biot 1851, vol. 1, 156.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

35

farming and sericultural work will be arranged, in the winter sacrifice, achievements will be presented”). Wei Zhao韋昭, historian of the state of the Eastern Wu during the Three Kingdoms period, annotates: 社，春分祭社也。事，農桑 之屬也。冬祭曰烝，烝而獻五穀布帛之屬也42 (“社 means the sacrifice ceremony for the kitchen on the spring equinox, 事 means to arrange farming and sericultural work, the winter sacrifice is called as 烝, it means to offer five sorts of grain, fabrics and textiles”). Tian Wuzhao 田吴炤, scholar of the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic years, writes: 竊以貢、功以同音相訓，《國 語》“蒸而獻功”，即謂貢也43 (“貢 and 功 interpret each other because they have the same pronunciation, in the sentence 蒸而獻功 in Guoyu, 獻功 means 貢”). 蒸 is the same as 烝. In Guangya 廣雅 (The Expanded Erya), 貢 is regarded to have several meanings. One of those is 功. In the Shang period 貢 probably still had major economic functions, but slowly changed to political ones,44 and in the Eastern Zhou period, 貢 started to develop from taxation types to diplomatic techniques.45 In the “Xu Gong shisi nian” 宣公十四年 (The Fourteenth Year of the Reign of Duke Xuan) in Zuozhuan, Meng Xianzi 孟獻子 (ca. 624–554 BCE), a politician of the state of Lu during the Spring and Autumn period, explained the importance of 朝而獻功 “to go to the court and present the achievements” to the Duke Xuan of Lu 魯宣公 (r. 608–591 BCE). These four characters have a great importance for understanding the aims of the tribute activities and the semantic development of the character貢: 臣聞小國之免於大國也，聘而獻物，於是有庭實旅百。朝而獻功，於是有容貌采 章。嘉淑而有加貨，謀其不免也。誅而薦賄，則無及也。(SSJZS, vol. 2, 1886) “I have heard that the way in which a small state escapes [being incriminated by] a great one is by sending to it friendly missions and making various offerings, on which there are the hundred things set forth in the court-yard. Or, if the prince goes himself to the court [of the great state] to show his services, then he assumes a pleased appearance, and makes elegant and valuable presents, even beyond what could be required of him. 42 The example from “Luyu xia” in Guoyu and the annotation of Wei Zhao are both cited from Duan Yucai 段玉裁, Shuowen jiezi zhu 説文解字注 (Commentary on the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Shanghai 1988, 280. 43 Ding Fubao 丁福保, Shuowen jiezi gulin 説文解字詁林 (A Collection of Glosses on the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), vol. 7, Beijing 1988, 2749. 44 David N. Keightley, The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty, in: Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaugnessy (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 b.c., Cambridge 1999, 232–291, 281–282. 45 By analyzing the high-level visits among leadership in Chunqiu, Gassmann conducted research on the political relations between Lu and other states. Robert H. Gassmann, Cheng Ming: Richtigstellung der Bezeichnungen: Zu den Quellen eines Philosophems im antiken China. Ein Beitrag zur Konfuzius-Forschung (Schweizer Asiatische Studien. Monographien 7), Bern/New York 1988, 170–188.

36

Li Wen 李文

He acts thus lest he should not escape [being incriminated]. If, after being reprimanded, he presents rich offerings, it is too late.”46

This paragraph can be read as a description of the origin and aims of the tribute system. From the language aspect, the phrase 朝而獻功 “to go to the court and present achievements” is the origin of the word 朝貢 “to go to the court and present tribute”. Here the character 貢 already has the denotation that one state presents tributes to another state for political reasons. In summary, 功 and 貢 are not only similar in their pronunciations; their meanings are also closely related. Although Wang Li does not consider these two characters as cognate characters in his Tongyuan zidian, they are supposed to be cognate, they only belong to different parts of speech. The former is a noun, whereas the latter is usually used as a verb; in the case of semantic extension, it can also be used as a noun and means then “tribute”. In ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, Axel Schuessler regards 貢 as cognate with 工, 功 and 攻: “‘Tribute, present’ n. [Shu], ‘to present’ [Zuo] may perh. be related to either →go¯ng1工功攻 or → gòng1 共”.47 However, this paper does not consider 貢 and 共 as cognate.

3.3

Relations between 工 and 貢: summary of the origins of the character 貢

If both the relation between 工 and 功 and the relation between 功 and 貢 are taken into account, 貢 is supposed to be a differentiated character of 工, as is the character 功. These three characters are cognates. In SWJZ, the structure of 功 is described as 从力从工，工亦聲 (SWJZ, 293) (“[功] takes 力 and 工 as semantic components, 工 is also its phonetic component”). Based on this, the structure of 貢 is supposed to be described as follows: it takes 貝 and 工 as semantic components; 工 is also its phonetic component. 工 is both the phonetic and semantic component of 貢 and defines its meaning. Characters in which a component is both a semantic and phonetic component are the so-called huìyì jia¯n xíngshe¯ng zì 會意兼形聲字 “associative compound and phono-semantic compound character”, the phonetic component is also related to the meaning of a phono-semantic compound character of this kind. Wang Li considers that “all characters in which a component is both a semantic and phonetic component are cognate characters” (Tongyuan zidian, 9). However, there are characters that are associative compound and phono-semantic com-

46 Zuo Qiuming 1895, 324. 47 Axel Schuessler, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, Honolulu 2007, 257. n.: noun. [Shu]: Shangshu. [Zuo]: Zuozhuan.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

37

pound from their origin on; 貢 is one of those characters, although SWJZ does not indicate this structure. From the aspect of the form development of Chinese characters, the differentiation from 工 to 貢 shows one possibility by which phono-semantic compound characters arise: adding a semantic component to an existing character in order to show the extended meaning clearly.48 Two new characters were created for extended meanings of 工: for the meaning “achievements, accomplishments”, the noun 功 was created; for the meaning “to present achievements”, the verb “貢” was created. With the addition of a semantic component to 工, 貢 arose. The chosen semantic component is 貝, which refers to money and treasures. It can represent the features of tribute to a great extent. The original character 工 is maintained in the new character as a semantic and phonetic component, as is its meaning and pronunciation. The character 貢 arose as an associative compound and phono-semantic compound character. However, since the semantic component 貝 represents the meaning of 貢 to such a great extent, the role of the component 工 as a semantic component faded progressively. As for the phonetic aspect, 工 has a level tone, whereas 貢 has a departing tone. According to Wang Li’s theory, the qùshe¯ng 去聲 “departing tone” did not exist in Old Chinese: it was spoken as a cháng rùshe¯ng 長入聲 “long entering tone”. The departing tone began to exist in the Wei-Jin period. “Characters with a departing tone and a vowel as coda are usually transformed from characters with a long entering tone, a small number of them are transformed from characters with a píngshe¯ng 平聲 “level tone” or a shaˇngshe¯ng 上聲 “rising tone”; characters with a departing tone and a consonant as coda are transformed from characters with a level or rising tone”.49 The character 貢 has a consonant as coda, so it is supposed to have had a level or rising tone in Old Chinese. According to Guo Xiliang 郭錫良, 工, 功 and 貢 had the same pronunciation in Old Chinese: koŋ.50 According to the theory that the departing tone arose from the coda “-s” of the Old Chinese, the character 工 is supposed to have had “-ŋ” and “-ŋs” as a coda before its differentiated character 貢 arose. Zhenzhang Shangfang 鄭張尚芳 reconstructs the ancient pronunciation of 工 and 功 as kooŋ, 貢as kooŋs.51 William Baxter and Laurent Sagart reconstruct the pronunciation of 工 as

48 See Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭, Wenzixue gaiyao 文字學概要 (An Introduction to Chinese Characters), revised edition, Beijing 2013, 150–151. 49 Wang Li 王力, Hanyu yuyin shi 漢語語音史 (History of Chinese Phonetics) (Wang Li quanji 王力全集 [Complete Works of Wang Li] 2), Beijing 2014, 159–160. 50 Guo Xiliang 郭錫良, Hanzi guyin shouce 漢字古音手冊 (Handbook of the Ancient Pronunciations of Chinese Characters), extended edition, Beijing 2010, 445–446. 51 Zhengzhang Shangfang 鄭張尚芳, Shanggu yinxi 上古音系 (Old Chinese Phonology), 2nd edition, Shanghai 2003 (Reprint Shanghai 2013), 333.

38

Li Wen 李文

kˤ oŋ and 貢 as [k]ˤ oŋ-s.52 The coda of 貢 contains in both cases “-s”. Regarding the departing tone, there are different theories and different pronunciation reconstructions. However, as the form of 工 has been developed, it is obvious that its differentiated characters share its pronunciation.

4.

Conclusion

The character 貢 of the word 朝貢 is one of the earliest characters used in the Chinese taxation system. According to examples shown above, the meaning of 貢 has changed continuously: first as a general term for taxation, then as tribute revenue, an independent part of financial revenues of several dynasties. Tribute offerings from foreign countries, which were at first of the same level as a tribute offering from provinces and from vassal states, later almost became the most prominent form of 貢. Therefore, when discussing the origin of 貢, the relevant dynasties should be taken into account as background, which may affect the research results. However, through this review of the semantic development of 貢, it appears that “to present achievements” is always part of its nature.

Abbreviations JGWHJ JGWZD JGWZGL JGWZSL JWXYTJ SSJZS SWJZ XNJK YHDJL YXCCJ

Jiaguwen heji shiwen Jiaguwen zidian Jiagu wenzi gulin Jiagu wenzi shilin Jinwen xingyi tongjie Shisan jing zhushu Shuowen jiezi Xiaotun nandi jiagu kaoshi Yinxu Huayuanzhuang dongdi jiaguwen leizuan Yinxu Xiaotun cun zhong cun nan jiagu

Bibliography Primary Sources Duan Yucai 段玉裁, Shuowen jiezi zhu 説文解字注 (Commentary on the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Shanghai 1988. 52 William Baxter, Laurent Sagart, Old Chinese, A New Reconstruction, New York 2014, 339.

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

39

Duanju shisan jing jingwen 斷句十三經經文 (The Punctuated Texts of the Thirteen Classics), 6th edition, Shanghai 1934 (Reprint Taibei 1973). Hanshu 漢書 (History of [Former] Han), by Ban Gu 班固, Beijing 1962. Han Feizi jijie 韓非子集解 (Works of Master Han Fei, with Collected Commentaries) (Xinbian zhuzi jicheng 新編諸子集成 [New Edition of the Masters Collection]), by Han Feizi 韓非子, ed. Wang Xianshen, 王先慎, Beijing 1998. Hou Hanshu 後漢書 (History of Later Han), by Fan Ye 范曄, Beijing 1965. Jiaguwen heji shiwen 甲骨文合集釋文 (Translations of the Complete Set of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), vol. 1, by Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, Beijing 2009 (JGWHJ). Liushu gu 六書故 (Origins of the Six Types of Chinese Characters), by Dai Tong 戴侗, Shanghai 2006. Shiji 史記 (Records of the Grand Historian), by Sima Qian 司馬遷, Beijing 1959. Shuowen jiezi 説文解字 (Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), by Xu Shen 許慎, Beijing 2013 (SWJZ). Shuowen jiezi gulin 説文解字詁林 (A Collection of Glosses on the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), vol. 7, by Ding Fubao 丁福保, Beijing 1988. Shouwen jiezi xizhuan 説文解字繋傳 (Commentary on Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), by Xu Kai 徐鍇, Beijing 1987. Shisan jing zhushu 十三經注疏 (Commentary and Sub-commentary to the Thirteen Classics), vol. 1, ed. Ruan Yuan 阮元, Beijing 1980 (SSJZS). The Book of Documents (Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 22), by Confucius 孔子, trans. by Bernhard Karlgren, Stockholm 1950. The Ch’un Ts’ew, with The Tso Chuen (The Chinese Classics 5), by Zuo Qiuming 左丘明, trans. by James Legge, 2nd, revised edition, Hongkong 1872 (Reprint Oxford 1895). The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu˘ ((Probsthain’s Oriental Series 25), vol. 2, by Han Feizi 韓非子, trans. by W. K. Liao, London 1959. The History of the Former Han Dynasty, vol. 3, Imperial Annals XI and XII and the Memoir of Wang Mang, by Ban Gu 班固, trans. by Homer H. Dubs, Baltimore 1955. The Sacred Books of China, the Texts of Confucianism, Part III: The Li Ki, 1–10, by Confucius 孔子, trans. by James Legge, ed. F. Max Müller (The Sacred Books of the East 27), Oxford 1885 (Reprint Delhi 1966). Wang Yun 王筠, Shuowen jiezi judou 說文解字句讀 (Periods and Commas of the Explanation of Simple Graphs and Complex Characters), Beijing 2016. Xiaotun nandi jiagu kaoshi 小屯南地甲骨考釋 (A Philological Study of the Oracle-Bones at Xiaotun South), by Yao Xiaosui 姚孝遂, Xiao Ding 肖丁, Beijing 1985 (XNJK). Yinxu Huayuanzhuang dongdi jiaguwen leizuan 殷墟花園莊東地甲骨文類纂 (Classification and Compilation of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions in East of Huayuanzhuang in the Yin Ruins), by Hong Yang 洪颺, Fuzhou 2016 (YHDJL). Yinxu Xiaotun cun zhong cun nan jiagu 殷墟小屯村中村南甲骨 (Oracle-Bones from the Center and South of the Xiaotun Village in the Yin Ruins), by Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中國社會科學院考古研究所 (Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences), Kunming 2012 (YXCCJ).

40

Li Wen 李文

Secondary Sources William Baxter, Laurent Sagart, Old Chinese, A New Reconstruction, New York 2014. Édouard Biot, Le Tcheou-Li ou Rites des Tcheou, 2 vols., Paris 1851. Robert H. Gassmann, Cheng Ming: Richtigstellung der Bezeichnungen: Zu den Quellen eines Philosophems im antiken China. Ein Beitrag zur Konfuzius-Forschung (Schweizer Asiatische Studien. Monographien 7), Bern/New York 1988. Guo Xiliang 郭錫良, Hanzi guyin shouce 漢字古音手冊 (Handbook of the Ancient Pronunciations of Chinese Characters), extended edition, Beijing 2010. Hu Houxuan 胡厚宣, Wu Ding shi wuzhong jishi keci kao 武丁時五種記事刻辭考 (Examination of Five Kinds of Notation Inscriptions of the Wu Ding Era), in: Hu Houxuan, Jiaguxue Shangshi luncong chuji 甲骨學商史論叢初集 (Collection of Essays on the Shang History on the Basis of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions, Part 1), vol. 3, Beijing 1944. Huang Tianhua 黃天華, Zhongguo caizheng zhidu shi 中國財政制度史 (The History of China’s Financial System), vol. 1, Shanghai 2017. Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China, Stanford 1985. David N. Keightley, The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty, in: Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaugnessy (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 b.c., Cambridge 1999, 232–291. Liu Zhiji 劉志基 et al., Han Ying duizhao jiaguwen jinyi leijian 漢英對照甲骨文今譯類檢 (Selection Catalogs of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions with present English Translations), Nanning 2005. Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭, Wenzixue gaiyao 文字學概要 (An Introduction to Chinese Characters), revised edition, Beijing 2013. Rong Geng 容庚, Jinwen bian 金文編 (Collection of Bronze Inscriptions), Beijing 1985. Axel Schuessler, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, Honolulu 2007. Ken-ichi Takashima, A Little Primer of Chinese Oracle-Bone Inscriptions with Some Exercises, Wiesbaden 2015. Wang Li 王力, Hanyu yuyin shi 漢語語音史 (History of Chinese Phonetics) (Wang Li quanji 王力全集 [Complete Works of Wang Li] 2), Beijing 2014. Wang Li 王力, Tongyuan zidian 同源字典 (A Dictionary of Cognate Characters) (Wang Li quanji 王力全集 [Complete Works of Wang Li] 13), Beijing 2014. Wu Zhenyu 武振玉, Zhou Xiaofeng 周曉鳳, Yinzhou jinwen “xianna” yi dongci shilun 殷 周金文“獻納”義動詞釋論 (Verbs Indicating Offertory in the Bronze Inscriptions of Yin and Zhou Dynasties), in: Shenzhen daxue xuebao (renwen shehui kexue ban) 深圳 大學學報(人文社會科學版) (Journal of Shenzhen University, Humanities & Social Sciences) 1 (2013), 141–147. Xu Hong 徐紅, Huadong buci zhong de jiyu dongci 花東卜辭中的給予動詞 (A Study on the Give-Type Verbs in Huadong Oracle), in: Liaoning daxue xuebao (zhexue shehui kexue ban) 遼寧大學學報(哲學社會科學版) (Journal of Liaoning University, Philosophy and Social Sciences) 3 (2018), 138–145. Xu Zhongshu 徐中舒, Jiaguwen zidian 甲骨文字典 (A Dictionary of Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), Shanghai 1988 (JGWZD).

The Origin of the Character gòng 貢

41

Yang Shengnan 楊升南, Jiaguwen zhong suo jian shangdai de nagong zhidu 甲骨文中所 見商代的貢納制度 (The Tribute System of the Shang Dynasty in Oracle-Bone Inscriptions), in: Yindu xuekan 殷都學刊 (Journal of Yindu) 2 (1999), 27–32. Yu Xingwu 于省吾, Jiagu wenzi gulin 甲骨文字詁林 (Collected Explanations of OracleBone Inscriptions), vol. 2, Beijing 1996 (JGWZGL). Yu Xingwu 于省吾, Jiagu wenzi shilin 甲骨文字釋林 (Collected Interpretations of OracleBone Inscriptions), Beijing 1979 (JGWZSL). Zhang Shichao 張世超 et al., Jinwen xingyi tongjie 金文形義通解 (Explanation of Form and Meaning of the Bronze Graphs), Kyoto 1996 (JWXYTJ). Zhang Xiuxia 章秀霞, Yinshang houqi de nagong zhengqiu yu shangci yi Huadong buci wei li 殷商後期的貢納、徵求與賞賜——以花東卜辭為例 (Tributes Offerings, Levies and Rewards in the Late Yin-Shang Period, Exemplified by Huadong Oracle-Bone Divinations), in: Zhongzhou xuekan 中州學刊 (Academic Journal of Zhongzhou) 5 (2008), 190–194. Zhengzhang Shangfang 鄭張尚芳, Shanggu yinxi 上古音系 (Old Chinese Phonology), 2nd edition, Shanghai 2003 (Reprint Shanghai 2013).

The System

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

The territory of the Mongol-Yuan Empire, based on the military conquests launched by Chinggis Khan and his descendants, can be divided into two types, namely direct or indirect rule according to the way of governance. After the enthronement of Khubilai Khan, the areas directly ruled by the Mongolian court were Mongolia, and the areas formerly controlled by the Liao 遼 (Qitan), Jin 金 (Jürjin), Xixia 西夏 (Tangqut), Song 宋, Tibet (Tufan 吐蕃), and Yunnan 雲南. Areas under indirect rule included several northwest uluses established by the descendants of Chinggis Khan, which were called territories of royal princes (zhuwang weixia 諸王位下), namely the territory of Prince Abu Sa’id (Busaiyin Dawang weixia 不賽因大王位下, Il-Khanate), the territory of Prince Töre Temür (Dulai Tiemuer Dawang weixia 篤來帖木兒大王位下, Chaghatai Khanate) and the territory of Prince Özbeg (Yuejibie Dawang weixia 月即別大王位下, Qïpcˇaq Khanate), as well as kingdoms under the system traditionally called jimi 羁縻 system, namely dependent states. Similar to the previous dynasties, the lands and inhabitants of the dependent states nominally belonged to the Mongol-Yuan, but were in fact still under the control of their original regime. However, between the Yuan court and the subordinates, compared with that of the past, the tribute system of the MongolYuan was maintained more by force. The most important subordinate kingdoms of the Yuan were the Uyghur 畏兀兒, the Qarluγ 哈剌魯, Koryo 高麗 (Korea1) and Annam 安南 (Northern Vietnam) according to the time of surrender to the 1 The annals of Khubilai Khan in the Yuanshi record that Khubilai Khan said to the king of Korea that he surrendered later, therefore his position was after other princes. In the time of Taizu, namely Chinggis Khan, the Iduqut of the Uygurs surrendered first, so his position was higher than that of other rulers. Arslan Khan of the Qarluq surrendered after him, therefore his position was lower than the Iduqut. The Korean king should have known this point. (Song Lian 宋濂 [ed.], Yuanshi 元史, Beijing 1976, juan 7, 128) In the eyes of Khubilai Khan, Korea, Uygur and Qarluq all belonged to the surrendered kingdoms. (18 March 1270) 至元七年二月乙未， 詔諭禃曰：汝內附在後，故班諸王下。我太祖時亦都護先附，即令齒諸王上，阿思蘭後 附，故班其下，卿宜知之。

46

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

Mongols, among which Annam and Korea were the most typical ones. This article will focus on the conditions proposed by Khubilai Khan when he negotiated with Koryo and Annam.

1.

Title and content of Annam’s and Koryo’s surrender

When a kingdom surrendered to the Mongols, what conditions would its ruler accept? What were these conditions called? Who first proposed them? In Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese sources, these conditions were clearly referred as liushi 六事, namely the six demands. There is no unified statement about the specific content of these six demands, which are recorded differently, but rather similar in different sources. For instance, in the “History of the Goryeo Dynasty” (Gaoli shi 高麗史), when recording the imperial edict issued by Khubilai Khan to Wang Chang 王淐, Duke An Qing 安慶公 of Koryo in 1268, the specific conditions of the surrender were listed as follows: 1. chujun zhuzhan 出軍助戰 (providing military troops to assist Mongols during war), 2. zhuanliang 轉糧 (providing food for Mongol-Yuan troops), 3. qing daluhuachi 請達魯花赤 (inviting Mongol-Yuan daruγacˇis2) and 4. dianshu minghu 點數民户 (counting the households).3 In the same year, Khubilai Khan ordered the king of Koryo again, stating that according to the system set by Taizu huangdi 太祖皇帝, namely Chinggis Khan, subordinate kingdoms should fulfill the following obligations: 1. nashi 納質 (sending hostages to the Mongolian court) 2. zhijun 助軍 (providing military assistance) 3. shuliang 輸糧 (providing food) 4. sheyi 設驛 (establishing officially sponsored post-stations) 5. gong hushuji 供户數籍 (providing population census) 6. zhi daluhuachi 置達魯花赤 (setting up daruγacˇis).4 In the description of Annam in the Yuanshi, it was recorded that when the Annamese envoy Yang Anyang 楊安養 returned to his country in 1273, an im-

2 Mongolian officials in charge of finance and administration. 3 Zheng Linzhi 鄭麟趾, Gaoli shi 高麗史, juan 26 (https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=en&res=470509), annals of Yuanzong 元宗, part 2 (Koyro Yuanzong 高麗元宗, 9th year / Zhongtong 中統, 5th year, 1268). 4 Ibid. “惟我太祖成吉思皇帝制度，凡内屬之國，納質，助軍，輸糧，設驛，供户數籍，置 達魯花赤，已嘗明諭之矣。”

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

47

perial edict was issued to Annam’s king Chen Guangbing 陳光昺 informing him about the six demands:5 1. junzhang qinchao 君長親朝 (the king should personally pay a visit to the Mongol-Yuan court) 2. zhidi ruzhi 子弟入質 (nobles should send brothers or sons to the MongolYuan court as hostages) 3. bian minshu 編民數 (carrying out population census) 4. chujunji 出軍役 (performing military service) 5. shuna fusui 輸納稅賦 (paying taxes) 6. zhi daluhuachi 置達魯花赤 (setting up Mongolian daruγacˇis)6 The whole text of the imperial edict issued by Khubilai Khan to Annam can be found in Annamese sources, in which the following sentences referring to the six demands appeared: 1. The king should pay a personal visit to the Mongol-Yuan court 2. Nobles should send brothers or sons as hostages 3. Households should be registered 4. Military service should be performed 5. Taxes should be paid 6. Mongolian daruγacˇis should be set up The Annamese side had earlier been informed of these six demands.7 In addition to the official records cited above, this negotiation between the two sides about the six demands as surrendering conditions was also mentioned in 5 The “Description of Annam”, Annan zhuan 安南傳, (Yuanshi, juan 209, 4635–4637) mentions that in Zhiyuan 至元, 12th year, 2nd month, (1273) Khubilai Khan issued an imperial edict informing Annam of the six demands. One year later, the king of Annam sent envoys to pay tribute to the Yuan, and requested exemption from the six demands. （至元十二年二月，“諭 以六事”。十三年二月，安王國王陳“光昺遣黎克復 、文粹入貢，以所奏就鄯闡輸納貢 物， 事屬不敬， 上表謝罪， 并乞免六事。 ) But Khubilai Khan insisted that the six demands should be obeyed. (二月 “詔安南國王陳光昞，仍以舊制六事諭之。”), Yuanshi, juan 8, 163. 6 Yuanshi, juan 209, 4635–4637. The negotiations between the Yuan and Annam for the presentation of the six demands can also be found in the annals of Khubilai Khan (Zhiyuan, 12th year, 1st month, renchen 壬辰 [17 February 1275], when the delegation of Annam was about to leave. An imperial edict was issued stating that the traditional regulations should be obeyed, namely 1. carrying out census, 2. Setting up a Mongolian Darγucˇi, 3. obeying military conscription, 4. paying taxes and yearly tributes. 至元十二年正月壬辰，安南國使者還，敕以舊 制籍戶、設達魯花赤、簽軍、立站、輸租及歲貢等事諭之。 (Yuanshi, juan 8, 160). 7 Li Ze 黎崱, ed. by Wu Shangqing 武尚清, Annan zhilüe安南志略 (Description of Annam), Beijing 1995, juan 2, 48: 祖宗定制：凡内外附之國，君長親朝、子弟納質、籍戶口，出軍 役， 輸納税賦， 仍置達魯花赤統治之， 此六事， 往年已（輸鄉）[諭卿]矣。 ; Yuanshi, juan 209, 4635: “未幾，復下詔諭以六事：一，君長親朝；二，子弟入質；三，編民數； 四，出軍役；五，輸納稅賦；六，仍置達魯花赤統治之。”

48

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

the text of the “Inscription of the Spirit Road” of Li Kezhong’s 李克忠 tomb. It was recorded that when Li Kezhong was serving as a secretary in the Ministry of Personnel at the age of 28, that a delegation was sent to Annam from the court for the presentation of the six demands. He was ordered to be an official in the Daruγacˇi’s office of Annam accompanying Qasar Qaya 哈尔薩哈雅/合撒兒海牙 to visit Annam. That was in 1275 under the regime of Khubilai Khan.8 Three years later (1278), after the Song dynasty was conquered, the Yuan and Annam once again mentioned the term six demands during their dispute over the conditions of surrender. The Yuanshi notes that in the 8th month of that year, a Yuan delegation was sent to Annam, headed by the minister of the Ministry of Rituals Chai Chun 柴椿. He asked Annam’s king Chen Rixuan 陳日烜 to pay a personal visit to the Yuan court. At the end of that year, the Yuan envoy mentioned to the king Chen Rixuan that more than 20 years had passed since Annam had surrendered, but the six demands still had not been obeyed. But the Annamese side persisted that Annam was exempted from the six demands.9 From the above-mentioned material, it is clear that six demands are a term for the conditions of surrender used by the Mongol-Yuan court. So, we believe that this term was also used in the Yuan-Korea negotiations, although no direct records have been found either in Yuan or Korean sources so far.

2.

Requiring the six demands from Korea and Annam – time and origin

The Mongols arose in the steppes, while Annam is located in the south of the East-Asian continent. As there is considerable distance between the two, there had not been direct contact between Mongols and Annam in the time of Chinggis Khan, his son Ögedei, and his grandson Güyük, his successors as Great Khan. The first contact between the Mongols and Annam was in the regime of Möngke Khaghan. During his regime, Khubilai was ordered to conquer Yunnan. In the 4th year of Möngke Khaghan’s reign, Khubilai returned to Mongolia after Yunnan was conquered, and Uriyangqadai (Wulianghatai 兀良合台), his general, remained there as a commander to attack local unconquered kingdoms and people. Thus, military conflict broke out between the Mongols and Annam.10 8 Xu Youren 許有壬, Zhizheng ji 至正集, in: Yuanren wenji zhenben congkan 元人文集珍本 叢刊, vol. 7, Taibei, 1985, juan 61, 280: “年甫二十八，…遂掾吏部。朝廷遣使安南，責以六 事，署安南國達嚕噶齊 [達魯花赤] 府知事，偕哈尔薩哈雅 [合撒兒海牙, Qasar Qaya] 等行，至元乙亥 [1275] 四月也”. 9 Yuanshi, juan 209, 4638–4539. 10 In a Yuan document Jingshi dadian, in the part of the conquest of Annam 經世大典·征伐·安 南, we read: “憲宗二年，世祖征大理”，“三年，大理平。四年世祖北還，留兀良哈䚟攻

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

49

According to the Yuanshi, in summer of the 8th year of Möngke’s reign (1258), the royal son-in-law of Chen Guangbing 陳光昞, new king of Annam, visited Uriyangqadai, and then was sent to Möngke Khaghan, who was campaigning against the Song dynasty in Sichuan. Möngke Khaghan then sent a Muslim envoy named Naladin 訥剌丁11 to Annam, who proclaimed that if Annam really decided to surrender, the king should pay a personal visit to the Mongolian court, and, if not, Annam should say so clearly. Annam asked how it would be treated after its surrender. This response was reported to Prince Buqa (Buhua 不花), a Mongolian prince stationed in Yunnan after Khubilai Khan left.12 He sent Na諸夷未附者。 七年， 兵次交趾北阿閩， 遣使往諭， 不返。 又遣徹徹都等將兵進抵兆 江，兀良哈䚟繼進。十二月十三日，交人敗，入其國。國主陳勝竄海島，出所遣使獄 中， 屠其城。 留九日， 以（熟）[熱]班師。 還至三十七部鬼方， 復遣二使招勝。 勝還 國，憤残毀，縛還二使” (Su Tianjue 蘇天爵, Guochao wenlei 國朝文類, juan 41, in: Sibu congkan 四部叢刊 [www.crossasia.org]). The first contact between the Mongols and Annam is described in more detail in the Yuanshi, juan 209, 4633–4634): 元憲宗 三年癸丑，兀良合台從世祖平大理。世祖還，留兀良合台攻諸夷之未附者。七年丁巳 十一月，兀良合台兵次交趾北，先遣使二人往諭之， 不返，乃遣徹徹都等各將千人， 分道進兵，抵安南京北洮江上，復遣其子阿朮往為之援，并覘其虛實。交人亦盛陳兵 衛。阿朮遣軍還報，兀良合台倍道兼進，令徹徹都為先鋒，阿朮居後為殿。十二月， 兩軍合，交人震駭。阿朮乘之，敗交人水軍，虜戰艦以還。兀良合台亦破其陸路兵， 又與阿朮合擊，大敗之，遂入其國。日煚竄海島。得前所遣使於獄中，以破竹束體入 膚，比釋縛，一使死，因屠其城。國兵留九日，以氣候鬱熱，乃班師。復遣二使招日煚 來歸。日煚還，見國都皆已殘毀，大發憤，縛二使遣還。 11 The annals of Khubilai Khan mention that on 3 October 1262 (Zhongtong 中統 3rd year, 9th month, renshen), Chen Guangbing, the Annamese king and Naladin, the Mongolian daruγacˇi, were awarded tiger-shaped tallies. 授安南國王陳光昞及達魯花赤訥剌丁虎符。(Yuanshi, juan 5, 86). Wang Huizu 汪輝祖, a Qing scholar, identified this Naladin 訥剌丁 with the Yuan official Nasuladin 納速剌丁 found in the Yuanshi, juan 4, p. 72. (Yuanshi benzheng 元史本證, juan 37, zhengming 證名 1). In the annotations of the Yuanshi we find that this name was also recorded as Nouladin 耨剌丁in the Annan zhilüe 安南志 略. In this note is further written that Nasuludin 納速魯丁 / Nasuladin 納速剌丁 should be a copy mistake of Naladin 訥剌丁（Yuanshi, juan 4, 78, note 11). Höhe Undur (Huhe Wendu’er 胡和温都爾) disagrees with this note and believes that both Naladin 訥剌丁 and Nasuladin 納速剌丁 should be Nasudin 納速丁. (Xinban Yuanshi Jiaozheng Zhaji 新版校正札记 (Review of the New Edition of the Yuanshi), in: Neimenggu shehui kexue 内蒙古社會科學 (Inner Mongolia Social Sciences) 1 (1981), 59–62, here 59. All the above mentioned identifications ignore that these names are ordinary Muslim names. Naladin 訥剌丁/ Nouladin 耨剌丁 should be Arabic Nu¯r alDı¯n, and Nasuludin 納速魯丁/ Nasuladin 納速剌丁should be identified with Nasr alDı¯n. These are two different names and thus persons. 12 According to Fang Hui 方慧 it is not clear who Buqa was. Since, according to the Yuanshi, Uriangqatai should report to him, he sent Naladin to the Mongolian court using official post stations, he must have been the most powerful prince in Yunnan. Perhaps he was the first prince before prince Hügecˇi (Hugechi 忽哥赤), son of Khubilai Khan who arrived in 1267 (Dali zongguan duanshi shici nianli jiqi yu menggu zhengquan guanxi yanjiu 大理縂管段氏 世次年歷历及其與蒙古政權關系研究 [Studies on the governors of Dali and the genealogy of the Duan family and its relationship with the Mongolian court], Kunming 2008, 54). Li Zhian 李治安 found that Wang Yun 王惲, a Yuan author, records in his Zhongtang shiji 中堂

50

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

ladin back to Annam to ask Annam to send envoys to announce their surrender. Chen Guangbing surrendered and said that hostages would be sent to the Mongolian court as soon as a positive answer from the Mongols was received. Then Uriyangqadai sent Nuladin to report this to Möngke Khaghan.13 From the negotiations between the two sides, we can conclude that the main condition of the Mongols was the surrender of Annam’s king and his personal visit to the Mongolian court. Nothing referring to the six demands is mentioned. Records referring to the early communication between Khubilai Khan and Annam after his enthronement can be found in different sources. The part about Annam in the chapter entitled zhengfa 征伐 (conquest) of the Jingshi Dadian 經 世大典 mentions that in the first year of the Zhongtong reign (1260), after the visit of the Yuan envoy Meng Jia 孟甲 (official of the Ministry of Ritual), Chen Guangbing 陳光昺, king of Annam, sent a delegation to the Yuan court and asked for permission to pay tribute each three years. This proposal was approved.14 The text of the imperial edict issued by Khubilai Khan to Annam in 1260 was only an abstract, but the whole text can be found in the Annan zhilue 安南志 略: On 5 January 1261 (Zhongtong 1st year, 12th month, 3rd day), the Yuan delegation headed by Meng Jia, with an imperial edict, informed Chen Rijiong 陳 日煚, king of Annam, that everything would be unchanged. The edict also said that Korea’s envoys had applied for a similar condition before and that this was approved by the emperor. Annam could follow this example.15 According to the text of this imperial edict, Khubilai Khan had been informed of conditions in Annam by a local Yunnan official, whose name is written as Jiniemoding 戢聶陌丁, later corrected as Zhiniemoding 職聶陌丁 by the editor Wu Shangqing 武尚清. The name of the same official was written as Niezhi事記 (in: Qiujianji 秋澗集, juan 81) that on 30 June 1261 (Zhongtong 中統, 6th month, 2nd day) Khubilai Khan ordered the award to prince Buqa of a gilded silver seal, called “Jianchang Prince seal”, for he led the military conquest of Dali. Jianchang was another name of Yunnan (詔賜不花大王駝鈕金鍍銀印，其文曰建昌王印，時王見征戍大理諸部。建昌，雲南之 別稱也). Yuandai fenfeng zhidu yanjiu (zengdingben) 元代分封制度研究（增订本）, Beijing 2007, 357. This prince Buqa, namely Jianchang Prince, is registered in juan 108, 2748 of the Yuanshi, but no further information is given. 13 Yuanshi, juan 209, 4634. 14 Guochao wenlei, juan 41, in: Sibu congkan. 15 Annan zhilüe, 1995, juan 2, 46: ‘Da Yuan Zhaozhi’ 大元詔制 (Imperial edicts issued from the Great Yuan). 《中統元年十二月初三日世祖聖德神功文武皇帝旨諭安南國陳日煚詔》 我祖宗以武功創業， 文德未（備）[脩]。 朕纉承丕緒， 鼎新革故， （務）[撫]綏萬邦 。遂於庚申歲建元，為中統元年。誕敷詔赦，次第頒行。其不泄邇，不忘遠，誠之所 在， 事有未遑也。 適大理寺臣安撫（戢）[職]聶陌丁馳驛表聞爾邦嚮風慕義之誠， 及 念（鄉）[卿]在先朝已歸欵臣附， 遠貢方物； 故頒詔旨， 遣禮部郎中孟甲充安南宣諭 使，禮部員外郎李文俊充副使，諭本國官僚士庶：凡衣冠典禮風俗百事，一依本國舊 例，不須更改。况高麗國比遣使來請，已經下詔，悉依此例。除戒雲南等處邊將，不 得擅興兵甲， 侵掠疆埸， 撓亂人民； （鄉）[卿]國官僚士民， 各宜安治如故。 故茲詔 示，念宜知悉。

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

51

moding 聶只陌丁 in the abstract in the Yuanshi, which is a transcription of the name Najm al-Dı¯n (‘Star of the religion’). This name was also written as Nizhimading 匿只馬丁 during the Yuan. Therefore, the correct form of the name of the Yunnan local official should be Niejimoding 聶戢陌丁, namely the first character ji戢 should be put after the second character nie 聶, Zhiniemoding 職 聶陌丁 is a false transcription. As everything should keep unchanged and the six demands were not mentioned, the relations between the Yuan and Annan still remained at an initial stage during the reigns of Möngke Khaghan and the early years of Khubilai Khan. Both Yuan and Annam sources recorded the time when the Yuan court proposed the six demands to Annam. According to the imperial edict issued by Khubilai Khan,16 they were sent on July/August 1267 (7th month, Zhiyuan 至元 4th year), while according to the Yuanshi it was the 9th month (September/ October).17 According to the Gaoli shi, the Mongols proposed the six demands to Korea on 4th May 1268 (wuchen year [Zhiyuan 5th year], 3rd month, renshen).18 Based on this record, the time when the six demands were proposed to Korea is some months afterwards, but in fact on 14th January 1263 (xinyou year [Zhongtong 3rd year] 12th month, yimao), the Gaoli shi records that Khubilai Khan awarded to the Korean official Gao Rui 高汭, when the latter left the Yuan court, a calendar for Korea. He further told him that to all recently surrendered countries regardless of distance, the ancestors had established regulations, namely the duty of nazhi 納質 (sending hostages), jiminbian 籍民編 (register of inhabitants), zhiyou 置郵 (setting up postal stations), chu shilü 出師旅 (providing military troops), zhuanshu liangxiang 轉輸糧餉 (providing and transporting grain), and buzhu junchu 補助軍儲 (subsidizing military reserves).19 These are obviously just the above-mentioned six demands. This should be the earliest text referring to them. Thus, the six demands were proposed to Korea five years earlier than to Annam. Khubilai Khan mentioned that the six demands to Koryo were based on regulations set up by ancestors. The imperial edict issued in the 12th year of the Zhiyuan reign also mentions that the six demands were based on regulations established by ancestors.20 Who were these “ancestors”? Ancestor should mean a person who was a forefather of Khubilai Khan and was emperor of the Mongolian Empire. The Mongolian emperor before Kublai was his elder brother Möngke. Their father was Tolui, the youngest son of 16 17 18 19 20

Annan zhilüe, 1995, juan 2, 47. Yuanshi, juan 6, 116. Gaoli shi, juan 26. Gaoli shi, juan 25. Annan zhilüe, juan 2, 48.

52

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

Chinggis Khan, but he was never enthroned, and was thus not in a position to set the six demands. Before Möngke, his cousin Güyük had been emperor. But Güyük and Möngke belonged to the same generation as Khubilai Khan among the Chinggids, and Khubilai Khan would not call them “ancestors”. Güyük’s father Ögedei was Khubilai Khan’s uncle, but he was not a direct ancestor of Khubilai’s. Therefore, Chinggis Khan is the only possible ancestor mentioned in the imperial edicts issued by Khubilai Khan. The imperial edict issued by Khubilai Khan in 1267 mentions that the above mentioned six demands were established by Chinggis Khan.21 The Gaoli shi mentioned that in 1268, when Khubilai Khan gave orders to the Korean king, the obligations of all subordinate kingdoms were established by Chinggis Khan. These records prove that it is Chinggis Khan himself who proposed the conditions, namely the six demands. Since the six demands to the surrendered kingdoms had already existed during the time of Chinggis Khan, why were they not required from Korea and Annam when they surrendered during the regime of Möngke Khaghan or before the end of the 3rd year of the Zhongtong reign of Khubilai Khan? Possibly Möngke’s succession and the fall of the House of Ögedei did not only interrupt the order of the Khan’s succession established by Chinggis Khan, but also caused major changes in court politics and disrupted the implementation of previous policies towards subordinate kingdoms. In the early years after Khubilai’s accession to the throne, he was perhaps unfamiliar with traditional principles for handling relations with subordinate kingdoms. In addition, he focused on suppressing the chaos launched by his brother Arigh Böke阿里不哥 and the rebel Li Tan李璮 during this period. Only in the 3rd year of the Zhongtong reign, when his position was consolidated, did he understand Chinggis Khan’s policy towards surrendered kingdoms and ordered the traditional six demands be sent to Korea and Annam.

3.

The Core Terms of the six demands and The Causes for Differences

Actually, the number of the terms of the “six demands” recorded in the different sources is eight rather than six, as seen in the following table. To summarize, the six demands, recorded by the Yuan, Koryo and Annam, were different according to time and occasion. Even the same meaning was differently labelled in historical sources. The main difference lies in the content of

21 Yuanshi, juan 6, 116.

term nazhi 納 質, Sending hostages

zidi ruzhi 子 弟入質, Sending hostages

1267 至元四 年 Version 1

1 Hostages 納質

Time 1263 中统三 年

Number & Content

bian minshu 編民數, Registering inhabitants (no.3 in original)

term jimin 籍民, Counting inhabitants

term zhiyou 置 郵, Installing postal stations

2 Census of 3 Postal population stations 籍民户 設驛

chujunyi 出 軍役, Offering military help by sending troops

term chushi 出 師, Sending military troops

4 Military assistance 助戰

term zhuanshulianxiang buzhujumchu 轉輸 糧餉、補助軍儲 Providing and transporting food for military troops

5 Provision of troops 供軍食

junzhang xinchao 君 長親朝, King himself paying visit to the Yuan court (no.1 in original)

term

shuna shuifu 輸 納税賦, Paying taxes

term

6 Personal 7 Taxes visit of the 輸賦税 king to the Yuan Court 君長親朝 source Gaoli shi, juan 25, Imperial Edict of 1263 zhi daluAnnam huachi 置達 zhilüe, 魯花赤, juan 2, 47 Installing daruγacˇi (no.6 in original)

term

8 Daruγacˇi 置达鲁花赤

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

53

1268, 2nd month 至元五 年二月

Time Version 2

Number & Content

(Continued)

term zidi ruzhi 子 弟入質, Sending hostages (no.2 in original)

1 Hostages 納質

dianshu minhu 點數 民户, Counting inhabitants (no.4 in original)

term term bianmin 編 民, Registering inhabitants (no.3 in original)

2 Census of 3 Postal population stations 籍民户 設驛

5 Provision of troops 供軍食

chujun zhuzhan 出 軍助戰, Offering military help by sending troops in war (no.1 in original)

zhuanliang 轉糧, Providing food for military troops (no.2 in original)

term term chujunyi 出 軍役, Offering military help by sending troops

4 Military assistance 助戰

term junzhang laichao 君 長來朝, King himself paying visit to the Yuan court (no.1 in original)

term nafushui 納賦稅 Paying taxes (no.5 in original)

6 Personal 7 Taxes visit of the 輸賦税 king to the Yuan Court 君長親朝

qing daluhuachi, 請 達魯花赤, Inviting daruγacˇi (no.3 in original)

term zhi daluhuachi 置達 魯花赤, Installing daruγacˇi

8 Daruγacˇi 置达鲁花赤

Gaoli shi, juan 26

source Yuanshi, juan 6, 116

54 Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

term nazhi 納 質, Sending hostages (no.1 in original)

zidi nashi 子 弟納質, Sending hostages (no.2 in original)

1275 至元十 二年 Version 1

1 Hostages 納質

Time 1268, 3rd month 至元五 年三月

Number & Content

(Continued)

ji hukou 籍 戶口, Counting inhabitants (no.3 in original)

term gong hushuji 供户數 籍, Providing census of population (no.5 in original)

term sheyi 設 驛, Installing postal stations (no.4 in original)

2 Census of 3 Postal population stations 籍民户 設驛

term zhujun 助 軍, Offering military help by sending troops (no.2 in original) chujunyi 出 軍役, Offering military help by sending troops (no.4 in original)

4 Military assistance 助戰

term shuliang 輸糧, Providing food for military troops (no.3 in original)

5 Provision of troops 供軍食

junzhang qingchao 君長親朝, King himself paying visit to the Yuan court (no.1 the original)

term

zhuna shuifu 輸 納 税賦, Paying taxes (no.5 in original)

term

6 Personal 7 Taxes visit of the 輸賦税 king to the Yuan Court 君長親朝

zhi daluAnnam huachi 置達 zhilüe, 魯花赤, juan 2, 48 Installing daruγacˇi (no.6 in original)

term source Gaoli shi, zhi daluhuachi 置達 juan 26 魯花赤, Installing daruγacˇi (no.6 in original

8 Daruγacˇi 置达鲁花赤

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

55

Time Version 2

Number & Content

(Continued)

term

1 Hostages 納質

term jihu籍戶, Counting inhabitants (no.1 in original)

term lizhan立 站 Installing postal stations (no.4 in original)

2 Census of 3 Postal population stations 籍民户 設驛

term qianjun簽 軍, Offering military troops (no.3 in original)

4 Military assistance 助戰

term

5 Provision of troops 供軍食

term

term shuzu suigong 輸租歲 貢, Paying taxes and yearly tribute (no.5 in original)

6 Personal 7 Taxes visit of the 輸賦税 king to the Yuan Court 君長親朝 term zhi daluhuachi置達 魯花赤, Installing daruγacˇi (no.2 in original)

8 Daruγacˇi 置达鲁花赤

source Yuanshi, juan 8, 160

56 Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

57

the terms. There are actually eight different terms mentioning the contents of the six demands: 1. “Sending Hostages” is the expression in the Gaoli shi, but it is expressed as zidi ruzhi 子弟入質 “sending noble children and brothers as hostages” in the Annan zhilüe and in the Yuanshi. It is also mentioned as zidi nashi 子弟納質 with the same meaning. 2. “Census of population” is described in Gaoli shi as jimin 籍民 “registering inhabitants” and dianshu minhu 點數民户 “counting inhabitants” or gonghu shuji 供户數籍 “providing census of population”. However, in the Annan zhilüe it is mentioned as bianminshu 編民數 “counting inhabitants” and jihukou 籍戶口 with the same meaning. In the Yuanshi it is called bianmin 編 民 or jihu 籍戶 “registering inhabitants”. 3. “Setting up postal stations” is found in the Gaoli shi as zhiyou 置郵 “installing postal stations” or sheyi 設驛, and in the Yuanshi as lizhan 立站 with the same meaning. 4. “Proving military assistance” in the Gaoli shi is called chushi 出師 “offering military troops” and chujun zhuzhan 出軍助戰 “providing military help by sending troops to war” or zhujun 助軍with almost the same meaning, while in the Annan zhilüe and in the Yuanshi it is called chu junyi 出軍役 “offering military help by sending troops”; in the Yuanshi also as qianjun 簽軍 “offering military troops”. 5. “Supplying food for troops” is only found in the Gaoli shi as zhuanshu lianxiang buzhu junchu 轉輸糧餉、補助軍儲 “providing and transporting food for military troops”, or zhuanliang 轉糧 “providing food” or shuliang 輸 糧 “transporting food”. 6. “Personal visit to Yuan Court by the king” is the expression in the Annan zhilüe. It is called junzhang laichao 君長來朝 with the same meaning in the Yuanshi. It is not mentioned in the Gaoli shi. 7. “Taxation” in the Annan zhilüe is called shuna shufu 輸納税賦 “taxation”, in the Yuanshi it is called na shufu 納税賦 “paying taxes” or shuzu suigong 輸租 歲貢, “paying taxes and yearly tribute”. It is not mentioned in the Gaoli shi. 8. “Setting up daruγacˇis” called zhi daluhuachi 置達魯花赤, but in the Gaoli shi is also written qing daluhuachi 請達魯花赤 “inviting daruγacˇis”. What caused the different expressions of the same meaning in the six demands? The historical sources referring to the six demands mentioned were all written in Chinese. Since the six demands were originally proposed by Chinggis Khan himself, the original text should be in Mongolian. Although no historical materials have been found, mentioned or cited so far, the differences in Chinese expression could be caused by the Mongolian-Chinese translation. The diplomatic language used for communication between the Yuan, Koryo, and Annam

58

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

should be Chinese. Therefore, although the contents of the six demands recorded in the Gaoli shi and the Annan zhilüe are all in Chinese, they originally could be derived from the Chinese version of the imperial edicts, or from the Chinese oral expression of the Yuan envoys. In other words, the differences in the texts could be derived from the Mongol-Yuan side. The legacy of Chinggis Khan, namely his orders, teachings, and words is called the Yeke Jasa (dazasa 大札撒). In the event of a major ceremony, the Yuan court would order a minister to declare its content. If the six demands come from the Yeke Jasa, and according to the annals of Ögedei Khaqan in the Yuanshi, the Yeke Jasa had a text,22 then the content of the six demands required of Korea and Annam should be the same. However, the difference between the two indicates that the six demands are based on the Taizu huangdi shengzhi 太祖皇帝聖制 (Chinggis Khan’s system). According to the sources, they are not from the Yeke Jasa. Therefore, it can be speculated that if Chinggis Khan really proposed the six demands for subordinate kingdoms, its contents were never recorded in written 22 In the 8th month of the 1st year of Ögedei Khaqan (1228), the Great Jasa was issued. After this text the meaning of Great Jasa was given in a short annotation in Chinese “Grand decrees” (Yuanshi, juan 2, 29). “頒大札撒(華言大法令也)”. As for the Persian sources referring to the Yeke Yasa, see the Chinese translation of the Ta¯rı¯kh Ja¯ha¯ngusˇa¯ (Shijie zhengfuzhe shi 世界征 服者史, Huhot: Inner Mongolia People’s Publishing House 1981, vol. 1, 220). Rashı¯d al-Dı¯n wrote: “The Qa’an, when he ascended the throne of the kingdom, ordered the Yasaq, that all orders which were before given by Chinggiz Khan shall be obeyed and conserved and defended from any alternations and changes.” [tr. by Ralph Kauz] ‫ﻗﺎﺁﻥ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮﯾﺮ ﻣﻠﮏ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ ﮔﺸﺖ‬ . ‫ﺍﻭﻝ ﯾﺎﺳﺎﻕ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺖ ﺍﺣﮑﺎﻣﯽ ﮐﻪ ﭘﯿﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﯾﻦ ﭼﯿﻨﮕﮕﯿﺰ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﺩ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺎﻓﺬ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮ ﻭ ﺗﺒﺪﯾﻞ ﻣﺼﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺮﻭﺱ‬ Rashı¯d al-dı¯n Fazl Alla¯h Hamada¯nı¯, Ja¯mi‘ al-tawa¯rı¯kh, ed. by Mahim Karimı¯, Tehran ˙ Jasa was mentioned in several Yuan documents, for instance, Wang 1959, 636. The Great Yun’s 王惲, Ding fazhi 定法制(Qiujianji 秋澗集, juan 90, in: Sibu congkan), Ke Jiusi’s 柯九思 poem (Gongci 15 宮詞十五首, in: Danqiusheng ji 丹邱生集, juan 3, Guangxu 光緒 edition) and Xu Yuanrui’s 徐元瑞 Lixue zhinan 吏學指南, ed. by Yang Ne 楊訥, Hangzhou, 1988, 66; Zhiyuan gaiyuanzhao 至元改元詔, in: Yuan dianzhang 元典章, juan 1, ed. by Chen Gaohua 陳高華 e. a., Beijing 2011, 6. For studies on the Great Jasa, see David Ayalon, The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan, in Studia Islamica 33 (1971), 97–140; 34 (1971): 151–180; 36 (1972): 113–158 and 38 (1973): 107–142; Gerhard Doerfer, Türkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen IV, 1789, Wiesbaden 1985, 70–82; David O. Morgan, The ‘Great Ya¯sa¯ of Chingiz Kha¯n’ and Mongol Law in the ¯Ilkha¯nate, in: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49 (1986), 163–176 and his The “Great Ya¯sa of Chingiz Khan” Revisited, in: Reuven Amitai/Michal Biran (eds.), Mongols, Turks and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedˇ inggis Qan’s entary World, Leiden/Boston 2005; Igor de Rachewiltz, Some Reflections on C ˆJasaγ, in: East Asian History 6 (1993), 91–104. Research related to this topic published or done in China includes Qige’s 奇格, Zailun Chengjisihan dazasa 再論成吉思汗《大札撒》, in: Social Academy of Inner Mongolia 内蒙古社會科學 6 (1996), 23–28; Zhang Changli 張長利, Guanyu Chengjisihan dazasa de ruogan wenti 關於成吉思汗大札撒的若干問題, in: Minzu yanjiu 民族研究6 (1998), 92–99; Wu Haifang 吴海航, Chengjisihan dazasa tanxi 成吉思汗 《大札撒》探析, in: Faxue yanjiu 法學研究5 (1999), 136–151; Li Yunian 李玉年, Dazasa dui Yuanchao lifa de yingxian jiqi zai Zhonghua faxi zhongde diwei 《大札撒》對元朝立法的影 响及其在中華法系中的地位, in: Shilin 史林3 (2007), 77–86, 190.

The Tribute System and the Dependent States of Mongol-Yuan China

59

forms, but could have circulated among Mongolian nobles after he passed away. They circulated in this way until Khubilai Khan was enthroned, and no specific text existed. In other words, the six demands were remembered on different occasions and at different times. When the six demands were required for Korea and Annam in 1262 and 1268, during Khubilai Khan’s regime, in the 30 years between the death of Chinggis Khan and the enthronement of Khubilai Khan, they must have been mentioned repeatedly among the members of the royal families, the families of the princesses and the royal sons-in-law, and courtiers.

Bibliography David Ayalon, The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan, in: Studia Islamica 33 (1971), 97–140; 34 (1971): 151–180; 36 (1972): 113–158 and 38 (1973): 107–142. Gerhard Doerfer, Türkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, Wiesbaden 1963–1985. Fang Hui方慧, Dali zongguan duanshi shici nianli jiqi yu menggu zhengquan guanxi yanjiu大理总管段氏世次年历及其与蒙古政权关系研究 (Studies on the Governors of Dali and the Geneaology of the Duan Family and its Relationship with the Mongolian Court), Kunming 2008. Su Tianjue 蘇天爵, Guochao wenlei 國朝文類, in: Sibu congkan 四部叢刊 (www.crossasia.org). Höhe Undur 胡和温都尔, Xinban Yuanshi jiaozheng zhaji 新版元史校正札记 (Review of the New Edition of Yuanshi), in: Neimenggu shehui kexue内蒙古社會科學 (Inner Mongolia Social Sciences) 1 (1981), 59–62. Ke Jiusi’s 柯九思, Danqiusheng ji 丹邱生集, juan 3, Guangxu 光緒 edition. LI Yunian李玉年, Dazasa dui Yuanchao lifa de yingxian jiqi zai Zhonghua faxi zhongde diwei 《大札撒》對元朝立法的影响及其在中華法系中的地位, in: Shilin 史林3 (2007), 77–86, 190. Li Ze 黎崱, ed. by Wu Shangqing 武尚清, Annan zhilüe 安南志略 (Description of Annam), Beijing 1995. Li Zhian李治安, Yuandai fenfeng zhidu yanjiu 元代分封制度研究, Beijing 2007. Rashı¯d al-dı¯n Fazl Alla¯h Hamada¯nı¯, Ja¯mi‘ al-Tawa¯rı¯kh, ed. by Mahim Karimı¯, ˙ Tehran 1959. David O. Morgan, The ‘Great Ya¯sa¯ of Chingiz Kha¯n’ and Mongol Law in the ¯Ilkha¯nate, in: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49 (1986), 163–176. David O. Morgan, The “Great Ya¯sa of Chingiz Khan” Revisited, in: Reuven Amitai/Michal Biran (eds.), Mongols, Turks and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, Leiden/Boston 2005. Qige奇格, Zailun Chengjisihan dazasa 再論成吉思汗《大札撒》, in: Inner Mongolia Social Academy 内蒙古社會科學 6 (1996), 23–28. ˇ inggis Qan’s ˆJasaγ, in: East Asian History 6 Igor de Rachewiltz, Some Reflections on C (1993), 91–104. Song Lian 宋濂 (ed.), Yuanshi 元史, Beijing 1976.

60

Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝

Su Tianjue 蘇天爵 (ed.), Guochao Weilei 國朝文類, Yuan edition printed in the Zhizheng 至正 period, facsimile published in: Sibu congkan 四部叢刊. Wang Huizu 汪輝祖, Yuanshi benzheng 元史本證, Beijing 1984. Wang Yun 王惲, Qiujian ji 秋澗集, in: Sibu congkan 四部叢刊. Wu Haifang 吴海航, Chengjisihan dazasa tanxi 成吉思汗《大札撒》探析， in: Faxue yanjiu 法學研究5 (1999), 136–151. Xu Youren 許有壬, Zhizheng ji 至正集, in: Yuanren wenji zhenben congkan 元人文集珍 本叢刊, vol. 7, Taibei, 1985. Xu Yuanrui 徐元瑞 Lixue zhinan 吏學指南, ed. by Yang Ne 楊訥, Hangzhou, 1988. Yuan dianzhang 元典章, ed. by Chen Gaohua 陳高華 e. a., Beijing: Zhonghua shuju and Tianjin guji chubanshe, 2011. Zhang Changli 張長利, Guanyu Chengjisihan dazasa de ruogan wenti 關於成吉思汗大札 撒的若干問題，in: Minzu yanjiu 民族研究6 (1998), 92–99. Zheng Linzhi 鄭麟趾, Gaoli shi 高麗史 (https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=en&res=470509).

He Xinhua 何新華

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange under the Qing Tributary System

The tributary system of the Qing dynasty was composed of a series of ideas, practices and systems, including ceremonial implementation, correspondence and exchange of goods. Among them, the exchange of goods constitutes one of the important items of the tributary system of the Qing dynasty. For the exchange of Chinese and foreign goods under this tributary system, the academic community generally refers to it as ‘tribute trade’. However, the forms of exchange of Chinese and foreign goods under the tributary system of the Qing dynasty were different, and its operational mechanism was also complicated. The Qing court set up different forms of exchanges of goods for different types of countries. The general term ‘tribute trade’ does not fully apply to the exchange of all Chinese and foreign goods in the Qing dynasty. This paper attempts to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the forms of exchange of Chinese and foreign goods under the tributary system of the Qing dynasty, and examines the illusion and reality of the ‘tribute trade’ in the Qing Dynasty from the institutional level, and finally reveals the essential characteristics of the tributary system in the Qing Dynasty.

1.

Tribute and reward exchange between the Qing court and the tributary states

The Qing dynasty roughly divided the states with which it had relations into two categories: tributary and non-tributary states. The tributary states referred to those states that formally established tributary relations with the Qing dynasty. The official tributary relationship between the Qing court and these states was confirmed by a ‘document’ (biaowen 表文) produced by these states and an ‘imperial edict’ (chiyu 敕諭), similar to ‘mutual recognition’ between modern countries. These states included seven countries during the early Qing dynasty: Korea, Liuqiu 琉球, Vietnam, Siam, Lan Xang, Myanmar and Sulu. After the middle of the Qianlong period (1736–1796), the Qing court established a formal

62

He Xinhua 何新華

tributary relationship with Islamic states of Central Asia and with the Gorkha kingdom. As an important indicator for establishing tributary relations, a formal system of tribute exchanges had been created between the Qing court and the tributary states. This system contained the following provisions.

1.1.

Provisions for the occasion of offering tribute

The Qing court stipulated the regulations of tribute types as regular tribute and additional tribute. Regular tribute referred to the routine tribute to the Qing court during fixed periods. After the item and amount of the regular tribute were determined, the respective country was not allowed to change this. “When foreigners pay regular tribute, the amount must be exact.”1 Therefore, regular tribute was also known as ‘customary tribute’ (changgong 常貢) and ‘conventional tribute’ (ligong 例貢). Additional tribute could be presented on special occasions, such as celebrations, expressing gratitude and presenting a memorial to the emperor (chenzou 陳奏). This temporary increase in tribute was called ‘additional tribute’ ( jiagong 加貢). Additional tribute was also specified by items and amount. The Qing court did not treat additional tribute as strictly as regular tribute. Additional tribute items of Korea, Liuqiu, and Vietnam could also be presented after regular tribute. This is called ‘offset tribute’ (digong 抵貢). Thus, the economic burden of the tributary states could be moderately reduced.

1.2.

Provisions for tribute items and amount

The Qing court clearly stipulated the variety and quantity of regular and additional tribute and defined rigid provisions for the three core tributary countries of Korea, Vietnam, and Liuqiu. For Siam and Lan Xang, only the regular tribute is stipulated, and additional tribute was voluntary: “In the case of additional tribute, there is no quota.”2 As for Sulu, Myanmar, the Central Asian countries and Gorkha, the Qing court did not clearly stipulate the regular and additional tribute.

1 Kun Gang 崑岡 et al., Guangxu huidian 光緒會典 (Collected Statutes of the Guangxu Reign), Beijing 1991, juan 503, 830. 凡外國進貢正貢方物，自不可短少。 2 Liang Tingnan 梁廷枏, Haiguo sishuo 海國四說 (Four essays on the Maritime Countries), Beijing 1993, 176.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

63

These tributary goods regulations were not static. When the relations between the Qing court and the tributary states entered a stable period, the Qing court constantly adjusted the tributary goods. As time went on, the variety and amount of tributes lessened. The tributary goods regulations were finally established in the middle of the Qing dynasty. They are listed in the table below. Table 1: Tribute items and amount of tribute states in the Qing dynasty Polity Korea

Regular tribute (zhenggong 正貢) 1. Annual tribute (niangong 年貢): white ramie cloth, white cotton silk, red cotton silk, green cotton silk, kapok cloth, five-clawed dragon mats, patterned mats, deer skin, otter skin, waist knives, all kinds of paper, sticky rice 2. Longevity Holy Day tribute (wanshou shengjie gongwu 萬壽聖節貢 物): yellow ramie cloth, white ramie cloth, silk fabric, dragon curtain mats, different patterned mats, otter skin, white cotton paper, thick oil paper 3. New Year’s Day tribute (yuandan lingjie gongwu 元旦令節貢物): yellow ramie cloth, white ramie cloth, silk fabric, dragon curtain mats, different patterned mats, white cotton paper 4. Winter Solstice Festival tribute (dongzhi lingjie gongwu 冬至令節 貢物): the same as the New Year’s Day tribute

Additional tribute ( jiagong 加貢) 1. Tribute for congratulation and gratitude (qingjia gongwu慶 賀貢物): yellow ramie cloth, white ramie cloth, yellow silk fabric, purple fabric, white fabric, dragon curtain mats, patterned mats, all kinds of paper 2. Paying documents with tribute (chenzou gongwu 陳奏貢 物): yellow ramie cloth, white ramie cloth, yellow silk fabric, purple fabric，white fabric, dragon curtain mats, patterned mats, otter skin, green rat skin，all kinds of paper, yellow brush pens, ink stone 3. Shengjing audience the tribute (Shengjing audience tribute 盛 京接駕貢物)： leopard skin, deer skin, otter skin, green rat skin, Japanese swords, abalones, octopus, cod fish, sea cucumber, kelp, red razor clam, floating pepper, white honey, cypress seed, ginkgo, yellow chestnuts, dried persimmon

64

He Xinhua 何新華

Table 1 (Continued) Polity Liuqiu

Vietnam

Siam

Regular tribute (zhenggong 正貢) 12,600 jin of sulfur, 3,000 jin of red copper, and 1,000 jin of white steel

Additional tribute ( jiagong 加貢) 1. Expressing gratitude tribute (xie’en gongwu 謝恩貢物): no regular tributary goods 2. Tribute of students in the Imperial College expressing gratitude (guozijian liuxue xie’en gongwu 國子監留學謝 恩貢物): 3,000 sheets of folding screen paper, 50 pieces of banana cloth 3. Tribute of students returning home (liuxuesheng xuecheng guiguo xie’en gongwu 留學生 學成歸國謝恩貢物): 5,000 sheets of folding screen paper, 100 pieces of banana cloth 2 pairs of ivory, 4 rhinoceros horns, 1. Tribute for celebrations 200 pieces of native silk, 600 liang of (qinghe gongwu 慶賀貢物): fragrant incense, 1,200 liang of fragrant, 2 pairs of ivory, 4 rhinoceros’ and 90 jin of villous amomum and betel horns, 100 pieces of native silk nut 2. Paying documents with tribute (chencou, xie’en gongwu 陳奏、謝恩貢物): no regular tributary goods no regular tributary goods 1. Tributary goods for the Emperor (gongjin huangdi gongwu 恭進皇帝 貢物): elephant, ambergris, juvenile incense, rhinoceros horn, ivory, cardamom, dalbergia, garcinia, big maple, cinnamon, ebony, hematoxy, piper, camphor, catechu, catechu skin, gum bark, sulphur, sandalwood, borneol, kingfisher skin, peacock tail, broad red cloth, large Dutch felt, borneol oil, rose dew 2. Tributary goods for the Empress (gongjin huanghou gongwu 恭進皇 后貢物): half of the Emperor’s

Lan Xang Burma

two elephants no regular tributary goods

no regular tributary goods no regular tributary goods

Sulu Gul

no regular tributary goods no regular tributary goods

no regular tributary goods no regular tributary goods

Central no regular tributary goods no regular tributary goods Asian countries Source: Guangxu huidian 光緒會典 1991, juan 39, 447–448.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

1.3.

65

Reward regulations

In accordance with the principle of “there are things to pay, and the tribute must be rewarded” (wu you suochang, gong you suoshang 物有所償，貢有所賞), the Qing court rewarded the tributaries. The recipients included king, queen, tributary ambassadors, and entourage.

1.4.

Comments on the forms of tribute-reward communication in the Qing dynasty

The exchange of gifts between China and tributary states in the Qing dynasty was the most important form of exchange of Chinese and foreign articles, reflecting the characteristics of the suzerain-vassal hierarchy of the Qing dynasty tributary system. Emperor Qianlong believed that this kind of tribute exchange “will connect China with other countries and their feelings, unveil the unification of all the world, and has far-reaching intentions.”3 In the form of tribute-reward communication, the tribute embodied a strong political meaning: First, the contributing tribute was to a certain extent mandatory. The tribute of Korea in the early Qing dynasty could even be considered war compensation. Second, the tribute was a symbol of the country’s recognition of China as the suzerain state. The tribute symbolized a unified system of the world, established by the Qing court. Third, the tribute derived from the native sources. The principle “Your tribute is what your land produces” (rentu zuogong 任土作貢) had important political significance. The locality of the tribute shows the central kingdom’s symbolic jurisdiction over the tribute. Fourth, the use of tribute went beyond the meaning of the article itself. The Zuozhuan 左傳 (Commentary of Zuo), 4th year of Duke Xi (656 BC) records, “The tribute does not enter the king, the king sacrifice is not available.” (ergong baomao buru, wangji bugong 爾貢包茅不入，王祭不供) The tribute had an irreplaceable role in the ritual ceremony. Tribute such as elephants, spices, paper, and cloth were used in court etiquette, rituals and daily imperial consumption, and became part of the imperial power re-production process of the Qing dynasty. It played an extremely important role in the political legitimacy of the Qing dynasty. In return for tribute, the gifts of the Qing court also reflected the remuneration system between the guests and the host under the traditional hierarchy. The rewards followed the principle of “giving more and getting less” (houwang baolai 厚往薄來) in value to realize the political purpose of “cherishing people from 3 Fu Heng 傅恒 et al., Xiyu tuzhi jiaozhu 西域圖志校注 (Gazetteer of the Western Regions, Edited and Annotated), ed. Zhong Xingqi 鐘興麒 et al., Urumqi 2002, 466.

66

He Xinhua 何新華

afar and make them obedient” (huai yuanren ze sifang guizhi 懷遠人則四方歸 之). Although the tribute relationship formed a material exchange relationship, it did not entail trade. From the Qing court’s point of view, the tribute had never been viewed from the perspective of commercial interests. “No matter if the tribute is valuable or not, its importance is the heart of its sincerity.”4 When the tribute was lost due to shipwrecks, etc. the Qing did not require replenishment, but still gave compensation. Additional tribute was allowed as the next regular tribute by the Qing court without any commercial considerations. For some peripheral tributary countries there may have existed commercial motives, but for Korea, Vietnam, Liuqiu and other major tributaries such motives were not the most important factor. Hae-Jong Chun evaluated the tribute and reward system of the Qing dynasty between China and Korea, “Obviously, there is no sufficient economic reason for the Chinese rulers to create and maintain such a grand institutional history.”5

2.

Trade exchange between the Qing court and the Tributary states

In addition to the tribute exchange, the exchange of goods between the Qing court and tributary states had four forms: trade in the Huitong guan 會同館, trade at ports of entry, permanent border trade and Sino-Siam rice trade. Table 2: Forms of trade exchange between the Qing court and tributary states Forms of trade Duration exchange Huitong guan 3–5 days

Place Beijing Huitong guan

Ports of Entry Permanent Border Trade

30–40 days Fuzhou, Xiamen, Guangzhou Fixed time each year China/Korea, Vietnam, Myanmar, Gorkha, and other border areas of countries

Sino-Siam rice trade

Yongzheng and Qianlong periods

Fujian, Zhejiang, Guangdong

4 Qing Shengzu shilu 清聖祖實錄 (Qing Veritable Records [Shengzu]), Beijing 1985, juan124, 313 (12 Feb 1686, Shengzu, 25th year, 1st month, yihai). 夫貢物何足珍貴，正鑒其誠敬之心 耳。 5 Hae-Jong Chun, Sino-Korean Tributary Relations in the Ch’ing Period, in: John King Fairbank (ed), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968, 90–111, here 110.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

2.1.

67

Trade in the Huitong guan

Trade in the Huitong guan referred to the merchandise trade that the tribute mission carried out at the building a few days before the tribute mission in Beijing was finished. The tribute mission carried many goods for tribute, but some goods were carried for sale. All goods would be exempted from customs duties. Tributary states were only allowed to trade for 3–5 days in the Huitong guan, but Korea and Liuqiu could trade without time restrictions.6 The Qing court also did not levy taxes on trade in the Huitong guan.

2.2.

Trade at ports of entry

Trade at the port of entry referred to the trade of goods there after the main part of the embassy left for Beijing. The Qing court limited the size of the personnel allowed to journey on to the capital: While missions roughly numbered between 100 and 200, only 20–30 of them were allowed to enter Beijing. Most of the personnel thus remained at the port of entry and waited for the tribute mission to return for the journey home. These foreigners also had numerous goods, and the Qing court allowed transactions on-site conducted by local middlemen, and a special tax rate or total exemption from taxation. We read in the Guangxu huidian: “The goods carried by the tributaries are exempted from taxation. It is monitored by the governor of the border province. When the border trade goes on, buyers and sellers are not allowed to transact on credit, delay payment and conduct private deals.”7

2.3.

Permanent border trade

Permanent border trade referred to fixed trading areas between the Qing court and the land-bound tributary states. It opened at a fixed time every year. The Qing court usually set up checkpoints at border crossings to supervise envoys and merchants and established custom relations with the regions bordering Korea, Vietnam, Myanmar, Gorkha and Central Asia. Starting in the early Qing dynasty China and Korea agreed to trade in the three markets of Zhongjiang 中江, Huining 會甯 and Qingyuan 慶源 on the border of 6 Kun Gang 崑岡 et al., Guangxu huidian 光緒會典 (Collected Statutes of the Guangxu Reign), Beijing 1936, juan 39, 452. 7 Ibid. 貢船往來所帶貨物，俱停其徵稅。其就邊境貿易者，該督撫委員監視。鋪戶商行人 等，不得賒買拖延及私相交易。

68

He Xinhua 何新華

Shengjing 盛京. The Qing court sent officers to supervise the trade, and each transaction was limited to 20 days. In the border areas of China and Vietnam, China established Ping’er 平而, You’ai 由隘 and Shuikou 水口 in Guangxi as markets in the early Qianlong period. In the border areas of China and Myanmar were markets in Lao Guantun, Xinjie and Manmo on the Myanmar side. Chinese and Burmese traveled regularly there for trade. Border trade between China and Central Asia began in the 24th year of Qianlong (1759). As the rule of the Qing court in the North and South of the Tianshan mountains gradually consolidated, it allowed merchants from Central Asian countries to trade in Uch Turfan, Kashgar, and Yarkand. The tax rate for ordinary commodities was 30 %, for satin cloth and fur goods 5 %.8 In order to facilitate management, the Qing court authorized a representative in Kashgar to be selected to conduct trade activities with China. The formal border trade between China and South Asian countries began after the Qing military expedition to Nepal in the late Qianlong period, but trade between Tibet and Nepal had existed before. The 29 articles “Imperially Approved Ordinance for More Efficient Governing of Tibet” (Qinding Cangnei shanhou zhangcheng 欽定藏內善後章程) formulated in the 58th year of Emperor Qianlong (1793) re-established trade between Tibet and Nepal, allowing Nepalese businessmen to come to Tibet three times a year.

2.4.

The Sino-Siam rice trade

During the Yongzheng (1723–1735) and Qianlong periods, the Qing court had repeatedly conducted a special rice trade with Siam. The Siam rice trade originated from the method of using it as ballast cargo by Siam tribute ships. It was initially sold at Guangzhou and was construed to be part of the border trade in the frame of the tribute system. In the last years of Emperor Kangxi (1662–1722), the Qing court developed this border rice trade as a normal commercial trade activity outside the normal tribute period. During the Qianlong period, a considerable amount of rice in Siam was shipped to Fujian, Guangdong, and Zhejiang for sale, and the Qing court granted tax exemptions or preferential tax rates. In the second half of the Qianlong period, the Qing court ended the rice trade with Siam.

8 Xiyu tuzhi jiaozhu 西域圖志校注2002, 472.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

2.5.

69

Comments on the trade exchange between the Qing court and Tributary states

Among the above four forms of trade between China and tributary states, the trade of Huitong guan and trade at ports of entry belonged to the system of tributary missions. The permanent trade at the border was only allowed after the establishment of official tributary relationships between China and foreign countries. Officially, these trading activities were conducted because of political, and not of commercial, reasons. All three forms of trade existed on the basis of tributary relationships. Although the rice trade between Siam and the Qing court could be considered to be commercial, the limitation to rice cannot be regarded as typical for the exchange system between the Qing dynasty and the tributary states. The various forms of trade exchanges between China and tributary states were basically byproducts of the tributary system of the Qing dynasty.

3.

The trade system between the Qing court and the non-tributary states

China also had foreign relations with non-tributary countries. Although these countries did not establish formal tributary relations with the Qing court, they had official contacts with China. Non-tributary states of China in the Qing dynasty mainly referred to European countries. The Qing courts did not regard European countries as countries belonging to the ‘Western Regions’ of the geographical tradition but classified them among the Southern maritime countries with Southeast Asian countries because they entered China by the southern waters. Russia was regarded as a Northern country. Takashi Hamashita commented on this arrangement: “From the standpoint of the tributary trade system, the Qing didn’t treat the western countries as an independent category, but geographically put them in the periphery of adjacent tributary system to be included in the overall tributary system.”9 On the basis of the traditional control of relations with countries, the Qing court established the Canton system10 in 9 Takashi Hamashita, Jindai Zhongguo de guoji qiji: chaogong maoyi tixi yu jindai Yazhou jingjiquan 近代中國的國際契機： 朝貢貿易體系與近代亞洲經濟圈 (International Opportunities in Modern China: the Tribute-Trade System and the Modern Asian Economic Circle), trans. by Zhu Yingui 朱蔭貴, Ouyang Fei 歐陽菲, Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1999, 44 (Jp. Original Ed. To¯kyo¯ 1990). 10 Some researchers name the Canton system as the ‘Guangdong system’ (see Cao Wen 曹雯, Qingdai Guangdong tizhi zaiyanjiu 清代廣東體制再研究 (Re-study of Guangdong System in the Qing Dynasty), in: Qingshi yanjiu 清史研究 (Qing History Research) 2 (2006), 82–96, but

70

He Xinhua 何新華

Guangzhou (Canton) for countries such as the United Kingdom, and the Kyakhta system in Kyakhta, especially for Russia. These two systems constituted together the trade framework between European countries and the Qing dynasty.

3.1.

The Canton system

European countries which traded with China by the Southern sea included the Netherlands, Portugal, Britain, France, Sweden and others.11 The trade system between China and these countries in the Qing dynasty developed from a ‘four trading ports system’ in the Kangxi period to a ‘single port (Guangzhou) trading system’ in the middle of the Qianlong period. In the twenty-fourth year of Emperor Kangxi (1685), the emperor issued an imperial edict that the Qing would abolish the ban on maritime trade, and allow European countries to trade in Guangdong, Fujian, Zhejiang, and Jiangsu. The Qing court set up four custom offices in these provinces. In the 22nd year of Emperor Qianlong (1757), the emperor sent a secret order to the governor of Guangdong and Guangxi, Li Shiyao 李侍堯, and the governor of Fujian and Zhejiang, Yang Yingju 楊應琚: “All foreign traders must be told that trading will be limited to Guangdong, and not to trade any longer in Zhejiang…Guangdong province is densely populated, and most of the coastal residents make a living by foreign ships. There are not only 26 hongs in Guangzhou, but there is also military defense in Humen and Huangpu. Compared with Ningbo where ships can go straight inland without hindrance, the situation in Guangdong is different. Trade only in Guangdong will be the best choice.”12 According to the edict, the local officials in Guangzhou immediately announced that foreign businessmen could only trade in Guangzhou, and they were not allowed to go to Zhejiang or other locations. The trading place for European countries was eventually fixed to be Guangzhou. The Canton system was a unilateral stipulation of the Qing dynasty on the trade of European countries in China. These regulations were typical for the “The Rules of Guarding against Foreigners” (fangfan yiren zhangcheng 防範夷人章 this title is debatable, and it may come from the mistake of English ‘Canton’ pronunciation or misinterpretation of the Japanese ‘Guangdong’. Zhong Jianfeng 鈡劍峰 pointed out that “modern Japanese officials have two titles of ‘Guangzhou’ and ‘Guangdong’ for Guangzhou. […] It is customary to call Guangzhou ‘Guangdong city’”. See Zhong Jianfeng 鈡劍峰, Guangdong shenshe kaolüe 廣東神社考略 (Study on the Guangdong Shrine), in: Riben yanjiu 日本研究 (Japan Studies) 4 (2016), 64–73, here 65. 11 The Netherlands and Portugal were once official tributaries during the Kangxi period. Later, the Qing court removed the two countries from the ranks of ‘tributary countries’. 12 Qing Gaozong shilu 清高宗實錄 (Qing Veritable Records [Gaozong]), Beijing 1986, juan 550, 1023 (20 Dec 1757, Gaozong, 22nd year, 11th month, wuxu).

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

71

程).13 The Canton system was not bound by bilateral treaties, but was based on China’s unilateral regulations, statutes, and practices. In terms of legal significance, the Canton system defined and managed trade with European countries in accordance with China’s domestic law. The only right of foreign merchants under this system was to faithfully perform the provisions stipulated by the Qing court. In personal life and commercial trade no trespassing was allowed. During the Canton system, neither Portugal, the Netherlands in the earlier period, nor Britain, France and other countries in the later period, had signed an official treaty with China. Hudson commented on this: “The conditions of trade at Canton in the 18th century gave rise to a situation of great difficulty which was only resolved in the course of the 19th. There were first all the troubles due to the subjection of Europeans to Chinese law and administrative action without any diplomatic intercourse or formal treaty arrangements with Peking.”14

3.2.

The Kyakhta system

The Qing court distinguished Russia from other European countries. Russia was regarded by the Qing court as a large inland country in the North and was thus rated higher than the United Kingdom and other countries. In the early Qing dynasty, Russia was allowed to set up a trading house in Beijing. Russia also regularly sent commercial delegations to Beijing to trade, forming a unique Russian commercial trading system in the early Qing dynasty. In the fifth year of Yongzheng (1727), China and Russia signed the ‘Treaty of Kyakhta’ for the settlement of border issues, which included four aspects: borders, trade, religion, and handling of transgressors.15 In terms of trade, the two countries decided to establish a market on the border at Kyakhta. Kyakhta belonged to the territory of the left-winged flag of the Xietu 謝圖 Khan in the Khalkha Mongolian territory. It was located on the east bank of the Sejig River and 800 miles south of Kulun city. Kyakhta was but sparsely settled in the early years of Emperor Kangxi, but this changed largely during the Yongzheng period. In the sixth year of Emperor Yongzheng (1728), Kyakhta opened up to international trade for the first time and started Sino-Russian trade which lasted for nearly two centuries. After the formation of the Kyakhta system, the trade of the Russian merchant group in Beijing gradually declined. In the 57th year of Em13 Song-Chuan Chen, Merchants of War and Peace: British Knowledge of China in the Making of the Opium War, Hong Kong 2017, 48. 14 Geoffrey Francis Hudson, Europe and China: A Survey of their Relations from the Earliest Times to 1800, London 1931, 261. 15 Zhongwai jiuyuezhang huibian 中外舊約章彙編 (The Compilation of Former Treaties between China and Foreign Countries), vol. 1, ed. Wang Tieya 王鉄崖, Beijing 1957, 8–9.

72

He Xinhua 何新華

peror Qianlong (1792), China and Russia signed the ‘Kyakhta Trade Agreement’ to further improve the Kyakhta trading system. The Sino-Russian Kyakhta trade continued until the early 20th century. For the management of Kyakhta trade, the Qing court set up a surveillance office, subordinate to the grand minister superintendent of Kulun. In the process of trade in Kyakhta, Chinese and Russian businessmen met directly and did not use intermediaries and translators. The Kyakhta system was different from the Guangzhou system because it was based on two official treaties of China and Russia: the Kyakhta Treaty and the Kyakhta Trade Agreement. The latter particularly stipulated that the Chinese and Russian governments must “strictly control” their merchants, and the mutual trade must be “immediately clear on account and without debt.” If disputes arose between two sides, the border officials of both sides would punish their own people respectively after examining the nationality by a joint trial.16 From this point of view, the Kyakhta system originated the treaty system.

3.3.

Comments on the two trading systems

The Canton system and the Kyakhta system set up by the Qing dynasty were not a privilege granted to Britain or Russia, but rather corresponded with the traditional Chinese jimi 羈縻 (lose control) strategy. The premise of this jimi strategy was that the European countries were greedy and materialistic barbarians. The Qing court provided certain benefits to European countries and attempted to control the European countries by a strict trading system. In the Qing tributary system, the status of European countries was not only inferior to that of Korea, Vietnam, and Liuqiu, but even inferior to countries such as Central Asia and Gorkha. The Qing court did not give any political status to European countries, but the two sides just established a relationship through low-level economic exchanges. The trade system became the only bridge connecting China and the West in the Qing dynasty. In the 35th year of Qianlong (1770), the Emperor once commented on the Kyakhta system: “Russia is rich, but for tea, cloth, and other things it relies on us. And every year, the trade is so profitable that Russia requires trade with China. If we close the entries, China can control it as much as we want.”17 Whether Guangzhou or Kyakhta, the Qing court could close them at any time for political reasons, and European merchants might be expelled at any time. During the Qianlong period, the Qing court closed the Kyakhta market 16 Zhongwai jiuyuezhang huibian 中外舊約章彙編 1957, 29–30. 17 Qing Gaozong shilu 清高宗實錄 juan 871, 682 (9 Dec 1770, Gaozong, 35th year, 10th month, yimo).

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

73

three times. During the Daoguang period, the Qing court also closed the Guangzhou market due to the William John Lord Napier Event. “Closing the markets” was the main means of punishing barbarians in China’s tributary system. In general, these two sets of trading systems with European countries were mainly based on political principles rather than economic purposes. In the first paragraph of the Treaty of Kyakhta, the Qing court declared in a clear and unambiguous manner, “China had no interest in the Kyakhta mutual market at first, and the great emperor loves all sentient beings and could bear embarrassing Russia.”18 This kind of commercial trade activity had rather restrictive conditions, and was an institutional arrangement that reflected the essence of tribute: “The overall structure of the Qing dynasty mutual market system must be closed-restricted rather than open-mutual benefit. It must reflect the benevolence and prestige of the Heavenly Kingdom. This principle of setting is exactly the same as the tributary system.”19 Therefore, although the Canton system and the Kyakhta system were trading systems, they had very strong political and cultural implications. This extra-economic component is an important feature of tribute trade.

4.

Conclusion

In summary, there were a total of seven forms of exchange of Chinese and foreign articles in the Qing dynasty. There were five forms with tributary states and two forms with the non-tributary states. How to assess the nature of these exchanges between Chinese and foreign goods and determine the path and theoretical direction of the tributary system in the Qing dynasty: was it political or economic? If the exchange of these Chinese and foreign goods was examined as part of the trade system under the modern market economy, the tributary system would be regarded as a trade arrangement. Takashi Hamashita regards the exchange of Chinese and foreign goods in the Qing dynasty the same as modern international trade, and believes that “the fundamental point of the tributary system was originally supported by trade relations.”20, and also “The fundamental characteristic of tribute is that it is an activity carried out by commercial trade.”21 In fact, 18 Zhongwai jiuyuezhang huibian中外舊約章彙編 1957, 29. 恰克圖互市于中國初無利益，大 皇帝普愛眾生，不忍爾國小民困窘。 19 Wang Licheng 王立誠, Zhongguo jindai waijiao zhidushi中國近代外交制度史 (History of China’s Modern Diplomatic System), Lanzhou 1991, 23. 20 Takashi Hamashita 1999, 39. 21 Ibid., 38.

74

He Xinhua 何新華

this is a judgment of causal inversion. The tributary system of the Qing dynasty did not exist at all due to trade, but trade was attached to the tributary system. The main driving force behind the tributary system in the Qing dynasty was not the principle of trade. Regarding the essence of the tributary system as trade will lead to a misunderstanding of the Qing tributary system. This is a fundamental misunderstanding because it ignores the most essential political feature of the Qing tributary system. Attempts to use modern economic theories such as the trade circle and the international economic division of labor to explain the tributary system are not only inapplicable, but it is an inaccurate way to explain the tributary system. Regarding the relationship between trade and the tributary system, Mark Mancall asserted that equating the tributary system with trade and commerce was wrong: “To misread tribute simply as a cover for trade, and to understand trade as a purely commercial activity, is to distort the nature of the traditional institutions of the East Asian international order.”22 Rethinking the reasons for seeing the Qing tributary system as a trade system can be explored both academically and realistically. From the perspective of methodology, using modern economic theory to analyze the ancient tributary system with a long history of self-containment is ‘non-historical’, Gao Mingshi once pointed out: “Foreign scholars have interpreted tribute as commercial trading transactions, and called them ‘tribute trade.’ This is because historical issues are not treated historically.”23 From the perspective of real politics, some scholars from China’s neighboring countries are more willing to regard the tributary system as an economic system and equal economic relations replaced the ancient Chinese-centered hierarchy and played down the role of China as a tribute-receiving state. But China also had a tendency to regard the tributary system as an economic system. According to the classification criteria of the Chinese Library Classification (Fifth Edition), the book publications on the study of the tributary system in China are mainly classified into D829 (Chinese diplomatic history, history of foreign relations) and F752.9 (China’s foreign trade). Between these two major categories, the latter being more than the former, and a small number being included in K2/K3 (history). This classification completely ignores the fact that some books mainly involve politics, culture, and diplomacy and force them into the category of ‘trade’. It clearly shows that the Chinese academic circles have mainstream views on the nature of the tributary system as a foreign trade system, and basically form a mindset. “‘Tributary trade relation22 Mark Mancall, The Ch’ing Tribute System: An Interpretive Essay, in: John King Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968, 63–89, here 79. 23 Gao Mingshi 高明士, Tianxia zhixu yu wenhuaquan de tansuo: yi Dongya gudai de zhengzhi yu jiaoyu wei zhongxin 天下秩序與文化圈的探索︰以東亞古代的政治與教育為中心 (Exploration of the Order of the World and the Cultural Circle: Centering on Politics and Education in Ancient East Asia), Shanghai 2008, 24.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

75

ship’ has almost become synonymous with the ‘tributary relationship’, and the two are used interchangeably.”24 Some Chinese scholars have studied ‘trade’ of the tributary system in order to avoid unnecessary ‘historical burdens’ when dealing with neighboring countries due to the ‘political nature’ of the tributary system, and, by depoliticizing the nature of the tributary system in the historical period, they achieve the ‘political correctness’ of modern international relations. What’s more, some researchers have also looked at the seeds of ancient capitalism in China by considering these forms of exchange of Chinese and foreign goods as a commodity economy. As a large-scale and comprehensive system, the tributary system of the Qing dynasty cannot deny its economic aspects. However, these economic aspects cannot determine that the essence of the tributary system is a trade system. Similarly, despite exchanges of gifts such as bride price and dowry, the marriage system cannot be regarded as an economic system. The essence of the tributary system in the Qing dynasty was political, because of the following reasons: 1) The ancient Chinese system was based on politics. Under the ancient Chinese traditional system, the economy was attached to politics. “Economic relations could be formally permitted only within this political framework.”25 In the Qing dynasty, there was no market economic system in China. Under the principle of internal and external consistency, the Qing court could not allow an external commercial system inconsistent with the internal. “The Chinese tended to think of their foreign relations as giving expression externally to the same principles of social and political order that were manifested internally within the Chinese state and society.”26 Qian Mu pointed out that “we should study economic history from political history and social history, and study economic thought from political and social thoughts, and study economic systems from political and social systems.”27 2) The exchange of tribute under the tributary system of the Qing dynasty was a political interaction that fully reflected the political principles of suzerainvassal relations. It is obviously not correct to regard it as an economic activity. Other forms of trade were not normal market trade systems, and their operating mechanisms were highly dependent on political principles. They were 24 Qi Meiqin 祁美琴, Dui Qingdai chaogong tizhi diwei de zairenshi 對清代朝貢體制地位的再 認識 (Re-thinking of the Tributary System in the Qing Dynasty), in: Zhongguo bianjiang shidi yanjiu 中國邊疆史地研究 (Chinese Borderland History and Geography Research) 1 (2006), 47–55, here 49. 25 John King Fairbank, A Preliminary Framework, in: John King Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968, 4. 26 Ibid., 2. 27 Qian Mu 錢穆, Zhongguo lishi yanjiu fa 中國歷史研究法 (The Research Method of Chinese History), Beijing 2001, 71.

76

He Xinhua 何新華

highly ‘politicized’ trade relations, and the resulting so-called overseas trade commodity market network was very fragile, but also the spatial distribution of the market was fragmented, and there was no complete and organic circulation chain in the relationship between supply and demand of goods. As Wu Xinbo pointed out: “The ancient world and the modern world have one difference that due to the limitations of production methods and technologies, the central state and many peripheral countries cannot constitute an international trading system in any sense. They are mainly a political and cultural relationship.”28 One of the biggest logical loopholes in the tributary trade circle theory is to confuse official with private trade. If there was a real ‘trade circle’ in the Ming and Qing dynasties, it was at most a civilian or smuggling trade. “In this period, China’s overseas trading system can be attributed to the private spontaneous mode…The driving force of this overseas trading system is private overseas traders and smuggling traders.”29 This kind of private overseas trade network was an organic part of China’s ancient foreign trade, but it was unofficial and ‘anti-tribute’ in nature, which was beyond the scope of the official tributary system of the Ming and Qing dynasties. 3) As a system, the Qing tributary system showed comprehensive characteristics. It embraced elements such as etiquette, culture, security, politics, and economy. If only the economic element was extracted from the entire tributary system and regarded as the main factor determining the entire nature of the tributary system, the other more important elements would be ignored. Among all the elements that make up the tributary system, economy was placed in a secondary position after politics and etiquette. In the current academic world, the economic framework is generally used to interpret the tributary system, ‘tribute trade’ is the product of this research framework. But the meaning of this concept is not only broad, but also conceptually ambiguous: sometimes it refers to a specific type of transaction, sometimes to all types of transactions, and sometimes to the entire tributary system. This has led to confusion in the logical relationship between ‘tributary system’ and ‘tribute trade’. In fact, ‘tribute trade’ is only a part of the tributary system. 4) Finally, the character of the tributary system in the Qing dynasty should be determined mainly by the Qing court, the dominant player of the tributary 28 Wu Xinbo 武心波, Riben yu Dongya “chaogong tixi” 日本與東亞“朝貢體系”(Japan and East Asia’s “Tributary System”), in: Guoji guancha 國際觀察 (International Observations) 6 (2003), 60–66, here 60. 29 Zhang Naihe 張乃和, Jindai zaoqi Zhong Ying haiwai maoyi shichang tixi fayu zhi bijiao 近 代早期中英海外貿易市場體系發育之比較 (A Comparison on the Development of Overseas Trade Market System in Early Modern China and England), in: Beifang luncong 北方論 叢 (Northern Discussion Series) 6 (2003), 56–60, here 60.

Political or Economic? A Systematical Investigation of the Forms of Goods Exchange

77

system. In the hierarchical system that constituted the center and edge of the tributary relationship in the Qing dynasty, only the center was in a dominant position, and the edge was subordinate. Some tributary states in the Qing dynasty traded under the guise of tribute, and it is easy to understand tribute as trade. But it must be pointed out that this is a unilateral explanation. The Qing court never regarded the tributary system as an economic system, and the Qing court itself was clearly politically oriented to the tributary system. Judging from the formation process of this system, it was also a political process. The Chinese rulers supported tribute because it bolstered their prestige and their political influence. The most important tributary countries such as Korea, Vietnam, and Liuqiu also sought to bolster the legitimacy of their dynasties and enhance their international status in the East Asian world, which was centered on China by the tributary system. In short, the interpretation of the tributary system of the Qing dynasty should be carried out in the context of the ancient Chinese traditional context and the internal system of the Qing dynasty. Only if this is observed, can one get closer to the reality of the Qing dynasty tributary system. In the system of exchange of Chinese and foreign articles in the Qing dynasty, both the articles in the exchange of tribute and the articles of trade transcended the article itself and had greater significance for morality, ethics, and etiquette.

Bibliography Primary Sources Guangxu huidian 光緒會典 (Collected Statutes of the Guangxu Reign), by Kun Gang 崑岡 et al., Beijing 1991. Guangxu huidian 光緒會典 (Collected Statutes of the Guangxu Reign), by Kun Gang 崑岡 et al., Beijing 1936. Haiguo sishuo 海國四說 (Four essays on the Maritime Countries), by Liang Tingnan 梁廷 枏, Beijing 1993. Qing Gaozong shilu 清高宗實錄 (Qing Veritable Records [Gaozong]), Beijing 1986. Qing Shengzu shilu 清聖祖實錄 (Qing Veritable Records [Shengzu]), Beijing 1985. Xiyu tuzhi jiaozhu 西域圖志校注 (Gazetteer of the Western Regions, Edited and Annotated), by Fu Heng 傅恒 et al., ed. Zhong Xingqi 鐘興麒 et al., Urumqi 2002. Zhongwai jiuyuezhang huibian 中外舊約章彙編 (The Compilation of Former Treaties between China and Foreign Countries), vol. 1, ed. Wang Tieya 王鉄崖, Beijing 1957.

78

He Xinhua 何新華

Secondary Sources Cao Wen 曹雯, Qingdai Guangdong tizhi zaiyanjiu 清代廣東體制再研究 (Re-study of Guangdong System in the Qing Dynasty), in: Qingshi yanjiu 清史研究 (Qing History Research) 2 (2006), 82–96. Chen, Song-Chuan, Merchants of War and Peace: British Knowledge of China in the Making of the Opium War, Hong Kong 2017. Gao Mingshi 高明士, Tianxia zhixu yu wenhuaquan de tansuo: yi Dongya gudai de zhengzhi yu jiaoyu wei zhongxin 天下秩序與文化圈的探索︰以東亞古代的政治與 教育為中心 (Exploration of the Order of the World and the Cultural Circle: Centering on Politics and Education in Ancient East Asia), Shanghai 2008. Geoffrey Francis Hudson, Europe and China: A Survey of their Relations from the Earliest Times to 1800, London 1931. Hae-Jong Chun, Sino-Korean Tributary Relations in the Ch’ing Period, in: John King Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968, 90–111. John King Fairbank, A Preliminary Framework, in: idem (ed.), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968. Mark Mancall, The Ch’ing Tribute System: An Interpretive Essay, in: John King Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, New York 1968, 63–89. Qi Meiqin 祁美琴, Dui Qingdai chaogong tizhi diwei de zairenshi 對清代朝貢體制地位的 再認識 (Re-thinking of the Tributary System in the Qing Dynasty), in: Zhongguo bianjiang shidi yanjiu 中國邊疆史地研究 (Chinese Borderland History and Geography Research) 1 (2006), 47–55. Qian Mu 錢穆, Zhongguo lishi yanjiu fa 中國歷史研究法 (The Research Method of Chinese History), Beijing 2001. Takashi Hamashita, Jindai Zhongguo de guoji qiji: chaogong maoyi tixi yu jindai Yazhou jingjiquan 近代中國的國際契機：朝貢貿易體系與近代亞洲經濟圈 (International Opportunities in Modern China: the Tribute-Trade System and the Modern Asian Economic Circle), trans. by Zhu Yingui 朱蔭貴, Ouyang Fei 歐陽菲, Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1999, 44 (Jp. Original Ed. To¯kyo¯ 1990). Wang Licheng 王立誠, Zhongguo jindai waijiao zhidushi 中國近代外交制度史 (History of China’s Modern Diplomatic System), Lanzhou 1991. Wu Xinbo 武心波, Riben yu Dongya “chaogong tixi” 日本與東亞“朝貢體系” (Japan and East Asia’s “Tributary System”), in: Guoji guancha 國際觀察 (International Observations) 6 (2003), 60–66. Zhang Naihe 張乃和, Jindai zaoqi Zhong Ying haiwai maoyi shichang tixi fayu zhi bijiao 近代早期中英海外貿易市場體系發育之比較 (A Comparison on the Development of Overseas Trade Market System in Early Modern China and England), in: Beifang luncong 北方論叢 (Northern Discussion Series) 6 (2003), 56–60. Zhong Jianfeng 鈡劍峰, Guangdong shenshe kaolüe 廣東神社考略 (Study on the Guangdong Shrine), in: Riben yanjiu 日本研究 (Japan Studies) 4 (2016), 64–73.

Chia Ning

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty: From Mechanism of Empire-Building to Origins of the Dynastic Fall

The Qing (1636–1911) tribute system was a ritualized governing institution, essential to the early Qing’s construction and the late Qing’s destruction. The effect of the tribute system on the dynasty’s vicissitudes needs a deeper scholarly exploration. Some unnoticed or less-noticed critical issues will help advance such an exploration. The early Qing tribute system upheld a hierarchically-structured regional order and a China-centered market network, which connected three geo-political zones to China proper, where the Qing capital was located. In the first zone, Inner Asia, the tribute system significantly assisted to incorporate Mongolia, Tibet, Xinjiang, Qinghai and the hunting population (Solon in Heilongjiang and Urangkhai in Western Mongolia).1 The incorporation of these highly diverse Inner Asian societies as tributaries was unusual in China’s lengthy history.2 In the second zone, Asia, the Qing claimed a total of 37 polities, although it did not seek direct rule over them, and the pre-Qing tribute model continued. The seven polities most intimately (though unequally) connected to the Qing were Korea in the east, Ryukyu and Sulu (蘇祿, Philippines) in the southeast, Annan (安南, Vietnam) and Xianluo (暹羅, Thailand) in the south, Miandian (緬甸, Burma) and Nanzhang (南掌, Laos) in the southwest.3 A zone beyond Asia derived from 1 Chia Ning, Lifanyuan and Libu in Early Qing Empire Building, and Lifanyuan and Libu in the Qing Tribute System, in: Dittmar Schorkowich/Chia Ning (eds.), Managing the Frontier in Qing China: Lifanyuan and Libu Revisited, Boston 2016, 43–69 and 144–184; Chia Ning, Xining banshi dachen yu yongzheng shiqi Qinghai duominzu quyu guanli zhidu zhi xingcheng 西寧辦事大臣與雍正時期青海多民族區域管理制度之形成 (The Grand Minister Resident of Xining and the Qing Administration in the Highly Diverse Qinghai), in: Qingshi yanjiu 3 (2012), 57–70; and The Solon Sable Tribute, Hunters of Inner Asia and Dynastic Elites at the Imperial Center, in: Inner Asia 20/1 (2018), 26–63. 2 The Mongol Yuan can be the only comparable dynasty in this regard, but Yuan did not integrate all parts of the Qing Inner Asia. 3 Qinding daqing huidian 欽定大清會典 (The Emperor-Edited Collected Statutes of the Great Qing), 56 “Libu zhuke qinglisi” 禮部主客清吏司 (Bureau of Receiving the Guest of the Board of Rites), https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=352853 (14. 08. 2018).

80

Chia Ning

the European missionaries and merchants who had landed on China’s southern coast beginning in 1514. To the Ming-Qing rulers the distant European countries were imaginable by the all-under-heaven (tianxia 天下) concept but were impossible to reach and influence. Thus, the Qing tribute administration was not a unified managing system, but rather took different and deviating paths to manage, engage, act, and interact with the three distinct zones. There were four kinds of tributary status under two governing institutions in the Qing system. The Lifanyuan 理藩院, the Ministry for Managing the Outer [non-Han] Regions, operated the internal administration over Inner Asia (with exceptions of a few small Central Asia polities along the Qing edge), and the Libu 禮部, the Board of Rites, processed the tributaries from other parts of Eurasia. Imperial Russia upheld a unique status, matching neither the Inner Asian and Asian polities nor the European groups. A Russian envoy first arrived at the Shunzhi (r. 1643–1661) court in 1655 and was placed in the jurisdiction of the Lifanyuan. The 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk, which was signed by both empires on an equal footing, did not, however, change the Qing’s designation of Russia as a tributary until the Xiangfeng reign (1850–1861). Following the Portuguese who had settled in Macau and a few missionary individuals who served the imperial court, “envoys” from Holland came to the Shunzhi court in 1653, and from Italy, to the Yongzheng (r. 1723–1736) court in 1725.4 British merchants began to trade in southern China during the Kangxi reign (r. 1662–1722), and the Macartney Embassy from the British king arrived at the Qianlong (r. 1736–1795) court in 1793. The Qing court grouped these European groups with the Asian polities under the Libu in the tribute records.5 Thus, each tribute governing institution had two tribute categories to manage. The common assumption that Qing tribute was the product solely of the Chinese tribute tradition is only true for the Asian coastal polities. The Inner Asian tradition, from which Manchu power originated, significantly generated the separate administrations over the internal Lifanyuan zone and the external Libu zone. Clarifying these two tribute traditions in shaping the Qing tribute is the foundation for correctly understanding the Qing tribute system. Tribute ritual and tribute governance, even though closely linked and mutually conditioned, had separate functions and methods of operation. The regular annual ritual at court, or in Chengde during the Kangxi and Qianlong’s 4 Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 欽定禮部則例二種 (The Emperor-Edited Regulations of the Board of Rites, two editions), Changsha 2000, vol. 2, 173.322 for Holland and 175.326 for Italy (which was among the Xiyang or Western Ocean polities in this source). 5 Jiaqing chongxiu yitongzhi 嘉慶重修一統志 (The Jiaqing Edition of the Comprehensive Gazetteer of the Great Qing), vol. 34, 550–560.27065–27411 for Asian countries; 27145–27149 for Dutch, 21753–27170 for Italy under xiyang or “Western ocean” 西洋, 27293–27299 for England/British, 27407–27411 for France, and 27236–27238 for Russia.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

81

annual imperial hunt, symbolized the Qing-centered all-under-heaven fiction and manifested “a borderless polity” with no “ethnic and territorial boundaries.”6 The governable space was, however, limited and the management process, year-round. The early Qing Inner Asia was marked off by treaty-defined borders (Manchuria by the 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk, Mongolia by the 1727 Treaty of Kyakhta) and mountain ranges in southwest Tibet and in northwest Xinjiang. The Libu was responsible for all the rest of Asia, but the effectiveness of the system was more obvious with regard to Korea, Annam, and Ryukyu because of their ruling circles’ cultural recognition of China’s imperial authority. To the Russians and European groups who came to explore commercial opportunities, it was only inside Qing territory that the court could confine them by examining their “tribute” petitions, issuing their “tribute” permissions, regulating their itineraries for the court ritual, and restricting their number of traders and amount of goods. Before their conflict with the Qing tribute intensified at the turn of the nineteenth century, Europeans were unable to abandon the ritual protocol and to free their trade from strict tribute trade (chaogong maoyi 朝貢貿易) rules. Unlike the European groups who did not face tribute competition with the Qing, Imperial Russia competed with the Qing in tribute trade in the seventeenth century. The Qing-Russian collision in the Amur River region was primarily over the fur tribute from indigenous hunters, which resulted in hunters paying double tribute to two empires.7 Russia’s opposition to the Qing tribute protocols also resulted in Qing concessions that provided Russia with access to the large scale pelt trade in Khüree (present Ulaanbaatar) and Kyakhta, the Qing capital market, for half or even the whole year, and the opening of a Russian church and language school in the Qing capital.8 In the late nineteenth century, however, Russia joined the 6 Marc Andre Matten, Imagining a Postnational World: Hegemony and Space in Modern China, Leiden 2017, 33 and 40. 7 Michael Khodarkovsky, Non-Russian Subjects, in: Maureen Perrie (ed.), The Cambridge History of Russia, Cambridge 2006, 528; and Russia’s Steppe Frontier: The Making of a Colonial Empire, 1500–1800, Bloomington 2002, 48 and 61–63. Also see Anna Reid, The Shaman’s Coat: A Native History of Siberia. New York 2002, 45; and Elan Wood (ed.), Siberia: Problems and Prospects or Regional Development, New York 1987, 37. 8 For trade in Khüree and Kyakhta, see Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Wanbang laichao: Chaogong zhidu shilun 萬邦來朝：朝貢制度史論 (Tribute from the Ten Thousand Polities: A Historical Analysis of the Tribute System), Beijing 2014, 198. For the European trade to be limited in Guangzhou, see Yan Xiaoqing 嚴小青, Chongtu yu tiaoshi, 16th–19th shiji Guangzhou kou’an de zhongwai xiangliao maoyi 衝突與調適––16th–19th 世紀廣州口岸的中外香料貿 易 (Conflict and Adaptation – The Spices Trade in the 16th–19th Century Guangzhou), in: Guandong shehui kexue 6 (2016), 129–139, http://www.cssn.cn/zgs/zgs_lsdlx/201606/ t20160627_3089078_14.shtml (6. 11. 2018). For Qing–Russian trade in Kyakhta, see Michal Wanner, The Russian-Chinese Trade in Kyakhta: Its Organisation and Commodity Structure, 1727–1861, in: Prague Papers on the History of International Relations 2

82

Chia Ning

European countries by establishing a diplomatic rather than a tributary relationship with the Qing. The Qing tribute system was only one of the regional tribute operations in premodern global history. The far-flung Mayan civilization in northern Central America, for example, experienced tribute-bond relationships through stages of chieftain-level kingdoms, city states, and the Aztec Empire.9 In Russian history, again, tribute mechanisms facilitated territorial expansion and caused numerous arguments and disputes with the Qing “over the loyalty and tributary payments of the native peoples” in the seventeenth-century Amur River area.10 Since the discovery of the New World in 1492, the emerging global order led by Europe gradually supplanted the previous regional orders, including the Mayan and the Qing. While the early Qing developed the tribute system by managing the Lifanyuan and Libu zones differently, the European arrivals had already begun to challenge the system, which eventually replaced tribute relationships by diplomatic relationships, under the terms of the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia among the

(2014), 35–49; Feng Ruofei 豐若費 and Yan Hongzhong 燕紅忠, Qingdai Zhong-E Qiaketu maoyi de lishi zuoyong 清代中俄恰克圖貿易的歷史作用 (The Historical Effect of the China-Russia Trade in Kyakhta), in: Renwen zazhi 8 (2014), 92–99; Lai Huimin 賴惠敏, Qingzhenfu dui qiaketu shangren de guanli (1755–1799) 清政府對恰克圖商人 的管理 (The Qing Administration over the Traders in Kyakhta), in: Neimenggu shifan daxue xuebao 41/1 (2012), 39–66; Lian Juan 連娟, Jinshang yu zhong’e qiaketu maoyi 晉商與中俄貿易 (The Shanxi Merchants in the China-Russia Trade in Kyakhta), in: Eluosi dongya dong’ou shichang 12 (2017), 26–28. 9 Robert J. Sharer/Loa P. Traxler: The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Stanford 2006, 1, 76, 85– 86, 94, 180, 201, 221–222, 227, 296, 377, 403, 406, 422, 473, 544, 624, 631, 634, 657, 661, 684, 691, 697, 710, 713, 716–717, and 743. Michael E. Smith/Rances F. Berdan (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, Salt Lake City 2003, 69, 71, 104–105, 257, 267, and 296. Michael C. Meyer/William L. Sherman/Susan M. Deeds: The Course of Mexican History, Seventh Edition, New York 2003, 13, 61–62, 76–77, 124, 149, and 170. Michael C. Meyer/William H. Beezley (eds.), The Oxford History of Mexico, New York 2000, 126; and Matthew Restall, The Maya World: Yucatec Culture and Society, 1550–1850, Stanford 1997, 5, 52, 104, 173, and 258. 10 Michael Khodarkovsky, Russia’s Steppe Frontier: The Making of a Colonial Empire, 1500– 1800, Bloomington 2002, 50 and 528. For the tribute system in Russian history and Russian expansion, Ferdinand Feldbrugge, A History of Russian Law: From Ancient Times to the Council Code (Ulozhenie) of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich of 1649, Leiden 2017, 324 and 326; Nicholas V. Riasanovsky/Mark D. Steinberg: A History of Russia, Eighth edition, New York 2011, 39; Maureen Perrie (ed.), The Cambridge History of Russia: Volume 1 From Early Rus’ to 1689, New York 2006, 130–1, 133, 135, 146, 156, 168–169, 201, 317, 327–328, 331. Khodarkovsky 2002, 30, 48, 60, 63, 67; Colin Thubron, Siberia, New York 1999, 2, 12, 28–29, 45, 67 and 98; N. G. O. Pereira, White Siberia: The Politics of Civil War, Buffalo 1996, 12 and 37. John Channon/Rob Hudson, The Penguin Historical Atlas of Russia, New York 1995, 28. John J. Stephan, The Russian Far East: A History, Stanford 1994, 28, 22–23 and 32. The tribute system was not exactly the same in Qing, Russia, and Maya, but the comparative study of them is not the task of this study.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

83

European sovereign states.11 The early powerful Qing court was unaware of these developments, largely because of mistranslation by which Europeans petitions for equal trade were rendered into Qing tribute-trade and all-under-heaven terminology.12 The tribute-minded Qing rulers could not foresee that the remote homelands of these European envoys and merchants, who derived from sovereign nation-states, were about to develop colonies in which “The China Sea [would become] the European Lake”13 in the nineteenth century. The Western colonial order would soon replace the tribute order in the Qing world. In 1861, the Qing established a new institution, the Office of Managing Affairs of All Nations (Zongli geguo shiwu yamen 總理各國事務衙門, OMAAN), to deal with Westerners. OMAAN not only ended the Western countries’ tribute relationship with the Qing but also re-positioned the Qing into the Western colonial order, during which the Qing became a semi-colony and experienced earthshaking shifts such as the colonization of Korea (the Qing’s closest tributary) and Taiwan (Qing territory since the Kangxi reign) by a modernized Japan. Domestic tribute from Inner Asia still continued until the very end of the dynasty in 1911 but without the early Qing regulations. In 1853, the Xianfeng emperor issued an edict canceling the majestic tribute ritual and ordered those who were already on the road to return back home. In 1879, the Guangxu (r. 1875–1908) court gave the dynasty’s last instructions for the arrangement of the tribute items.14 The fall of tribute paralleled the fall of the dynasty.

Inherited Tribute Traditions Of the two lines of tradition which shaped the Qing tribute system, the Chinese tradition was carried on by the Libu mainly through the Zhou (1046–771 B. C.), Han (206 B. C. – A. D. 220), Tang (618–907), and Ming (1368–1644) dynasties.15 11 Turan Kayaoglu, Westphalian Eurocentrism in International Relations Theory, in: International Studies Review 12/2 (2010), 193–217, represents the scholarly debate over the Peace Treaty of Westphalia. Not involved in the debate, this discussion of the Qing tribute system merely represents the differences between the Qing tribute relationship and the contemporary Western sovereign state relationship. 12 Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Chaogong zhidu shilun 朝貢制度史論 (A Discussion of the History of the Tribute System), Beijing 2004, 225–226. 13 Video: The Pacific Century No. 1, The Two Coasts of China: Asia and the Challenge of the West, Pacific Basin Institute 1992. 14 Qinding daqing huidian Lifanyuan shili 欽定大清會典理藩院事例 (The Lifanyuan Case Management in the Emperor-Edited Collected Statutes of the Great Qing), Beijing 1991, 984.206 and 986.222. 15 Li Yunquan 2004, 4–13. Wang Kaixi 王開璽, Qingdai waijiao liyi de jiaoshe yu lunzheng 清代 外交禮儀的交涉與爭論 (The Discussion and Controversy on the Qing Diplomatic Protocols), Beijing 2009, 31; Fu Baichen 付百臣, Zhongguo lidai chaogong zhidu yanjiu 中國歷代

84

Chia Ning

The Inner Asian heritage was transmitted primarily through the Manchu’s ancestors, the Jurchens. The Ming organized tributaries into three categories, the “countries out of China” (zhufanguo 諸番國), the “barbarians in four directions” (siyi 四夷), and the “aboriginal officers” (tuguan 土官) who were appointed by the court to manage the southeastern and southwestern non-Han groups.16 The first two were outside of China, and the third was within but separate from Han society. Using tribute to rule over all of these peoples and entities was the “moral universalism” of the Confucian tradition.17 The Qing Libu continued to manage the first and third categories; the great change in the Qing was the incorporation of Inner Asia, a significant part of the Ming siyi.18 “The thirteenth-century Mongol rulers of the Yuan empire used practices involving tribute and investiture,” according to Ji-Young Lee,19 and, Nicola Di Cosmo wrote about a later era, “Manchu rule was established over the Mongols.”20 Not fully different from the Chinese tradition, the first of the three kinds of tribute entities of the Yuan (1271–1368) represented the countries outside of China, consisting of Korea, Java, Zhancheng (占城, Chiêm Thánh, middle part of present Vietnam), Miandian, and ten additional and more distant Asian polities. The Ming court received tribute from them more than 200 times throughout the dynasty.21 The second kind included the non-Chinese in border regions, and the

16 17 18 19 20 21

朝貢制度研究 (A Study of the Tribute System through Chinese Dynasties), Changchun 2008, 1; Cheng Nina 程妮娜, Cong tianxia dao dayitong: bianjiang chaogong zhidu de lilun yiju he sixiang tezheng 從天下到大一統： 邊疆朝貢制度的理論依據和思想特徵 (From Allunder-heaven to Great Unity: The Theoretical Foundation and Thinking Character of the Frontier Tribute System), in: Shehui kexue zhanxian 1 (2016), 88–102; Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Binli de yanbian yu Ming-Qing chaogong liyi 宾礼的演变与明清朝贡礼仪 (Development of the Guests and Tributaries of the Ming and Qing Dynasties), in: Hebei shifan daxue xuebao 27/1 (2004), 139–145, 140; Jian Junbo 簡軍波, Zhonghua chaogong tixi: Guannian jiegou yu gongneng 中華朝貢體系： 觀念結構與功能 (The Tribute System of China: Idea, Structure and Function), in: Guoji zhengzhi yanjiu 1 (2009), 132–143 and 134; and Zhou Fangyin 周方銀, Chaogong Tizhe de junheng fenxi 朝貢體制的均衡分析 (A Balanced Analysis of the Tribute System), in: Guoji zhengzhi kexue 25/1 (2011), 29–58, here 31. Daming huidian 大明會典 (Collected Statutes of the Great Ming), juan 105–108, https://cte xt.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=605445 (11. 12. 2018) and Mingshi 明史 (History of the Ming), juan 310–319, http://www.guoxue.com/shibu/24shi/mingshi/lianshu.htm (11. 12. 2018). Matten 2017, 51 and 53. The Qing Tuguan system changed but not as dramatically as the change in Inner Asia. The former requires a separate study and will not be discussed in this chapter. Ji-Young Lee, China’s Hegemony: Four Hundred Years of East Asian Domination, New York 2017, 50. Nicola Di Cosmo, The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800, in: Nicola Di Cosmo/Allen J. Frank/ Peter B. Golden (eds.), The Cambridge History of Inner Asia: The Chinggisid Age, New York 2009, 333. Li Yuanquan 2004, 55–58.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

85

third kind, the Mongol princes in distant regions.22 The fact that tribute was the prevalent system among the Mongols was further evidenced by the Russian experience under the rule of the Mongol Golden Horde (Kipchak khanate 1251– 1440). Arriving in Moscow “from the Turko-Mongol world,” tribute was later imposed by the expanding Russian state “specifically on the non-Christian peoples” as “a continuation of the Golden Horde’s practices.”23 The pre-Yuan Jurchen rulers of North China, who founded the Jin dynasty (1127–1279) collected tribute from the contemporary Southern Song (1127– 1279) and the Mongol tribes.24 The post-Yuan Jurchen chiefs paid tribute to the Ming, but the leader of the Manchus, Nurhaci (1559–1626), refused to provide tribute and instead founded his own Later Jin dynasty which his son Hong Taiji (r. 1626–1643) renamed Qing. The Qing inherited these traditions of tribute, incorporated the Lifanyuan zone and the remainder of the Libu zone, and continued the practices associated with Chinese and Inner Asian history. With the Lifanyuan’s complementary jurisdiction over Russia and Libu’s over European groups, the Qing employed the traditional tribute mechanism to deal with new polities in the new historical stage.

Tribute and Its Ritual Protocols The core of the tribute was the grand ritual ceremony at the court, called chaojin (朝觐) or chaoji (朝集). Since 1648 the “New Year tribute” (nianjie jingong 年節 進貢) overlapped with chaojin, where all high-ranking Qing officials, elites with ruling status (such as the Mongol in-laws), and external tribute envoys received the honor of an audience with the emperor.25 The two rituals, however, remained 22 Song Lian 宋濂, Yuanshi元史 (History of Yuan), 36 “Wenzong 5”, https://zh.wikisource.org /zh–hans/元史／卷036 or http://www.guoxue.com/shibu/24shi/yuanshi/yuas_036.htm (27.07. 2018). 23 Khodarkovsky 2002, 61–5 and 68–9. For the Golden Horde’s rule over the Russian princes via tribute, see Feldbrugge 2017, 324 and 326. 24 Yang Lingling, Prairie Eagle Genghis Khan, Shenyang: Liaohai chubanshe 2017, chapter 8 “Gongzhan jinguo de zhongdu.”, https://books.google.com/books?id=lNRZDwAAQBAJ&pg =PT169&lpg=PT169&dq=%E5%A5%B3%E7%9C%9F%E5%90%91%E8%92%99%E5%8F% A4%E7%BA%B3%E8%B4%A1%E5%90%97%EF%BC%9F&source=bl&ots=F3oual_cLz&si g=7x1z1qFTKIN1dZdauAjUvnU2dIQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjonNXWoOPcAhWrm OAKHQFEC8wQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=%E5%A5%B3%E7%9C%9F%E5%90 %91%E8%92%99%E5%8F%A4%E7%BA%B3%E8%B4%A1%E5%90%97%EF%BC%9F&f=f alse (10. 08. 2018). 25 Qinding daqing huidian shili Lifanyuan, 992.265. For the differences between chaojin and chaogong and their joint rituals, see Lifanyuan gongdu zeli sanzhong 理藩院公牘則例三種 (Three Documentary Editions of the Regulations of the Lifanyuan), Beijing: Quanguo

86

Chia Ning

separate.26 In the Shunzhi emperor’s words, the annual chaojin ritual at the New Year had two major purposes, to pay tribute and to know one’s place in the dynastic world by one’s ritual seating.27 Thus, tribute bearers were very sensitive to the seating order at the ritual.28 The Kangxi edition of ‘Collected Statutes’ further differentiated the Mongols’ gifts to the emperor for chaojin as gongxian 貢獻 and their tribute items, as chaogong 朝貢.29 (If chaojin and chaogong had been treated as the same political concept and the same ritual, there would be no need to separate the terms for material goods.) For the tribute envoys who did not come to the grand New Year ritual at court or the grand ritual in Chengde, the Libu arranged a separate ceremony for them to meet the emperor.30 All of the ritual events embodied the Qianlong emperor’s statement that “I am [ruling] the superior country and all [on other lands] are [my] vassals” (wowei shangguo, shuaitu jiechen 我為上國，率土皆臣).31 The ritual protocols incarnated this fantastic perception. The first key protocol was the formatted written petition, called biaowen (表 文), which was required from every envoy, on behalf of his polity’s ruler, to ask the Qing emperor’s approval of that polity’s tribute presentation. Since the Inner

26 27 28 29 30

31

tushuguan wenxian suowei fuzhi zhongxin 2010, vol. 1:3–16, 65, and 71–77; Qinding Lifanbu zeli 欽定理藩部則例 (Emperor-Edited Regulations of the Lifanyuan), Beijing 1992, 2:7b.120; Kangxi chao daqing huidian zhongde Lifanyuan ziliao 康熙朝大清會典中的理藩院資料 (The Lifanyuan Records in the Kangxi Edition of Collected Statutes of the Qing), in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.), Qingdai Lifanyuan ziliao jilu 清代理藩院資料集錄 (Collection of the Qing Dynasty Lifanyuan Records), Beijing 1998, 12, 16, 19, and 21; Yongzhengchao daqing huidian zhongde Lifanyuan ziliao 雍正朝大清會典中的理藩院資料 (The Lifanyuan Records in the Yongzheng Edition of Collected Statutes of the Qing), in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1998, 1. For the internal and external tribute presenters, see Qinding Lifanbu zeli, 19:1a.265. According to Zhang Shuangzhi, Qing dai chaojin zhiduyanjiu, Beijing 2010, 7–8, in Chinese history chaojin was the system by which the provincial officials came to meet the emperor and to be examined by the emperor. Qinding daqing huidian Lifanyuan shili, 984–985.199–213 for chaojin and 986.214–222 for chaogong. Also see separate chapters in the Kangxi and Yongzheng edition of Da Qing huidian Lifanyuan ziliao, in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1998. Qianlongchao neifu chaoben Lifanyuan zeli 乾隆朝內府抄本理藩院則例 (Handwritten Edition of the Regulations of the Lifanyuan in Qianlong’s Reign), in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1988, 65. He Xinhua 何新華, Zuihoude tianchao: Qingdai chaogong zhidu yanjiu 最後的天朝：清代 朝貢制度研究 (The last Heavenly Dynasty: A Study of the Qing Tribute System), Beijing 2012, 138–9. Kangxichao daqing huidian zhongde Lifanyuan ziliao, in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1998, 16.15–16 for gongxian and 19–21 for chaogong. Jiaqingchao daqing huidian Lifanyuan ziliao 嘉慶朝大清會典理藩院資料 (The Jiaqing Edition of the Collected Statutes of the Lifanyuan), in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1988, 50–53. By the time of the Jiaqing emperor’s hunting, the chaojin ritual was no longer magnificent. Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 2000, vol. 2, 166.302–3; Li Yunquan 2004, 221. Liu Jinzao 劉錦藻, Qing xuwenxian tongkao 清续文献通考 (Continued Comprehensive Examination of Literatures of the Qing), Shanghai 1936, 337.10781.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

87

Asian tribute procedure was integrated into the Lifanyuan–local direct official routines, this protocol was mainly for foreigners. The petition received official vetting in the provincial office and then the Libu and Neige (內閣, Grand Secretariat) at the court before it was presented to the emperor.32 Because of cultural similarities, Korea, Vietnam, and Ryukyu could follow the Qing written format very well, but those from Xianluo, Miandian, Nanzhang, Sulu, and the Tibetanrelated polities Nepal, Bulukba, and Zhemengxiong 哲孟雄 needed professional editing by the Qing petition supervisors. The “petitions” in English, Latin, Dutch, and Portuguese written with an assumption of equal status to the Qing, and those from the Muslim polities in Central Asia written in Turkic, Persian, and Tuote 托 忒 (Western Mongolian) languages, were redrafted by the Qing petition supervisors into the Qing tribute “discourse system” (huayu tixi 話語體系). When reading the tribute petitions, the emperor saw nothing but references to his legitimacy as the master of all-under-heaven.33 Russia challenged this protocol from the first Russian mission to the Shunzhi court, and the early Qing compromise never brought a final resolution to this dispute.34 Another key protocol was the ceremonial kneeling (three times) and kowtowing (nine times) to the Qing emperor at the tribute ritual required of everyone in the ritual audience. The 1793 British Macartney mission openly rejected this physical humiliation, adding another clash in addition to Russia’s. Some Asian entities also repudiated this Qing protocol. Once at the Kangxi court, for example, the Vietnamese envoy insisted on performing the Ming bow (five times) and kowtow (three times) rather than the Qing protocol.35 Such a challenge was, however, not aimed at refusing the protocol itself but at keeping the Ming protocol and renouncing the Qing protocol. Relying on the “function of symbolic power,”36 tribute protocols served as the door opener for outsiders to enter the Qing world. The Qing court kept these protocols as a means to define itself in relation to other polities. The essential challenge to the tribute system, not from the Asian polities but from the Euro-

32 Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 2000, vol. 2, 166.302. 33 He Xinhua 何新華, Qingdai chaogong wenshu yanjiu 清代朝貢文書研究 (A Study of the Qing Tribute Documents), Guangzhou 2016, 5, 8–12 and 37. Zhang Feng, Jiegong chaogong tixi 解構朝貢體系 (Analyzing and Reconstructing the Tribute System), in: Guoji zhengzhi kexue 22/2 (2010), 33–62, here 59. 34 Ye Baichuan 葉柏川, Eguo laihua shituan yanjiu 俄國來華師團研究 (1618–1807), Beijing 2010, 30 and 160–161. 35 He Xinhua 何新華, Huayu, shijiao yu fangfa: Jinnianlai mingqing chaogong tizhi yanjiude jige wenti 話語、 視角與方法： 近年來明清朝貢體制研究的幾個問題 (Language, Perspective and Method: Several Issues in the Study of the Ming and Qing Tribute in Recent Years), in: Zhongguo bianjiang shidi yanjiu 2 (2014), 1–10, here 9. 36 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 13.

88

Chia Ning

pean countries, eventually brought on military intervention in the nineteenth century and contributed to the Qing’s decline.

Tribute and Political Entitlement Political entitlement, or investiture (cefeng, 册封),37 was blended into the tribute ritual to justify the Qing emperor’s position as shepherd of the Qing tribute world. In the Lifanyuan zone, all the entitled were the Inner Asian natives, lay or religious. The entitlement recognized, produced, and reproduced the Inner Asian nobility and created a body of officialdom, the ruling base of Qing Inner Asia. Only high-ranking members of the Inner Asian ruling hierarchy were qualified to attend the court ritual.38 One’s ritual status and the received entitlement would determine the rewards from the emperor, whether it be stipend or salary from the court,39 travel expenses and accommodation in the capital city for tribute presentation, military protection and court-ordered disaster relief to an official’s home community, etc. In the Libu zone, on the other hand, the machinery of tribute operated differently. “Hegemony [of the Qing] did not rest on physical domination over other neighboring states,”40 writes Ji-Young Lee, and no salaries or disaster relief were issued to those countries. In the model tribute polities (dianxing er shizhide chaogong guanxi 典型而實質的朝貢關係), including Korea, Ryukyu, Vietnam, Xianluo, Sulu, Nanzhang, and Miandian, Qing political entitlement and material awards affected domestic rule because these countries’ cultures gave the holders of Qing entitlements prestige and power. The Qing practice of entitlement in Korea even went beyond the king and legitimized the king’s principal wife and his heir (often the eldest son) as well. The Qing also sent envoys to Korea, Annam and Ryukyu to issue edicts of entitlement – a demonstration of political intimacy and privilege.41 When the ordinary polities (yibanxingde chaogong guanxi一般性的 朝貢關係) of the more distant Asian countries sent emissaries, the tribute envoy received the Qing entitlement certificate and delivered it to his ruler on his return.

37 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 47. 38 Qianlongchao neifu chaoben Lifanyuan zeli, 130–131, and Jiaqingchao daqing huidian Lifanyuan ziliao, in: Zhao Yuntian (ed.) 1988, 41–5 and 104–116. 39 Qianlongchao neifu chaoben Lifanyuan zeli, 82–83 for the Inner Mongols and 139–40 for the Khalka and Qinghai Mongols. 40 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 31. 41 Qinding daqing huidian 欽定大清會典 (The Emperor–Edited Collected Statutes of the Great Qing), juan 56, https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=352853 (14. 08. 2018) and Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 2000, vol. 2, 176–7.329–334.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

89

No envoy from the emperor visited these polities.42 The Qing court viewed such “symbolic authorization”43 as extending the geo-political space of its Empire, and the rulers of the less powerful Asian polities “found China’s symbolic recognition of their identity as rulers [the practice of investiture] instrumental for enhancing their domestic position vis-á-vis their rivals.”44 The “tributaries by name” (mingyi shang de chaogong guanxi 名義上的朝貢 關係)45 were Russia and the European countries. The Qing court did not intend to entitle their rulers,46 but the tribute worldview automatically brought tribute terminology into the correspondence. In his letter to the British king, for example, the Jiaqing emperor declared the Qing’s “Superiority and Power” by which “the splendor of our greatness has not failed to pervade every part of the Earth.”47

Tribute and Two Forms of Material Exchange The tribute system had a strong material foundation. Every tribute gift presented to the emperor was paid for by the Qing court at a price much higher than its market value, making tribute “gifts” financially profitable for the presenting polities, along with the associated political gains. Separate rewards from the emperor to each tribute envoy and his followers greatly increased the privileges which the tribute societies received. The complementary gifts added the emperor’s extra grace to the most important tribute guests such as the intermarried or allied Mongol princes, religious leaders, and Asian envoys.48 The tribute convention of “giving more and receiving less” (houwang bolai 厚往薄來) was expected to bring border peace, a critical Qing emphasis.49 Just as those material privileges rewarded the high-class members of tribute societies, tribute trade, the only legal trade in the Qing empire, took place in large scale markets that benefited the general society.50 A tribute envoy always brought 42 Qinding Da Qing huidian, juan 56, https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=352853 (14. 11. 2018). 43 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 4. 44 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 169. 45 All the three types of tribute countries are quoted from Li Yunquan 2014, 2. 46 He Xinhua 2016, 583–698. 47 The “Declaration of the Emperor for the knowledge and consideration of the King of England” on 21st of December 1805, He Xinhua 2016, 610–611. 48 Qianlongchao neifuchaoben Lifanyuan zeli, 679–681. 49 He Xinhua 2012, 111; He Xinhua 2014, 8; and Chen Shangsheng, Shilun qingchao qianqi fenggong tixi de jiben tezheng 試論清朝前期封貢制度的基本特徵 (The Basic Character of the Early Qing Entitlement and Tribute System), in: Qingshi yanjiu 2 (2010), 92–100, http://i qh.net.cn/info.asp?column_id=5701 (28. 09. 2018). 50 Illegal trade existed on a large scale but is not discussed in this study.

90

Chia Ning

a trading team along on his journey. Most of the team were dropped at the assigned border markets. The envoy kept a small number of his followers, who were approved by the Qing court, to come with him to the capital, where a market was also open to them after the court ritual: ten days for the Inner Asians and three or five days to the Libu-zone envoys at the School of Combined Learning (Huitongguan 會同館). Korea and Ryukyu were granted more extensive trading days,51 as were the Russians. Such a “tribute trade system” established “an extensive trade network” and “provided economic stability for the entire international system [of Asia].”52 The Qing court periodically announced limits on tribute traders, boats, and amount of goods.53 These limits reflected the tributepresenting societies’ strong desire for trade. Ryukyu and Annam even asked the Qing to allow celebration tribute (qinghegong 慶賀貢), grace-thanks tribute (xie’engong 謝恩貢) and affairs-report tribute (chenzougong 陳奏貢) in addition to the regular tribute (zhenggong 正貢).54 In tribute governance, annual “turn assignments” determined the frequency of tribute. (see attachment “The Qing Tribute Annual Turn Arrangement”). Ritual gifts in kind, methods of presenting them, and the location of presentation were also under different regulations. For example, the Solon hunters of the northeast were designated to present their pelts at the local yamen, where they received award items from the court through a system called shangwuling 賞烏 綾,55 and the British “tribute” was always associated with the Guangzhou trade before the Macartney embassy of 1793. The gifts, whether presented at the court ritual or sent to the capital city from local yamens, contributed to the building of a political relationship. At the same time, tribute trade at the market or through the shangwuling system provided economic opportunities. The Qing rulers weighed the former highly and the participants regarded the latter much more so. Although the tribute material exchange was often the primary attraction to China’s traditional tribute presenters, the Europeans had a different interest. The Portuguese, Spanish, and Dutch came for free trade but found that only tribute

51 Guangxu edition of Da Qing huidian shili 光緒大清會典事例 (The case management in the Guangxu edition of Collected Statutes of the Qing), juan 510; Libu chaogong shiyi 禮部 朝貢 市易 (The Board of Rites, Tribute, Market trade), from Li Yunquan 2014, 138. 52 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 35. 53 Yongzhengchao daqing huidian zhong de Lifanyuan ziliao, in Zhao Yuntian (ed.), Qingdai Lifanyuan ziliao jilu, 37; Qianlongchao neifu chaben Lifanyuan zeli, in Zhao Yuntian (ed.), Qingdai Lifanyuan ziliao jilu, 68; and Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 2000, vol. 2, 166.301 for all the external tributaries, 173.322 for Holland, 175.326 for Italy (which was listed among the other Xiyang or Western Ocean polities in this source). 54 Li Yunquan 2014, 131 and 2004, 160. 55 Chia Ning 2018.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

91

entry could give them access to the Qing market.56 Gift exchange at the Qing court was not significantly beneficial to them, as shown in the exchange lists.57 Tributeconditioned trade was also far from meeting their commercial goals. The Russians were never satisfied with their trading privileges inside the Qing tribute system. The fruitless British Macartney mission requesting free-market trade became the prequel to the two Opium Wars (1839–1842 and 1856–1860) by which Great Britain, along with France, Germany, other European countries, and now also Japan, eventually opened China’s markets without tribute restrictions by forcing China to sign unequal treaties. The Qing experienced a transition from tribute exchange to unwilling market exchange.

Tribute in Asia Differing from the conclusion that tribute was “nothing more than a wishful imaginary”58 and the tribute-based world order existed only in the Chinese court’s own fantasy,59 this study argues that the Qing tribute arrangement was for a long time a functioning system whether it was accepted, or temporarily accepted, or conditionally accepted with various challenges in opposition to it. Politically and economically, it tied China proper, Inner Asia, East Asia and its Asian extensions into the Qing world. The tribute system shaped the policymaking, relationship-managing and actions not only of the Qing, but also of the other Asian countries. Pre-Meiji Japan, the greatest power, which “defied and challenged Chinese hegemony throughout most of the early modern period,”60 for example, did not search for a replacement to the tribute system but “created a self-proclaimed tributary order centered on itself by treating Qing tributaries Korea and Ryukyu as its own.”61 “Korean kings, too,” according to Lee, “reproduced tribute practices in their dealings with the Jurchens and the people of the Ryukyus to construct a ‘Korean world order.’”62 Even though the tribute center had mainly been associated with China, the tribute system had solid 56 Li Yunquan 2014, 217. 57 For the Korean list, see Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 2000, vol. 2, 166–7.306–312. For the European list, see Li Yunquan 2014, 188–189, as comparison. 58 Matten 2017, 305. 59 Zhuang Guotu 莊國土, Lüelun chaogong zhidu de xuhuan: Yi gudai zhongguo yu dongnanya de chaogong guanxi weili 略論朝貢制度的虛幻：以古代中國與東南亞的朝貢關係 為例 (On the Illusiveness of the Tributary System: A Case of the Tributary Relations between Ancient China and Southeast Asia), in: Nanyang wenti yanjiu 123/3 (2005), 1– 8, here 8. 60 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 4. 61 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 1 and 24. 62 Ji-Young Lee 2017, 52.

92

Chia Ning

foundations in Inner and East Asia, and there was no internal dynamic to abnegate it. Compared to the rising European sovereigns colonizing the non-European world,63 the Qing indirect rule in the Asian tributary polities did not lead to Western-style colonies, such as Vietnam under France, Miandian under the United Kingdom, etc. Japan’s colonization of Korea, again, came as result of modernized Japan’s adopting Western-style imperialism rather than a consequence of East Asia–rooted motivations. Late Qing China, at the center of the East Asian tribute system, was the most persistent, even though frail, defender of the traditional tribute order. In the struggle with the Western powers, the Qing focused almost exclusively on keeping the fantastical tribute protocols rather than on seeking pragmatic resolutions, as some studies have revealed.64

Tribute and the West Although the tribute system operated well for early Qing empire-building and the construction of the Qing world order, it faced four kinds of challenges, from Inner Asia, Asia, Russia, and the so-called European “barbarian merchants.”65 The case of the Zunghars in northern Xinjiang was an example of merging a confrontational Inner Asian power into the early Qing internal tribute orbit. Before the Qianlong emperor’s 1757 pacification, the Zunghars were a major military threat to the Qing, even though they, representing an external power, repeatedly offered tribute to the Qing. After 1757, the remaining Zunghars were organized into banners in Ili and Tacheng, which were made tribute units under the Lifanyuan. In East Asia, Japan’s refusal to join the Qing tribute order66 did not undermine the early Qing tributes ystem. Whoever rose to power in East Asia, and Inner Asia as well, the tribute tradition would likely be continued. The exceptional privileges of imperial Russia, a power resistant to the Qing tribute system throughout the dynasty, were puzzling. The Qianlong emperor’s straightforward denial of the British king’s request for what the Qing had “granted to Russia” did not change Russia’s “tribute” status. This status was established in the Shunzhi emperor’s first letter to the Tsar in 1655, confirmed by the Kangxi emperor’s edict to the Russian envoy in 1721,67 and continued in the 63 Jian Junbo 2009, 136–8. 64 Li Yunquan 2004, Chaogong zhidu shilun, chapter 5, 223–271, and Chapter 6, 284–313; and Li Yunquan 2014, chapters 5 and 6, 182–255. Wang Kaixi 2009, chapter 7, 670–714. 65 “Barbarian merchants” is quoted from the Qianlong emperor’s edict to Macartney in 1793, He Xinhua 2016, 606. 66 Zhang Feng 2010, 49–50. 67 He Xinhua 2016, 605 and 615–6.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

93

Jiaqing edition of Daqing yitongzhi (大清一統志, Unified Gazetteer of the Great Qing) compiled in 1842. The Russian challenge, which was of greater import than Japan’s, still did not interrupt the advance of the early Qing tribute system through the reign of Emperor Qianlong (r. 1736–1796). The overthrow of the Qing tribute system came about when the Western countries appeared as colonial powers rather than as the previous private merchant groups. Russia joined the Western powers. The 1858 Qing-Russian Treaty of Tianjin first abandoned the tribute style relationship, leading to the Tongzhi emperor’s 1873 meeting with ambassadors from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Russia, in which kneeling and kowtowing to the emperor were fully replaced by only bowing for respect.68 The European “amenable stage” under the Qing tribute rule, which lasted from the Shunzhi reign to the 1861 establishment of OMAAN when Westerners, including the Russians now, ceased to be treated as tributaries, was reversed, with the Qing becoming subject to the Europe-led international order described in Elements of International Law (Wangguo gongfa 萬國公法), which, written in 1836 by the U.S. lawyer Henry Wheaton, was translated into Chinese in 1864 and first introduced principles of modern international relationships between nations to China.69

Conclusion The Qing tribute system was a comprehensive mechanism of the imperial state and resulted in the incorporation of Inner Asia and East Asia into a Beijingcentered Qing world order. Existing tribute traditions in various parts of Asia allowed the early Qing tribute system to function without internal disruption. The changing global circumstances, however, threatened the survival of the regional tribute orders. “European imperialism and colonialism”70 ended the tribute order under which the Qing claimed borderless universal hegemony.71 The nineteenth-century resolution of the Qing-West conflict entailed the destruction of the tribute system, which eventually led to the collapse of the Qing dynasty.

68 Wang Kaixi 2009, 513–7 for the Qing-Russian treaty and 641 for the 1873 meeting. 69 He Xinhua 何新華, Wanguo gongfa yu Qingmo guojifa 《万国公法》与清末国际法 (Elements of International Law and late Qing international law), in: Faxue yanjiu 5 (2001), 137– 148. 70 Matten 2017, 298. 71 Matten 2017, 46–47.

94

Chia Ning

Attachment The Qing Tribute Annual Turn Assignment Annual Turns Seasonal (only for beginning of the Qing dynasty) 75 Once a year

Once every 2 years

People in Inner Asia72 Inner Mongols

Asian Polities73 Korea

Tibet Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama in rotation Muslim Jasak (Hami and Turfan) Inner Mongols

Korea

Once every 3 years Once every 4 years

Once every 10 years

Ryukyu Annam Xianluo

Khalkha Mongols Qinghai Mongols

Once every 5 years Once every 6 years

European Groups74

Sulu

Holland (it was changed into a more flexible arrangement later)

The Mongol Lama of Tibetan Buddhism The Tibetan Buddhist Temples in Gansu Muslim begs in Xinjiang Nanzhang

72 Da Qing huidian Lifanyuan shili, 984–5.199–206. For the Muslim begs and polities in Central Asia, see Jiaqingchao daqing huidian zhongde Lifanyuan ziliao, 113–116. 73 Qinding daqing huidian, juan 56, https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/欽定大清會典／卷五十六 (09. 02. 2018). Qinding Libu zeli erzhong欽定禮部則例二種. Changsha: Hainan chubanshe 2000, vol. 2, juan 167–173 “Zhuke qinglisi”, 306–323. The annual turns for each country was under the change over the Qing dynasty. See He Xinhua, Huayu, shijiao yu fangfa: Jinnianlai mingqing chaogong tizhi yanjiude jige wenti, in: Zhongguo bianjiang shidi yanjiu 2 (2014), 1– 10. 74 Qinding Libu zeli erzhong, vol. 2, juan 173 for Holland, 322, and juan 175 for Italy, 326 (Italy was listed among the other Xiyang or Western Ocean polities in this source). Also see He Xinhua 2016, 583–700. 75 Da Qing huidian Lifanyuan shili and Li Yunquan, Wanbang laichao, 118.

95

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

(Continued) Annual Turns

People in Inner Asia72 Flexible arrangement Jebtsundamba Khutukhtu Bulute, Anjiyan, etc. in Central Asia No annual presentation at the Solon in Heicourt but present tribute an- longjiang nually in local Yamen Ula Manchu in Jilin Urianghai in Western Mongolia No stabilized attendance at the court ritual

Asian European Groups74 Polities73 Miandian Nanyang Xiyang or Italy

Russia76 The Portuguese77 Italy (actually the Pope) 78

The British79

Bibliography John Channon/Rob Hudson, The Penguin Historical Atlas of Russia, New York 1995. Chen Shangsheng 陳尚勝, Shilun qingchao qianqi fenggong tixi de jiben tezheng 試論清 朝前期封貢制度的基本特徵 (The Basic Character of the Early Qing Entitlement and Tribute System), in: Qingshi yanjiu 2 (2010), 92–100, http://iqh.net.cn/info.asp?column _id=5701 (28. 09. 2018). Cheng Nina 程妮娜, Cong tianxia dao dayitong: bianjiang chaogong zhidu de lilun yiju he sixiang tezheng 從天下到大一統：邊疆朝貢制度的理論依據和思想特徵 (From Allunder-heaven to Great Unity: The Theoretical Foundation and Thinking Character of the Frontier Tribute System), in: Shehui kexue zhanxian 1 (2016), 88–102. Chia, Ning, Lifanyuan and Libu in Early Qing Empire Building, and Lifanyuan and Libu in the Qing Tribute System, in: Dittmar Schorkowich/Chia Ning (eds.), Managing the Frontier in Qing China: Lifanyuan and Libu Revisited, Boston 2016, 43–69 and 144–184. Chia, Ning, The Solon Sable Tribute, Hunters of Inner Asia and Dynastic Elites at the Imperial Center, in: Inner Asia 20/1 (2018), 26–63. Chia, Ning, Xining banshi dachen yu yongzheng shiqi Qinghai duominzu quyu guanli zhidu zhi xingcheng 西寧辦事大臣與雍正時期青海多民族區域管理制度之形成 (The Grand

76 77 78 79

He Xinhua 2016, 615–6. He Xinhua 2016, 1670 and 1678 Kangxi emperor’s edicts to the king of Portugal, 590–4. He Xinhua 2016, Kangxi and Yongzheng emperors’ edicts to the Pope, 594–7. He Xinhua 2016, 598–614.

96

Chia Ning

Minister Resident of Xining and the Qing Administration in the Highly Diverse Qinghai), in: Qinghsi yanjiu 3 (2012), 57–70. Nicola Di Cosmo, The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800, in: Nicola Di Cosmo/Allen J. Frank/Peter B. Golden (eds.), The Cambridge History of Inner Asia: The Chinggisid Age, New York 2009, 333–362. Ferdinand Feldbrugge, A History of Russian Law: From Ancient Times to the Council Code (Ulozhenie) of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich of 1649, Leiden 2017. Feng Ruofei 豐若費 /Yan Hongzhong 燕紅忠, Qingdai Zhong-E Qiaketu maoyi de lishi zuoyong 清代中俄恰克圖貿易的歷史作用 (The Historical Effect of the China-Russia Trade in Kyakhta), in: Renwen zazhi 8 (2014), 92–99. Fu Baichen 付百臣, Zhongguo lidai chaogong zhidu yanjiu中國歷代朝貢制度研究 (A Study of the Tribute System through Chinese Dynasties), Changchun 2008. He Xinhua 何新華, Wanguo gongfa yu Qingmo guojifa 《万国公法》与清末国际法 (Elements of International Law and Late Qing International Law), in: Faxue yanjiu 5 (2001), 137–148. He Xinhua 何新華, Zuihoude tianchao: Qingdai chaogong zhidu yanjiu 最後的天朝：清 代朝貢制度研究 (The Last Heavenly Dynasty: A study of the Qing Tribute System), Beijing 2012. He Xinhua 何新華, Huayu, shijiao yu fangfa: Jinnianlai mingqing chaogong tizhi yanjiude jige wenti 話語、 視角與方法： 近年來明清朝貢體制研究的幾個問題 (Language, Perspective and Method: Several Issues in the Study of the Ming and Qing Tribute in Recent Years), in: Zhongguo bianjiang shidi yanjiu 2 (2014), 1–10. He Xinhua 何新華, Qingdai chaogong wenshu yanjiu 清代朝貢文書研究 (A Study of the Qing Tribute Documents), Guangzhou 2016. Jian Junbo 簡軍波, Zhonghua chaogong tixi: Guannian jiegou yu gongneng 中華朝貢體 系：觀念結構與功能 (The Tribute System of China: Idea, Structure and Function), in: Guoji zhengzhi yanjiu 1 (2009), 132–143. Turan Kayaoglu, Westphalian Eurocentrism in International Relations Theory, in: International Studies Review 12/2 (2010), 193–217. Michael Khodarkovsky, Russia’s Steppe Frontier: The Making of a Colonial Empire, 1500–1800, Bloomington 2002. Michael Khodarkovsky, Non-Russian Subjects, in: Maureen Perrie (ed.), The Cambridge History of Russia, Cambridge 2006. Lai Huimin 賴惠敏, Qingzhenfu dui qiaketu shangren de guanli (1755–1799) 清政府對恰 克圖商人的管理 (The Qing Administration over the Traders in Kyakhta), in: Neimenggu shifan daxue xuebao 41/1 (2012), 39–66. Ji-Young Lee, China’s Hegemony: Four Hundred Years of East Asian Domination, New York 2017. Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Binli de yanbian yu Ming-Qing chaogong liyi 宾礼的演变与明清朝贡 礼仪 (Development of the Guests and Tributaries of the Ming and Qing Dynasties), in: Hebei shifan daxue xuebao 27/1 (2004), 139–145. Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Chaogong zhidu shilun朝貢制度史論 (A Discussion of the History of the Tribute System), Beijing 2004. Li Yunquan 李雲泉, Wanbang laichao: Chaogong zhidu shilun 萬邦來朝：朝貢制度史論 (Tribute from the Ten Thousand Polities: A Historical Analysis of the Tribute System), Beijing 2014.

The Tribute System in the Qing Dynasty

97

Lian Juan 連娟, Jinshang yu zhong’e qiaketu maoyi 晉商與中俄貿易 (The Shanxi Merchants in the China-Russia Trade in Kyakhta), in: Eluosi dongya dong’ou shichang 12 (2017). Lifanyuan gongdu zeli sanzhong 理藩院公牘則例三種 (Three Documentary Editions of the Regulations of the Lifanyuan), Beijing: Quanguo tushuguan wenxian suowei fuzhi zhongxin 2010. Liu Jinzao 劉錦藻, Qing xuwenxian tongkao 清续文献通考 (Continued Comprehensive Examination of Literatures of the Qing), Shanghai 1936. Marc Andre Matten, Imagining a Postnational World: Hegemony and Space in Modern China, Leiden 2017. Michael C. Meyer/William H. Beezley (eds.), The Oxford History of Mexico, New York 2000. Michael C. Meyer/William L. Sherman/Susan M. Deeds: The Course of Mexican History, Seventh Edition, New York 2003. Mingshi 明史 (History of Ming), juan 310–319, http://www.guoxue.com/shibu/24shi/ming shi/ lianshu.htm (11. 12. 2018). N. G. O. Pereira, White Siberia: The Politics of Civil War, Buffalo 1996. Maureen Perrie (ed.), The Cambridge History of Russia: Volume 1 From Early Rus’ to 1689, New York 2006. Qinding daqing huidian 欽定大清會典 (The Emperor – Edited Collected Statutes of the Great Qing), juan 56, https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=352853 (14. 08. 2018). Qinding daqing huidian Lifanyuan shili 欽定大清會典理藩院事例 (The Lifanyuan Case Management in the Emperor-Edited Collected Statutes of the Great Qing), Beijing 1991. Qinding Libu zeli erzhong 欽定禮部則例二種, Volume 2 (The Emperor-Edited Regulations of the Board of Rites, two editions), Changsha 2000. Qinding Lifanbu zeli 欽定理藩部則例 (Emperor-Edited Regulations of the Lifanyuan), Beijing 1992. Anna Reid, The Shaman’s Coat: A Native History of Siberia. New York 2002. Matthew Restall, The Maya World: Yucatec Culture and Society, 1550–1850, Stanford 1997. Robert J. Sharer/Loa P. Traxler: The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Stanford 2006. Michael E. Smith/Rances F. Berdan (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, Salt Lake City 2003. Song Lian 宋濂, Yuanshi 元史 (History of Yuan), 36, https://zh.wikisource.org/zh–han s/元史／卷036 or http://www.guoxue.com/shibu/24shi/yuanshi/yuas_036.htm (27. 07. 2018). John J. Stephan, The Russian Far East: A History, Stanford 1994. Colin Thubron, Siberia, New York 1999. Nicholas V. Riasanovsky/Mark D. Steinberg: A History of Russia, 8th Edition, New York 2011. Wang Kaixi 王開璽, Qingdai waijiao liyi de jiaoshe yu lunzheng 清代外交禮儀的交涉與 爭論 (The Discussion and Controversy on the Qing Diplomatic Protocols), Beijing 2009. Michal Wanner, The Russian-Chinese Trade in Kyakhta: Its Organisation and Commodity Structure, 1727–1861, in: Prague Papers on the History of International Relations 2 (2014), 35–49.

98

Chia Ning

Elan Wood (ed.), Siberia: Problems and Prospects or Regional Development, New York 1987. Yan Xiaoqing 嚴小青, Chongtu yu tiaoshi, 16th–19th shiji Guangzhou kou’an de Zhongwai xiangliao maoyi 衝突與調適––16th–19th 世紀廣州口岸的中外香料貿易 (Conflict and Adaptation – The Spices Trade in the 16th–19th Century Guangzhou), in: Guandong shehui kexue 6 (2016), http://www.cssn.cn/zgs/zgs_lsdlx/201606/t20160627_30890 78_14.shtml (06. 11. 2018). Yang Lingling, Prairie Eagle Genghis Khan, Shenyang: Liaohai chubanshe 2017. Ye Baichuan 葉柏川, Eguo laihua shituan yanjiu 俄國來華師團研究 (1618–1807), Beijing 2010. Zhang Shuangzhi, Qing dai chaojin zhiduyanjiu, Beijing 2010. Zhang Feng, Jiegong chaogong tixi 解構朝貢體系 (Analyzing and Reconstructing the Tribute System), in: Guoji zhengzhi kexue 22/2 (2010), 33–62. Zhao Yuntian (ed.), Qingdai Lifanyuan ziliao jilu 清代理藩院資料集錄 (Collection of the Qing Dynasty Lifanyuan Records), Beijing 1998. Zhou Fangyin 周方銀, Chaogong tizhe de junheng fenxi 朝貢體制的均衡分析 (A Balanced Analysis of the Tribute System), in: Guoji zhengzhi kexue 25/1 (2011), 29–58. Zhuang Guotu 莊國土, Lüelun chaogong zhidu de xuhuan: Yi gudai zhongguo yu dongnanya de chaogong guanxi weili 略論朝貢制度的虛幻：以古代中國與東南亞的 朝貢關係為例 (On the Illusiveness of the Tributary System: A Case of the Tributary Relations between Ancient China and Southeast Asia), in: Nanyang wenti yanjiu 123/ 3 (2005), 1–8.

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

1.

The Conceptualization of ‘Heavenly Horses’ and the Analogy of ‘Kazakh = Dayuan’

At the end of the 17th century through the 1710s, information about the Kazakhs appeared in Qing court records. Although the information mainly dealt with the conflict between the Kazakhs and Kalmyks,1 some of the writings about the Kazakhs indicate that the concrete conceptualizations of the Kazakh state and its people were just developing in the Qing court. Of these conceptions, we are especially interested in the following records. In the 12th month of the 35th year of Kangxi’s reign (1696), just after the defeat of Galdan, the Zunghar khan, a horse was presented to the Qing emperor. The linking of the ‘heavenly horse’ to the Kazakhs may be gleaned from this event. The ‘Pingding shuomo fanglüe’ 平定朔漠方略 recorded it by saying: “The day of ‘dingyou’ 丁酉 […] by paying respects to the emperor, the [Khalkha Mongol] princes sent out a horse to him and awaited his arrival. Then, when riding the horse, the emperor looked at ‘daxueshi’2 Zhang Yushu 張玉書 and said: ‘What I am riding is a horse from the Kazakh state. Galdan received it from the Kazakhs, and then, when Galdan was defeated, it was obtained by our army. Now, testing it by riding, I find that its sweat is just like blood. So, I reckon that it must be the ‘blood-sweating horse’ from Dayuan 大宛 that was mentioned by the ancients’. Then, Zhang Yushu and others submitted a palace memorial by saying: ‘According to the historical records, a horse 1 For example, we read from ‘Shengzu Ren huangdi shilu’ that the Qing emperor Kangxi received a statement from the Zunghar khan Tsewang Rabtan, in which the latter mentioned the activities of Tauke, the Kazakh khan, and the conflicts between Kazakhs and Zunghars. See: Da Qing lichao Shengzu Ren huangdi shilu 大清歷朝聖祖仁皇帝實錄 [The Veritable Records of the Shenzu Ren (Kangxi) Emperor of the Great Qing Dynasty]. 188:4, 37th year, 4th month, guihai 癸亥 day of the Kangxi reign (June 28, 1698). Facsimile edition reprinted by Zhonghua shuju, Beijing 1985 (abbreviated SZSL); see also: SZSL, 183:4, 36th year, 4th month, jiayin 甲寅 day of the Kangxi reign (May 24, 1697); ibid., 183:29, 36th year, 5th month, guimao 癸卯 day of the Kangxi reign (July 12, 1697). 2 Daxueshi 大學士 – title of Zhang Yushu the courtier with whom Kangxi had this conversation.

100

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

from Dayuan is a heavenly horse. The sweat of the horse looks like blood, and it runs like the wind. Being treated as an auspicious sign, it is even turned into a motif of music and songs. Never having seen it, the people always say that ‘it is a false story’. Now, the sweat of the horse your majesty is riding coincides with the records. If the fame of kindheartedness and might of your majesty have not spread extensively, how can we obtain such a special horse?’”3

Some 20 years later, the analogy being drawn between the Kazakh state and ancient Dayuan 大宛 appeared again in Tulisˇen’s map (Chinese: Tulishen 圖理 珅), the Qing envoy to the Kalmyk state along the Edil (Volga) riverbank from 1712 to 1715.4 Tulisˇen’s map is transmitted in two versions: one in Chinese inscribed with the Chinese name ‘Yiyulu ditu’ 異域錄地圖 (Additional Map Recording Memories of Foreign Regions), and another in Manchu named as ‘Ba Na i Nirugan’ (Physical Map).5 The geographical names on the two versions generally have a one-to-one correspondence. However, some of the Manchu names are shortened compared to the Chinese ones. Such a difference between the two language versions of the map draws our attention to the following: depicting Kazakh as a state with extensive territory, Tulisˇen refers to it just as ‘Hasak’ in the Manchu version (see map no. 2 below), but he then makes the proper identification by saying: “Kazakh – it was the very Dayuan state”.6 We will come back to this difference. Before that, let’s first turn our attention to the analogy being drawn between the Kazakh state and ancient Dayuan. Obviously, the analogy that had been suggested by Kangxi, the Qing emperor, in 1696 was made concrete on the map drawn by Tulisˇen. 3 Wen Da 溫達 et al., Shengzu Ren huangdi qinzheng pingding shuomo fanglüe 聖祖仁皇帝親 征平定朔漠方略. Repr., 2 vols. (book no. 4 of the ‘Chinese Historical Documents on Tibetology’ book series, Academy of Social Sciences of Xizang [Tibet], 西藏社會科學院西藏學漢 學文獻編輯室編輯‘西藏學漢文文獻匯刻’第四輯) (abbreviated QPSF), 34:13–14. The translation and emphasis marks in the text are mine. 4 In the 51st year of the Kangxi reign (1712), the Qing court dispatched an embassy, consisting of Tulisˇen, Inli and other Manchu officials, to the banks of the Volga, to return the favor of an envoy sent by Aiuka khan of the Kalmyk state. Tulisˇen and the rest crossed the lands of the Khalkha Mongols and Russia, as well as a corner of the Kazakhs’ land located along the banks of the Irtysh, before reaching the Volga; in the 54th year of the Kangxi reign (1715), the embassy returned to the Qing capital. Tulisˇen’s account of these three years of travel were compiled in a book and published in both the Chinese and Manchu languages. The book’s Chinese language version is called Yiyu lu 異域錄 (Memoirs Regarding the Foreign Lands); the Manchu language version is called ‘Lakcaha Jecen De Takuraha Babe Ejehe Bithei’ (Memoirs of Being Sent on a Mission to the Foreign Lands beyond the Borderlands). 5 Concerning the Chinese and Manchu versions of the map, we draw on the work of Chuang Chifa. See: Chuang Chi-fa (ed.) 莊吉發, Man Han Yiyulu Hsiao Chu 滿漢異域錄校注 (Works Comparing the Manchu and Chinese Language in Yiyulu, and Their Interpretation), Taipei 1983. 6 See: place no. 9 marked by us on both versions of the map.

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

101

Map no. 1: Yiyulu ditu. Source: Yiyulu (Xiao Fang Hu Zhai Yu Di Cong Chao edition)

Map no. 2: Ba Na i Nirugan. Source: Chuang Chi-fa, Man Han Yiyulu Hsiao Chu, Taipei, 1983

102

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

So, why the analogy? First, the explanation lies in the story about the ‘heavenly horse’ (tian ma 天馬) or ‘blood-sweating horse’ (hanxue ma 汗血馬) itself. According to what Zhang Yushu told the Qing emperor Kangxi (see the text above), the ‘heavenly horse’ is “treated as an auspicious sign” by the ancients. Also, in the ‘Shiji’ (Records of the Grand Historian) written by Sima Qian 司馬遷 (‘Herodotus of the East’), we read these lines, in which the same Chinese view can be traced back to the Han dynasty period (202 BCE–220 CE): “Sometime earlier, the emperor7 had divined by the ‘Book of Changes’ and been told that ‘divine horses are due to appear from the northwest’. When the Wusun came with their horses, which were of an excellent breed, he named them ‘heavenly horses’. Later, however, he obtained the blood-sweating horses from Dayuan, which were even hardier. He therefore changed the name of the Wusun horses, calling them ‘horses from the western extremity’, and used the name ‘heavenly horses’ for the horses of Dayuan.”8

From the relevant Chinese sources, we know that these activities being mentioned above stemmed from the struggles over hegemony in Inner Asia between the Han 漢 and Xiongnu 匈奴 empires. For the Han court, the ‘auspicious sign’ meant, first, a potential alliance with contemporary Inner Asian states such as Wusun 烏 孫 and Dayuan. In addition, it also meant the possibility of obtaining the finest mounts for the Han imperial campaigns against the Xiongnu.9 Eighteen centuries later, a similar situation presented itself before the Qing empire in its struggle over hegemony in Central Asia. So, the historic drama was replayed: Just like Han Wudi, emperor Kangxi also turned his attention to Central Asia. This time, the protagonists were the Qing dynasty and the Zunghar state. This is one of the main reasons why a Kazakh horse was treated as an ‘auspicious sign’ by the Qing emperor Kangxi and his courtiers. The Qing empire got what it desired: during the reigns of the later Qing emperors such as Yongzheng (the son of Kangxi) and Qianlong (the grandson of Kangxi), the Qing empire established its connection with the Kazakhs step by step. In Qianlong’s, one of the bases of the Qing’s victory in its campaigns against the Zunghars was its effective utilization of the Kazakh-Zunghar struggles and Kazakh mounts. By employing the Kazakh horses into both of its military operations and economic enterprises, such as opening the wastelands, the Qing empire not only fulfilled its goal of destroying the Zunghar state, but also established its firm rule over the land later called Xinjiang.10 7 Here the reference is to the Wudi Emperor (156–87 BCE) of the Han dynasty. 8 Sima Qian 司馬遷, Shiji 史記, 123 vols., Beijing 1982. 9 For these reasons, the Han court sent Zhang Qian to seek an alliance with the Wusun and Dayuan in 109 BCE. After that, Han Wudi sent his army twice (104 BCE and 103 BCE) to Ferghana. 10 Concerning Kazakh-Qing trade and its meaning, see: Ling Yongkuang 林永匡, Wang Xi 王 熹, Qingdai Xibei minzu maoyi shi 清代西北貿易史 (A History of Trade in the North-

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

103

There was an additional reason for the Manchu emperor to welcome such an ‘auspicious sign’: The nuance of the difference between the Manchu language version and the Chinese language version of Tulisˇen’s map concerning the ‘Kazakh’ name, which I mentioned above, needs to be explained here. I think that this inconspicuous difference reveals a significant truth – whether or not they were of interest to the Manchu populace, to the ordinary Manchu language reader, the concept of ‘heavenly horse’ and the analogy drawn between the Kazakh and the ancient Dayuan state meant much more for the Aisin Gioro house: by stressing its relevancy to these old conceptions in the Chinese world, the Manchu ruling house was trying to prove the legitimacy of its supremacy in China proper, despite its ‘barbarian’ origin. In traditional Chinese literature and historiography, the start of the events connected with the ‘heavenly horses’ is generally treated not only as the beginning of China’s military operations in Central Asia, but also as a symbol of the submission of foreigners to China. Emphasizing this analogy, the Kangxi emperor surely wanted to show that he could be compared favorably with the greatest emperors in Chinese history, such as Han Wudi, and in this way, he wanted to prove that he was granted the mandate as the ‘Son of Heaven’, and inherited legitimacy as the universal ruler of the Middle Kingdom and beyond. The early Qing court’s views of the Kazakhs had been widely sustained in Qing dynasty writings for quite a long time. So, we find that, when the Qing emperor Qianlong encountered Kazakhs face-to-face in the 1750s, he and his court scribes still favored the conception of ‘Kazakh – that is the Dayuan state in history’ and quite a number of written ‘researches’, paintings, and poetry lines were produced in this manner. The description on the portrait entitled as ‘Hasake toumu’ (哈薩 克頭目) is one of them: “The Kazakhs are located at the place north-west of the Zunghar [state]. It was the Dayuan [state] in the Han dynasty. The Kazakhs are divided into the Eastern and the Western. They have never communicated with China since time immemorial. Then, in western Region), Beijing 1991; James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass – Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759–1864, Stanford, California 1998; Peter C. Perdue, China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia, Cambridge, MA 2005. A batch of the relevant Manchu archival documents have been translated into modern Kazakh, see: Еженханұлы Б. (Ezhenkhan-uli B.) (ed.), Қазақ хандығы мен Цин патшалығының сауда байланыстары туралы қытай мұрағат құжаттары (Chinese Archival Documents on the Trading Relationships between Kazakh Khanate and Qing Court), vol. 1, Almaty 2008; Еженханұлы Б. (Ezhenkhan-uli B.) (ed.), Қазақ хандығы мен Цин патшалығының саясидипломатиялық байланыстары туралы қытай мұрағат құжаттары (Chinese Archival Documents on the Political-Diplomatic Relationships between Kazakh Khanate and Qing Court), vol. 1, Almaty 2009.

104

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

the 22nd year of Qianlong reign (1757), leading their followers, the Eastern Kazakh’s Abulai and Abulmambit, as well as the Western Kazakh’s Abuliz submitted to the Qing Emperor’s rule. And all of them sent their sons or nephews to have audiences with the Emperor. By this way they and their land were incorporated into our state […].”11

Yet, equating ‘Kazakh’ and ‘Dayuan’ is erroneous because Dayuan in the Han dynasty period sources corresponds to the Ferghana valley and the state was located there. So, the scribes in the Qing court realized the impropriety of the analogy and eventually pointed it out. Later, although it gradually faded away in subsequent Chinese writings, this analogy offered a template for the Qing empire in handling affairs concerning the Kazakhs and other Inner Asian peoples in general. Through such a mindset, the Qing-Kazakh relationship was gradually inserted into the general mosaic of the so-called ‘tributary system’ of Chinese foreign relations.12 And whenever we look at the historic mosaic, we always find that it is full of ambiguities and mutability. Of the historical legacy bred from these ambiguities and mutability, there are different interpretations of the historical documents and events, as well as of the true meanings of the Qing-Kazakh relationship in general. Much can be said about this. First, the case concerning the incredibility of the Chinese translation version of the first letter by Abulai Khan to the Qing court, or ‘Abulai xiangbiao’ 阿布賚降表 (Abulai’s declaration of surrender) as it is called in the Qing sources, will be discussed. 11 The portrait entitled as Hasake toumu 哈薩克頭目 (‘Chieftain of the Kazakhs’) is one of the ethnographic paintings kept in ‘Zhigong tu’ (or ‘Tche-kong-t’ou’ in French transcription) 職 貢圖, a Qing imperial album of paintings. Our source ‘Tche-kong-t’ou’ (Zhigong tu) is kept in: Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF), B 7b rés. 12 We may take the discussion of the scholars in the past half century on the topic of ‘tribute and frontier trade’ as an example. According to John Fairbank, all the trade between China and its neighbors was conducted under the rubric of ‘tribute’ (‘gong’ 貢), a Sino-centric concept stressing the superior position of the Chinese emperor and his benevolent grace in allowing outsiders to present him with gifts (John K. Fairbank [ed.], The Traditional Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge 1968). James Millward and others have convincingly demonstrated the inadequacy of this concept for grasping the complex interactions of the Qing empire with its people (James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass – Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759–1864, Stanford, CA 1998). Nicola Di Cosmo has developed the concept of tribute as an ‘environment’ that surrounded all of the Qing’s relations at its frontiers, comprising commercial, security, and ritual relationships (Nicola Di Cosmo, Kirghiz Nomads the Qing Frontier: Tribute, Trade, or exchange? in: Nicola Di Cosmo, Don J. Wyatt [eds.], Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, London/New York 2003). In 2010, Takahiro Onuma tried to find a new way of approaching Qing relationships, specifically with Kazakh nomads by developing his concept of ‘ejen-albatu relationships’, a somewhat ambiguous idea that Onuma himself defines as “a system of diplomacy centering on the diplomatic protocols” (Takahiro Onuma, The Relation between Qing Dynasty and Kazakhs in 1770’s: The Closing of the North-Western Border of Qing dynasty, in: To¯yo¯shi kenkyu¯, 69/2 [2010], 315–348).

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

2.

105

The So-Called ‘Abulai’s Declaration of Surrender’

Since the second half of the 18th century, the Chinese version of the first letter of Abulai Khan to the Qing court has been seen as the most important document concerning the history of the Qing-Kazakh relationship. The standard interpretation is: “The first letter of Abulai Khan addressed to Qianlong is a symbol of the incorporation of the Great and Middle Hordes of the Kazakhs into the Qing Empire.”13 However, how reliable is this Chinese translation of Abulai Khan’s letter? In the last 10 years, three versions of the letter have been published by the First Historical Archives of China, of them one is in Tödö Mongolian (Western Mongolian)14 and two are written in Manchu. Tentatively, hereafter the two Manchu versions shall be called ‘Manchu translation version 1’ and ‘Manchu translation version 2’.15 The difference between the later found versions of the letter is not obvious,16 but, when we compare them with the more popularly circulated Chinese trans13 One of the examples of the works that come to this conclusion can be found in: Li Sheng 厲聲, Hasakesitan jiqi yu Zhongguo Xinjiang de guanxi (15 shiji–20 shiji) 哈薩克及其與中國新疆 的關係 (15世紀–20世紀中期) (Kazakhstan and its Relations with China Regarding Xinjiang [15th–20th Centuries]), Harbin 2004, 108–114. 14 This Tödö Mongolian (or Western Mongolian) copy version was made while Abulai’s envoys were still on the road to Beijing. It is kept as an appendix of the memorial submitted by the Qing general Zhaohui 兆惠who received the Kazakh envoys at Uliyasutai. See: The First Historical Archives of China, Junjichu Manwen lufu dang 軍機處滿文錄副檔 (abbreviated JMLZ), document no. 1643-008 (original) and 045-002679 (microfilm). The document is dated “18th day of the 6th month of the 22nd year of the Qianlong dynasty” (August 2, 1757). 15 The ‘Manchu translation version 1’ is kept together with the memorial of Zhaohui we mentioned above. Zhaohui had purposely copied and sent out this ‘Manchu translation version 1’ (together with the Tödö Mongolian version) to the Qing court before the original letter reached there. Obviously, Zhaohui’s haste had something to do with the imperial order about translating and announcing ‘Abulai’s letter of submission’ to the world. The ‘Manchu translation version 2’ was mingled into a group of documents connected with the Lesser Horde Kazakh missions to Beijing in 1762–1763. It is kept as an appendix of the memorial of Jingeri, a Qing official in Urumchi, and the document is dated as “the 27th day of the 10th month of the 27th year of Qianlong reign” (December 12, 1762) (see: The First Historical Archives of China, JMLZ, document no. 1981-027 (original) and 065-0624 (microfilm). This group of documents is included in the collection: Xing Yongfu 邢永福, Zou Ailian 鄒愛 蓮, Bakhyt Ezhenkhanuli 巴哈提, 依加漢 (eds.), Qingdai Zhong Ha guanxi dangan huibian 清代中哈關係檔案彙編 (A Collection of the Archival Documents concerning Sino-Kazakh Relationship in Qing Dynasty Period) (A Facsimile Collection, vol. 1–2,) (abbreviated QZHGDH), vol. 2, 104–109, document no 42, Beijing 2006. There is one difference between these two Manchu translation versions. 16 But, there is a difference comparing the Tödö Mongolian version, ‘Manchu translation version 1’, and ‘Manchu translation version 2’: in the Tödö Mongolian version and ‘Manchu translation version 1’, a sentence reads: “I, Ablai, my children and the ‘albatus’ wish that you

106

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

lation, a very different vision appears before us. Here are the ‘Manchu translation version 2’ and the Chinese translation version of the letter: Manchu translation version 2

Chinese version

“I Respectfully raise this letter to his highness, the great khan: Since the time of my forefathers Esïm khan and Jängïr khan, Ezhen’s decrees have not found their way to us. We are pleased that the great khan has now turned his attention to us. I, Ablai, wish to make it known that the great khan has bestowed his favor on me, on my children and on the entire Kazakh dependents. [Therefore, I have dispatched] 7 chief ambassadors together with 11 [attendants]”.17

“I, the humble khan of Kazakhs and [the great emperor’s] servant Ablai, respectfully submit this tributary memorial to the great emperor’s throne. Since [the ruling times of] my ancestors Esïm Khan and Jängïr Khan, we have had no possibility to meet the ‘Zhongguo jiaohua’ 中國教化 [Chinese enlightenment through Confucian education]. We received the great emperor’s order just recently. Because the great emperor is bestowing his favor to us, a tribe in a fringe land, I, your servant, and all my dependences are filled with exultation, all of us feel grateful for the mercy of the great emperor. I, your servant Ablai, would lead all the Kazakhs to obey the great lord and to be the dependent servants of China forever. Kowtowing [remotely] to the great emperor and wishing to communicate with the great emperor, I respectfully sent out 7 of my chieftains and the chieftains’ 11 attendants to respectfully submit my ‘biaowen’ 表文 [tributary memorial] to the great emperor’s throne and to pay homage to the great emperor. Besides, I send respectfully the horses as my gift to the great emperor. [On this account] I respectfully submit [this tributary memorial]”.18

should bestow the title of responsibility as leader of the Kazakhs on me”, while in the ‘Manchu translation 2’ version it reads: “I, Ablai, wish to make it known that the great khan has bestowed his favor on me, my children and the entire Kazakh dependences.” The difference is not without its meaning. And I conjecture that some inconspicuous amendment was already made when the letter was copied and translated first by Zhaohui, the Qing official, while the ‘Manchu translation version 2’ seems formed in a different situation. Moreover, I think that the ‘Manchu translation version 2” is very probably closer to the original text. 17 The First Historical Archives of China, an appendix to the document: JMLZ, no. 1643– 008 (micro-film − 045–002679); Also see: QZHGDH, vol. 2, 104–109, document no. 42. The translation and the emphasis marks in the text are mine. 18 Da Qing Gaozong Chun (Qianlong) huangdi shilu 大清高宗純（乾隆）皇帝實錄 (Veritable Records of the Gaozong Chun [Qianlong] Emperor of the Great Qing Dynasty), Qinggui 慶 桂et al., Beijing 1986, 543:16b (abbreviated GZSL). Also see: Fuheng and others, (Qingding Huangyu) Xiyu tu zhi 欽定皇域西域圖志 (Imperially Commissioned Gazetteer of the Western Regions of the Imperial Domain) 1782. Repr., in: Zhong Xingqi 鐘興麒 and others, Xiyu tu zhi jiaozhu 西域圖志校注 (Xiyu tu zhi with notes), 44 vols., Urumqi 2002. The translation and the emphasis marks in the text are mine.

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

107

As the content of the ‘Manchu translation version 2’ shows, the letter of Abulai Khan comes closer to the traditional modes of communication used by the various Inner Asian nomadic peoples in history. From the text we know that Abulai Khan’s first letter to the Qing court is in no sense a document that was intended to declare submission; rather, it was written as a diplomatic communication in the straightforward and humble tone used at the time between Inner Asian khans. From the Qing court records relevant to this event, we know that, as soon as he learned about the arrival of the letter, the Qing emperor Qianlong gave an order to have the letter translated and disseminated. This order went as follows: “After the Kazakh khan Ablai’s letter of submission is translated, announce it in its entirety to the world. My order should be sent to every land.”19 But, if we consider carefully the intent of the newly-identified versions of the letter mentioned above, then what had reached the Qing emperor, and been announced “in its entirety to the world,” did not reflect Abulai’s intent. The Qing court and the flattering Chinese scribes of its day sought to broadcast their emperor’s ‘greatness’ to the entire world (that is, China proper and beyond), and for that reason they had to fabricate both the idea that the Kazakh Abulai had expressed regret that “since the time of my forefathers, we have not been able to benefit from Chinese enlightenment” (even though Abulai the Kazakh khan, as an Inner Asian nomadic leader, had nothing to do with ‘Confucian education’, and hardly knew what it was), and the idea that this Kazakh ruler had expressed the intention that “I will be China’s eternal servant.” Even though a fabricated document like this was disseminated ‘in its entirety to the world’, historical facts show that the Qing-Kazakh relationship even as early as in the 1760s can’t be called a ‘sovereign-dependent’ one. From the information kept in the Manchu documents that have been released in last two decades we know more clearly that instead of the pretended early closeness, the cultural-psychological orientation and security considerations prompted the Qing authorities to change their policy gradually towards the Kazakhs in the 1760’s. One sharp turn can be seen in the ethnic policy carried out by Qing in the borderland: From this time on, Kalmuks who had been the sworn enemy to both Kazakhs and Qing were treated as a people who could be used in defending the western borderland of the Qing, while the Kazakhs, who had been reliable allies of Qing in its ‘pacifying campaigns’ before the 1760s, became people who must be excluded from the western side of the Qing’s unilaterally conceived borderline (‘jecen’ in Manchu), namely the Ayagoz-Balkash-Chu line. Meantime, the rulers of the Kazakhs were also trying to adjust their relations with Qing – while trying 19 GZSL, 543: 16b. In Chinese the text is: “著將哈薩克汗阿布賚降表翻譯，宣佈中外，並將此 通行曉諭知之”.

108

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

to maintain the vested political and economic interests by further utilizing ‘intercultural languages’,20 they also put out concrete territorial claims. In another letter addressed to Qianlong in 1761, Abulai Khan indicated that his pasturelands reached in the East to Chorgo and in the South to Sarïbel, which basically coincide with the modern Kazakh-Chinese and Kazakh-Kirgiz borderlines.21

3.

Chinggis Khan’s legacy and the ‘Kazakh tribute’

As early as the 1710s, Kangxi already emphasized the ethno-geographic configuration of the Kazakh land and its people in order to conquer the Zunghars. According to the ‘Qing shilu’, Kangxi held a council meeting with his courtiers and some Jesuit missionaries in the 4th month of the 52nd year of the Kangxi reign (1713), during which he garnered the following information about Kazakhs: “Kazakhs […] they are always bound together by the businesses of slaughtering, destroying and thieving, and their unity is powerful. Whenever one of their women falls victim to robbery, she assuredly cuts the robber by her own hand, and then returns to her homeland. Their land is hot, and the grasslands are lush. Sweat pours from their horses like blood. Apples, pears and grapes grow there, and their fruits are all giant, wellformed and delicious. Apart from them, there are still many kinds of Muslim people in the northwest.22 All of them are the descendants of emperor Yuan Taizu 元太祖. Another branch of them lives near the Small West Ocean23, and evidently comprises 100,000 people by itself, all living in yurts.”24

This account suggests that, as early as 1713, the Qing court had already begun to realize that there was a warlike state of Kazakhs beyond China’s western borderlands, and the state not only controlled the steppe, but also ruled over some of Central Asia’s25 settled populations.26 Furthermore, the fact that nomadic peoples

20 Regarding the Kazakh-Qing correspondence, we are more inclined to accept the explanation given by Peter C. Perdue. In his book published in 2005, Peter C. Perdue writes: “I would rather call it a kind of intercultural language, serving multiple purposes for its participants … masking the different self-conceptions of its participants with formal expressions but allowing each, in different degrees, a measure of autonomy” (Peter C. Perdue, China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia, Cambridge 2005, 403). 21 My research on this Manchu translation of Abulai khan’s letter was published in ‘Saksaha’ at the end of 2018. 22 The text in Chinese is rendered Xibei 西北. By this, the Qing emperor clearly referred to the lands of Central Inner Asia. 23 The text in Chinese is rendered Xiao Xiyang 小西洋, namely ‘Little ocean in the west’. This apparently refers to the Caspian Sea. 24 SZSL, 253:10b–12a. The translation and the emphasis marks in the text are mine. 25 I use the term Central Asia here to indicate the region of modern Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

109

like the Kazakhs were referred to as ‘Yuan Taizu’s descendants’, namely the descendants of Chinggis Khan, indicates that the Qing court was also aware of the role of Chinggis Khan’s Golden lineage (Kaz. töre), an important legacy of Chinggis Khan, in the political life of Kazakh society. As is well known among scholars of Qing history, after the victory of the Manchu Hong Taiji’s army against Mongol Ligdan Khan in 1635, the Manchu Aisin Gioro ruling house tried hard to establish its image and reputation as the legitimate successor of the Chinggisid legacy, in which the most significant activities carried out by the Manchu Aisin Gioro house were: 1. marriage alliances between it and the Khalkha Mongol Chinggisids;27 and 2. the propaganda of Hong Taiji’s claim that he inherited the jade seal of Chinggis Khan.28 As a result of the efforts of the Manchu Aisin Gioro house, Mongols, by addressing the Manchu rulers as Bogdo Khan or Ejen Khan, began to recognize the Manchu emperors not only as the heads of the Qing state, but also as the grand khans of the Mongols themselves. And, as scholars such as Laura. J. Newby have already pointed out, the Qing emperor’s contact with the Turkic-Muslims was based on the claim to his Chinggisid lineage and an appeal to Mongol-style universalism.29 Information kept in the Manchu documents concerning the early official contacts between Qing court and the Kazakhs affirms such a conclusion. 26 This reminds us of the account of Anthony Jenkinson, the 16th century British traveler, about the Kazakhs. In his travelling notes, Jenkinson reveals that the Kazakhs and Kyrgyz “cut off the trade route between Bukhara and China” in the 1550s (Quoted in: Vasily Vladimirovich Barthold, Four Studies on the History of Central Asia, vol. 1, 156–160. Translated from Russian by Vladimir and Tatiana Minorsky, Leiden 1956). Of course, we may doubt the precision of Jenkinson’s words ‘cut off ’, because we read in Ming Chinese writings that, actually, there were concrete trading activities between Central Asia and China in the 1550s, of which we can mention these two accounts in Ming shilu: 1. On the jiashen 甲申 day of the 4th month of the 33rd year (1554) of the Jiajing reign, “Sultan Muzafar, the head of Turfan, and the heads of other ‘dimian’s [countries] such as Samarkand, Tianfang guo, Rumi and Hami sent out their own envoys to our imperial court in order to have an audience with our emperor, to pay tributes to our emperor with their horses and local products. According to the imperial rules and regulations, banquets and rewards are given to them” (Kyoto Imperial university, Department of Literature, Institute for Inner Asian studies (compiled), Ming Dynasty Sources on Central Asia – Extractions from the “Ming Shi Lu”, 722. Kyoto, 1974 (明代西域史料明實錄抄.京都帝國大學文學部內陸アジア研究所, 昭和四十 九年) (abbreviated MSL); 2. The same words as in the first account here were found on the dingchou 丁丑 day of the 3rd month of the 38th year (1559) of Jiajing reign (MSL, 723). 27 Dalizhabu 達力紮布, Qingdai Chahaer Zhasake Qi kao 清代察哈爾紮薩克旗考 (Notes on the Jasak Qi in Qing Dynasty), in: Lishi yanjiu 歷史研究 (Historical Studies) 5 (2005), 47–59. 28 In one of his relevant political propagandas in 1635, Hong Taiji carried out the ceremony that announced the recovery of the jade ‘seal’ of the Yuan dynasty. See: Kanda Nobuo 神田信夫/ Matsumura Jun 松村潤/Okada Hidehiro 岡田英弘 (eds.), Kyu¯ Manshu¯ to¯ 舊滿州檔 (The Old Manchu Archives), vol. 2, Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko 1972–1975, 258–261. 29 Laura J. Newby, The Empire and the Khanate: A Political History of Qing Relations with Khoqand c1760–1860, Leiden/Boston 2005, 42.

110

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

In the fall of 1757, approximately at the same time as the first Kazakh diplomatic mission to the Qing court, the envoys sent out by Qing borderland officials to the Kazakhs also arrived at Abulai’s horde. Interestingly, the composition of this official mission bore a strong Chinggisid color: the chief envoy Erkeshara, who held the Qing title ‘gong’ 公 (duke), was a Chinggisid descendant of the Khalkha Mongols. Another main member of the mission, Wanchukdorji, was also a Chinggisid.30 The Qing court’s selection of its envoys was, of course, not a random shot in the dark. Rather, it was an elaborate operation. Erkeshara, the later Qing envoy, had once been captured by the Zunghars and lived for some two years under them in the 1740s, and he developed a friendship with Abulai, then a Kazakh sultan who had also been captured by the Zunghars.31 As a friend and remote kinsman of Abulai the Middle Horde Kazakh khan, Erkeshara served for the Qing court as a goodwill ambassador to the Kazakhs. Very little was recorded about the reminiscing and chitchatting between the two distant relatives. Yet, Abulai Khan was obviously informed by Erkeshara about the status of the ‘Manchu khan’, namely the Qing emperor, as a legitimate monarch. And Abulai Khan began to see the Manchu khan as one of the two great rulers in the Eurasian continent and even started to call himself a son of the Manchu khan. In the palace memorial presented by Nusan, the imperial commissioner to the mentioned Manchu mission to Abulai Khan’s horde, we are told that Abulai Khan said these words to the Qing envoys: “According to what I am told, it is the Manchu khan who keeps the highest status in the East, while in the West it is the Kongker khan who keeps such a status. Now, I turn out to be a son of the great Manchu khan […].”32

Here using the name ‘Manchu khan’ Abulai surely indicated the Qing emperor; while, the name ‘Kongker’ here must be the original form of the name of the state of Kong-ga-er 控噶尓 or Hong-ga-er 洪噶爾 which appeared in the 18th century Qing dynasty Chinese sources, and it can be identified with the Ottoman Empire.33 30 JMLZ, document no. 1671–015 (micro-film no. 047–1338–1388). 31 A brief note concerning the friendship can be found in a Manchu archival document. See: The First Historical Archives of China and The Centre of the Geographic-Historical Studies of the Borderlands of China 中國第一歷史檔案館與中國邊疆史地研究 中心 (ed.), Qingdai Xinjiang Manwen dang’an huibian 清代新疆滿文檔案彙編 (The Collection of the Manchu Archival Documents about Xinjiang at the Time of the Qing Dynasty) (abbreviated QXMDH), vol. 25, Guiling: Guangxi shifan daxue chubanshe 2012, 184–188. 32 The Manchu text reads: “meni donjihangge. ˇsun dekdere ergide manju han amba. un tuhere ergide kungkar han anba. te bi amba ejen i jui oho”. See: JMLZ, document no. 1671–015 (micro-film no. 047–1338–1388). The translation is mine. 33 We find various forms of the name in the Qing dynasty Chinese sources such as Xiyu wenjian lu 西域聞見錄, Xiyu dili tushuo 西域地理圖說, and others. Although there are different views among previous researchers on the identification and localization of this state, yet

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

111

This means that, Abulai Khan in 1757 treated the Ottoman sultan and the Manchu khan (namely the Qing emperor) as the two greatest rulers on the Eurasian continent. What made Abulai Khan draw such a conclusion was surely something else than his accurate estimation of the strengths of the major powers in the Eurasian continent at that time, because, by all accounts, he was aware of the power of his northern neighbor, the Russian Empire, from which he felt an increased pressure that was stronger than that from any of his other neighbors.34 many scholars agree that it has something to do with the Ottoman Empire (See: Onuma Takahiro 小昭孝博, ‘Konggaer guo’ xiaokao’ 控噶爾國小考 [A Brief Note on ‘Kongge’er’ State], in: Minzu shi yanjiu 民族史研究 [Studies on Ethnic Histories] 8 [2008], 153–163. See also: Zhonghan 鐘焓, Kongga’er shiliao pingzhu 控噶爾史料評注 [Commentaries and notes on the sources on the history of Kongga’er], in: Minzu shi yanjiu 9 [2010], 153–163). Recently, we found two accounts which can be treated as proof that both the Qing ManchuChinese and the Inner Asians in the 18th century were really referencing the Ottoman Empire by using the name Kongga’er (Hongga’er)/Kongker: 1. In the Qianlong Map we read this description about a city near the Mediterranean: “This is Gongsidandinabole city 拱斯當底 訥伯勒和屯where the khan of the Hongga’er state 紅噶爾國resides.” Here the two characters ‘hetun’ 和屯stand for the Mongolian word ‘khoton’, which means ‘city’ (See: Wang Qianjin 汪前進, Liu Ruofang 劉若芳 (eds.), Qingting san da shice quantu ji 清廷三大實測全圖集 (A Comprehensive Collection of the Qing Court Three Grand Maps Drawn by Actual Measurement), Qianlong neifu yutu 乾隆内附輿圖, Beijing 2007; Here the name ‘Gongsidandinabole’ is obviously a transcription of Constantinople, namely Istanbul; 2. In a Manchu document we read this: 1771, when the Kalmuks migrated eastward from the Volga region to the Qing territory, a group of Kongker hu¯ise (Muslims), who originally had been captured by the Kalmuks, disaffiliated themselves from the Kalmuks half-way through the eastward migration and sought asylum among Kazakhs who belonged to Abulai khan. Then, having decided to send these people home, Abulai khan said to them: “Although we share a common ancestor, yet the Kalmuks obstructed the communication between us previously. After the migration of the Kalmuks, may the way between us be open, and we will strengthen our relations. Pass these words of mine to the head of your country.” See: The Department of ethnic studies of the Institute of ethnology of the Academy of social sciences of China, the Manchu language department of the First historical archives of China (ed.), Manwen Tu’erhute dangan yi bian 滿文土爾扈特檔案譯編 (A Collection of the Manchu Language Archival Documents on Torgauts), 255, Beijing 1988. It is clear here that the country whose communication links were being obstructed by the Kalmuks on the Volga was the Ottoman Empire, and, by mentioning the “same [Turkic] origin”, Abulai khan was aware of the historic linkage between Kazakhs and Turks in Anatolia. 34 Chokan Valikhanov, a direct descendant of Abulai khan, left us an account about Abulai’s conversation with Galdan Tsering, when Abulai was held in captivity by the Zunghar khontaiji in 1741. What Abulai said to Galdan Tsering is quite like his words written in the Manchu document we are discussing here. But in Valikhanov’s record, we find that Abulai held a broader understanding of the great powers around him. The late Professor Joseph F. Fletcher noticed this story and translated it into English. Here I quote his translation: “[The Oyirad chief] Galdan [Tsering, d. 1745] asked Ablai [the khan of the Kazakh Middle Horde, d. 1781], while the latter was his prisoner, ‘Which sovereigns are above the others?’ ‘Kondaker (the Crimean khan), the Russian White Tsar, Izhen-khan [the emperor of China], Galdan, then myself.’ ‘Men, men [Right, right]!’ Galdan was saying. ‘You rule a small people but are worthy of a great people,’ said Ablai.” (See: Joseph F. Fletcher, China and Central Asia, in: John K. Fairbank [ed.], The Traditional Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Rela-

112

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

Here in the source a subjective political value orientation of Abulai Khan is reflected, and it finds its roots in the older Inner Asian nomadic tradition. First, an old Inner Asian political approach, namely a metaphoric family tie approach between Inner Asian nomadic khans and China emperors reappeared here. Such an approach had existed intermittently from ancient times down to the time of Abulai Khan. In the Chinese historical writings, we find the alleged ties between Maodun chanyu 冒頓單于 and Han dynasty emperors, between the Tujue kaghan 突厥可汗 and Tang dynasty emperors, and between Timurid rulers and Ming dynasty emperors. Quite a number of Inner Asian dynasties treated the relations between their dynasties and Chinese Tang and Song ruling houses as sheng jiu 甥舅 (nephew and uncle),35 or called themselves by the names of the ruling houses that had previously existed in North China36. In describing the relations between the Timurids and the Ming dynasty, the late Professor Joseph F. Fletcher already pointed out that the “Metaphoric family ties of this sort express a kind of political equality among rulers, in which the ‘son’ or ‘younger brother’ acknowledged the greater power (as opposed to the juridical authority) of the ‘father’ or ‘elder brother’ – i. e., the ‘son’ or ‘younger brother’ was a less powerful ally and not a subject.”37 The concept of metaphoric family ties was an Inner Asian nomadic tradition rather than a Chinese one, because, according to the Chinese world system which was conceived out of the virtues of Confucianism, a relationship between a Chinese emperor and a barbarian could by no means be expressed as something like a familial relationship. So, the reasonable explanation of the origin of the concept is that it came from Inner Asian nomads who maintained a strong tradition of organizing their society on the principle of imagined consanguinity.38

35 36

37 38

tions, Cambridge 1968, 206–224, 337–368, here 346, note 7). It seems that Professor Fletcher didn’t understand the Kazakh word ‘мен’ here – it means ‘I, me’ instead of ‘right’, and his explanation of the name Kondaker as ‘Crimean khan’ (the explanation from the editor of this book: Chokan Valikhanov, Sbornie sochinenii v piati tomakh, Alma-ata 1984 [abbreviated Valikhanov-sochinenie] vol. 1, 222, note 22) is also different from ours. The account of Wang Yande, the Song dynasty envoy, about the Xizhou Huihu 西州回鶻 (Idiqut Uyghur in Turfan and Beshbaliq) offers us a famous case of this. Two famous cases can be mentioned here: 1. Some of the Qara Khan rulers bore the title Tabgach khan. The term Tabgach in the Medieval Turkic language corresponds to Chinese Tuoba 拓跋, an Inner Asian people who turned to be the founders of the Northern Wei dynasty in China; 2. After the collapse of the Liao dynasty in Northern China, the name of the ruling house of that dynasty, Kitai (Kidan is its plural form) was brought to Central Inner Asia, and a new Inner Asian dynasty was named Qara Kitai (‘Black Kitai’ or ‘Western Kitai’). What is interesting is the fact that the name ‘Kitai’ turned out to be the standard name for ‘China’ and ‘Chinese’ in many languages later in the Eurasian continent. Fletcher 1968, 366, note 112. It is proper to mention here the understanding of such a social organizing principle among Kazakhs by Chokan Valikhanov, the grandson of Abulai khan. In his work, Valikhanov compared tribal relations with those of the family: the relationship between a horde and a

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

113

So, we can say that the beginning of the relationship between the Qing court and the Kazakhs led by Abulai Khan was a ‘rediscovery’ of the old approach of the Sino-Turkic engagement in Eurasia. The fact that Abulai Khan, who had never really had any contact with anyone within the Qing ruling house before 1757,39 deemed that he had a relation with the Manchu khan had much to do with Chinggis Khan’s legacy being employed by the Qing court in its early engagement with the Kazakhs. On July 3, 1761, Gordeev, a Russian translator who had visited Abulai Khan and learnt about the Kazakh missions to the Qing court previously led by Jolbarïs Sultan and Dauletkerey Sultan, submitted a report to his commander: “Last summer, Bogdo Khan, namely the ‘Tenirtik’ called by Kyrgyz40, who rules over China employed admonitory and deceptive words to both Jolbarïs and Dauletkerey, envoys dispatched by Abulai, for the purpose of persuading the Kyrgyz people to get along with Chinese and not separate from Bogdo Khan [himself] who should be considered as their [Kyrgyz’s] own ruler, because, [as Bogdo Khan said], Chinese and Kyrgyz people have always been an united tribe [единоплемен] since the beginning of the generation of Chinggis Khan who lived in a time of long ago, while, on the contrary, Russians and Kyrgyz people have always been divided into different tribes or kinship [род].”41

The employment of the tactics such as dispatching the Chingisids as envoys to Kazakh lands and conceiving the historical mythology of ‘a long-lived united tribe (единоплемен)’ reflected the Qing court’s efforts to win the affection of the Kazakhs. And, it was the legitimacy of the Chinggisid lineage claimed by the Manchu ruling house that made Abulai Khan feel a relationship to the Qing.42

39 40 41 42

tribe resembled the relationship between elder and younger brothers (Valikhanov-sochinenie, vol. 2, 148). Abulai khan’s first letter to the Qing court (see above) tells us that the Kazakh ruling house had had very limited perceptions of the Manchu emperor before the Kazakhs encountered Qing forces in the middle of the 18th century. ‘Tenirtik’ is obviously a combined word of ‘täŋïr’ + ‘tek’ (‘heaven’ + ‘root, origin’), and it is something equivalent to the Chinese notion of ‘tianzi’ 天子 [the son of heaven]. In using the term ‘Krygyz’, the Russians in the 18th–19th centuries generally indicated Kazakhs. Kazakhsko-ruskie otnosheniia v XVI–XVIII vekakh: sbornik dokumentov i materialov. C. 621. Alma-Ata 1961. It needs to be mentioned here that, in the early stages of the Kazakh-Manchu relationship, other Kazakh töres were also drawn closer to the Manchu Aisin Gioro ruling house by such a concept. Apart from the event concerning Abulai khan’s appeal to the Qing, other cases also prove that Kazakh rulers liked to emphasize to the Qing court their relationship to the Chinggisid lineage. From the Manchu translation versions of the letters sent by the Lesser Horde Kazakh khan-sultans addressed to Qianlong, the Qing emperor in 1762, we realize that the Kazakh rulers proudly declared themselves as the descendants of Chinggis khan. What the Lesser Horde Kazakh khan-sultans wanted to reveal generally in their letters can be summed up as this: “Despite our location that is far away from the Qing state, we, the Lesser Horde Kazakhs, wanted to be involved in the Kazakh-Qing relationship and benefit from it. What

114

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

Thus I argue that the Chingis Khan legacy rather than the ‘Confucian enlightenment of China’ played a crucial role in the Qing court’s engagement with the Kazakhs in the 18th century, and the historical meaning of the Inner Asian tradition concerning the so-called tributary system certainly deserves further research.

Bibliography Vasily Vladimirovich Barthold, Four Studies on the History of Central Asia, vol. 1, translated from Russian by Vladimir and Tatiana Minorsky, Leiden 1956. Chuang Chi-fa (ed.) 莊吉發, Man Han Yiyulu Hsiao Chu 滿漢異域錄校注 (Works Comparing the Manchu and Chinese Language in Yiyulu and Their Interpretation), Taipei 1983. Nicola Di Cosmo, Kirghiz Nomads the Qing Frontier: Tribute, Trade, or Exchange?, in: Nicola Di Cosmo/Don J. Wyatt (ed.), Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, London/New York 2003. Dalizhabu 達力紮布, Qingdai Chahaer Zhasake Qi kao 清代察哈爾紮薩克旗考 (Notes on the Jasak Qi in the Qing Dynasty), in: Lishi yanjiu 歷史研究 (Historical Studies) 5 (2005), 47–59. The Department of ethnic studies of the Institute of ethnology of the Academy of social sciences of China, the Manchu language department of the First historical archives of China (ed.), Manwen Tuerhute dangan yibian 滿 文土爾扈特檔案譯編 (A Collection of the Manchu Language Archival Documents on Torguts), Beijing 1988. Еженханұлы Б. [Ezhenkhan-uli B.] (ed.), Қазақ хандығы мен Цин патшалығының сауда байланыстары туралы қытай мұрағат құжаттары (Chinese Archival Documents on the Trading Relationships between Kazakh Khanate and the Qing Court), vol. 1, Almaty 2008. Еженханұлы Б. [Ezhenkhan-uli B.] (ed.), Қазақ хандығы мен Цин патшалығының саяси-дипломатиялық байланыстары туралы қытай мұрағат құжаттары (Chinese

encourages us to think about this is because that all the three hordes of Kazakhs have been governed by us, the descendants of Chinggis khan, and all of them have been in solidarity by sharing their losses and gains”. These letters have been translated into the modern Kazakh language. See: B. Ezhenkhan-uli, The Newly Found Archival Documents concerning the Diplomatic Missions Sent by Lesser Horde Kazakhs in 1762: The Letters by Kazakh KhanSultans and the Palace Memorials by the Qing Officials, in: The Committee of Information and Archives, Ministry of Communications and Information of Republic of Kazakhstan (ed.), The Bulletin of the National Centre of the Archaeography and Historical Sources Studies 1 (2011), 15–27. Astana (Еженханқлы，Б.，1762 жылғы Кіші жүз қазақтарының Цин патшалығына жіберген дипломатиялық миссияларына қатысты тың мұрағат құжаттар: қазақ хан-сұлтандарының хаттары және Цин ұлықтарының мәлімдемелері // Археография және деректану ұлттық орталығының Хабарлары, 2011 жылғы 1-саны. Астана, 2011 ж.).

Notes on the Early Discourse of the Qing Court about the ‘Kazakh Tribute’

115

Archival Documents on the Political-Diplomatic Relationships between the Kazakh Khanate and the Qing Court), vol. 1, Almaty 2009. Еженханұлы Б [Ezhenkhan-uli, B.]., The Newly Found Archival Documents Concerning the Diplomatic Missions Sent by Lesser Horde Kazakhs in 1762: The Letters by Kazakh Khan-Sultans and the Palace Memorials by the Qing Officials, in: The Committee of Information and Archives, Ministry of Communications and Information of The Republic of Kazakhstan (ed.), The Bulletin of the National Centre of the Archaeography and Historical Sources Studies 1 (2011), 15–27. John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Traditional Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge 1968. Joseph F. Fletcher, China and Central Asia, in: John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Traditional Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge 1968, 206–224, 337–368. Fuheng 傅恒 et al., (Qingding Huangyu) Xiyu tuzhi 欽定皇輿西域圖志 (Imperially Commissioned Gazetteer of the Western Regions of the Imperial Domain) 1782. Repr., in: Zhong Xingqi 鐘興麒 et al., Xiyu tu zhi jiaozhu 西域圖志校注 (Xiyu tu zhi with notes), 44 vols., Urumqi 2002. GZSL, Qinggui 慶桂 et al., Da Qing Gaozong Chun (Qianlong) huangdi shilu 大清高宗純 （乾隆）皇帝實錄 (The Veritable Records of the Gaozong Chun (Qianlong) Emperor of the Great Qing Dynasty), Beijing 1986. Kanda Nobuo 神田信夫/Matsumura Jun 松村潤/Okada Hidehiro 岡田英弘 (eds.), Kyu¯ Manshu¯ to¯ 舊滿州檔 (The Old Manchu Archives), vol. 2, Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko 1972–1975. Li Sheng 厲聲, Hasakesitan jiqi yu Zhongguo Xinjiang de guanxi (15 shiji–20 shiji) 哈薩克 及其與中國新疆的關係 (15世紀–20世紀中期) (Kazakhstan and its Relations with China Regarding Xinjiang [15th–20th Centuries]), Harbin 2004, 108–114. Ling Yongkuang 林永匡, Wang Xi 王熹, Qing Dai Xibei minzu maoyi shi 清代西北貿易 史 (A History of Trade in North-western Region), Beijing 1991. James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass – Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759–1864, Stanford: Stanford University Press 1998. MSL, Kyoto Imperial university, Department of Literature, Institute for Inner Asian studies (comp.), Ming Dynasty Sources on Central Asia – Extractions from the “Ming Shi Lu”, Kyoto 1974. Laura J. Newby, The Empire and the Khanate: A Political History of Qing Relations with Khoqand c1760–1860, Leiden/Boston 2005. Takahiro Onuma 小昭孝博, ‘Konggaer guo’ Xiao Kao 控噶爾國 (A Brief Note on ‘Konggeer’ State’), in: Minzu shi yanjiu 民族史研究 (Studies on Ethnic Histories) 8 (2008), 153–163. Takahiro Onuma, The Relations between the Qing Dynasty and the Kazakhs in the 1770s: The Closing of the North-Western Border of Qing Dynasty, in: To¯yo¯shi kenkyu¯, 69/2 (2010), 315–348. Peter C. Perdue, China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia, Cambridge 2005. QXMDH, The First Historical Archives of China and The Centre of the Geographic-Historical Studies of the Borderlands of China 中國第一歷史檔案 館與中國邊疆史地研究中心 (ed.), Qingdai Xinjiang Manwen dang’an huibian 清代新

116

Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli

疆滿文檔案彙編 (The Collection of the Manchu Archival Documents about Xinjiang at the Time of the Qing Dynasty), Guiling 2012. QZHGDH, Xing Yongfu邢永福, Zou Ailian鄒愛蓮, Bakhyt Ezhenkhanuli 巴哈提, 依加 漢 (eds.), Qingdai Zhong Ha guanxi dangan huibian 清代中哈關係檔案彙編 (A Collection of the Archival Documents concerning the Sino-Kazakh Relationship in the Qing Dynasty Period) (Facsimile Collection, vol. 1–2), vol. 2, Beijing 2006. Sima Qian 司馬遷, Shiji 史記, 123 vols., Beijing 1982. SZSL, Da Qing Lichao Shengzu Ren huangdi shilu 大清歷朝聖祖仁皇帝實錄 (The Veritable Records of the Shengzu Ren (Kangxi) Emperor of the Great Qing Dynasty). Facsimile edition reprinted by Zhonghua shuju, Beijing 1985. Chokan Valikhanov, Sbornie sochinenii v piati tomakh, Alma-ata 1984. Wang Qianjin 汪前進, Liu Ruofang 劉若芳 (eds.), Qingting san da shice quantu ji 清廷三 大實測全圖集 (A Comprehensive Collection of the Qing Court Three Grand Maps Drawn by Actual Measurement), Qianlong Neifu Yutu 乾隆内附輿圖, Beijing 2007. Zhonghan 鐘焓, Konggaer shiliao pingzhu 控噶爾史料評注 (Commentaries and Notes on the Sources on the History of Konggaer), in: Minzu shi yanjiu (Studies on Ethnic Histories) 9 (2010), 153–163.

Zsombor Rajkai

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

In the classic interpretation of tributary relations, John K. Fairbank and Ssu-yu Teng outlined four aspects of the tribute system: 1. “the tributary system was a natural outgrowth of the cultural pre-eminence of the early Chinese”; 2. “it came to be used by the rulers of China for political ends of self-defense”; 3. “in practice it had a very fundamental and important commercial basis”; 4. “it served as the medium for Chinese international relations and diplomacy”.1 The first, second and fourth aspects were referred to as the Chinese motivation while the third aspect was attributed to foreign political entities. Despite the wide-scale use and acceptance of the term tribute system, however, there have been several critical approaches and amendments since the late 1970s to what this term – as a Western coinage to describe China’s foreign relations in premodern times – means, and how this can be related to other types of foreign relations.2 First of all, critiques emerged regarding the motivations behind tributary relations from both sides. On the one hand, there are critiques regarding the motivation of the Chinese court in demanding tribute that focused on prestige and Sinocentric supremacy alone, excluding the possibility of economic interests when dealing with foreign polities.3 On the other hand, there are also criticisms regarding the motivations of the foreigners that solely emphasized their economic gains obtained through tributary relations, and that also excluded the

1 John K. Fairbank and Ssu-yu Teng, On the Ch’ing Tributary System, in: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 6, 2 (1941), 135–246, here 137. 2 It must be noted that Fairbank himself apparently did not intend to provide a rigid dogmatic theory of China’s foreign relations in general, yet his statements seemed to lend themselves to that interpretation. See Paul M. Evans, John Fairbank and the American Understanding of Modern China, New York/Oxford 1988. 3 See Morris Rossabi’s Ph. D. dissertation (Ming China’s Relations with Hami and Central Asia, 1404–1513: A Reexamination of Traditional Chinese Foreign Policy, New York: Columbia University 1973 [1970]) for an early representative critique on the tribute system theory from an economic point of view.

118

Zsombor Rajkai

possibility of other motivations besides an economic one.4 Second, there are also critiques of the ‘monochronic’ aspect of the so-called tribute system suggested by Fairbank and Teng.5 These critics claim that the tribute system was not static throughout the two-thousand years of imperial China,6 and that there were periods of systemic breakdown besides periods of systemic stabilization.7 Such critiques also include the assertion that the Sinocentric worldview did not prevail in certain historical periods such as in Song 宋 times when China was relatively weak, and that several tribute systems should be differentiated according to different historical conditions.8 In doing so, these critiques are somehow connected to the dilemma of ideology versus pragmatism, that is, whether the former or the latter was more prevalent in China’s foreign relations during premodern times.9 As a result, scholars of the field today tend to agree that there never existed a uniform tribute system throughout China’s ancient history.10 Moreover, a few of them, like James L. Hevia arguing from a postmodernist point of view, or John E. Wills, emphasizing the role of ‘defense’ rather than tributary relations

4 For instance, foreign rulers were often motivated to engage in official contacts with China in order to strengthen the legitimacy of their rule or to seek military protection. 5 Among other works, see Nicola Di Cosmo, Kirghiz Nomads on the Qing Frontier: Tribute, Trade, or Gift Exchange? in: Nicola Di Cosmo/Don J. Wyatt (eds.), Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, London 2003, 351–372; James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass: Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759–1864, Stanford 1998. 6 For instance, Wang Gungwu and Zheng Yongnian (eds.), Sino–Japanese Relations: Interaction, Logic, and Transformation, London 2008. 7 Giovanni Andornino, The Nature and Linkages of China’s Tributary System under the Ming and Qing Dynasties, in: London School of Economics Department of Economic History, Working Papers of the Global Economic History Network (GEHN) No. 21/06, 2006, 1–49. Though Andornino calls China’s tribute system “the most consistent world-system” (Ibid., 1), he also recognizes different historical periods within the tribute system in terms of systemic stability and breakdown. On the other hand, Peter C. Perdue draws attention to the fact that differences in Sino–foreign tributary relations occurred not only in time, but also in space. There were regions as in the case of Korea, where tributary relations proved to be relatively stable, whereas in regions, such as in the northwest frontier, they were rather unstable [see Peter C. Perdue, A Frontier View of Chineseness, in: Giovanni Arrighi/ Takeshi Hamashita/Mark Selden (eds.), The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150 and 50 Year Perspective, London 2003, 51–77]. 8 See Morris Rossabi (ed.), China among Equals: The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th–14th Centuries, Berkeley 1983. 9 See Alastair I. Johnston, Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History, Princeton 1998 for a prominent discussion on the matter. 10 For instance, scholars, such as Mark Mancall or Giovanni Andornino, regard the great variety of Sino–foreign tributary relations as various manifestations of the same tribute system (see Mark Mancall, China at the Center: 300 Years of Foreign Policy, New York 1984; also see the aforementioned study of Andornino).

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

119

themselves, even suggested the need for other alternative analytical frameworks.11 Very recently, however, certain critiques go so far as to question the validity of the tribute system as a general system dominating Sino–foreign relations in imperial times, by emphasizing the use of different strategies in practice.

1.

Tributary and non-tributary relations

One of these critiques refers to the conditions during the Spring and Autumn era, as well as the Western and Eastern Han 漢 dynasties. After analyzing several documents from early imperial China, Armin Selbitschka argues that documents from this historical period were much less influenced by ideological rhetoric and that diplomatic strategies other than early tributary relations such as taking hostages and making marriage alliances were also in practice.12 In addition to early tributary relations, hostage and marriage alliance, Selbitschka – by making reference to Roswell S. Britton13 – also points to the existence of other modes of interaction in the pre-Han period, namely court visits and audiences, missions, envoys, treaties and covenants, transfer of territory, asylum, and mediation.14 Among these types of interaction, tribute during the time of the Spring and Autumn era – which, according to Selbitschka, had a dualistic character as both a source of state revenue and a symbol of subordination – was merely a physical expression of one’s actual or purely nominal submission to the house of Zhou 周, whereas tribute offerings per se were not restricted to the Zhou at all.15 Selbitschka also argues that the use of the term gong 貢 – often translated as tribute – during the Han times was not limited to subjugated foreign polities, but it was also a duty for domestic institutions and – from the start of the Eastern Han period – even for individual subjects, and thus it was merely a form of tax levied on actors who were completely incorporated by the empire.16 Tributary relations thus functioned neither as an ideological device or economic enterprise, but 11 James L. Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the MacCartney Embassy of 1793, Durham/London 1995; John E. Wills, Embassies and Illusions: Dutch and Portuguese Envoys to K’anghsi, 1666–1687, Cambridge, MA 1984; John E. Wills, Tribute, Defensiveness, and Dependency: Uses and Limits of Some Basic Ideas About Mid-Qing Dynasty Foreign Relations, in: American Neptune 48 (1988), 225–229. Arthur Waldron went so far as to call the tribute theory a discredited theory (see Arthur Waldron, Sino-centric World Order in Asia a Discredited Theory, in: Financial Times, 2005 August 24). 12 Armin Selbitschka, Early Chinese Diplomacy: Realpolitik versus the So-called Tributary System, in: Asia Major, Third Series 28, 1 (2015), 61–114, here 73. 13 Roswell S. Britton, Chinese Interstate Intercourse before 700 B. C., in: The American Journal of International Law 29, 4 (1935), 616–635. 14 Selbitschka 2015, 71–72. 15 Ibid., 79. 16 Ibid., 90–91.

120

Zsombor Rajkai

merely as a practical tool to establish friendly relations between two polities at different levels of political strength as a symbolic consent to the status quo, nor was tribute a heavenly sign of legitimate rule of the Chinese emperor over the entire universe.17 On the other hand, neither did early imperial China demand that all foreign entities submit tribute, provided that they were not a threat to China, nor did foreign entities have a general and uniform understanding of tributary relations.18 Moreover, Selbitschka also argues that there is no clear evidence from the available sources for a generous reciprocal gifts for tribute offerings, except in the case of remote countries. In sum, Selbitschka refutes the idea that in early imperial China there was a shift from previous heqin 和亲 treaties based on taking hostages and creating marriage alliances to a tribute system.19 Thus, under this scheme, the various types of tribute systems can be differentiated according to different historical periods. Selbitschka’s views refer to early imperial China and not necessarily applicable to the case of late imperial China. On the other hand, the above core concept – that is, the conception of tributary relations as one type of foreign relations – can be found in a study on early Ming明 China too.20 Zhang Feng – writing in the field of political science – chooses early Ming China to demonstrate the various problematic aspects of the tribute system theory. He points to the existence of three different – though not unrelated – interpretations of the tribute system: the interpretation by Fairbank and Teng as “the medium for Chinese international relations and diplomacy”, the interpretation by Chinese historians focusing on the historical development of ritual practices and bureaucratic institutions, and the interpretation by the English School as “an institution of historical East-Asian international society”.21 He deconstructs the main assumptions of the tribute system theory based on the interpretation by Fairbank and Teng and questions the general assumption attributed to the Sinocentric world order. He argues that the actions and policies of Chinese rulers may have been more related to specific situations rather than a result of a worldview and values based on a Sinocentric tribute ideology.22 During a discussion of early Ming China, he points to the existence of various types of non-tributary relations such as the employment of war, also including “military 17 18 19 20

Ibid., 91, 93, 96. Ibid., 96, 104. Ibid., 114. In fact, the aforementioned study by Selbitschka makes reference to Zhang’s study, but Selbitschka does not specify the way this study inspired the shaping of his research interest in early Imperial China. Yet, the problems discussed in the two studies are quite similar. 21 Zhang Feng, Rethinking the ‘Tribute System’: Broadening the Conceptual Horizon of Historical East Asian Politics, in: The Chinese Journal of International Politics 2 (2009), 545–574, here 549, 551, 552. 22 Ibid., 555.

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

121

conquest, administrative control, diplomatic manipulation and cultural-ideological attraction” and highlights the use of persuasion, blackmail, balking and challenging.23 By distinguishing tributary relations from non-tributary relations, Zhang Feng states that the tribute system should be treated as a dependent variable rather than as an independent variable.24 In doing so, the core statement of his study is that if the underlying conditions of China and the foreign entities change, so do the characteristics of the tribute system. Based on this assumption, he further asserts that the tribute system can be perceived on two levels: through Sinocentric discourse or rhetoric that seems to be constant, and through a pattern of interactions that seems to show a great variety. He suggests an analytical framework that includes two constant motivations for Chinese rulers: legitimacy and security. Both have to be combined with situational variables in order to understand behavioral patterns.25 In relation to this rough analytical framework, Zhang Feng in his study briefly discusses Sino–Korean, Sino–Mongol and Sino– Japanese relations during early Ming times, and gives some concrete examples for illustrating the multiplicity of these relations. In a later study, based on an analysis of the aforementioned three case studies, he further develops his research on Sino–foreign relations.26 Zhang discusses China’s grand strategies in foreign relations and the responding strategies of foreign polities as secondary actors. In doing so, he aims to create a Chinese style of international relations theory, by discussing the characteristics and advantages of a so-called Chinese methodological relationalism in contrast to Western methodological individualism. Zhang’s theory presupposes a high level of rationality in decision making and attempts to describe the strategic behavior of China and foreign polities within a clearly defined theoretical framework. Nonetheless, certain historical conditions such as the ambiguous Mongol influence from Yuan 元 times are not mentioned though they would seem to be relevant in understanding the characteristics of early Ming China.

2.

Ambiguous Mongol influence on early Ming China

At the birth of Ming China, security became the primary concern for the Hongwu 洪武 emperor as the founder of the dynasty. In order to ensure the security of his empire, he had recourse to both practices originating from Yuan times and practices different from the preceding dynasty. The most remarkable Mongol 23 24 25 26

Ibid., 566, 569. Ibid., 568. Ibid., 570–571. Zhang Feng, Chinese Hegemony: Grand Strategy and International Institutions in East Asian History, Stanford 2015.

122

Zsombor Rajkai

influence on the practice of the Hongwu emperor’s rulership refers to the emphasis given to the military leadership. Edward L. Dreyer, who – among other researchers – studied the military origins of early Ming China focusing on the reigns of the Hongwu and Yongle 永樂 emperors, distinguishes five aspects of Mongol influence: military conquest, foreign affairs and foreign trade, the preponderance of military officers over civil officials, official appointment in the military based on heredity, as well as the – temporary – suspension of the civil service examinations.27 The use of war, along with the aspiration for military conquest, was truer of the Yongle emperor than of the founder himself, since the Hongwu emperor adopted an isolationist policy after establishing Ming China, except for his campaigns against the Mongols until 1388. The high status of military officers compared to civil officials, along with the heredity of official appointments in the military, may derive from the fact that the military played an important role for the establishment of the Ming dynasty. Both the Hongwu and Yongle emperors needed to depend on military forces to achieve their goals. The temporary suspension of the civil service examinations between 1373 and 1384 was also a remarkable sign of Hongwu’s lack of trust in the Confucian way of producing capable men for administrative work.28 As for foreign affairs and foreign trade, however, there were striking differences between the two emperors. First, the Hongwu emperor increasingly adopted an isolationist policy, due in part, to his failure to recapture Inner Asian territories which had been under Yuan rule. Moreover, he did not value foreign trade.29 In contrast, the Yongle emperor took a rather interventionist policy by having recourse to both friendly and aggressive attitudes, and also favored commercial ties with foreign polities by making use of the tribute system.30 On the other hand, whereas for instance the military origins of early Ming China can be regarded as reflecting the direct impact of the preceding Yuan 27 Edward L. Dreyer, Early Ming China: A Political History 1355–1435, Stanford 1982, 2–4. 28 John D. Langlois, The Hung-wu reign, 1368–1398, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 107–181, here 131. 29 In fact, the Hongwu emperor, for the first time in Chinese history, tied foreign trade to tributary relations – at least in theory (Ibid., 169). Therefore, foreign trade that was in the hands of eunuchs was not an independent activity in Ming times, but – at least officially – highly controlled by the state, the regulations of which were set by the Ministry of Rites (libu 禮部), thus it could not be used effectively for controlling the ‘barbarians’ (see Frederick W. Mote, The Ch’eng-hua and Hung-chih reigns, 1465–1505, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368– 1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 343–402, here 396). 30 Nonetheless, it is interesting to see that whereas the Hongwu emperor developed a relatively aggressive policy against Korea and a somewhat less interventionist policy towards Annam. The Yongle emperor’s attitudes to Korea and Annam were rather the opposite of those of his father.

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

123

dynasty, in other aspects a direct Mongol impact is either not evident or at least remains ambiguous. Morris Rossabi calls for the necessity of a careful analysis and discusses the possible Mongol influence on early Ming China from various political and cultural aspects.31 First, the establishment of the initial Ming government, along with the establishment of a military elite over the scholar-official stratum and the employment of a Yuan-based military organization, the moving of the capital to the north from the reign of the Yongle emperor on, the continued support for astronomy and medicine, a high interest in mapmaking and geography, as well as the establishment of the College of Interpreters (huitongguan 會 同館) and the College of Translators (siyiguan 四夷館) can all be regarded as reflecting the influence of the preceding Yuan dynasty. In contrast, the establishment of the Censorate by the Hongwu emperor to monitor the bureaucracy, the lack of antipathy towards religion, the decreased access of women to property and ownership, the employment of restitution payments to aggrieved parties, as well as changes in the family practices such as the division of property before the parents’ death and the inheritance of property between brothers after the death of one cannot solely be attributed to Mongol influence either due to having Chinese antecedents from previous times or in certain cases due to the resurgence of neoConfucianism. However, most importantly, there is insufficient evidence that the early Ming rulers demanded universal rule by posing themselves as the successors to the Chinggisid dynasty.

3.

Foreign policy of early Ming China

In light of the ambiguous Mongol influence on early Ming China, it becomes important – though not easy to give a full-scale answer to – how this heritage directly or indirectly influenced the assumed Sinocentric worldview of these two aforementioned remarkable rulers, along with their strategies in dealing with foreign polities including tributary relations.32 By examining the use of tributary relations as a diplomatic strategy, along with other types of strategies, we may be able to note that both rulers seemed to be flexible and pragmatic in shaping their foreign relations. Whereas for instance the Hongwu emperor was engaged in war 31 Morris Rossabi, Notes on Mongol Influences on the Ming Dynasty, in: Morris Rossabi (ed.), Eurasian Influences on Yuan China, Singapore 2013, 200–223. 32 Early Ming emperors paid considerable attention to Buddhism and Taoism in their private life, but in public they had recourse to neo-Confucianism, believing that the latter could promote social harmony, as well as reverence for the authority of the emperor [see Hok-lam Chan, The Chien-wen, Yung-lo, Hung-hsi, and Hsüan-te reigns, 1399–1435, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 182–304, here 184].

124

Zsombor Rajkai

with the Mongols and and also sacked Hami in 1393, in 1395 in the ‘Ancestral Injunctions’ (Huang Ming zuxun 皇明祖訓) he renounced the use of warfare against fifteen foreign states in the East and South, including Korea, Japan, Ryukyu and Annam. His growing caution in foreign relations that manifested itself in a fundamentally isolationist policy, through which he intended to control foreign relations by prohibiting maritime traffic in 1372, and also by tying foreign trade to tribute, was accelerated after the alleged attempt of Chancellor Hu Weiyong 胡惟庸 to seize the throne in 1380, in which Japan was allegedly involved. Nonetheless, in strategically important places he had recourse to various types of action, such as blackmail and persuasion in the case of Korea in order to keep the country under control. Again, despite a basically isolationist policy, he welcomed Central Asian missions from the Timurid Empire during the 1380s and 1390s, and he even dispatched return missions in order to confirm tributary relations. The Yongle emperor seemed to be even more flexible, though sometimes rather inconsistent in his foreign relations, and his underlying methods varied from a lenient attitude, such as proposing a marriage alliance in the case of Korea,33 to aggressive actions. Moreover, he also employed a ‘divide and rule’ policy, as in the case of Tibet and the Mongols.34 For instance, although he initiated campaigns against the Mongols, he attempted to play off the Oyirad (or Western) Mongols and Eastern Mongols by providing them with trading privileges through the tribute system. On the other hand, he did not seem to be consistent in rewarding his Mongol allies for their support, and this significantly contributed to the instability of Sino–Mongol relations.35 Nonetheless, the Yongle emperor was successful in creating harmonious relations with Korea, also in turning the Jurchens in Manchuria to his side, as well as in creating formal tributary relations with Central Asian cities, such as Hami, Turfan, and Beshbaliq by accepting their nominal submission. On the other hand, he showed a high level of pragmatism in his relations with the Timurid Empire, which rejected even nominal submission. In 1410 Yongle sent a letter to Sha¯hrukh, in which he treated the Timurid ruler as China’s vassal. Sha¯hrukh responded to this letter angrily, and suggested that the Chinese emperor should convert to Islam. Yongle changed his attitude to Sha¯hrukh and addressed him as an equal ruler in another diplomatic letter sent in 1418. 33 Huang Zhilian 黃枝連, Dongya de liyi shijie: Zhongguo fengjian wangchao yu Chaoxian bandao guanxi xingtai lun 東亞的禮儀世界—中國封建王朝與朝鮮半島關系形態論, Beijing 1994, 280. 34 Chan 1988, 263; Morris Rossabi, The Ming and Inner Asia, in: Denis Twitchett/Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, 221–271, here 227, 228, 243. 35 Rossabi 1998, 226, 231.

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

125

This pragmatic manner of rulership also manifested itself in the use of the tribute system. One aspect refers to the frequency of tribute missions prescribed by the Chinese court. The permitted frequency of tribute missions varied from country to country, but so did the actual number of tribute missions in practice. For instance, in the case of Korea, the frequency of tribute missions was first restricted to every three years during the Hongwu period – though later it was changed to three times a year in 1400, during the Jianwen 建文 period,36 whereas it was limited to every ten years in the case of Japan – at least in theory. On the other hand, while Chinese rulers did not mind the violation of the prescribed frequency of tribute bearing in the case of foreign polities such as Siam37 or Central Asian cities along with the Mongols by bringing more tribute missions than officially permitted, there were only two banquets given to the strategically less important Java, despite the numerous tribute missions (eleven in total) it sent to the Ming court after 1406.38 In contrast, however, the rulers of early Ming China also had recourse to the rejection of tribute missions in case of improper behaviour by foreign envoys or inadequate goods brought as tribute items, as well as for strategic reasons or a lack of trust in a foreign polity. Early Ming emperors paid special attention to the legitimacy of the ruling dynasty in the case of Annam and Korea – not without consequences though. For instance, the delayed investiture of Korean kings during the time of the Hongwu emperor led to a certain degree of rupture in the relations between the two countries.

4.

Perception of tributary relations by foreign political entities

The development of foreign relations, however, did not depend solely on the Ming rulers’ foreign policy, but rather on the foreigners as well. How did foreign polities perceive their relations with China regarding the tribute system? Though it is difficult to apply to modern international relations theories to premodern conditions, an anthropological approach can be found in several studies related to China’s foreign relations. For instance, in a study of the Kirghiz nomads’ relations with Qing China, Nicola Di Cosmo argues that whereas “the tribute system was a function of frontier administration”,39 it was more like a channel for 36 Kang Jae-eun, The Land of Scholars: Two Thousand Years of Korean Confucianism, trans. by Suzanne Lee, Paramus/New Jersey 2006 (Korean Original Ed. Hangilsa Publishing Co., Ltd. 2003), 179. 37 Sarasin Viraphol, Tribute and Profit: Sino–Siamese Trade 1652–1853, Cambridge, MA 1977, 142. 38 Wang Gungwu, Community and Nation: Essays on Southeast Asia and the Chinese, Sydney 1981, 78. 39 Di Cosmo 2003, 356.

126

Zsombor Rajkai

political benefits for the local Muslim administrators, while the nomads perceived it as a guarantee of economic profit and political protection. Di Cosmo also asserts that whereas the nomads looked at smaller transactions with the Qing officials as an exchange of gifts, the Qing side treated it rather as tribute.40 In considering early Ming China, it seems difficult to say that foreign polities considered themselves vassals of China – regardless of whether they were under nominal or actual submission. This is obvious in the case of the rulers of the remote Timurid Empire that never really accepted a status as China’s vassal, but even Korea, the so-called ‘model tributary state’ or ‘younger brother’ of China, challenged China’s authority when it came to security issues, especially during the time of the Hongwu emperor. So did the Mongols, who considered tributary relations mainly as an opportunity for economic gain, or Japan, where a formal submission to China – except for the time of Ashikaga Yoshimitsu 足利義滿 (1403) – was eventually impossible due to local political conditions. The formal submission of Hami, Turfan, and Beshbaliq during the Yongle reign can also be said to be a result of coerced submission by China, along with a desire of these cities for Chinese protection or legitimacy of power due to the region’s unstable political conditions, rather than a result of self-perception as a true vassal of China.41 The Jurchens in Manchuria were relatively successfully handled by the Chinese during the early Ming period. However, they did not seem to accept the Chinese world order either, and the same goes for the self-perception of the Tibetans.42 In the South, foreign polities that were brought by Yongle’s maritime voyages into contact with China regarded the tribute system as an opportunity for trade rather than as perceiving themselves as China’s vassals.43 Even Annam that not only had strong cultural relations with China, but even replicated China’s tributary system within its own geographic proximity,44 resisted the Ming’s attempt at annexation. On the other hand, the tribute system prevailed in early Ming China, in which all parties attempted to pursue their own interests. Though the second half of the fifteenth century – during the growing weakness of China in foreign relations – brought about greater opportunities in negotiating tributary relations, we can also note that the status of early Ming China also provided a certain degree of opportunity for foreign entities. For instance, the early Ming rulers tolerated the violation of the prescribed frequency of tribute missions in 40 41 42 43 44

Ibid., 362. Chan 1988, 258. Rossabi 1998, 245, 260. Chan 1988, 270. David C. Marr, Sino–Vietnamese Relations, in: The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 6 (1981), 45–64, here 49. A similar phenomenon can be seen in the case of Choson Korea too] see Kenneth R. Robinson, Centering the King of Choson: Aspects of Korean Maritime Diplomacy, 1392–1592, in: The Journal of Asian Studies 59, 1 (2000), 109–125, here 122].

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

127

the case of certain foreign polities, and Korea, as mentioned above, even managed to change the officially permitted frequency of tribute missions from every three years to three times a year in 1400. Therefore, it is interesting to consider how much the tribute system functioned as an area for negotiation in early Ming times.

5.

Concluding remarks

Modern academic studies tend to recognize the diversity of Sino–foreign (tributary) relations, and that despite the preponderance of research on the Chinese aspect several studies attempt to understand the nature of these relations from a non-Chinese perspective as well. However, only a few studies – such as the aforementioned research of Zhang Feng – aim at going beyond the research scope of respective case studies in an attempt to create a comparative analytical model. Zhang Feng’s initial analytical framework (2009) that includes the two constant motives of legitimacy and security from the perspective of China, along with various situational variables, as well as his further developed analytical model (2015), which emphasizes emphasizing Chinese relations in contrast to Western methodological individualism, have to be praised as a remarkable attempt to create a Chinese style of international relations studies. On the other hand, the following issues require acknowledgement in any evaluation of Zhang’s analytical model. First, although Zhang argues for the advantages of a relational approach in the study of premodern foreign relations, he does not discuss its potential disadvantages compared to other approaches. Second, Zhang’s model seems to attach too much rationality to both Chinese and foreign strategic decision making, and by stressing the advantage of the relational approach, his model also denies the autonomy of the participating Chinese and foreign actors. Third, Zhang’s model, just as the title of his book suggests, treats foreign polities only as secondary actors under China’s hegemony. Ming China was powerful in the region, yet the way Zhang treats foreign polities as secondary actors, as well as the degree to which Zhang excludes the possibility of autonomous behavior of the participating Chinese and foreign actors in decision making require careful re-examination. The institution of tribute per se is a Chinese invention indeed, yet in studying the various manifestations and implications of tributary relations as a diplomatic strategy, it should not be viewed as a system that solely expressed the internal interests of China. It is more like a dynamic system that was used and shaped by both China and foreigners. Foreign polities are not to be viewed merely as secondary actors in these relations, as Zhang Feng suggests, but rather as actors who

128

Zsombor Rajkai

were constantly forced to reassess and renegotiate their relations with China according to their own interests and worldview. Similarly, China had to do the same in its interaction with foreign polities. Therefore, an anthropological approach that studies ‘the perception of the surrounding world’, along with a constructivist approach that studies the way two (or more) actors construct their mutual understanding through various interactions, seems to be essential in the study of Sino–foreign relations. On the other hand, negotiations were possible to different degrees in Sino– foreign (tributary) relations.45 For instance, whereas the ritual aspects of tributary relations outlined by the Ministry of Rites were hardly open for negotiation, foreigners seemed to have a somewhat better chance to negotiate other aspects of these relations, such as the allowed frequency of tribute missions, the goods and items for exchange, and even the place of transaction, as in the case of the Mongols in the second half of the sixteenth century, who managed to change the place of transaction from the capital to the frontier zone when China was not as strong at dealing with foreigners as in early Ming times.46 Moreover, negotiations concerning both the employment and contents of tributary relations were possible in early Ming China, despite the fact that Chinese imperial rule was relatively strong. Thus, the various degrees of possibility for negotiation concerning the conditions of tributary relations – as the nature of these relations was dynamic – seen through the various types of interactions, motivations and perceptions of actual conditions by both China and foreign polities could be used for future studies as an analytical unit to obtain a better understanding of the conditions of tributary relations, along with non-tributary relations, in different historical contexts.

45 In fact, numerous studies provide historical examples of negotiation between China and foreign polities. For instance, Nicola Di Cosmo asserts that the tribute “environment” at the frontier zone in Qing times provided an “area of negotiation” in the first place (Di Cosmo 2003, 367). Yet, he restricts this area of negotiation to the less strict tribute environment manifested at the frontier zone, in contrast to the strict conditions embodied by the tribute system at the court in the capital. This kind of limitation of negotiation, however, may be a little too strict, and the examination of the possibility of Sino–foreign negotiation should be extended to various contexts and interactions besides the one described by Di Cosmo. 46 Ray Huang, The Lung-ch’ing and Wan-li Reigns, 1567–1620, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368– 1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 511–584, here 558.

Tribute as a Diplomatic Strategy in Early Ming China

129

Bibliography Giovanni Andornino, The Nature and Linkages of China’s Tributary System under the Ming and Qing Dynasties, in: London School of Economics Department of Economic History, Working Papers of the Global Economic History Network (GEHN) 21/6, 2006, 1–49. Roswell S. Britton, Chinese Interstate Intercourse before 700 B. C., in: The American Journal of International Law 29/4 (1935), 616–635. Chan Hok-lam, The Chien-wen, Yung-lo, Hung-hsi, and Hsüan-te reigns, 1399–1435, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 182–304. Nicola Di Cosmo, Kirghiz Nomads on the Qing Frontier: Tribute, Trade, or Gift Exchange?, in: Nicola Di Cosmo/Don J. Wyatt (eds.), Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, London 2003, 351–372. Edward L. Dreyer, Early Ming China: A Political History 1355–1435, Stanford 1982. Paul M. Evans, John Fairbank and the American Understanding of Modern China, New York/Oxford 1988. John K. Fairbank and Ssu-yu Teng, On the Ch’ing Tributary System, in: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 6/2 (1941), 135–246. James L. Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the MacCartney Embassy of 1793, Durham/London 1995. Ray Huang, The Lung-ch’ing and Wan-li Reigns, 1567–1620, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 511–584. Huang Zhilian 黃枝連, Dongya de liyi shijie: Zhongguo fengjian wangchao yu Chaoxian bandao guanxi xingtai lun 東亞的禮儀世界—中國封建王朝與朝鮮半島關系形態論, Beijing 1994. Alastair I. Johnston, Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History, Princeton 1998. Kang Jae-eun, The Land of Scholars: Two Thousand Years of Korean Confucianism, trans. by Suzanne Lee, Paramus/New Jersey 2006 (Korean Original Ed. Paju 2003). John D. Langlois, The Hung-wu reign, 1368–1398, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 107–181. Mark Mancall, China at the Center: 300 Years of Foreign Policy, New York 1984. David C. Marr, Sino–Vietnamese Relations, in: The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 6 (1981), 45–64. James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass: Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759–1864, Stanford 1998. Frederick W. Mote, The Ch’eng-hua and Hung-chih reigns, 1465–1505, in: Frederick W. Mote/Denis Twitchett (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 7: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 1, Cambridge 1988, 343–402. Peter C. Perdue, A Frontier View of Chineseness, in: Giovanni Arrighi/Takeshi Hamashita/Mark Selden (eds.), The Resurgence of East Asia: 500, 150 and 50 Year Perspective, London 2003, 51–77.

130

Zsombor Rajkai

Kenneth R. Robinson, Centering the King of Choson: Aspects of Korean Maritime Diplomacy, 1392–1592, in: The Journal of Asian Studies 59/1 (2000), 109–125. Morris Rossabi, Ming China’s Relations with Hami and Central Asia, 1404–1513: A Reexamination of Traditional Chinese Foreign Policy, New York 1973 (Ph. D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1970). Morris Rossabi (ed.), China among Equals: The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th– 14th Centuries, Berkeley 1983. Morris Rossabi, The Ming and Inner Asia, in: Denis Twitchett/Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, 221–271. Morris Rossabi, Notes on Mongol Influences on the Ming Dynasty, in: Morris Rossabi (ed.), Eurasian Influences on Yuan China, Singapore 2013, 200–223. Armin Selbitschka, Early Chinese Diplomacy: Realpolitik versus the So-called Tributary System, in: Asia Major, Third Series 28/1 (2015), 61–114. Sarasin Viraphol, Tribute and Profit: Sino–Siamese Trade 1652–1853, Cambridge, MA 1977. Arthur Waldron, Sino-centric World Order in Asia a Discredited Theory, in: Financial Times, 2005 August 24. Wang Gungwu, Community and Nation: Essays on Southeast Asia and the Chinese, Sydney 1981. Wang Gungwu and Zheng Yongnian (eds.), Sino–Japanese Relations: Interaction, Logic, and Transformation, London 2008. John E. Wills, Embassies and Illusions: Dutch and Portuguese Envoys to K’anghsi, 1666– 1687, Cambridge, MA 1984. John E. Wills, Tribute, Defensiveness, and Dependency: Uses and Limits of Some Basic Ideas About Mid-Qing Dynasty Foreign Relations, in: American Neptune 48 (1988), 225–229. Zhang Feng, Rethinking the ‘Tribute System’: Broadening the Conceptual Horizon of Historical East Asian Politics, in: The Chinese Journal of International Politics 2 (2009), 545–574. Zhang Feng, Chinese Hegemony: Grand Strategy and International Institutions in East Asian History, Stanford 2015.

Morris Rossabi

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

James Hevia and Qing Foreign Relations In “Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the Macartney Embassy”1, James Hevia described diplomatic relations surrounding the English envoy George Macartney’s mission (1792) to China and asserted that Qing foreign relations ought to be considered part of rituals and not simply based on the realities of power. Guest Rituals (binli 賓禮) and ceremonies were perceived as in opposition to reason and rationality. Hevia asserted that the Emperors were concerned with hierarchy and focused on being portrayed as superiors to inferior foreigners. As Hevia noted, “In forming hierarchical relations that drew for their coherence on powerful cosmic principles embedded in higher-order rites…the supreme lord’s [i. e. Emperor] virtue and grace [would be confirmed] throughout the world.”2 The Emperor would be recognized as the intermediary between the cosmos and Earth, and public meetings, parades, and audiences, which were often of a massive scale, were orchestrated to support the Emperor’s position. Hevia disputed the view of rituals as simply demonstrating appearance and not reality. However, he also acknowledged that “evidence indicating that the court was willing to compromise on the issue of ceremony can be found in an instruction to princes and officials in Peking of September [1793] (170).” What is significant is that the Qing Emperor was willing to compromise and be flexible on ritual matters but not on substantive issues. The Macartney embassy did not achieve its goals of a British diplomatic residence in Beijing and additional trade opportunities, and at the same time the court showed little interest in the advanced mechanical instruments from the West. In a later article, Hevia emphasized the religious, metaphysical, and cosmological aspects of rituals, and, in a somewhat ahistorical manner, he “critiqued the tendency to separate rites for 1 James Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the Macartney Embassy, Durham 1995. 2 Ibid., 212.

132

Morris Rossabi

supposedly more substantive issues such as politics or commerce.”3 From this standpoint, knowledge of foreigners was peripheral; their principal roles entailed acceptance of and fitting in to this tributary system.

Yongle and Expansionist Policy The reign of the Yongle (r. 1403–1424) Emperor (personal name, Zhu Di) challenges some of these assumptions. Yongle was one of the most activist Emperors in the Ming dynasty and certainly the most prominent advocate of China’s involvement in the outside world. Unlike his father, the Hongwu (r. 1368–1398) Emperor (personal name, Zhu Yuanzhang), he favored the Mongol or Yuan dynasty policy of openness and interactions with foreigners.4 Some scholars have of late emphasized the Mongol influence on the Ming, and indeed, his reign witnessed a return to pre-Ming or Yuan internationalism.5 It is unnecessary to attribute this policy to the influence of his reputed mother, who is sometimes identified as a Mongol or a Korean.6 A more likely explanation is Yongle’s realism and pragmatism. Unlike a typical Chinese ruler, he sought competence, not adherence to strict Confucian standards. As a recent biographer writes, “he… looked for men of total, consuming loyalty and great efficiency to serve him, sometimes neglecting to assign a high priority to virtue…he would appoint able and talented people to serve in the central government as administrators but would assign virtuous men to local governments for routine bureaucratic work.”7 Almost as soon as he ascended the throne, in October of 1402, Yongle deviated from his father’s policy of limited relations with other states. Yongle ordered the dispatch of envoys to Vietnam, Ayutthaya, Java, Ryukyu, Japan, Sumatra, and Champa and eventually to Tibet and Korea. They would bring gifts to foreign rulers and encourage them to send ambassadors to his court. Foreign envoys arriving in China would attest to Yongle’s legitimacy, despite his usurpation of the throne from his nephew. Realpolitik, not rituals, influenced the Emperor’s desire for greater contact with foreign states. The arrival of more foreign em3 James Hevia, Postpolemical Historiography: A Response to Joseph W. Esherick, in: Modern China 24/3 (1998), 319–327, 324. 4 Although it should be noted that the Hongwu Emperor also dispatched embassies to the Ryukyu islands, Siam, and other lands. 5 See David Robinson, The Ming Court and the Legacy of the Yuan Mongols, ed. David Robinson, Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368–1644), Cambridge 2008, 365–421. 6 On the controversies concerning his birth mother, see Henry Serruys, A Manuscript Version of the Legend of the Mongol Ancestry of the Yung-lo Emperor, in: Analecta Mongolica 8 (1972), 19–61, and Li Dongfang 黎東方, Xishuo Mingchao 細說明朝, vol. 1, Taipei 1964, 218. 7 Shih-shan Henry Tsai, Perpetual Happiness: The Ming Emperor Yongle, Seattle 2001, 91.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

133

bassies would bolster his claims to legitimacy. As Wang Yuan-kang has observed, “material power, rather than cultural hegemony, was the decisive factor in the creation and maintenance of the tribute system.”8 Envoys from Korea and Ayyutthaya arrived in 1403, and Yongle instructed his officials that “from now on, all the people from all countries outside who wish to enter China are allowed to do so,”9 a major challenge to his father’s foreign policy. It is no accident then that Yongle adopted a realistic foreign policy and was not bound by the strictures of the tribute system. His choice of foreign policy personnel dovetailed with his general views about selecting officials and showed scant consideration of their adherence to Confucianism. Zheng He, a Muslim, commanded the most renowned overseas expedition until that time in Chinese history. A Jurchen named Isiha led a mission to his compatriots in Manchuria. Hou Xian, a eunuch, traveled to Tibet to invite Tsong-kha-pa, the founder of the Yellow Sect of Tibetan Buddhism, to travel to the Ming court and to meet with Yongle, and he later voyaged to Bengal to resolve a dispute among rivals in India. Huang Yan, another eunuch, was dispatched to observe and participate in the investiture of Sejong (r. 1418–1450) as King of Korea. Still other eunuchs served as envoys to Japan and Siam, Java, Malacca, Cambodia, and other Southeast Asian lands. If Yongle had wished to restore the tribute system structure, based on traditional precepts, would he have sent eunuchs, many of whom were illiterate and others of whom were foreigners, as his representatives? Would these envoys be fully cognizant of the rituals associated with foreign relations? His appointment of such foreigners as Isiha and such Muslims as Zheng He conveyed a view that non-Chinese and non-Confucians might be able to ingratiate themselves with those foreign peoples of similar backgrounds and religions. Realism dictated that the Emperor’s representatives avoid rigidity in Chinese claims of cultural or political superiority, which were beliefs that reflected the views of much of the scholar-official class. Prudence motivated Yongle to dispatch envoys who were not wedded to the Confucian orthodoxy. His policy of openness to foreigners also overturned many of the tribute system’s shibboleths. Instead of lack of concern and interest in the so-called barbarians, Yongle’s court was well informed about foreigners and commissioned reports about near and distant lands. The envoy Chen Cheng’s (1365– 1451) description of Herat and Ma Huan’s (1380–1460) depiction of Zheng He’s (1371–1433) even more far-flung regions were classic accounts, but other am8 Wang Yuan-kang, Power and the use of force, in: Timothy Brook, Michael van Walt van Praag and Miek Bolties (eds.), Sacred Mandates: Asian International Relations Since Chinggis Khan. Chicago 2018, 71. 9 Ibid., 67.

134

Morris Rossabi

bassadors produced other, less renowned works on foreign areas.10 These accounts reveal considerable knowledge of the power, the culture, and the products of numerous foreign lands. Unlike the conventional wisdom, the Ming court actually sought information about foreign regions Naturally, he could not abandon all claims to his own virtue and benevolence. Nor could he retreat from the view that China was the civilized center of the world and that it could serve to help foreigners transform themselves (laihua) and adopt Confucian values and perceptions of proper behavior and a good society. Neither could he give up the concept that foreign rulers needed the Ming Emperors’ sanction to be accepted as legitimate. Yet Yongle recognized that the rigid assertion of these principles would prove counterproductive and required a more pragmatic approach. Yongle treated foreigners based on his envoys’ accounts, as well as reports from officials on the borders. He and the court rated foreign states and accorded the envoys gifts and audiences consonant with their evaluations. Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n Naqqa¯sh, the envoy from the Timurid ruler Sha¯hru¯kh Bahadur, confirms this, writing that “At every Post-house, they used to give in the measure that had already been fixed according to the rank, mutton, geese, fowls, rice, flour, honey, beer, wine, garlics etc.”11 Every foreign state that had contact with China was ranked in the same way. The court developed realistic appraisals of its value and power and then worked out the scale and the number of gifts and the treatment of envoys. These evaluations required knowledge of the potential threat of foreign states and of an attempt to deter foreign raids, invasions, and attacks. At the same time, some officials and merchants also sought to benefit from foreign trade, another significant objective of foreign relations, which Hevia tended to discount. Insufficient sources on the details of foreign trade does not mean that such commerce was insignificant.

Gifts and Realism Concerning gifts, after a foreign envoy offered tribute, the Ming Emperors provided valuables for foreign rulers. Countries that posed no threats or had borrowed elements of Chinese culture would not necessarily be granted requests for special gifts in reply. For example, Japan was too far away to mount a viable military challenge to China. Moreover, the Ming court recognized that Japan had 10 Ma Huan’s work has been translated: J. V. G. Mills, Ying-yai Sheng-lan: The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores. London 1970; for Chen Cheng, see Morris Rossabi, Ch’en Ch’eng’s Hsiyu fan-kuo chih: A Translation, in: Ming Studies (1983), 49–60; id., Two Ming Envoys to Inner Asia, in: T’oung Pao, 1976, 1–34. 11 K. M. Maitra, A Persian Embassy to China, New York 1970, 35.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

135

borrowed the Chinese characters, Confucianism, and Buddhism, among other features of culture, and thus perceived the Japanese as younger brothers and the Chinese as older brothers. Because Japanese pirates or wako could be irritants at sea or in coastal zones, the court provided opportunities for tribute but limited Japanese embassies to one every decade. As a result, only eleven official missions reached China between 1433 and 1549. Japanese merchants were, at various times, able to evade such restrictions and traded with the court and Chinese merchants. However, the court repeatedly denied Shogunal requests for specific gifts in reply, especially copper coins, which were the basis of the monetary system in Japan.12 Hami was on the opposite side of the spectrum. Known as the gateway to the Western Regions and as a town south of the Tianshan mountains, which was vital to the Silk Roads, it also occupied a strategic position. Mongolians or Central Asians who controlled the town could launch attacks on China from this location. Thus, the Ming sought to maintain cordial relations with Hami and to prevent an enemy force from dominating it. Indeed, the court was prescient, for Esen (d. 1455), a Mongolian leader, conquered the town of Hami in the 1440s and used it as a base to raid Chinese territory. Recognizing Hami’s importance, the Ming court offered lavish gifts in reply to the town’s rulers, and the ‘Da Ming huidian’ describes some of these presents. In 1406, the Yongle Emperor gave sixty bolts of fine silk and 214 of coarse silk to Toghto, the Hami ruler, and donated six bolts of fine silk and six bolts of coarse silk to Toghto’s paternal grandmother and to each of his consorts and four bolts of fine silk and four of coarse silk to his aunt. Two years later, the Emperor presented fifty bolts of fine silk, twenty of coarse silk, three robes of gold brocaded fine silk, two black deerskin boots, and two felt stockings to Toghto, as well as six lined garments of colored satin to Toghto’s paternal grandmother and each of his consorts.13 This level of presents persisted through much of the fifteenth century. The gifts in reply to Hami’s merchants and envoys were also based on a realistic assessment of foreign goods. Although they were described as tribute goods, they really were trade items. Each foreign product had a specific exchange rate, which both sides knew. A so-called Western horse was valued at six lined garments of colored satin; each average horse at one bolt of fine silk, eight bolts of coarse silk, and the value in paper money of two bolts of coarse silk, with the paper currency used to purchase other Chinese products; an inferior horse was rated at one bolt of fine silk, seven bolts of coarse silk, and the value in paper 12 See Nakajima Sho¯ (ed.), Shintei zenrin kokuho¯ki, Tokyo 1932, 3, 27; see translation by Wang Yi-t’ung, Official Relations Between China and Japan, 1368–1549, Cambridge 1953, 103. 13 Shen Shixing 申時行, et al., Da Ming huidian 大明會典, Taibei, 1963 reprint, 112, 1653.

136

Morris Rossabi

money of one bolt of coarse silk; and each new born colt and each horse, which died en route, exchanged for three bolts of coarse silk.14 The exchange rate for a camel was four lined garments of colored satin, and the court paid six bolts of coarse silk and the value in paper money of one bolt of coarse silk for camels that died en route. The court’s willingness to compensate merchants for their losses of horses and camels attests to their need for these animals. The court and Hami also devised exchange rates for other products, including jade, sal ammoniac, lapis lazuli, fine big steel knives, antelope horns, sable, blue-flowered handkerchiefs, and animal pelts. The exchange rates changed from time to time, but their existence revealed the court’s pragmatism concerning trade. Further evidence of its realism is the prohibition on providing Hami with iron implements, weapons, knives, and scissors, goods that could be used to threaten China. Tamerlane’s descendants in Central Asia dispatched principally animals, and the exchange rate was clearly specified. Each Western horse received five lined garments of colored satin and the value in paper money of ten bolts of coarse silk. Leopards were valued at eight lined garments, leopard skins at one, and lion skins at two.

Korea and the Jurchens Like Japan, Korea borrowed Confucianism, Buddhism, and the Chinese written language and went one step further in adopting Chinese-style civil service examinations. Thus, it could be considered in a younger brother-elder brother relationship with China. The Ming court could have adopted the same policies it had employed with Japan, limiting the number of tribute missions and denying Korean requests for specific gifts. Unlike Japan, however, Korea shared a common border with the Ming in China’s northeast, and historically, raids, attacks, and invasions had often started along China’s northeastern frontiers.15 The Korean royal family, as well as other families from the nobility, had concluded marital alliances with the Mongols, the Ming’s dreaded enemy, which meant that some Koreans posed a threat to China. However, the Joseon dynasty (1392–1910), which sought amicable relations with China, had replaced the Goryeo Kingdom (918–1392), but a number of influential families still had intimate links with the Mongols and could be hostile to the Ming. Still another concern was Korean relations with the Jurchens who had invaded and occupied North China from 1127 to 1234. Finally, some Ming officials and merchants wished to obtain ginseng, gold, silver, lacquerware, otter skins, and horses from Korea. 14 Da Ming huidian 112, 1653. 15 See, for example, Gari Ledyard, Yin and Yang in the China-Manchuria-Korea Triangle, in: Morris Rossabi, China among Equals. 1983, 313–353.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

137

A realistic assessment of China’s security, as well as a careful review of Korean products that could benefit China, prompted the court to accept the arrival of Korean embassies, which entailed considerable expenses. China paid for the envoys’ lodging, food, transport, and entertainment. The court allowed Korea to send 391 embassies from 1392 to 1450. Despite the costs, the court did not deny access to any of these embassies. Nor did the Ming court categorically rule out satisfying the Korean royal family’s requests for special gifts. It provided dragon robes, silk, books, and medicines, among other presents. Chinese officials and merchants profited from the tribute and trade products, which, in addition to the items listed earlier, included furs, paper, slaves, eunuchs, and young women. Adding to the costs were banquets for all foreign missions. The number, the scale, and the elaborateness of the banquets depended on a pragmatic assessment of the importance of the individual state or region, which varied in the case of Korea. The Court of Imperial Entertainment (guanglusi) was responsible for providing and serving the food, wines, and delicacies for these events. In addition, court musicians entertained the envoys, which added to the expenses.16 The audiences and the maintenance of foreign envoys for days or even months at a time, and gifts were costly, but pragmatism indicated that the expenses contributed to better relations and ultimately savings for the court. Yongle himself sent missions to Korea “to inquire and investigate, to announce the imperial succession or the naming of an heir apparent.”17 Slightly less than one embassy a year arrived in Korea. The Ming court assumed that assigning eunuchs, many of Korean extraction, to the embassies would foster harmonious relations. Instead, many of the eunuchs were boorish and aroused considerable hostility. Nonetheless, both Korea and Ming China adopted realistic policies to avoid conflict. The Jurchens of Manchuria frequently brought Korea and Ming China together. Each feared that the other would form an alliance with the Jurchens against the other and gain an advantage in Northeast Asia. The Ming sought stability by establishing wei, or Guards, in the Jurchen lands and offering military titles to the Jurchen rulers. Most important were economic relations. The Yongle Emperor dispatched several embassies to the Jurchens, including ones led by Isiha (fl. 1409–1451), a Jurchen eunuch, to devise proper tributary and commercial contacts with the Jurchens.18 As with the use of Korean eunuch envoys to Korea, Isiha was sent to his own people as a Ming strategy to promote good relations. Unlike the Korean envoys, Isiha’s missions were received cordially, and 16 Da Ming huidian. 114, 1669–1673. 17 Donald Clark, Sino-Korean Tributary Relations under the Ming, in: Denis Twitchett/ Frederick Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China: Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368– 1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, 282. 18 On Isiha, see Morris Rossabi, Two Ming Envoys to Inner Asia, in: T’oung Pao 62 (1976), 2–15.

138

Morris Rossabi

he even constructed the Yongningsi, a Buddhist temple, and mounted a stele to commemorate his success.19 Chinese obtained furs and horses from the Jurchens. Such commerce became formal and standardized. Chinese and Jurchen merchants devised the following exchanges: (a) Outstanding horse – eight bolts of coarse silk and twelve bolts of cotton (b) Superior horse – four bolts of coarse silk and six bolts of cotton (c) Average horse – three bolts of coarse silk and five bolts of cotton (d) Inferior horse – two bolts of coarse silk and four bolts of cotton (e) Foal – one bolt of coarse silk and three bolts of cotton.20 The court did prohibit the export of weapons and iron, but it provided grain to Jurchen farmers whose lands were devastated by droughts or other natural disasters.21 The court then provided elaborate gifts in reply to the ambassadors. Each Jurchen with the rank of Commissioner-in-chief received four lined garments of colored satin, the value in paper money of two bolts of coarse silk, one robe of gold-brocaded fine silk, and one pair of boots and stockings. Those with lesser titles were granted slightly fewer gifts. Jurchens who furnished valuable intelligence secured two robes of fine silk, one lined garment of colored satin, and the value in paper money of one bolt of coarse silk.22 On the other hand, the Ming received valuable products in tribute and trade. The Jurchens obtained horses from the Koreans and the Mongols and camels from the Mongols and then transshipped them to the Ming. They also brought furs and gerfalcons and, less frequently, gold and silver vessels.

Yongle and Failed Diplomacy The failures of diplomacy entailed preparations for war, another realistic Ming assertion. The dynasty had borrowed battle tactics from the Mongols, including flag, cymbal, and drum signals to coordinate actions to bolster morale, and it rang bells to transmit orders. In short, war and violence were not far from the minds of many Chinese policy makers. They first exhausted all avenues for diplomacy, but if negotiations proved fruitless, they resorted to violence. 19 On this inscription, see Luo Fuyi 羅福頤, Nuergan Yongningsi beibukao, in: Manshu¯ gakuho¯ 5 (1937), 97–99. On the construction of a stele during the first of Yongle’s campaigns in Mongolia, see V. M. Kasakevich, “Sources to the History of the Chinese Military Expeditions into Mongolia” (trans. by Rudolf Löwenthal), in: Monumenta Serica 8 (1943), 328–330. 20 Inaba Iwakichi, Kenshu¯ Jochoku no genchi oyobi senju¯chi, in: Manshu¯ rekishi shiri 2 (1913), 201–213. See also Morris Rossabi, The Jurchens in the Yuan and Ming, Ithaca 1982. 21 Tamura Jitsuzo¯, et al., Mindai Mammo¯ shiryo¯, Minjitsuroku-sho¯ Manshu¯-hen, vol. 1, Kyo¯to 1954–1957, 262. 22 Da Ming huidian, 111, 1650.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

139

Violence often characterized Yongle’s relations with the Mongols. Conflicts repeatedly flared up along the frontiers and in the steppes. Knowledge of these campaigns is skewed because the Chinese sources, the only written accounts, are not entirely reliable. Statistics are especially suspect. Chinese accounts often overstate the damage and loss of life the Ming inflicted on the Mongols. Some battles, which they portray, did not take place or at least not on the scale the sources depict them. The Mongols repeatedly avoided full-scale battles, opting instead for hit-and-run attacks or guerilla raids. Yongle designed policies to undermine the Mongols. He did not acknowledge the possibility of peace if China offered permission for the Mongols’ desperate need for commerce. If the Ming had allowed considerably more opportunities for the Mongols to trade, it would likely have reduced conflicts along its northern borders. Here was a case in which the Ming did not adopt a realistic and conciliatory policy. The Yongle Emperor sought to use the tried and true tactic of divide and rule to deflect the threat posed by the Oyirad and the Eastern Mongols, the two major contingents among these steppe peoples. Even without Yongle’s deliberate attempt to cause divisions, the Oyirad and the Eastern Mongols would have faced formidable obstacles in unifying. Mongol pastoral nomads rarely joined together into large confederations because the dominant and generally optimal unit of organization was a small group. They only infrequently transferred their loyalty and allegiance from a group leader to a Khan. Yongle adopted a belligerent policy. By initially favoring the Oyirad, he earned the Eastern Mongols’ wrath. Nonetheless, his support for the Oyirad helped them to defeat Arughtai, the Eastern Mongols’ leader. Judging from later events, however, the Oyirad initial victory was hardly decisive. A humiliating defeat of one of his generals prompted Yongle personally to lead five campaigns against the Mongols.23 The Chinese sources described these expeditions in almost the same fashion. Yongle would organize a sizable force, allegedly half a million in one campaign and 230,000 in another, and would set forth for the steppes. In several cases, the Ming allegedly intimidated the Mongols who fled, and the Chinese forces thus did not find substantial enemy troops. When they defeated the Mongols, they encountered small detachments, not a major force. The only real battle was a confrontation in 1415 with the Oyirad who, perhaps buoyed by their highly successful hit and run policies, decided to challenge Yongle’s army in open combat. Both sides used cavalries, archers, and swordsmen, but the ensuing battle did not lead to a clear-cut victory. The Ming 23 On these campaigns, see Wolfgang Franke, Yung-lo’s Mongolei-Feldzüge, in: Sinologische Arbeiten 3 (1945), 1–54; id., Chinesische Feldzüge durch die Mongolei im frühen 15. Jahrhundert, Sinologica 3 (1951–1953), 81–88; V. M. Kasakevich, 328–355; and Dmitri Pokotilov, History of the Eastern Mongols during the Ming Dynasty from 1368 to 1644, trans. by Rudolph Löwenthal, Chengtu 1947–1949.

140

Morris Rossabi

advantage in men and weapons was scarcely useful in steppe warfare. In any event, both the Ming and the enemy suffered serious losses, and the Oyirad became especially vulnerable. Arughtai capitalized on the Oyirad’s weakness to attack and kill their leader. The death of the Oyirad ruler was the only important consequence of Yongle’s campaigns. The Ming emperor was unable to pacify the various Mongol groups, yet he devoted considerable financial resources to these expeditions. Some Court officials perceived of these campaigns as wasteful and persuaded Yongle’s immediate successors to abandon such expeditions. Aware that the Ming began to face financial difficulties, they resented the squandering of resources which these inconclusive, if not failed, campaigns represented. In light of later events, their realistic assessments were accurate. However, they neither recognized nor acknowledged that permission for the Mongols to trade might have averted border disturbances. Disputes over trade and tribute continued to bedevil relations, leading to minor military engagements and hit and run raids. The Court could not prevent these raids, partly because of the inadequacy of its cavalry. This deficiency placed the Ming at a disadvantage in dealings and conflicts with the Mongols, who were consummate horsemen. Ironically, despite repeated struggles with the Mongols, the Ming Court adopted much from its steppe predecessors. Some of these borrowings were due to the first Emperor’s decision to permit what were perceived to be loyal Mongols to remain in China. Conflicts among the Mongol leaders in Mongolia, famines or at least lack of assurance of necessities in their native land, and the seductiveness of a more abundant economy combined to induce some Mongols to remain or to flee to China. A few performed valuable services as translators or interpreters and as members of the Imperial Guard (Jinyiwei 錦衣衛), a special elite force that protected the Emperor and probably derived from the Mongol institution known as the keshig.24 The Court provided some with a rice allowance and paper money and others with pastureland and hay for their horses.25 The Ming also adopted features of Mongol military organization. Like the Yuan dynasty, it based itself on a decimal system, with a chiliarchy (qianhuso 千戶所) and five chiliarchs comprising a Guard (wei 衛).

24 On the keshig, see C. C. Hsiao, The Military Establishment of the Yuan Dynasty. Cambridge 1978, 33–43, and Christopher Atwood, Ulus, Emirs, Keshig Elders, Signatures, and Marriage Partners: The Evolution of a Classic Mongol Institution, in: David Sneath (ed.), Imperial Statecraft: Political Forms and Techniques of Governance in Inner Asia, Sixth-Twentieth Centuries, Bellingham 2006, 141–173. 25 Henry Serruys, Foreigners in the Metropolitan Police during the 15th Century, in: Oriens Extremus 8 (1961), 62–63; and id., Landgrants to the Mongols in China, 1400–1460, in: Monumenta Serica 25 (1966), 394–405.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

141

The Court’s policy in Annam (present-day North Vietnam) also diminished its military stature. The Yongle Emperor adopted a bellicose stratagem. He was provoked when a usurper acquiesced to a Ming demand to restore a Tra¯n descendant as the King but then ambushed and killed the hapless monarch. Yongle was compelled to avenge this betrayal by the rebels. In 1406, he dispatched two expeditionary armies and one naval force, allegedly of more than 200,000 men. The so-called Eastern army attacked via the province of Guangxi, while the Western units crossed over from Yunnan province into Vietnam. This twopronged assault moved with considerable alacrity, and Ming forces occupied the Annamese capitals. The naval contingent captured the rebel leader when he tried to escape by sea. By early 1407, the Ming seemed to have been singularly successful, but appearances were deceptive. Attempting to govern the newly-subjugated territory as part of a newlyfounded province, Jiaozhi 交趾, within China, Ming forces faced unusual and eventually devastating challenges. Although they seized the capitals, the vast majority of the Annamese population lived in the countryside, and native leaders capitalized on familiarity with the terrain in resisting the Ming. Their Annamese opponents generally did not engage in full-scale battles. Instead they developed what would later be termed guerilla warfare. Ambushes, night-time raids on Ming forces, and small-scale attacks on Chinese troops who were separated from their armies were the principal Annamese tactics. All these engagements required the support of the native inhabitants, the key to the guerillas’ successes. Native leaders received intelligence information, sanctuary, and food and supplies from the local populations who resented the Chinese occupation and the taxes imposed upon them by Ming officials. This was classic guerilla warfare, in which the Ming’s advanced weapons and seemingly overwhelming force did not guarantee success. In addition, Ming troops were unaccustomed to Annam’s tropical and semi-tropical heat, and many succumbed to the attendant parasitic and infectious diseases.26 The Yongle Emperor also misjudged the closeness of Annamese and Chinese civilizations. Although the Annamese had borrowed the use of the Chinese written language and had adopted features of Confucian civilization, they had their own strong identity and did not wish to be subsumed by the Ming. The

26 On the invasions, Alexander Woodside, Early Ming Expansionism (1406–1427): China’s Abortive Conquest of Vietnam, in: Harvard University Papers on China (1963), 1–37, is still useful. See also John Whitmore, Vietnam, Hô Quý and the Ming (1371–1421). New Haven 1985. For additional sources, see Morris Rossabi, Ming Conflict with her Neighbors, 1368– 1644, ed. David Parrott, Cambridge History of War: Volume Three (forthcoming).

142

Morris Rossabi

Chinese were also distressed by the Annamese Confucians’ incorporation of the ideas of local cults.27 Like many campaigns against guerilla warfare, the Ming invasion appeared at first to be successful and a harbinger for the establishment, in July of 1407, of Jiaozhi as a Chinese province. In one expedition after another, Ming troops defeated the Annamese forces. In 1408–09, they overwhelmed a Tra¯n descendant, and in 1411–1414, they crushed still another Tra¯n leader. Yet in 1417–18, another outbreak against Chinese rule erupted. On this occasion, a vibrant military leader named Lê Loi (ca. 1385–1433) arose and galvanized the population. He lost to the Ming forces on the battlefield several times, but he then reverted to the policy of guerilla warfare and continued to wear down the Chinese invaders. The Chinese advantage in weaponry and firepower could not match knowledge of the terrain, support from the local populace, ambushes, and unorthodox tactics of meeting the enemy. The war of attrition ground down the Ming forces. The remarkable Ming innovations in weaponry scarcely made a difference in small-scale combat. Huge expenses added to Chinese difficulties. Court officials, horrified by the costs of the expeditions in Annam and Mongolia, wanted to abandon these aggressive policies. Within three years of the Yongle Emperor’s death, the Court ordered the withdrawal of Ming troops. Proper analysis and implementation of tactics and strategy proved to be more important than weapons and more numerous and allegedly more powerful forces. In sum, no matter how superior the Ming’s weaponry and manpower, corruption, demoralization, strategic ineptness, and economic problems outweighed its other assets.

Conclusion: Yongle’s Foreign Policies A study of Yongle’s foreign relations challenges Professor Hevia’s interpretation concerning rituals, at least in the earlier dynasty. Yongle’s policies were based on a systematic and pragmatic analysis of each foreign group, state, or kingdom.28 The analysis could be inaccurate as in the invasions of the Mongols and Vietnam, but the court attempted these conquests on a realistic appraisal of the enemy. Its gifts to foreign rulers and envoys and its permissions to trade centered on an estimation of the significance and power of foreigners. To be sure, proper rituals 27 Wang Gungwu, China and Southeast Asia, ed. Jerome Ch’en and Nicholas Tarling, Studies in Social History: Essays in Memory of Victor Purcell, Cambridge 1970, 381–385 and 118–122. 28 Based on a survey of studies of foreign relations in the Song and Ming dynasties and applying their insights to the modern world, Wang Yuan-kang, Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics, New York 2011, agrees that realism and power politics dictated Chinese foreign relations.

Yongle, Tributary Relations, and Foreign Policy

143

in greetings and interactions were conducted in a prescribed fashion and were perceived to be significant, partly because they bolstered the Emperor’s status and legitimacy, despite his usurpation of the throne. However, rituals did not supersede realism in developing Ming foreign policies.

Bibliography Timothy Brook/Michael van Walt van Praag (eds.), Sacred Mandates: Asian International Relations Since Chinggis Khan, Chicago 2018. Jerome Ch’en/Nicholas Tarling (eds.), Studies in Social History: Essays in Memory of Victor Purcell, Cambridge 1970. Wolfgang Franke, Yonglo’s Mongolei-Feldzüge, in: Sinologische Arbeiten 3 (1945), 1–54. Wolfgang Franke, Chinesische Feldzüge durch die Mongolei im frühen 15. Jahrhundert, Sinologica 3 (1951–1953), 81–88. James Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar, Durham 1995. James Hevia, Postpolemical Historiography: A Response to Joseph Esherick, in: Modern China 24/3 (July 1998), 319–327. C. C. Hsiao, The Military Establishment of the Yuan Dynasty, Cambridge 1978. Inaba Iwakichi, Kenshu¯ Jochoku no genchi oyobi senju¯chi, in: Manshu¯ rekishi shiri 2 (1913), 201–213. V. M. Kasakevich, Sources to the History of the Chinese Military Expeditions into Mongolia, trans. by Rudolf Löwenthal, Monumenta Serica 8 (1943), 328–355. Li Dongfang 黎東方, Xishuo Mingchao 細說明朝, Taipei 1964. Luo Fuyi 羅福頤, Nuergan Yongningsi beibukao, in: Manshu¯ gakuho¯ 5 (1937), 97–99. K. M. Maitra, A Persian Embassy to China, New York 1970. J. V. G. Mills, Yingyai Shenglan: The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores, London 1970. David Parrott (ed.), Cambridge History of War, Volume Three (forthcoming). Dmitri Pokotilov, History of the Eastern Mongols During the Ming Dynasty from 1368 to 1644, trans. by Rudolf Löwenthal, Chengtu 1947–1949. David Robinson (ed.), Culture, Countries, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368–1644), Cambridge 2008. Morris Rossabi, Two Ming Envoys to Inner Asia, in: T’oung Pao 62 (1976), 1–34. Morris Rossabi, The Jurchens in the Yuan and Ming, Ithaca 1982. Morris Rossabi, Ch’en Ch’eng’s Hsi-yü fan-kuo chih: A Translation, in: Ming Studies (1983), 49–60. Morris Rossabi (ed.), China among Equals, Berkeley 1983. Henry Serruys, Foreigners in the Metropolitan Police During the 15th Century, in: Oriens Extremus 8 (1961), 62–74. Henry Serruys, Landgrants to the Mongols in China, 1400–1600, in: Monumenta Serica 25 (1966), 394–405. Henry Serruys, A Manuscript Version of the Legend of the Mongol Ancestry of the Yongle Emperor, in: Analetica Mongolica 8 (1972), 19–61. Shen Shixing 申時行, et al., Da Ming huidian 大明會典, Taipei 1963 reprint.

144

Morris Rossabi

David Sneath (ed.), Imperial Statecraft: Political Forms and Techniques of Governance, Inner Asia, Sixth-Twentieth Centuries, Bellingham 2006. Tamura Jitsuzo et al., Mindai Mammo¯ shiryo¯, Minjitsuroku-sho¯ Manshu¯-hen, Kyoto 1954–1957. Tsai Shih-san Henry, Perpetual Happiness: The Ming Emperor Yongle, Seattle 2001. Denis Twitchett/Frederick Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China: Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998. Wang Yi-t’ung, Official Relations Between China and Japan, 1368–1549, Cambridge 1953. Wang Yuan-kang, Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics, New York 2011. John Whitmore, Vietnam, Hô Ouý, and the Ming (1371–1421), New Haven 1985. Alexander Woodside, Early Ming Expansionism (1406–1427): China’s Abortive Conquest of Vietnam, in: Harvard University Papers on China (1963), 1–37.

Britta-Maria Gruber

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu1 Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return

In 1632, the Aisin state (Gold state) had already been in existence for 16 years steadily expanding its territory through conquests, submission, and union of various Jurchen and Mongolian groups, as well as Chinese border regions. It had been established on 17th February 1616, when the beile (princes) and ambasa (dignitaries) of the Jurchen had asked Nurhaci (1559–1626)2 to accept a formidable name. Since then, Nurhaci had become known as Genggiyen Han.3 He died in September 1626, and his eighth son Hong Taiji (1592–1643)4 succeeded to the throne as Sure Han ‘Wise Khan’. He continued his father’s work to build a stable state by seeking allies among the Mongols and also turning to Chinese territory outside as well as inside the Great Wall.5 These enterprises posed an enormous challenge to Hong Taiji who faced manifold problems in his multi-national realm. On the one hand, the newly conquered territories had to be integrated, and on the other hand, he had to keep ˇ aqar his Mongolian allies under control, and there was still the threat of the C

1 In 1632, the Manchus were still known as Jurchen (Man. Jus´en), only in 1635 did the ruler Hong Taiji order in an edict that from now on the name Manchu had to be used. JMZD: Jiu Manzhou Dang 舊満洲檔 (Old Manchu Archives), 10 vols., edited by Ch’en Chieh-hsien, Taipei, National Museum Shih-lin, 1969, vol. 9, f. 4508: 1, 4509: 6–10. For a description see Ch’en Chiehhsien, Manchu Archival Materials, Taipei 1988, 14–33. 2 Biography in: ECCP: Fang Chao-ying, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, 1970, 594–599. 3 This was the first day of the red-dragon year (‘fulgiyan muduri aniya’). See Tongki Fuka Sindaha Hergen I Dangse ‘The Secret Chronicles of the Manchu Dynasty’ 1607–1637 AD, translated and annotated by Kanda Nobuo et al., Tokyo 1955, Vol. 1, 67–68. In the Manzhou shilu his full name reads ‘geren gurun-be ujire genggiyen han’ (Brilliant Khan, Nurturer of all Nations). See Imanishi Shunju¯ 今西春秋, Manwa mo¯wa taiyaku manshu¯ jitsuroku 満和蒙和 対訳満洲実録, To¯kyo¯ 1992, 141. 4 Biography in: ECCP: Fang Chao-ying, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, 1970, 594–599. 5 A survey of the events is in: Gertraude Roth-Li, State building before 1644, in: The Cambridge History of China, Part One: The Ch’ing Empire to 1800, vol. 9, 2002, 9–72, here 41–62.

146

Britta-Maria Gruber

leader Ligdan Qan6 who had been attempting to recreate the great Mongol empire of the past. The Jiu Manzhou Dang, a collection of documents written in Manchu and Mongolian covering the years 1607–1632 and 1635–1636 contain two special files giving a detailed account of Mongolian visits to the Manchu ruler, Hong Taiji, their tribute or presents, and the gifts they received in return. The first file carries the title “Dangsa recording the 5th year of Sure Han (1631), the white-sheep year and the months. Documents which had been sent to and which had come from the Mongols, and what had been given to the envoys as reward. Audience visits of rulers and princes of the Mongols and other states and of what had been given as presents. Documents of receiving the Mongols and escorting [them] out as well as holding banquets [in honour of] the Mongols.”7 The title of the second file reads “Sure Han’s 6th black-monkey year (1632). Dangsa recording the year and months. Documents of the Mongol princes (beise, beile, noyan) who had joined [the Manchus – Jusˇen] coming to kowtow, [of what] had been received [from] and given to them, their escorting out and the banquets held.”8 Both files do not mention the word alabun “tribute”. Tribute comes from the Latin tributum meaning “direct tax, poll-tax” or “property tax” being imposed according to requirement, and which was used for the purpose of war only. When the Roman citizens did not have to pay taxes any longer from 168 BC on, then tributum was understood to be ‘tribute’, ‘duty’, ‘rate’, and ‘contribution, donation, gift, present’.9 In the Middle Ages tributum meant ‘state tax’, ‘rent’, ‘corvée – labour service’.10 In the context of the both files in question, tribute rather means ‘gifts, presents’, because no visitor ever came or left empty handed. As the second file

6 Ligdan Qan see: Michael Weiers, Das Verhältnis des Ligdan Khan zu seinen Völkerschaften, in: Serta Tibeto-Mongolica, Festschrift für Walther Heissig zum 60. Geburtstag am 5. 12. 1973, Wiesbaden 1973, 365–380. 7 (F. 3373) (1) su¯re han-i sunjaci aniya ˇsaho¯n honin aniya (2) biya ejehe dangs-e: (3) 天tian (4) monggo-de u¯nggihe jihe elcin-de ˇsangnaha bithe: (5) monggo-i encu gu¯run-i han beise acanjime +jihe aika bu¯he (6) *monggo-be okdoho fu¯dehe sarin sarilaha bithe: A complete transliteration and translation of this file is in: Britta-Maria Gruber, Zur Entwicklung der Herrschaft im Aisin-Staat 1616–1636, in: Tunguso Sibirica 17 (2006), 39–105. 8 (F. 3907) (1) °sure han-i ningguci sahaliyan bonio aniya: aniya biya ejehe (2) dangsa: dahaha monggo-i hengkileme jihe: (3) gaiha. buhe. fudehe. sarilaha bithe: JMZD, vol. 8. 9 Menge-Güthling, Langenscheidts Großwörterbuch Lateinisch-Deutsch, mit Etymologie, 198422, 766. 10 J.F. Niermeyer, C. Van De Kieft, Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus, Lexique latin médiéval – Medieval Latin Dictionary – Mittellateinisches Wörterbuch, vol. 2, Leiden 2002, 1361–1362. See also: G. Wirth, I. Spätantike; P. Schreiner, II. Byzanz; U. Mattejiet, III. Hoch- und Spätmittelalter, in: Lexikon des Mittelalters, vol. 8, 986–987.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 147

covering the first, second, ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth months is rather long, a selection of typical as well as exceptional events will be introduced here. First month (Feb. 20th – Mar. 20th): F. 3909 (1) °ice-de: han-de: korcin-i tusiy-e-tu efu aniya doroi seme emu morin: tofohon ajin: (2) sereng darhan taiji emu morin benjihe: °tere inenggi arui dalai cu¯hur aniya doro-i seme (3) +han-de emu temen: duin morin jafaha bihe: emu temen: ilan morin gaiha: On the first day (Feb. 20, 1632), Tusiyetu Efu of the Korcin11 had brought one horse and 15 sturgeons, Sereng Darhan Taiji one horse on the occasion of the New Year to the Han. On the same day, Dalai Cu¯hur of the Aru12 had donated one camel and four horses on the occasion of the New Year to the Han. He took one camel and three horses. (4) ice juwe-de: korcin-i hatan batur elcin duin niyalma isinjiha: ++han-de aniya doro-i seme (5) emu ajin benjihe: On the second day, Hatan Batur of the Korcin and envoys, four people, had arrived. On the occasion of the New Year, they had brought one sturgeon. (6) ice ilan-de: arui han-i emu elcin: taiku-i emu elcin: tubai emu elcin ere ilan elcin-de (7) emte suje: jaku¯ta morin buhe: erei emgi ++han-i butu mal genehe: esei gamaha bithei gisun: (8) arui urad gürün-i qan: taiqu: kümü qung baγatur: cˇok-tu böke noyan: tuba erke tayiji: (9) neyici noyan: tümen darqan tayiji: muǰai dural noyan: tui qatan baγatur ese-de (10) °qaγan-i ǰarliγ bicˇig: ǰalayid γorlos elǰige-yin kegüded: nige morin-i üneber tan-acˇa dörbe tabu mori (3910) (1) abqu-yin tula: tan-du qudal-iyar ayilγaǰu öber-tü buu orutuγai genem bisiü: teden-ü (2) ügen-dü buu oru: cˇaqar-yin qaγan abaγ-a-yin ǰinong-du ˇcerig mordaγsan ucˇir-tu: (3) bida ˇcaqar-acˇa kele bariǰu iregeǰi ilegeǰü bile: tere ilegegsen-i medeǰü ǰinong-i simdeǰü (4) negel ügei ger ǰüg ǰaqaraǰu qariǰi kele: mani-gi kitad-tu mordaγsan-i cˇaqar medeǰü (5) dalayi-gi dobtaluγad: mani cˇerig baγuγsan-i sonuscˇu: nekenem geǰü emiyeǰi ǰaqaraǰu qariǰi (6) bayinam: dalayi-yin ulus-acˇa: tan-i keltegei saγuγsan-i cˇaqar medeǰü: oda tan-du (7) mordaqula tani ken emüglekü bui ǰaγaral ügei yabuǰu mör-tü tan-i oroǰu ülü abqu buyu: (8) ulus mal-iyan abdaγsan qoyina mani ǰüg orobacˇi kereg buyu: mandu neyileküle tan-du (9) amur bisiü:: On the third day, [the Han] had given to the envoy of the Aru Han, the envoy of Taihu, and the envoy of Tuba, to these three envoys, one silk cloth and eight horses each. Together with these, cattle hidden from the Han had gone. The words of the [Han’s] letter dispatched to them: The Qans of the Urad people of the north: Taiqu, Kümü Qung ˇ oγtu Böke Noyan, Tuba Erke Taiǰi, Qabu Neicˇi Noyan, Tümen Darqan Taiǰi, Baγatur, C Muǰai Dural Noyan, Tui Qatan Baγatur: To them a letter with the words of the Qaγan: 11 Korcin is the Manchu transliteration according to Erich Hauer, Handwörterbuch der Mandschusprache, Wiesbaden 1952, 596. According to the Poppe transliteration system, it would be Qorcˇin. See: Nicolas Poppe, Grammar of Written Mongolian, Porta Linguarum Orientalium, Neue Serie 1, Wiesbaden 1954, 17–26. An account of the earlier relationship of the Manchu-Qorcˇin relationship is in: Michael Weiers, Der Mandschu-Khortsin Bund von 1626, in: Documenta barbarorum: Festschrift für Walther Heissig zum 70. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden 1983, 412–435. 12 Aru-Qorcˇin see: Veronika Veit, Die mongolischen Völkerschaften vom 15. Jahrhundert bis 1691, in: Die Mongolen, Beiträge zu ihrer Geschichte und Kultur, Darmstadt 1986, 379–411, here 399–402.

148

Britta-Maria Gruber

‘The ǰalayid, Гorlos, Elǰige-yin Kegüged, do they not say, because one would take four or five horses from you at the price of one horse by frightening you with lies, ‘Do not enter ˇ aqar has mobilized the south?’ Do not obey their instructions! Because the Qan of the C troops against the ǰinong of the Abaγ-a we have let [men] come and sent to obtain ˇ aqar. These whom we have sent found out that [the C ˇ aqar] said intelligence about the C they would raid into the ǰinong’[s territory], and where [they] could not pursue [anyone ˇ aqar have found out that we have set anymore], they would speedily return home. The C out for China, and after they have attacked the Dalai, they hear that our troops have stopped on the way, and that we say, we would pursue them; they are now afraid and ˇ aqar get to know that you have settled outside the hurriedly return home. When the C ulus (country) of the Dalai, and they now go against you, who is it, who protects you, so that you move along without haste/feat and go on your own way, and you are not carried/taken off. After your country and animals have been taken away, even if you [then] enter into our direction (you come to us), there will be trouble. As soon as you join us, will there not be peace for you?13

This letter gives an insight of the problems the various Mongolian groups had ˇ aqar (Man. Cahar) and their leader Ligdan been facing for a long time with the C Qan. Many of these groups tried to stay independent, while others had already become allies of the Manchus. Nevertheless, the Manchu ruler had to convince all ˇ aqar posed to them, and of them, i. e. allies and non-allies, of the dangers the C that he – the Manchu ruler – would be the only one to protect them, although the ˇ aqar had already been weakened by their leader’s erratic behavior towards his C people by 1632. °tere inenggi cahar kalka barin-i beise-de asidarhan: hu¯sibu: nomtu: nikan ere duin amban uile beideme genehe: On the same [third] day, Asidarhan, Hu¯sibu, Nomtu, Nikan, these four amban went to the beile of the Cahar, Kalka (Mong. Qalqa), and Barin to judge [legal] cases. (10) ice sunja-de korcin-i tumei beilei bolotoi jargu¯ci juwe gucube gajime isinjiha: (11) +han-de juwan seke gajiha bihe: gaihaku¯ amasi bederebuhe: On the fifth day, Bolotoi Jargu¯ci of Tumei beile of the Korcin arrived bringing two friends along. They had brought ten sables. [The Han] did not take them, [but] sent them back. (3911) (1) nadan-de arui dalai cu¯hur-be – han-i boo-de gajibi orin sunja dere dasabi: (2) ilan buhu¯ yali bujubi sarilaha: On the seventh day, after Dalai Cu¯hur of the Aru had been brought to the Han’s house, and 25 tables had been arranged, the meat of three deer had been cooked, and a banquet was held. °tere inenggi: sun dureng-i elcin genehe. sun during-de (3) han-i etuhe gecuheri faku¯ri: sahaliyan dobihi mahala: dehi kiyan dambagu unggihe: elcin-de: emu suje: jaku¯n mocin: 13 This letter is written in Mongolian, a transliteration and translation into German is, in: Michael Weiers, Mongolenpolitik der Mandschuren und Mandschupolitik der Mongolen zu Beginn der dreissiger Jahre des 17. Jahrhunderts, in: ZAS 22 (1989–1991), 256–275, here 270– 272.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 149

(4) juwe hailun: emu umiyesun: juwan kutule-de sunjata mocin buhe: On the same day, Sun Dureng’s envoy had gone. Sun Dureng sent trousers made of satin worn by the Han, a winter hat of black fox fur, and 40 bundles of tobacco. The envoy was given one silk cloth, eight cotton cloths, two otters, and one belt, and the ten serfs were given five cotton cloths each. °tere inenggi dung daicin-ni elcin (5) genehe: ede buhengge emu suje: jaku¯n mocin: juwe kutulede ilata mocin buhe: On the same day, the envoy of Dung Daicing had gone. He was given one silk cloth and eight cotton cloths, and the two serfs three cotton cloths each. (6) jaku¯n-de: isut gurun-i garma ilden batur genehe: ede – han-i buhengge emu sekei (7) hayahan-i ergume: sekei mahala-de aisin sijeri hadahai: aisin-i umiyesun: emu (8) indahu¯n: jaku¯n hule jeke buhe: On the eighth day, Garma Ilden Batur of the Isut state had gone. He was given from the Han: one sable trimmed court dress, a golden badge to be pinned on a sable-trimmed winter hat, a golden belt, one dog, and eight bushels of grain. °juwan-de korcin-i sonom-i jui budasiri-de buhengge (9) ilan uksin saca: juwe foloho enggemu hadala: foloho jebele emke: emu gecuheri: duin (10) suje: susai mocin: menggun-i dongmoγ emke buhe: On the tenth day, Budasiri, the son of Sonom of the Korcin, was given three armours and helmets, two engraved saddles and bridles, one engraved quiver, one brocade, four silk cloths, 50 cotton cloths, and one silver pot (dongmo – a high metal jug). °juwan ninggun-de korcin-i amba mama: (3912) (1) ajige mama: uksˇan nakcu: dagu¯r hatan batur elcin genehe: amba mama-de: gu¯sin mocin: ilan suje: (2) dambagu orin kiyan: gismai14 emu boose: ajige mama-de: gu¯sin mocin: juwe suje: dambagu orin kiyan. (3) gismai emu boose: uksˇan nakcu-de: orin mocin: juwe suje: dambagu orin kiyan: gismai emu boose: (4) dagu¯r hatan batur-de: juwan mocin: juwe suje: dambagu orin kiyan unggihe: duin elcin-de (5) sunjata mocin: duin kutule-de juwete mocin buhe: On the sixteenth day, the Korcin’s Amba Mama, Ajige Mama, Uksˇan Nakcu, and Dagu¯r Hatan Batur’s envoys had gone. [The Han] had sent Amba Mama 30 cotton cloths, three silk cloths, 20 bundles of tobacco, and one package of gismai; Ajige Mama, 3 cotton cloths, two silk cloths, 20 bundles of tobacco, and one package of gismai; Uksˇan Nakcu 20 cotton cloths, two silk cloths, 20 bundles of tobacco, and one package of gismai; Dagu¯r Hatan Batur ten cotton cloths, two silk cloths, 20 bundles of tobacco. The four envoys were given five cotton cloths each, and the four serfs two cotton cloths each. °orin-de: dalai cu¯hur genehe: dalai cu¯hur-de (6) +han-i etuhe sekei hayahan-i ergume: moncon hadaha mahala-de aisin-i sijerin hadahai: emu tanggu¯ mocin: emu (7) gecuheri: uyun suje: juwe foloho enggemu hadala: ilan uksin saca: emu foloho jebele-de beri niru (8) sisihai: menggun-i dongmoγ emke: gu¯sin giyan dambagu buhe: On the twentieth day, Dalai Cu¯hur had gone. He was given a sable-trimmed court dress worn by the Han, a golden badge to be pinned on a winter hat with a silk knob on it, 100 cotton cloths, one satin/brocade with dragons depicted on it, nine silk cloths, two carved saddles and bridles, three armours and helmets, one bow and arrows to be put in a carved quiver, one silver pot, and 30 bundles of tobacco.

14 The meaning of gismai could not be established.

150

Britta-Maria Gruber

°orin emu-de: cahar: kalka: barin-de (9) uile beideme genehe asidarhan: nikan: nomtu: hu¯sibu isinjiha: On the twenty first day, Asidarhan, Nikan, Nomtu, and Hu¯sibu, who had gone to the Cahar, Kalka, and Barin to judge [legal] cases, had arrived. °orin duin-de galju seter (10) elcin: sereng darhan batur elcin genehe: galju seter-de gu¯sin mocin: sunja suje: foloho enggemu hadala (3913) (1) emke: hilteri uksin saca emke: cai sunja boose: dambagu orin kiyan: amba ˇsempi emke: °sereng darhan batur- (2) -de orin mocin: ilan suje: foloho enggemu hadala emke: uksin saca emke: foloho umiyesun emke: (3) jebele dashu¯wan emke: cai sunja boose unggihe: jihe elcin ubasi-de emu suje: uyun mocin: sunja (4) kiyan dambagu buhe: sereng darhan batur elcin-de nadan mocin: kutule-de juwe mocin buhe: tere ubasi elcin- (5) -de unggihe bithei gisun: On the twenty-fourth day, Galju Seter’s and Sereng Darhan’s envoys had gone. Galju Seter sent 30 cotton cloths, five silk cloths, one carved saddle and bridle, one scaled armour and helmet, five packages of tea, 20 bundles of tobacco, one large green grained leather; Sereng Darhan Batur sent 20 cotton cloths, three silk cloths, one carved saddle and bridle, one armour and helmet, one carved belt, one quiver and bow case, and five packages of tea. The envoy Ubasi, who had come, was given one silk cloth, nine cotton cloths, and five bundles of tobacco. Sereng Darhan Batur’s envoy was given seven cotton cloths, and the serf two cotton cloths.

In a letter to Galǰaγu Seter [Qorcˇin], Sure Han spoke about a number of problems, and how they should be solved in an edict dated the eighteenth day of the first month of spring of the monkey year (1632), such as the killing of fugitives by noyad (Mongolian rulers): If noyad kill fugitives, who come along, ten households will be taken (by the Manchus); if common people kill them, all the murderers will be killed; theft; appointment of headmen (of ten households each); unauthorized legal proceedings by noyad; obtaining provisions in case of need while travelling; and the penalty that would be imposed. In the end, this resulted in a set of penalty laws issued in November that same year.15 Second month (Mar. 21st – Apr. 18th): (3917) (6) °juwe biyai ice juwe-de garma taiji-de emu suje: jaku¯n mocin buhe: jusˇenhaji (7) seme habsˇame jihe bihe: ede jafabufi naiman-i darhan hong baγatur-de unggihe bithe-i gisun (8) han hendume: […] On the second day, Garma Taiji (of the Cahar) had been given one silk cloth and eight cotton cloths. He had come filing suit saying: “I am Jusˇenophile.”

Then a letter was sent to Darqan Qong Baγatur of the Naiman stating: ˇ aqar is killing all of his clan and family; one of your clan members, who The Qan of the C is left over, is Garma. Now, however, he has come saying: ‘I want to get together with the older and younger brothers.’ While Darqan Qong Baγatur and the princes of Naiman, you all love him, should you not give him a little piece of land and livestock, of will you 15 JMZD F. 3913: 6–3916: 9. See: Michael Weiers, Die mandschu-mongolischen Strafgesetze vom 16. November 1632, in: ZAS 19 (1986), 88–126.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 151

impoverish after you have said: ‘We have given him a little?’ If you love your older and younger brothers, who have come to be destitute, if one hears that in distant places, and one looks at it nearby, the reputation is good. Have you not seen that ǰinong Baγatur loves Abai too and takes care of him? (Sixth year of Secˇen Qan, second day of the middle spring month).16

This letter shows yet again the political situation and the difficulties Ligdan Qan was creating. Many of his people had fled to other Mongolian territories, where they were not really welcome. There were too many fugitives who had often been forced to leave their entire property behind. They were turning to Sure Han, considered to be the highest authority for help. However, the Han was far from being able to solve all the problems by issuing edicts or orders. He was regarded as ˇ aqar camp, but he obviously did not dare the leader of the anti-Chinese and anti-C to interfere massively with the internal quarrels among those Mongolians, who had already joined him. All he seems to have thought suitable was to convince his allies to follow his instructions in a friendly manner or put them on their honour. (5) tere inenggi karacin-i ombu cu¯hur – – han-de acanjime hengkileme jihe: (6) […]-de elbihe: karacin-i […] beise: tabunang-de elcin genehe: (7) ede unggihe bithei gisun: – – han hendume: u¯lhei tabunang se suwe: daci gaiha (8) an-i alban gaici17 sain kai: kooli aku¯ amargi beisei gaiha alban-be: te suwe (9) gaici waka kai: julgei henduhe gisun: – beile niyalma irgen-be kokiraburaku¯: doro-i (3819) (1) alban gaisu: sala moo hiyan-i hu¯sun-de: ambula eyeci moo olhombi sehebi jetere joboro (2) niyalmai damu ihan-be gaibi jeci: tere niyalma usin ba ai-i deribumbi: usin aku¯ci: (3) suweni gurun yoyome butere isici jugu¯n jugu¯n-i samsime wajiha manggi suwe gurun aku¯ (4) adarame banjimbi: jetere gurun-be gosime usin-be kiceme deribubi uwasime niyalma oho (5) manggi jeke seme hu¯wanggiyaraku¯ kai suweni jali hendumbidere: On that same day, Ombu Cuhu¯r had come for an audience and to kowtow. A letter from the Han was given to an envoy, who went to the Karacin’s Tabunang. The Han said in this ¯ lhei Tabunang of the Karacin and others, if you collect taxes as has been letter: U customary from the beginning, it is good. If you now collect the taxes taken from the beise behind without regulation/rules, this is a mistake. The words spoken in antiquity: The beile do not let the people be harmed. Collect taxes according to rule! If the sala-tree drains off the strength of the incense, the timber dries up. After one has taken the cattle only of the people, who suffer, to eat [them], whereby will the people begin [to cultivate] the fields? If there is no field, if your state reaches [the point of] dying in dire need, and after road by road being scattered has ended, your state is no more, how will you live? After you have begun [to work] the fields diligently loving a state that eats, and after skinny people have existed, there is no harm saying ‘Eat!’ One will probably speak of your wickedness. (3920) (2) juwan duin-de: dalai cu¯hur: bumba-de unggihe bithei gisun: (3) +han-i bithe: 16 Transliteration of both the Mongolian and Manchu text as well as a German translation is in Michael Weiers, Zur Stellung und Bedeutung des Schriftmongolischen in der ersten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts, in: ZAS 19 (1986), 38–67, here 52–54. 17 Alban gaimbi “to collect taxes”.

152

Britta-Maria Gruber

suweni junabi-be nuktere ba jecen kai seme henduci ojoraku¯: jecereme yabuhai: (4) boo ulha-be cahar-de gaibu manggi meni meni gurun-be fafularaku¯: ainu sindabi (5) hu¯lhabumbi: culgan-de gisurehe uile-be efuleme buraku¯ sere: geren culgan-i ejete (6) beisebe unggibi: suweni ula yalume honin jeme yabumbihede suwende geli saiyu¯n: (7) caharde gaibuha ulha-i yali: sain banjire gurun-de toodame gajimbio: On the fourteenth day, the words of the letter sent to Dalai Cu¯hur and Bumba, the letter of the Han: ‘If you say that the place where you two nomadize is the boundary, it is not alright. After yurts and livestock have been taken from the Cahar when wandering around the boundary, some nations are not prohibiting [this]. After you have been somehow squandering away [your booty], you let steal. You say, there is no ruining the matters spoken of at the assembly. After we have sent all the beise and leaders of the assembly, when [they] were wandering about riding your relay horses and eating sheep, ˇ aqar, will it be was this also good for you? The meat of the livestock taken from the C given back to a nation that lives well?’ (9)°orin emu-de caharni kesikteng-ni sonom taiji: babung taiji: naiman hong batur-de ukame jibhi bihe: (10) bibhi – – han-de acara unde seme hengkileme jihe: jidere doroi ilan morin: emu giyahu¯n gajiha bihe: (3921) (1) han – morin-be gaihaku¯ bederebuhe: giyahu¯n-be gaiha: On the twenty first day, Sonom Taiji of Kesigten of the Cahar [and] Babung Taiji had come fleeing to Hong Batur of the Naiman. After that had happened, they have come to kowtow to the [Sure] Han, because they had not yet met him. On the occasion of their coming, they have brought three horses and one falcon. The Han did not take the horses and returned them. He accepted the falcon. (3921) (5) orin ninggun-de arui durban keguket kuisung taiji – – han-de acanjime jihe: (6) jidere doroi juwan temen: emu morin gajiha bihe: – – han gaihaku¯ amasi bederebuhe: (7) °tere inenggi karacin-i babai sereng tabunong – – han-de acanjime jihe: jidere doroi (8) emu ihan: duin honin yali: ilan kukuri arki gajibi – – han-de angga isibuha: On the twenty sixth day, Kuisung Taiji from the Durban Keguket of the Aru came to the Han for an audience. On the occasion, he brought ten camels and one horse. The Han did not accept that and sent all back. On that same day, Babai Sereng Tabunong of the Karacin had come for an audience to the Han. On this occasion, he brought one cattle, the meat of four sheep, and three flat bottles of arki (strong liquor, distilled liquor), and he had the Han taste it. Third month (Apr. 19th – May 18th): (3927) (1) °orin jaku¯n-de korcin-i galju seter juwan gucu-be gajime jihe: – han-de jidere (2) doroi sunja morin: juwan seke: [emu] seke-i hayaha jibca emke gajiha: On the twenty eighth day, Galju Seter of the Korcin had come bringing ten friends. On the occasion of his coming to the Han, they had brought five horses, ten sables, and one fur coat lined with sable. (3) °orin-uyun-de galju seter-be jihe doroi han ini boo-de (4) dosimbufi emu ihan: duin honin wafi orin [dere] dasafi (5) sarilaha: gajiha sunja morin: juwan seke: jibca-be yoni gaiha: On the twenty ninth day, after the Han had Galju Seter enter his house on the occasion of his coming, one cattle and four sheep had been killed and 20 tables set, and a banquet was held. The Han accepted all the five horses, ten sables and the short fur jacket that

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 153

had been brought. Ninth month (Oct. 14th – Nov. 11th): (3929) (6) °ice sunja-de arui sun dureng: bandi taiji: honici taiji ere ilan beile-be jimbi seme (7) + han sunja bai tubade okdoho: – han-de acame jidere doroi morin orin juwe: temen ilan: jafafi aldangga (8) emu jergi niyaku¯rame acafi hanci ibefi emu jergi tebeliyeme acarade – han ishun okdome emu ilan (9) okson ibefi ishunde hengkilefi tebeliyeme acaha: amba beile-de sinu – han-i songkoi acaha: (10) tereci beise-de ahu¯n-i bodome tebeliyeme acaha: acame wajiha manggi: han-i hashu¯ ergi-de (11) tebuhe: tereci sun dureng-ni emu ihan: duin honin-i yali: bandi taiji emu ihan: ilan honin (12) yali arki ceni gajiha doroi: – han-be sarilaha: sarilame wajiha manggi okdoho doroi (3930) (1) [emu ihan]: juwan honin wafi sarilaha: sun dureng-ni jaku¯n [m]orin: emu temen: bandi taiji (2) emu temen: honici taiji emu morin-be gaiha: jai juwan ilan morin: emu temenbe bederebuhe: On the fifth day, the Han went to a place five li off, saying that Sun Dureng of the Aru, Bandi Taiji, Honici Taiji, these three beile were coming. On the occasion of [their] coming to meet the Han, they had brought 22 horses and three camels as tribute, and after they had met him kneeling once in the distance, they came near, once embracing him when they met. After the Han by coming towards [them] had advanced a couple of steps, and they had kowtowed to one another, they met embracing each other. They met Amba Beile18 according to the Han’s. Then they met embracing the beise, according to the difference of age. After the greeting had ended, they had sat on the left side of the Han. Then they held a banquet for the Han [with] Sun Dureng’s one cattle, the meat of four sheep, Bandi Taiji’s one cattle, the meat of three sheep, and the arki they had brought for this occasion. After the banquet had ended, [and one cattle] and ten sheep had been killed on the occasion of having been welcomed, a banquet was held. [The Han] had accepted Sun Dureng’s eight horses, one camel, Bandi Taiji’s one camel, and Honici Taiji’s one horse. Next he had 13 horses and one camel sent back. (3) °tere inenggi monggoi korcin-i gurun-i ejen tusiyetu han aku¯ oho seme elbehe alanjihe manggi (4) +han – – butu etuke mahala etufi dergi dukai fejergi boo-de tefi jilgan tuciraku¯ songgome hendume: koro dain- (5) -de oci emu babe aliha bihe: doro-de oci inu amba yangse: hebe gisun-de inu ambula sain bihe: ainara (6) guculehe dahame ambulakan banjiha bicina seme hendume jing songgoro-de: ashan-i ambasa surumbume hendume: (7) +han – – terei jalin-de ambula ume gasara tere emu gurun-i ejen – – abka jortai ekiyembume gamahangge kai […]. On this same day, after Elbehe had come reporting that the leader of the Mongolian Korcin state, Tusiyetu Han19, had died, and the Han had put on a simple dress and hat

18 Daisˇan is the second son of Nurhaci. See George A. Kennedy, Daisˇan, in: ECCP, 214. 19 The relationship of Tusiyetu Han (i. e. Ooba, Aoba) and the Jurchen rulers had been a difficult one from the very beginning. The Qorcˇin’s territory was situated between the Jurchen’s and ˇ aqar’s, the Jurchen’s arch-enemy; a precarious position for Ooba who had been trying to the C avoid any final decision of which side to choose. Thus, he angered Hong Taiji who wrote a letter in December 1928 demanding clarification in no uncertain words. See Britta-Maria Gruber, Konfliktbewältigung unter Verbündeten – Zum Verhältnis der Mandschuren und Mongolen im Aisin-Staat, in: Modi des Erzählens in nicht-abendländischen Texten. Narratio Aliena, BZTN, vol. 2, Berlin 2009, 277–299, here 281–291.

154

Britta-Maria Gruber

and had sat down at the house under the eastern door, he spoke weeping in a toneless voice: “When I was in sorrow or war, I received support at one place. When there was a doro (way), there was also a great appearance. He (Tusiyetu Han) was also very good in his advice. What am I to do, because we were friends, I wished he had lived longer”, while he kept crying his ambans at his side spoke consolingly: “Han, do not grieve about this matter so much. This one state leader – heaven had willfully taken away!” […].

To cut a very long story short, the Han kept on complaining that he would not find such friends like Tusiyetu Han and Subudi of the Karacin again. Two days later he had sent a mission to the Korcin on the occasion of mourning and the funeral. (3931) (7) °ice nadan-de erke cu¯hur beile: sun dureng-be: boo-de gamafi emu ihan: ninggun honin wafi (8) gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: °jaku¯n-de mergen daicing beile: sun dureng-be boode (9) gamafi emu ihan: ninggun honin wafi gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: (10) uyun-de amba beile: sun dureng-be +boode gamafi emu ihan ninggun honin wafi: gu¯sin (11) dere dasafi sarilaha: °juwan-de +sun dureng-be – – han boode dosimbufi emu ihan: (12) ninggun honin wafi + gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: °juwan emu-de manggu¯ltai beilei boode sun during-be (13) dosimbufi: emu ihan: ninggun honin wafi gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: (3933) (1) °juwan juwe-de fiyanggu¯ beile: kubuhe suwayan-i [ubu] seme: sun dureng-be boo-de dosimbufi emu (2) ihan: ninggun honin wafi: gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: °juwan ilan-de jirgalang beilei boode (3) sun dureng-be dosimbufi emu ihan: ninggun honin wafi: gu¯sin dere dasafi sarilaha: (4) °juwan duin-de yoto beilei boode sun dureng-be dosimbufi emu ihan: ninggun honin wafi gu¯sin dere (5) dasafi sarilaha: On the seventh day, after Erke Cu¯hur Beile20 had taken Sun Dureng [of the Aru] to his house and one cattle and six sheep had been killed and 30 tables set, a banquet was held. On the eighth day, after Mergen Daicing Beile21 had taken Sun Dureng to his house and one cattle and six sheep had been killed and 30 tables set, a banquet was held. On the ninth day, after Amba Beile had taken Sun Dureng to his house and one cattle and six sheep had been killed and 30 tables set, a banquet was held. On the tenth day, Sun Dureng was invited by the Han, on the eleventh day by Manggu¯ltai Beile22, on the twelfth day by Fiyanggu¯ Beile23, on the thirteenth day by Jirgalang Beile24, on the fourteenth day by Yoto Beile25; in all instances a similar banquet was held. (6) °tofohon-de arui sun dureng-de: – han-i buhengge sunja gecuheri: emu suwayan cekemu: (7) puse noho cekemu juwe: emu darda: juwan ninggun suje: fulgiyan jafu juwe: juwe tanggu¯ (8) mocin: tanggu¯ boose cai: aisin dosimbuha menggun-i tampin emke: menggun soolha emke: gui (9) hu¯ntahan emke: foloho enggemu hadala ilan: hilteri uksin saca emke: tuktuma uksin saca (10) duin: emu giyahu¯n buhe: °bandi taiji-de emu gecuheri: juwe suje: foloho enggemu (11) hadala emke: jebele dashu¯wan emke: orin mocin: °honici taiji-de emu hilteri uksin (12) saca: foloho enggemu hadala emke: emu gecuheri: juwe suje: orin mocin buhe: bume wajiha (13) manggi boo-de dosimbufi juwe 20 21 22 23 24 25

I. e. Dodo, his biography is in: Fang Chao-ying, ECCP, 215. I. e. Dorgon, his biography is in: Fang Chao-ying, ECCP, 215–219. See George A. Kennedy, ECCP, 562–563. See Fang Chao-ying, ECCP, 248–249. See George A. Kennedy, ECCP, 397–398. See George A. Kennedy, ECCP, 935.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 155

honin wafi: orin dere dasafi sarilaha: sarilame wajiha manggi (14) sun dureng-de – hani etuhe suwayan suje-de ifiha sahalca sekei hayahan-i jibca: (15) sekei mahala: aisin-i umiyesun: gu¯lha emu juru buhe: On the fifteenth day, Sun Dureng was given by the Han five brocades, one yellow Japanese satin with golden threads interwoven, 16 silk cloths, two red felts, 200 cotton cloths, 100 packets of tea, one silver ewer inlaid with gold, one silver tureen, one tortoiseshaped cup, three carved saddles and bridles, one scaled armour and helmet, four cavalry armours and helmets, and one falcon. Bandi Taiji was given one brocade, two silk cloths, one carved saddle and bridle, one quiver and bow case, and 20 cotton cloths. Honici Taiji was given one scaled amour and helmet, one carved saddle and bridle, one brocade, two silk cloths, and 20 cotton cloths. When the handing over [of the presents] had been finished and they had entered the house and two sheep had been killed and 20 tables set, a banquet was held. After the banquet had ended, Sun Dureng was given a black sable-trimmed fur jacket sewn on yellow silk worn by the Han, a golden belt, and one pair of boots. (3934) (3) – – – °juwan ninggun-de arui sun dureng (4) genehe: erebe fudeme: sahaliyan beile genefi emu ihan: duin honin wafi sarilaha: On the sixteenth day, Sun Dureng of the Aru had gone. After Sahaliyan Beile26 had gone escorting him, one cattle and four sheep had been killed and a banquet was held. (5) °juwan jaku¯n-de caharaci ilan niyalma juwan duin morin gajime ukame jihe: mejihe fonjici cahara kerulen-de (6) bi sere: On the eighteenth day, three people came fleeing from the Cahar country. When they were asked about news, they said that the Cahar were on the Kerulen (River). (8) […] °orin duin-de karacin-i subudi dureng-i (9) jui gurusihib isinjiha: – han-de ilan gecuheri: emu cekemu: emu juwangduwan: juwe fulgiyan suje. (10) juwe temen: ilan morin: juwe kukuri arki: ilan honin-i yali gajiha +bihe: juwe temen: ilan morin-be gaihaku¯: (11) +amasi bederebuhe: boo-de dosimbufi emu honin wafi: juwan dere dasafi sarilaha: On the twenty fourth day, Gurusihib (Gurushib), son of Subudi Dureng of the Karacin, had arrived. He had brought three brocades, one Japanese satin, one coloured satin with gold threads interwoven, two red silk cloths, two camels, three horses, two flat bottles of arki, and the meat of three sheep. The Han did not take the two camels and three horses and had them returned. After [Gurushib] had been invited into the [Han’s] house and one sheep been killed and ten tables arranged, a banquet was held. (3935) (3) °tere inenggi beidere jurgan-i jirgalang beile: dorolon jurgan-i sahaliyan beile tulergi (4) dahaha monggo beisede weile beideme: ˇsajin ilibume nuktere babe toktobume genehe: On this day (26th day, Nov. 8th), Jirgalang Beile of the Board of Justice and Sahaliyan Beile of the Board of Rites had gone to judge the case of the defected outer Mongolian beise, to promulgate prohibitions, and to lay down the places of nomadizing. (5) °orin nadan-de korcin-i tusiy-e +tu efu gege-de jobolon-i doroi – han-i tohoho ilarsu (6) foloho boosi sindaha enggemu hadala: sekei dahu¯ sindame amba sujei sijigiyan: giyancui (7) ojin: jaku¯n boo emte suje: nure juwe malu: hibsu emu malu: handu bele emu

26 See George A. Kennedy, ECCP, 631–632.

156

Britta-Maria Gruber

too: (8) ˇsulhe emu ˇsoro: mucu emu ˇsoro: uli emu ˇsoro: ufa emu too: dabsun emu sin: (9) erebe hife baksi beneme genehe: On the twenty seventh day, Hife Baksi27 went to take to Gege (Junje Gungju) [widow of] Tusiyetu Efu of the Korcin on the occasion of mourning [the death of her husband] a saddle inlaid with threefold carved precious stones, a long silk coat being worn over a sable coat, a long woman’s garment of raw silk, eight precious stones, one silk cloth, two bottles of (rice) wine, one bottle of honey, a case of late maturing rice, one basket of pears, one basket of grapes, one basket of wild prunes, one case of flour, and one peck of salt.

ˇ aqar Junje Gungju or Gege was the second wife of Tusiyetu Efu who had a C woman as a first wife. She did not seem to be happy with this arrangement that had already been made by Nurhaci, the first Manchu ruler. Unfortunately, nothing more is heard of her after her husband’s demise. The last entry of the entire file to be mentioned here is dated from the tenth month, and it deals with the aforementioned laws on penalties. As these have already been translated and annotated by Weiers in 198628, only the topics will be given here: 1. Unauthorized entry of the pasturelands; 2. Unauthorized trespassing of borders; 3. Killing of incoming refugees; 4. Expulsion respectively of ordinary murderers; 5. Theft and thieves; 6. Appointment of headmen; 7. Unauthorized legal procedures outside [one’s territory]; 8. Supply of food in case of need; 9. Cooperation with thieves; 10. Inspections; 11. Service on journeys (supply of relay horses, etc.); 12. Conduct in case of war; 13. Conduct of persons responsible for the execution of a sentence; 14. Procedure in case of non-payment of a fine; 15. Procedure in case of death penalty resulting from false testimony; 16. Discretionary decision with reference to item 3; 17. Regulation of the fines from item 1 to 16.

27 See Fang Chao-ying, ECCP, 663, sub Songgotu. 28 See footnote 15.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 157

Conclusion The file’s title is quite misleading, although there are long entries of presents brought to the Han and given by him in return. The usual gifts of the Mongols reflect their way of life in the steppes, namely that they have been breeding horses, camels, and sheep. The Qaracˇin whose territory was closer to the Chinese border offered precious goods, probably because they traded with the Chinese and could obtain wares highly esteemed by both Jurchen and Mongols. However, a different picture is shown with regard to the endeavours of the Han to bind the various Mongolian groups closer to his side. Hong Taiji had to keep his allies somehow under control, but – as has already been mentioned – he was probably not in a position to enforce law and order strictly. The many letters he wrote hint at the ˇ aqar Qan may not have been able to realize problems he had to deal with. The C his dream of a Mongol empire any more, yet the idea of Mongols remaining independent thereby out of control of the Jurchen and thus posing a threat to him may have worried Hong Taiji. As a ruler, he showed generosity by handing out large bulks of gifts and sometimes returning presents of the Mongols in order not to deplete them of their resources. On the other hand, they had to accept him – more or less – as their highest authority. They came to see him and not vice versa.

Source text JMZD: Jiu Manzhou Dang 舊満洲檔 (Old Manchu Archives), 10 vols., edited by Ch’en Chieh-hsien, Taipei, National Museum Shih-lin, 1969.

Bibliography Ch’en Chieh-hsien, Manchu Archival Materials, Taipei 1988. ECCP: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970. Fang Chao-ying, Abahai, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970. Fang Chao-ying, Dodo, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 215. Fang Chao-ying, Dorgon, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 215– 219.

158

Britta-Maria Gruber

Fang Chao-ying, Fiyanggu¯, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 248– 249. Fang Chao-ying, Nurhaci, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 594– 599. Fang Chao-ying, Songgotu, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 663– 666. Britta-Maria Gruber, Zur Entwicklung der Herrschaft im Aisin-Staat 1616–1636, in: Tunguso Sibirica 17 (2006). Britta-Maria Gruber, Konfliktbewältigung unter Verbündeten – Zum Verhältnis der Mandschuren und Mongolen im Aisin-Staat, in: Stefan Conermann (ed.): Modi des Erzählens in nicht-abendländischen Texten. Narratio Aliena? (Studien des Bonner Zentrums für Transkulturelle Narratologie (BZTN) 2), Berlin 2009, 277–299. Erich Hauer, Handwörterbuch der Mandschusprache, Wiesbaden 1952. Imanishi Shunju¯ 今西春秋, Manwa mo¯wa taiyaku manshu¯ jitsuroku 満和蒙和対訳満洲 実録, To¯kyo¯ 1992. George A. Kennedy, Daisˇan, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 214. George A. Kennedy, Jirgalang, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 397–398. George A. Kennedy, Manggu¯ltai, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 562–563. George A. Kennedy, Sahaliyan, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 631–632. George A. Kennedy, Yoto, in: Arthur W. Hummel, Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, Washington, United States Government Printing Office 1943, Reprint: Taipei 1970, 935. Menge-Güthling, Langenscheidts Großwörterbuch Lateinisch-Deutsch, mit Etymologie, 198422. J. F. Niermeyer, C. Van De Kieft, Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus, Lexique latin médiéval – Medieval Latin Dictionary – Mittellateinisches Wörterbuch, 2 vols., Leiden 2002. Nicolas Poppe, Grammar of Written Mongolian, Porta Linguarum Orientalium, Neue Serie 1, Wiesbaden 1954. Gertraude Roth-Li, State building before 1644, in: Denis Twitchett and John K. Fairbank (general eds.): The Cambridge History of China, Part One: The Ch’ing Empire to 1800, vol. 9, 2002, 9–72. Tongki Fuka Sindaha Hergen I Dangse ‘The Secret Chronicles of the Manchu Dynasty’ 1607–1637 AD, translated and annotated by Kanda Nobuo et al. Tokyo 1955, vol. 1, 67– 68.

Mongolian Tribute to the Manchu Ruler in 1632 and the Ruler’s Gifts Given in Return 159

Michael Weiers, Das Verhältnis des Ligdan Khan zu seinen Völkerschaften, in: Serta Tibeto-Mongolica, Festschrift für Walther Heissig zum 60. Geburtstag am 5. 12. 1973, Wiesbaden 1973, 365–380. Michael Weiers, Der Mandschu-Khortsin Bund von 1626, in: Documenta barbarorum: Festschrift für Walther Heissig zum 70. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden 1983, 412–435. Michael Weiers, Die mandschu-mongolischen Strafgesetze vom 16. November 1632, in: Zentralasiatische Studien (ZAS) 19 (1986), 88–126. Michael Weiers, Mongolenpolitik der Mandschuren und Mandschupolitik der Mongolen zu Beginn der dreissiger Jahre des 17. Jahrhunderts, in: Zentralasiatische Studien (ZAS) 22 (1989–1991), 256–275. Michael Weiers, Zur Stellung und Bedeutung des Schriftmongolischen in der ersten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts, in: Zentralasiatische Studien (ZAS) 19 (1986), 38–67. Veronika Veit, Die mongolischen Völkerschaften vom 15. Jahrhundert bis 1691, in: Michael Weiers (ed.), Die Mongolen, Beiträge zu ihrer Geschichte und Kultur, Darmstadt 1986, 379–411. G. Wirth, I. Spätantike; P. Schreiner, II. Byzanz; U. Mattejiet, III. Hoch- und Spätmittelalter, in: Lexikon des Mittelalters, vol. 8, 986–987, Lizenzausgabe, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.

Rui Manuel Loureiro

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System: From Tomé Pires (1516) to Juan González de Mendoza (1585)

The earliest extant Portuguese, and perhaps European, reference to ‘China’ as a specific Asian region appears to be a caption on the well-known Cantino world map. This innovative map was produced in Lisbon in 1502 by an anonymous cartographer, in the wake of the first two Portuguese maritime expeditions to India, led respectively by Vasco da Gama and Pedro Álvares Cabral. Cantino was an emissary of the duke of Ferrara, who was then visiting Portugal, and he managed to acquire a copy of the Portuguese official world-map, which was being constantly updated. The caption on the Cantino map, placed near the Malayan Peninsula, reads as follows: “Malacca: In this city, one can find all the merchandise that comes to Calicut, namely, cloves, benjoin, agarwood, sandalwood, storax, rhubarb, ivory, valuable precious stones, pearls, musk, fine porcelains, and many other trade items; all of these, or the most part, come from other regions, towards the land of the Chinese”.1

The Portuguese, after successfully establishing a direct maritime route from Lisbon, were then developing their first outposts in the west coast of India. From there, they intended to participate actively in the trade in spices and other valuable commodities, diverting a good share of that trade via the Cape route to Europe. And so they were rapidly collecting useful information about Asia’s most relevant marts, about the most valuable commodities, and about the most important trade routes. Within that context, China was immediately perceived by the Portuguese as a strategic region, from a commercial point of view.2 1 Armando Cortesão/Avelino Teixeira da Mota (eds.), Portugaliae Monumenta Cartographica, 6 vols., Lisbon 1988: “Malaca em esta cidade ha todas as mercadorias que vem a Calicut .s. cravo & benjoim & lenhaloe & sândalos, estoraque & ruibarbo & marfim & pedras preciosas de muita valia & perolas & almizquer & porçolanas finas & outras muitas mercadorias; todas, a mor parte, vem de fora, contra a terra dos Chins” (I, pl. 5). Regarding the Cantino planisphere, see Luís de Albuquerque/J. Lopes Tavares, Algumas observações sobre o planisfério “Cantino” (1502), Coimbra 1967. 2 Concerning the first Portuguese contacts with China, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Fidalgos, Missionários e Mandarins: Portugal e a China no Século XVI, Lisbon 2000.

162

Rui Manuel Loureiro

The Portuguese network in Asia quickly expanded, and soon, in 1511, there was a solid outpost in Melaka, which served as a convenient starting point for several exploratory ventures throughout the South China Sea. These expeditions took Portuguese envoys in Asian or Portuguese ships to various destinations, such as Siam, Java, the Maluku Islands, Timor, and also to China. The first Portuguese documented voyage to China was made by a Portuguese merchant, one Jorge Álvares, in 1513, when he travelled to the islands off the Pearl (or Zhujiang 珠江) River Estuary, which had been represented tentatively, the previous year, in a chart drawn in Malacca by the Portuguese cartographer Francisco Rodrigues.3 From then on, contacts between the Portuguese from Melaka and the Chinese southern coast developed regularly, on the basis of yearly visits and mutually profitable exchanges. And so, Portuguese observers were able to steadily collect and accumulate information about many aspects of the Chinese world. Captains, sailors, civil servants, and traders regularly contributed to this process, by combining bits of their own personal experience with the data received from Chinese informants. An important note, Portuguese documents coming from Melaka in the early years of the sixteenth century testify to a ubiquitous presence, throughout the South China Sea, of Chinese merchants who maintained regular trading contacts with China.4 The Portuguese apothecary Tomé Pires is the most important of the early reporters. While living in Melaka, he was able to compile a huge mass of information about Asia, and by 1515 he had completed his well-known ‘Suma Oriental’, a revolutionary text by the standards of its time. Designed as a kind of global Asian geography, this manuscript – which was directed at a carefully selected Portuguese readership, and had a restricted circulation – presented a complex new world of trade and merchandise, complemented by essential information about political organizations, social practices and cultural differences.5 Tomé Pires dedicated one long section of his text to China, and this was the first systematic survey of that Asian realm produced by a European since the discovery of the Cape route. From his base in Melaka, he collected his in-

3 About Rodrigues, who seems to have died on the China coast in the early 1520’s, see José Manuel Garcia, O Livro de Francisco Rodrigues: O Primeiro Atlas do Mundo Moderno, Porto 2008. 4 On this subject, see Roderich Ptak, Ming Maritime Trade to Southeast Asia, 1368–1567. Visions of a System, in: Claude Guillot/Denys Lombard/Roderich Ptak (eds.), From the Mediterranean to the China Sea, Wiesbaden 1998, 157–192. 5 See the new critical edition of Tomé Pires, Suma Oriental, ed. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Lisbon 2017. For an English translation, see the older edition of Armando Cortesão (ed.), The Suma Oriental of Tomé Pires and the Book of Francisco Rodrigues, 2 vols., London 1944.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

163

formation mostly from Chinese and Malay informers, but also from Jorge Álvares, the first Portuguese who had visited the Chinese coast. China is presented in the ‘Suma Oriental’ as a most relevant Asian power, for Tomé Pires states that “the things of China are immense, in territory, population, resources, […] and other things”.6 But what is interesting in his account is the limited, but relatively well-informed description that he presents of the Chinese tribute system.7 Tomé Pires is clearly aware that China is at the centre of a complex web of political and diplomatic relations, and he divides Chinese tributaries in two different categories: – On the one hand, he mentions the “Kings that are vassals to the king of China, his tributaries, that pay him tribute”. He specifically uses the word tributarios. And these, according to his informants, are the kings of Champa, Cochinchina, Lyukiu, and Japan. One must not forget that he is writing from the point of view of Melaka. – On the other hand, Tomé Pires mentions the “Vassal kings with no obligation of tribute, only of gifts”. And these, as reported by his sources, are the kings of Java, Siam, Pasai (in Sumatra), and Melaka. – The Portuguese apothecary further adds that these last ones “send their ambassadors with the seal of China to the king of China every five years, or every ten years, and each one sends him the best commodities of their kingdoms, such as they know that are in demand in China”.8 The ‘selo da China’ mentioned by Tomé Pires was the imperial seal, or feng 封, used within the Chinese tribute system. And the Suma Oriental stresses that these ambassadors are free to enter and leave China, and they can anchor in the port of Canton/Guangzhou. Tomé Pires is careful to identify the commodities that were previously sent from Melaka to China, as tribute, and that included, among others: pepper, white sandal, agarwood, rings with precious stones, and dead

6 Tomé Pires, Suma Oriental, 150: “fazem as cousas da China gramdes, asy na terra como jentes, riquezas, pompas, estados, e contas outras”. 7 For a classical approach to the Chinese tribute system, see John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, MA 1968. On the connections between tribute and trade in the early modern period, see John E. Wills, Jr., Relations with maritime Europeans, 1514–1662, in: Denis Twitchett/Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China – Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, 333–375; and also, more recently, Gakusho Nakajima, The Structure and Transformation of the Ming Tribute Trade System, in: Manuel Perez Garcia/Lucio de Sousa (eds.), Global History and New Polycentric Approaches: Europe, Asia and the Americas in a World Network System, Singapore 2018, 137–162. 8 Tomé Pires, Suma Oriental, 152: “estes mamdam seus embaixadores com o sello da China a ellrey da Chyna, de cimquo em cinquo anños, e de dez em dez anños, e cada huu˜ lhe mamda do melhor de suas terras, do que sabem que laa quere˜”.

164

Rui Manuel Loureiro

birds from the Banda islands (the famous birds-of-paradise).9 The account of Tomé Pires is extremely accurate, if we consider that in this case he was collecting mainly second-hand oral information. He was certainly aware of the basic mechanisms of the Chinese tribute system. And he further adds a short paragraph detailing the “manner in which the ambassadors are received by the king”. It seems as if he was collecting practical instructions for a future Portuguese ambassador. Coincidentally or not, when Tomé Pires arrived in India in 1516, on his way back to Europe after his tour of duty in Asia, he was ordered to embark with captain Fernão Peres de Andrade, just recently arrived from Portugal in a large carrack, with specific instructions from the Portuguese crown to carry out a diplomatic mission to China. The Portuguese monarch Manuel I, in order to consolidate and enlarge his recently acquired possessions in the Indian Ocean’s shores – a part of his imperial strategy –, was trying to establish relations with the most important Asian rulers, through the exchange of ambassadors. He was doing so in a typical European fashion, sending his envoys in search of reciprocity in diplomatic relations.10 In spite of the slowness of communications, it is not impossible that the Portuguese monarch was already aware of the mechanisms of the Chinese tribute system. The Italian merchant Giovanni da Empoli had been to Melaka while Tomé Pires was still living there, and he seems to have obtained a partial copy of the Suma Oriental. In 1514 Empoli was back in Lisbon, and it is quite possible that a similar copy arrived at the hands of King Manuel I, prompting him to dispatch an embassy to China in the following year, under the command of Fernão Peres de Andrade.11 The Portuguese expedition eventually reached the Chinese coast, and Fernão Peres de Andrade anchored some of his large ships in front of the city of Canton / Guangzhou for several months. The events of the Tomé Pires embassy, which went all the way to Beijing in 1520–1521, are well known, and have been repeatedly studied, so we don’t need to go over them. But it is important to stress that the total failure of the Pires embassy appears to have been caused both by a strict interpretation of the tribute system on the part of the Chinese and by a clear misunderstanding of the me-

9 Tomé Pires, Suma Oriental, 152: “De Malaca lhe mamdavam pimemta e samdallos brancos, alguu˜ pãao de boa grãdura, e asy de garo, que he lenho aloões de butiqua, anees de pedras fynas, pasaros que vem de Bamda mortos, e cousas a estas semelhamtes, chamalotes, he cada huu˜ segumdo tem”. 10 Regarding King Manuel I’s imperialism, see Isabel Soler, El sueño del rey: Viajes y mesianismo en el Renacimiento peninsular, Barcelona 2015. 11 About Empoli’s connections with China, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Nas partes da China, Lisboa 2009, 35–54.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

165

chanics of the tribute system on the part of the Portuguese. Or even a clear misunderstanding of what China was all about.12 – The Chinese authorities refused to receive an embassy from a non-tributary state, because Portugal, evidently, was not registered in the imperial protocol. – The Portuguese, on their side, went about the embassy business expecting reciprocity, while on their commercial deals with the Chinese they adopted the same confrontational attitude that they had used with much success in other parts of maritime Asia. – Furthermore, complaints about the Portuguese conquest of Melaka arrived at the Chinese court through an embassy from its former ruler. Following a series of diplomatic misunderstandings, and open military confrontation between the Chinese coastal defence and Portuguese ships in the Guangdong coast, Tomé Pires and his retinue were arrested in Canton/ Guangzhou. After 1522 the Portuguese did not return to the Chinese coast for an entire decade. The members of the embassy withered away in their prison cells. The ambassador Tomé Pires died in his Guangdong prison, sometime around 1527. It is not difficult to figure out why the Portuguese stayed away from China during a decade: – The first tentative approach had concluded with open confrontations with the Chinese regional authorities. – In Melaka it was always possible to have access to Chinese commodities through the collaboration of Chinese overseas communities in Southeast Asia. – And there had been a change of strategy in Lisbon, regarding farthest Asia. The new Portuguese ruler, King João III, had given up on his father’s imperial dreams, and was chiefly interested in maintaining profitable trade relations with the regions bordering the South China Sea, without investing in many resources.13 It was only years later, in 1533, that an anonymous Portuguese merchant reported that he had visited the ‘Porto Velho de Cantão’ (‘the old port of Canton’) for the first time since the violent confrontations that had taken place in the previous decade between the Portuguese and the Chinese.14 And in the following years Portuguese ships were back in the Guangdong area, where they received 12 Concerning the Tomé Pires embassy, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Nas partes da China, 75–93. 13 On this political change within the Portuguese overseas empire, see Sanjay Subrahmanyam, The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500–1700: A Political and Economic History, London 1993. 14 See Adelino de Almeida Calado, Livro que trata das cousas da índia e do Japão, in: Boletim da Biblioteca da Universidade de Coimbra 24 (1960), 1–138: “eu fuy a Camtão ao porto Velhyo” (114).

166

Rui Manuel Loureiro

reports from some of the surviving members of the Tomé Pires embassy, the socalled ‘letters from the captives of Canton’.15 One of these letters, written by Cristóvão Vieira, can be read as a detailed case study of the Portuguese misunderstanding of the Chinese tribute system. Vieira, among a wealth of information about many aspects of the Chinese world, explains how the Tomé Pires embassy went about its mission, describing all the steps in enormous detail: – The reception of the embassy in Canton/Guangzhou – The itinerary to the Chinese capital – The informal and exceptional meeting with the Zhengde Emperor in Nanjing – The arrival in Beijing – The rituals of the foreign embassies – The several diplomatic problems that the Portuguese had to face with the imperial protocol – The return back to Guangzhou – The arrest of the ambassador and his retinue One of the main problems was caused by the translation of the letter from the Portuguese king prepared by the Chinese interpreters in Guangzhou. As Cristóvão Vieira informs us, they had translated the royal letter having in mind the framework of the tribute system: “Captain-major and ambassador come to the land of China by order of the king of the Fulangji with tribute; they come to ask the seal, according to custom, to the Lord of the World, Son of Heaven, to obey him.”16

The original letter, of course, must have been formulated in a rather distinct prose, in the reciprocal manner used by European rulers, who addressed each other as equals. João de Barros, a well-known Portuguese chronicler writing in the middle years of the sixteenth century, used the information transmitted by Cristóvão Vieira, in a description of China, which he included in his ‘Décadas da Ásia’, 15 For a critical edition of these letters, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Cartas dos cativos de Cantão, Cristóvão Vieira e Vasco Calvo (1524?), Macau 1992. For a recent French translation, see Pascale Girard (ed.), Prisonniers de l’Empire Céleste: Le désastre de la première ambassade portugaise en Chine (1517–1524), Paris 2013; and for an older English translation, see Donald Ferguson, Letters from Portuguese Captives in Canton, Written in 1534 and 1536, Bombay 1902. 16 Rui Manuel Loureiro, Cartas dos cativos de Cantão, 27–28: “Capitão-moor e embaixador vem a terra da Cinha por Mandado do rey dos Franges com pareas; vem pedir o selo, segundo custume, ao Senhor do Mundo Filho de Deos, pera lhe ser obediente”. Regarding the encounter between Pires and the Chinese emperor, see Serge Gruzinski, L’aigle et le dragon. Démesure européenne et mondialisation au XVIe siècle, Paris 2012.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

167

published in Lisbon in three volumes between 1552 and 1563. He mentions the basic mechanics of the tribute system, alluding in particular to the imperial seal: “This seal is given by the emperor to all the kings and princes that become his vassals, and he also gives his ensign, and they use it in all their letters and writings, thus demonstrating they are his subjects”.17

Barros further adds details about the rituals followed by embassies in Beijing, and he seems to have understood the Chinese extreme concern with all aspects related with the reception of foreign emissaries. – The embassies are lodged in an official residence – The day and hour of the reception is chosen according to astrological precepts (“em óra electa per astrologia”) – The ambassadors are received in a square in front of the imperial palace – They perform five ritual prostrations when they advance, and another five as they retreat, and so on.18 The failure of the Tomé Pires embassy was a valuable lesson in unveiling the Chinese ways of managing foreigners. And the Portuguese were quick to learn from their own mistakes. As information about China accumulated in Melaka and in Goa – the strategic center of the Portuguese dominions in Asia –, the idea of a formal embassy was completely abandoned. In the next 25 years, the Portuguese concentrated on developing mutually profitable trade relations with China, on the basis of informal agreements reached with local authorities throughout the South China coast. The first Portuguese contacts with Japan, after 1543, were instrumental in the development of these informal commercial contacts with China. From the 1540’s and the 1550’s there is evidence of Portuguese doing business, successively, in the Zhoushan 舟山 archipelago, at a region they termed Liampó, in the stretch of coast between Fuzhou and Xiamen, at Chinchéu, which was a region and a port in the Fujian coast, and finally in the Pearl River (Zhujiang) Estuary, at Sanchoão, Lampacau, and Macao.19 The embassy question only started being raised again, intermittently, among the Portuguese in Asia, in the 1550’s and 1560’s, after Francis Xavier – the leader of the Jesuit mission to Asia – visited Japan and became aware of the extraordinary importance of China in the geopolitical context of East Asia. Through 17 João de Barros, Década Terceira da Ásia, ed. Isabel Vilares Cepeda, Lisboa 1992, 157r: “Este sello que aquelle jmperador dá a todolos reys e principes que se fazem seus vassallos, e da sua divisa: e com ella se assinam elles em todalas cartas e escripturas, por demonstraçam de serem seus subditos” (bk. 6, ch. 1). On João de Barros and his interest on China, see Charles R. Boxer, João de Barros, Portuguese Humanist and Historian of Asia, New Delhi 1981. 18 João de Barros, Década Terceira da Ásia, 155v–158v (bk. 6, ch. 1). 19 For a detailed history of Portuguese contacts with the South China coast in the first half of the sixteenth century, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Fidalgos, Missionários e Mandarins.

168

Rui Manuel Loureiro

information that he collected from Portuguese and Japanese informers, Francis Xavier understood that: – the Jesuits, in order to be able to spread the Christian religion among the Japanese, had to start their proselytizing efforts with China. – they could only enter China, and reach the ears of the Chinese emperor, through a formal embassy sent to Beijing by the Portuguese Crown. Nevertheless, Xavier’s letters do not show a clear understanding of the mechanisms of the tribute system. He merely stresses the importance of sending an ambassador, in order to be able to reach the Chinese court.20 During his last visit to Goa, Francis Xavier was able to obtain from the Portuguese authorities the nomination of an ambassador, the merchant Diogo Pereira, one of the richest Portuguese in Asia, who was deeply involved in the trading networks within the South China Sea. But the embassy project failed, because it was boycotted by the Portuguese authorities in Melaka – D. Pedro da Silva and D. António de Ataíde, two of the sons of Vasco da Gama –, who were also involved in commercial dealings with China, and who understood that the Jesuit embassy project could jeopardize the informal agreements that were at work with the Portuguese merchants on the China coast. Francis Xavier died in December 1552 at the island of Sanchoão (or Shangchuan 上川), where, in that year, at least five Portuguese ships were conducting their commercial exchanges with Chinese counterparts.21 In the following years, there were paramount developments on the Pearl River Estuary. In 1554, a Portuguese captain named Leonel de Sousa reached an informal agreement with the Guangdong authorities, through which the Portuguese were allowed to trade freely, if certain fixed taxes were paid to the maritime customs. And in 1557, the Portuguese were allowed to winter in Macau for the first time, and this peninsula, from then on, became their steady base on the South China coast. Apparently, some sort of annual tax was agreed upon with the Chinese regional authorities.22 Curiously enough, the tribute system practically disappeared from the Portuguese sources that included materials about China. And we find Chinese matters being dealt with in most of the Portuguese treatises and chronicles that were published after the middle years of the sixteenth century. 20 Among the extensive bibliographies regarding the Jesuits’ missions in Asia, and specifically in China, see Luís Filipe Barreto, Macau: Poder e Saber, Séculos XVI e XVII, Lisbon 2006. 21 For a detailed account of Xavier’s contacts with China, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Nas Partes da China, 95–112. 22 Regarding the establishment of the Portuguese in Macau, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Em busca das origens de Macau, Macau 1997; and also Jin Guo Ping/Wu Zhiliang, Revisitar os primórdios de Macau: para uma nova abordagem da História, Macau 2007.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

169

The most notable example was the well-known ‘Tratado das coisas da China’ written by the Portuguese missionary Gaspar da Cruz. The Dominican friar visited the Guangzhou area with Portuguese traders in 1556. Once he got back to Portugal, a few years later, in 1569–1570, he published an extensive book in Évora, fully dedicated to the ‘Chinese things’, as the title mentions, the first systematic European treatise about China.23 Surprisingly enough, among a wealth of information about the Chinese world, including geography, politics and administration, economy and trade, social and cultural practices, the judicial system, and religious ideas, there is absolutely no information about the tribute system or its functioning. Gaspar da Cruz merely writes that the ambassadors who visit China – receive many gifts from the emperor – don’t pay taxes on their trading commodities – and are lodged at the expense of the Chinese authorities Otherwise, there is no more information in the ‘Tratado das coisas da China’ about the tribute system, which is a rather puzzling characteristic in a work so well-informed about all other things Chinese. Most probably, the Chinese tribute system, by the 1560s and 1570s was not considered a relevant topic within the context of Portuguese-Chinese relations. And it seems that on the Chinese side the “tribute system had lost its vitality and centrality in late Ming management of foreign relations”.24 The ‘Macau formula’ – the new Chinese method of managing the Folangji25 – worked perfectly for the Portuguese merchants, who were allowed to settle in Chinese territory and participate in commercial dealings. And it also worked fine for the Portuguese authorities in India, which indirectly profited from the Macau trade through the collection of taxes and the issuing of trade permits. In fact, within the Portuguese empire, the subject of the tribute system was only relevant for the Jesuits. In their letters emanating from Melaka and Macau, the Jesuits kept insisting that they would only be allowed to enter and preach in China through a formal Portuguese embassy. And two more attempts were organized between

23 See Gaspar da Cruz, Tratado das coisas da China, ed. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Lisboa 2010. For an English translation, see Charles R. Boxer (ed.), South China in the Sixteenth Century, London 1953. 24 John E. Wills, Jr., Embassies and Illusions: Dutch and Portuguese Envoys to K’ang-hsi, 1666– 1687, Cambridge, MA 1984, 23. 25 See Kai Cheong Fok, The Macao Formula: a Study of Chinese Management of Westerners from Mid-Sixteenth Century to the Opium War Period, PhD dissertation, Honolulu 1978.

170

Rui Manuel Loureiro

1562 and 1565. This time, the nominated ambassadors were the same Diogo Pereira, and his son-in-law Gil de Góis.26 So we can see a pattern at work here. In face of the lack of interest on the part of the Portuguese authorities in organizing an embassy to Beijing – a project that was deemed to be impracticable since the days of Tomé Pires –, the Jesuits turned to the merchants. They were trying to associate themselves with the most powerful Portuguese traders acting in the South China Sea, those who had the funds, the ships, the contacts, and perhaps the interest in strengthening ties with China. But the embassies never materialized, and the Jesuits had to pursue another entirely different strategy.27 Soon after the Portuguese had settled permanently in Macau, and clearly in response to this event, the Spanish opened a regular route between Mexico and the Philippine Islands. And in the early 1570s Manila became their headquarters, from where they also began to monitor the Chinese coast.28 Several attempts were made by the Spanish to obtain an agreement similar to the one the Portuguese had negotiated in Guangdong. In 1575, a Spanish mission even visited Fujian. The mission failed in its objectives, but the Spanish were able to collect valuable information about China, and they immediately became aware of the basic nature of the tribute system. Martín de Rada, an Augustinian missionary who participated in the mission, wrote several reports about China. And in one of those he mentioned that he had heard that in the Chinese capital there were envoys of several Asian regions that regularly paid tribute to the Chinese emperor. His list included “these nations. Cauchy, Leuquiu, Chienlo, Malaca, Tayni, Campuchi, Chaussien, Tata, Cauly, Gitpon, Huyhue, who are said to be Moors and live in the interior regions between China and Bengala, and all pay tribute to the king of China”. He further added that he had seen in Fuzhou “some men from Louqiui, whom we name Leqios, who were bringing their tribute”.29

26 Concerning these two embassies, see Rui Manuel Loureiro, Em busca das origens de Macau and also Jorge Manuel dos Santos Alves, Um Porto entre Dois Impérios: Estudos sobre Macau e as Relações Luso-Chinesas, Macau 1999. 27 For an account of the Jesuits’ entry in China, see Liam Matthew Brockey, Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579–1724, Cambridge, MA 2007. 28 On the Spanish approaches to China, see Manel Ollé, La empresa de China: De la Armada Invencible al Galeón de Manila, Barcelona 2002 and also Clotilde Jacquelard, De Séville à Manille, les Espagnols en mer de Chine, Paris 2015. 29 Martín de Rada, Relaçion verdadera de las cosas del Reyno de Taibin, ed. Dolors Folch / Alexandra Prat, electronic edition, https://www.upf.edu/asia/projectes/che/s16/radapar.h tm (31. 01. 2019): “Dieron nos por minuta aver alli estas naçiones. Cauchy, Leuquiu, Chienlo, Malaca, Tayni, Campuchi, Chaussien, Tata, Cauly, Gitpon, Huyhue y estos ultimos dizen ser moros que biven la tierra adentro entre la China y Bengala y todas estas naçiones dizen que pagan parias al rrey de China. Vimos nosotros en Hocchiu unos hombres de Louquiu que

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

171

The information collected by Martín de Rada quickly arrived in Spain, by way of Manila and Mexico. And it came into the hands of Bernardino de Escalante, a regular priest, who published a book in Seville in 1577, which was almost entirely dedicated to China, the ‘Discurso de la navegacion que los Portugueses hazen à los Reynos y Provincias del Oriente’.30 This work was largely based on Portuguese materials, and namely on the treatise of Gaspar da Cruz already mentioned, which he perhaps had acquired during a visit to Lisbon around 1570.31 It included practically no information on the Chinese tribute system. There was only a brief allusion to foreign ambassadors and tribute missions, copied from the reports of Gaspar da Cruz and Martín de Rada.32 The Spanish crown, of course, was keen to participate in the profitable Chinese trade, from its new base in Manila. Even more so after 1580, when the Spanish monarch Felipe II also became king of Portugal.33 And, as the Portuguese had done many decades earlier, the Spanish authorities in Madrid also set about organizing an embassy to China, in order to try and establish peaceful trade relations that would be centralized in Manila. Formal letters were written by King Felipe II to the Wanli Emperor, and dispatched to Mexico with a group of Augustinian friars.34 The idea of a formal embassy, while being supported by the Augustinians, curiously enough, met with strong opposition from the Spanish civil authorities in Mexico and in the Philippines. Overseas governors, apparently well informed about the mechanics of the Chinese tribute system, argued that the honor of Spain would be compromised if the Spanish monarch submitted to the obligations of a formal embassy that would have to declare openly its subservience to the Chinese emperor.

30 31

32 33 34

nosotros llamamos Leqios que venian a traer sus parias, o, tributo”. For an English translation of Rada’s account, see Charles R. Boxer, South China in the Sixteenth Century, 260–310. See Bernardino de Escalante, Discurso de la navegacion que los Portugueses hazen à los Reinos y Prouincias del Oriente, y de la noticia que se tiene de las grandezas del Reino de la China, ed. Lourdes Díaz-Trechuelo, Salamanca 1991. Concerning Escalante, see Ricardo Padrón, Sinophobia vs. Sinophilia in the 16th Century Iberian World, in: Revista de Cultura/Review of Culture 46 (2014), 95–107; and also Rui Manuel Loureiro, Ecos portugueses nos impressos hispalenses de Bernardino de Escalante, in: Fernando Quiles/Manuel Fernández Chaves/Antonia Fialho Conde (eds.), La Sevilla Lusa: La presencia portuguesa en el Reino de Sevilla durante el Barroco / A presença portuguesa no Reino de Sevilha no período Barroco, Seville 2018, 236–251. Bernardino de Escalante, Discurso de la navegacion que los Portugueses hazen, 69v–71v (ch. 12). About the impact of the Iberian Union in Asia, see Rafael Valladares, Castilla y Portugal en Asia (1580–1680): Declive imperial y adaptación, Leuven 2001. See Carmen Y. Hsu, Dos cartas de Felipe II al emperador de China, in: eHumanista 4 (2004), 194–209; and Carmen Y. Hsu, Writing on Behalf of a Christian Empire: Gifts, Dissimulation, and Politics in the Letters of Philip II of Spain to Wanli of China, in: Hispanic Review 78/3 (2010), 323–344.

172

Rui Manuel Loureiro

The embassy was eventually cancelled. But one of its members, Juan Gonzalez de Mendoza, who had travelled as far as Mexico, became totally obsessed with China, when he came back to Europe. He collected all the available materials about Chinese matters, including the printed works of João de Barros, Gaspar da Cruz, and Bernardino de Escalante, the manuscript reports of Martín de Rada, and also manuscript translations made in Manila of some Chinese printed books. And in 1585, he published in Rome a long treatise, the ‘Historia de las cosas mas notables del gran reyno de la China’ (‘the most noteworthy things about the kingdom of China’), which was a huge editorial success, being widely circulated and reprinted.35 But, regarding the Chinese tribute system, his information was rather sketchy, and he only reproduced what his predecessors had written about the formal protocol involving foreign embassies, in a chapter entitled “On the courtesy that the king of this great kingdom extends to the ambassador that comes to him, sent by kings, princes, or communities”. He based his account of imperial protocol in the writings of João de Barros and Gaspar da Cruz, paying close attention to the experiences of Tomé Pires’ embassy, whom he erroneously calls “Bartolomé Pérez”, following Bernardino de Escalante.36 As it had happened with Portugal in the 1530s, Spain quickly put aside any project involving an embassy to the Chinese court. After all, the Spanish in the Philippines were able to develop strong trading relations with China, through the mediation of the Chinese community settled in Manila. And so, as it had happened with Portuguese written sources, the subject of the tribute system practically disappeared from Spanish accounts of China. Both Iberian powers, in their dealings with China, had acquired a basic understanding of the tribute system, as it appears in the writings of Tomé Pires, João de Barros, Gaspar da Cruz, Martín de Rada, Bernardino de Escalante and Juan González de Mendoza. But the Chinese way of organizing diplomatic contacts with the surrounding Asian polities, through formal embassies that acknowledged China’s centrality and predominance in the current world order, was totally unacceptable from the European point of view. Portugal and Spain were both expanding powers, controlling extensive empires – the Portuguese, largely 35 Juan González de Mendoza, Historia del gran reyno de China, ed. Ramón Alba, Madrid 1990. On González de Mendoza’s account, see the analysis of Donald F. Lach, Asia in the Making of Europe: A Century of Discovery, 2 bks., Chicago 1994, 742–794; and also Diego Sola García, La formación de un paradigma de Oriente en la Europa moderna: la ‘Historia del Gran Reino de la China’ de Juan González de Mendoza, PhD dissertation, Barcelona 2015. 36 Juan González de Mendoza, Historia del gran reyno de China, 144–148: “De la cortesia que haze el Rey deste Gran Reyno a los enbajadores que van a el, de parte de Rey, principe, o comunidad” (pt. I, bk. 3, ch. 23). Cf. Bernardino de Escalante, Discurso de la navegacion que los Portugueses hazen, 69v–71v.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

173

maritime, the Spanish, largely territorial –, and thus unprepared and unwilling to enter into a formally submissive relationship with the Chinese realm. A rather more practical agreement had to be achieved, both in Macau and in Manila, to allow for a mutually profitable relationship to continue between Portugal and Spain, on one side, and China, on the other. Thus the absence of interest in the mechanisms of the tribute system that characterises the late sixteenth century Iberian accounts of China, after an initial curiosity about such an exotic way of organizing diplomatic relations between different polities.

Literature Luís de Albuquerque/J. Lopes Tavares, Algumas observações sobre o planisfério “Cantino” (1502), Coimbra 1967. Adelino de Almeida Calado, Livro que trata das cousas da índia e do Japão, in: Boletim da Biblioteca da Universidade de Coimbra 24 (1960), 1–138. Luís Filipe Barreto, Macau: Poder e Saber, Séculos XVI e XVII, Lisbon 2006. João de Barros, Década Terceira da Ásia, ed. Isabel Vilares Cepeda, Lisboa 1992. Charles R. Boxer (ed.), South China in the Sixteenth Century, London 1953. Charles R. Boxer, João de Barros, Portuguese Humanist and Historian of Asia, New Delhi 1981. Liam Matthew Brockey, Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579–1724, Cambridge, MA 2007. Armando Cortesão (ed.), The Suma Oriental of Tomé Pires and the Book of Francisco Rodrigues, 2 vols., London 1944. Armando Cortesão/Avelino Teixeira da Mota (eds.), Portugaliae Monumenta Cartographica, 6 vols., Lisbon 1988. Gaspar da Cruz, Tratado das coisas da China, ed. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Lisboa 2010. Bernardino de Escalante, Discurso de la navegacion que los Portugueses hazen à los Reinos y Prouincias del Oriente, y de la noticia que se tiene de las grandezas del Reino de la China, ed. Lourdes Díaz-Trechuelo, Salamanca 1991. John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, MA 1968. Donald Ferguson, Letters from Portuguese Captives in Canton, Written in 1534 and 1536, Bombay 1902. Gakusho Nakajima, The Structure and Transformation of the Ming Tribute Trade System, in: Manuel Perez Garcia/Lucio de Sousa (eds.), Global History and New Polycentric Approaches: Europe, Asia and the Americas in a World Network System, Singapore 2018, 137–162. José Manuel Garcia, O Livro de Francisco Rodrigues: O Primeiro Atlas do Mundo Moderno, Porto 2008. Pascale Girard (ed.), Prisonniers de l’Empire Céleste: Le désastre de la première ambassade portugaise en Chine (1517–1524), Paris 2013.

174

Rui Manuel Loureiro

Juan González de Mendoza, Historia del gran reyno de China, ed. Ramón Alba, Madrid 1990. Serge Gruzinski, L’aigle et le dragon. Démesure européenne et mondialisation au XVIe siècle, Paris 2012. Carmen Y. Hsu, Dos cartas de Felipe II al emperador de China, in: eHumanista 4 (2004), 194–209. Carmen Y. Hsu, Writing on Behalf of a Christian Empire: Gifts, Dissimulation, and Politics in the Letters of Philip II of Spain to Wanli of China, in: Hispanic Review 78/3 (2010), 323–344. Clotilde Jacquelard, De Séville à Manille, les Espagnols en mer de Chine, Paris 2015. Jin Guo Ping/Wu Zhiliang, Revisitar os primórdios de Macau: para uma nova abordagem da História, Macau 2007. Kai Cheong Fok, The Macao Formula: A Study of Chinese Management of Westerners from Mid-Sixteenth Century to the Opium War Period, PhD dissertation, Honolulu 1978. Donald F. Lach, Asia in the Making of Europe: A Century of Discovery, 2 bks., Chicago 1994. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Cartas dos cativos de Cantão, Cristóvão Vieira e Vasco Calvo (1524?), Macau 1992. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Em busca das origens de Macau, Macau 1997. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Fidalgos, Missionários e Mandarins: Portugal e a China no Século XVI, Lisbon 2000. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Nas partes da China, Lisboa 2009, 35–54. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Ecos portugueses nos impressos hispalenses de Bernardino de Escalante, in: Fernando Quiles/Manuel Fernández Chaves/Antonia Fialho Conde (eds.), La Sevilla Lusa: La presencia portuguesa en el Reino de Sevilla durante el Barroco / A presença portuguesa no Reino de Sevilha no período Barroco, Seville 2018, 236– 251. Manel Ollé, La empresa de China: De la Armada Invencible al Galeón de Manila, Barcelona 2002. Ricardo Padrón, Sinophobia vs. Sinophilia in the 16th Century Iberian World, in: Revista de Cultura/Review of Culture 46 (2014), 95–107. Tomé Pires, Suma Oriental, ed. Rui Manuel Loureiro, Lisbon 2017. Roderich Ptak, Ming Maritime Trade to Southeast Asia, 1368–1567. Visions of a System, in: Claude Guillot/Denys Lombard/Roderich Ptak (eds.), From the Mediterranean to the China Sea, Wiesbaden 1998, 157–192. Martín de Rada, Relaçion verdadera de las cosas del Reyno de Taibin, ed. Dolors Folch / Alexandra Prat, electronic edition, https://www.upf.edu/asia/projectes/che/s16/rada par.htm (31. 01. 2019). Jorge Manuel dos Santos Alves, Um Porto entre Dois Impérios: Estudos sobre Macau e as Relações Luso-Chinesas, Macau 1999. Diego Sola García, La formación de un paradigma de Oriente en la Europa moderna: la ‘Historia del Gran Reino de la China’ de Juan González de Mendoza, PhD dissertation, Barcelona 2015. Isabel Soler, El sueño del rey: Viajes y mesianismo en el Renacimiento peninsular, Barcelona 2015.

Early Iberian Reports on the Ming Tribute System

175

Sanjay Subrahmanyam, The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500–1700: A Political and Economic History, London 1993. Rafael Valladares, Castilla y Portugal en Asia (1580–1680): Declive imperial y adaptación, Leuven 2001. John E. Wills, Jr., Embassies and Illusions: Dutch and Portuguese Envoys to K’ang-hsi, 1666–1687, Cambridge, MA 1984. John E. Wills, Jr., Relations with maritime Europeans, 1514–1662, in: Denis Twitchett/ Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China – Volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, 333–375.

Wan Ming 萬明

Focusing on the Indian Ocean: An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

Introduction The tributary system in ancient China has always been the focus of Chinese and foreign academic circles with fruitful results, involving many disciplines, including history, diplomacy, international relations, politics, anthropology, sociology and so on.1 These studies have contributed greatly to the understanding of the characteristics of foreign relations of ancient China, gaining insight into the causes of diplomatic issues, and promoting the research of the Silk Road. 1 In the past, the main achievements of Chinese and foreign historians focused on the study of tributary system or so-called feudatory system, among which was particularly ‘theory of tributary system’ put forward by some scholars represented by John King Fairbank (1907– 1991) and Ssu-yu Teng (1905–1988) of the United States, see John K. Fairbank and Ssu-yu Teng, On the Ch’ing Tributary System, in: John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge 1968. The original edition was published in 1968, was edited by John K. Fairbank and translated into Chinese by Du Jidong 杜繼東, which includes 13 papers in total by scholars from many countries, researching and analyzing the tributary system of traditional China from theory to practice, and was the masterpiece on the study of tributary system and traditional diplomatic relations in China. It was Huang Zhilian who proposed a “system of the rule of rites by Chinese dynasty”, see Huang Zhilian 黄枝連, Tianchao lizhi tixi yanjiu 天朝禮制體系研究 (Research on the System of the Rule of Rites by Chinese Dynasties), 3 vols., Beijing 1992, 1994, 1995. James L. Hevia, an American scholar, criticized ‘the tributary system’ represented by John K. Fairbank and the view that Chinese world order was centered on the West from the perspective of courtesy. See works of James L. Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the Macartney Embassy of 1793, Chapel Hill 1995, translated by Deng Changchun 鄧常春, Huairou yuan ren: Maga’erni shihua de zhongying liyi zhongtu 懷柔遠人: 馬嘎爾尼使華的中英禮儀冲突, Bejing, 2002, 251. Generally speaking, commentaries on the tributary system often started from China, or from East Asia. My article (Wan Ming 萬明, Chongxin sikao chaogong tixi 重新思考朝貢體系 [Rethinking of the tributary system), in: Zhou Fangyin 周方銀 and Gao Cheng 高程 (ed.), Dongya zhixu: guannian, zhidu yu zhanlüe 東亞秩序：觀念、制度與戰略 [Order in East Asia: ideas, institutions and strategies]. Beijing 2012, 114–129) proposed to re-recognize it from a broader perspective, and proposed that paying tribute in ancient times was not a unique form of international relations in China, but an international inertial practice which had long existed between the East and the West.

178

Wan Ming 萬明

However, it should be noted that extensive scientific discourse has been formed during these researches, which has also affected further in-depth discussion of the issue. After the collapse of the Mongol-Yuan Empire, great changes took place in the international arena, and Sino-foreign relations underwent a process of collapse and reconstruction. At the beginning of the 15th century, the foreign policy of the Ming Dynasty took a major turn aiming at the ocean. There appeared an unprecedented trend in China from a ‘big farming country’ towards a ‘big ocean country’. From 1405 to 1433, Zheng He 鄭和 (1371–1433) led a fleet of more than 20,000 people to conduct seven long-distance voyages from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean; he visited more than 30 countries and launched unprecedented large-scale nautical diplomatic activities. This was a typical example of the establishment of the tributary system in the Ming Dynasty.2 It could be confirmed that the large-scale naval activities of the Ming Dynasty in the Indian Ocean promoted the formation of an international system in the Indian Ocean and laid a solid foundation for the birth of a global integration at sea. Here, in particular, special attention should be paid to the Namoli Ocean 那没 黎洋, described by Ma Huan 馬歡 (1380–1460) who accompanied Zheng He on his voyages to the ‘Western Ocean’ (viz. Indian Ocean) and the overall discovery of the Indian Ocean. The previous researches focused more on the relationships between China and certain regions or countries, and specifically on special aspects of ‘Voyages to the Western Ocean’. These researches did not comprehensively and systematically sort out and analyze the route, characteristics and internal logic of Zheng He’s voyages, making it impossible to establish a holistic understanding of the history of Zheng He’s long-distance voyages. Thus, the investigation over a lengthy period lacked a reliable historical basis. The vertical line of history was composed of time, and the horizontal line was composed of space. In order to seek all the tracks of naval diplomacy of voyages to the Western Ocean, and to understand the concept of the ‘Overall Ocean’ in the Ming Dynasty, 2 In the early 1960s, Yang Lien-sheng pointed out that “In East Asia, the power of militarycivilian integration in China undoubtedly often played a leading role, but it could not be inferred that China had no concept of the existence of other civilized countries.” He believed that a ‘China-centered world order’ was not a fact, but a myth. (Chinese World Order from the Perspective of History, in: Fairbank 1968, 20–33). During the Qing Dynasty, China and the West collided directly, which formed clear oppositions and accounted for ‘the impact-response theory’. In the early Ming Dynasty, people’s understanding of Sino-foreign relations of the Ming Dynasty was formed before the expansion arrival of Western force. The indigenous diplomatic concept of ancient China and its evolution process deserved special attention. See my book Wan Ming, Zhongguo rongru shijie de bulü: Ming yu Qing qian qi haiwai zhengce jiao jiu 中國融入世界的步履: 明與淸前期海外政策比較硏究 (China’s road to the world: A comparative study of foreign trade policy in the Ming and the early Qing dynasty), Beijing 2000 (reprint 2014) and my article Wan Ming 2012.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

179

I believe it necessary to connect all the voyages to the Western Ocean and carry out comprehensive research. Thus, it may be possible to truly understand the overall appearance of naval diplomacy of the Ming Dynasty in the early 15th century and its influence on the construction of the international pattern of the Indian Ocean. Therefore, this paper mainly used the original reports, namely Ma Huan’s ‘Yingya shenglan’ 瀛涯勝覽, together with Fei Xin’s 費信 ‘Xingcha shenglan’ 星槎勝覽, Gong Zhen’s 鞏珍 ‘Xiyang fanguo zhi’ 西洋番國志, the steles erected by Zheng He on the voyages to the Western Ocean, records of western countries’ tributes and Zheng He’s nautical charts and so on, to re-trace the detailed naval diplomacy of the Ming Dynasty around the Indian Ocean. It will further examine the evolving internal logic of the tributary system, and explore how China and the countries around the Indian Ocean formed the international system in the early 15th century, in order to deepen the understanding of history of China’s foreign relations and even global history.

Part I: Unprecedented Orientation in Ming China: The Seven Voyages to the Indian Ocean Zhang Qian 張騫 (164–114 BCE) was dispatched to the Western Regions in the Han Dynasty. This diplomatic activity and others were called ‘chiseling out’ and highlighted the ‘official’ opening of the Silk Road. Zheng He’s activities in the Indian Ocean were an unprecedented diplomatic activity by the Chinese government, and the largest direct contact between ancient China and the overseas world, providing a basis for exploring the Maritime Silk Road. In the ‘Poem of Travelling’ (preface of Ma Huan’s Yingya shenglan) we read: “Of the embassy of Po wang3 to distant lands we heard; Greater still the glorious favour in the present reign conferred!”4

These two lines show that Ma Huan equated ‘going down to the Western Ocean’ in the early Ming Dynasty with Zhang Qian’s ‘chiseling out’ the Western Regions. At the beginning of establishment of the Ming Dynasty, in response to the great changes in international relations after the collapse of the Mongol-Yuan Empire, Emperor Taizu 太祖 of the Ming Dynasty (1328–1398) adopted an allround diplomacy in the three regions: The Western Ocean, the Eastern Ocean and the Western Regions. He established a national policy based on ‘no exploitation’ 3 That is the famous Han envoy Zhang Qian 張騫 who was sent to the Yuezhi 月氏. 4 Ma Huan, trans., annot. by J. V. G. Mills, Ying-yai Sheng-lan. The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores [1433] (The Hakluyt Society Extra Series 42), Cambridge1970, 74; Ma Huan, ed. by Wan Ming, Mingben “Yingya shenglan” jiaozhu 明本《瀛涯勝覽》校注 (Annotations of the Yingya shenglan of the Ming editions), Guangzhou 2005, 3.

180

Wan Ming 萬明

and was committed to the idea of ‘sharing the blessings of peace’ (gonghou taiping zhi fu 共享太平之福) and rebuilding a legitimate international order. That meant that the pattern of foreign relations in ancient China underwent a major turning point.5 At the same time, on the basis of peaceful diplomatic relations, the land and sea channels connecting Asia, Africa and Europe were reactivated. The transformation of Ming Dynasty’s diplomatic mode was oriented to the ocean, and the landmark event was Zheng He’s seven voyages to the Indian Ocean. At this time, it was no longer a policy of receiving visitors who expressed their sincerity by paying tribute, but of actively sending diplomatic missions abroad to ‘attract tribute.’ In an imperial edict of Emperor Yongle (3rd month, 7th year of the Yongle reign [1409]), the following statements were made: Now I dispatch Zheng He who takes the imperial edict to publicize my will: You should follow the heavenly law, abide by my words strictly, abide by the rules of propriety and order, do not violate the rules, do not bully the minority and the weak, so people can share the blessings of peace. If some people express their sincerity and visit us, they will be all bestowed with rewards. Therefore, the imperial edict is issued to help everybody to know that.6 It was particularly worth noting that in the works of Ma Huan, the places where the Chinese ships arrived, no matter big or small, even as small as a mountain village, were without exception called ‘countries’. This was undoubtedly a clear orientation of diplomatic behavior and the concept of ‘country’ in the regions of the Indian Ocean emerged as never before.

5 Wan Ming 萬明, Mingdai waijiao moshi yu qi tezheng kaolun: jian lun waijiao tese xingcheng yu beifang youmu minzu de guanxi 明代外交模式及其特徵考論：兼論外交特色形成與北 方遊牧民族的關係 (The textual research on the diplomatic model and its characteristics of the Ming dynasty: Concurrently discussing the relation between formation of diplomatic characteristics and nomadic nationalities in the North, in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國史研究 (Journal of Chinese Historical Studies) 4 (2010), 27–57. 6 Huangdi chiyu sifang haiwai zhu fanwang ji toumuren deng 皇帝敕谕四方海外諸番王及頭 目人等 (The imperial edict to kings and leaders all around and overseas), In: Jinian weida hanghaijia Zheng He xia xiyang 580 zhounian choubei weiyuanhui 紀念偉大航海家 鄭和下西洋580週年籌備委員會 (Preparation committee for the 580th anniversary of the voyages to the Western Oceans of the great navigator Zheng He) (ed.), Zheng He jiashi ziliao 鄭 和家世資料 (The family data of Zheng He), Beijing 1985, 2.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

1.

181

‘The Namoli Ocean’ in Ma Huan’s Writings – the Indian Ocean

In the writings of Ma Huan the ‘Western Ocean’ was called ‘Namoli Ocean’ (Indian Ocean).7 Scrutinizing the scope of the ‘Western Ocean’ could restore the geographical knowledge of the whole Indian Ocean in the early 15th century, and help to understand the coverage of network in the Indian Ocean. According to the Yingya shenglan, Ma Huan visited twenty countries by himself:8 Champa (Zhancheng 占城), Java (Zhaowa 爪哇), Palembang (Jiugang 舊港), Siam (Xianluo 暹羅), Malacca (Manlajia 滿剌加), Aru (Yalu 啞魯), Samudra (Sumendala 蘇門答臘), Nagur (Nagu’er 那孤兒), Lide (Lidai 黎代), Lambri (Nanboli 喃勃里), Ceylon (Xilan 錫蘭), Quilon (Gelan 葛蘭), Cochin (Kezhi 柯枝), Calicut (Guli 古里), Maldive and Laccadive Islands (Liushan 溜山), Dhufar (Zufa’er 組法兒), Aden (Adan 阿丹), Bengal (Banggela 榜葛剌), Hormuz (Hulumosi 忽魯謨厮) and Mecca (Tianfang 天方). The order of countries in the book is obviously not arranged according to the route.9 The same record is found in Xiyang fanguo zhi. Fei Xin’s Xingcha shenglan records 44 countries, of which the first 22 countries were: Champa, Panduranga (Bintonglong 賓童龍), Cape Varella (Lingshan 靈山), Pulau Condore (Kunlunshan 崑崙山), Celam Islet (Jiaolanshan 交蘭山), Siam, Java, Palembang, Malacca, Pulau Sembilan (Jiuzhoushan 九洲山), Samudra, Tattooed Faces (Huamian 花面), Langkasuka (Longyaxijue 龍牙犀角), Pulau Rondo Longxian yu 龍涎嶼), Nicobar Islands (Cuilan yu 翠蘭嶼), Ceylon (Xilanshan 錫蘭山), Quilon (Xiao Junan 小咀喃), Cochin, Calicut, Hormuz, Lasa (Lasa 剌撒)10 and Bengal. The latter 22 countries were: Cambodia (Zhenla 真臘), Pulau Aur (Dongxizhu 東西竺), Tamiang (Danyang 淡洋), Singapore Strait (Longyamen 龍牙門), Langkawi (Longyashanti 龍牙善提), Timor (Jili dimen 吉 里地悶), Pahang (Pengkeng 彭坑), Taiwan and Ryukyu (Liuqiu 琉球), Three Islands (Sandao 三島), Mait (Mayi 麻逸), Karimata (Jialimada 假里馬打), Janggala (Zhongjialuo 重加羅), Burneo (Boni 渤泥), Sulu (Sulu 蘇祿), Quilon, Aden, Dhufar, Guimbo (Zhubu 竹步), Mogadishu (Mugudushu 木骨都束), Maldive and Laccadive Islands (Liuyang 溜洋), Brawa (Bulawa 卜剌哇) and Mecca.11 Many historians believe that the author did not visit all these areas. In 7 Wan Ming, Ma Huan qixia Yinduyang–Ma Huan bixia de “Namoliyang” 鄭和七下印度洋— 馬歡筆下的“那没黎洋” (Zheng He’s seven voyages to the Indian ocean – the “Namoli Ocean” in Ma Huan’s writings), in: Nanyang wenti yanjiu 南洋問题研究 (Southeast Asian Affairs) 1 (2015), 79–89, here 79–83. 8 The characters of the various place names differ; here only one version is given. 9 Ma Huan, ed. by Wan Ming 2018, 1–2, Ma Huan/Mills 1970, viii; the suffix ‘country’ (guo 國) is dropped here and below. 10 For a discussion of Lasa, see Ma Huan/Mills 1970, 347–348. 11 Fei Xin, trans. by J. V. G. Mills, rev., ed., annot. by Roderich Ptak, Hsing-ch ’a sheng-lan. The Overall Survey of the Star Raft (South China and Maritime Asia 4), Wiesbaden 1996, 5–6.

182

Wan Ming 萬明

addition to the respective countries in Ma Huan’s records, it is worth to note these three countries in East Africa: Guimbo, Mogadishu and Brava. According to the stone tablets erected by Zheng He, he reached over thirty countries on his voyages. For example, the tablet of ‘Deeds on Visiting Foreign Countries’ in the Tianfei Palace 天妃宮 of Liujiagang 劉家港, Loudong 婁東 reads:12 At the beginning of the reign of Yongle, Zheng He was dispatched to visit foreign countries for seven times, leading tens of thousands of officers and soldiers, and more than 100 ships from Taicang to the sea each time. They passed by more than 30 countries, such as Champa, Siam, Java, Cochin and Calicut, and reached Hormuz in the Western Regions, etc., covering an area of more than 100,000 li in the sea. The ‘more than 30 countries’ could complement the records of Ma Huan and Fei Xin. For example, the record of the 5th voyage to the Western Ocean in 1417 says:13 “When the navy reached the Western Regions led by Zheng He, Hormuz offered lions, leopards and horses for tribute. Aden offered Kirins for tribute, Zulafa offered longhorn elands for tribute, Mogadishu offered zebras and lions for tribute, and Brava offered camels and ostriches for tribute.”

The inscription of the tablet enabled people to confirm that Mogadishu and Brava in East Africa in Fei Xin’s record were indeed the countries reached by the missions. The ‘Tablet of Efficacious Deeds of Tianfei’s Holy Spirit’ reads:14 Since the mission in the 3rd year of the reign of Yongle to the Western Ocean, this was the 7th time. Zheng He visited Champa, Java, Samboja and Siam, directly across the Southern Sindhu, Sri Lanka, Calicut and Cochin to Hormuz, Aden and Mogadishu in the Western Regions with more than 30 foreign countries, big and small, covering an area of more than 100,000 li in the sea. This stone tablet proves that Mogadishu was included in the places where they had been. From the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean, Zheng He’s voyages were a nautical endeavor covering almost all of the Indian Ocean. The port cities they reached can be divided into three parts: east, middle and west: The eastern part was from the South China Sea to Malacca, and then to Java and Samudra, namely the intersection of the Indian Ocean. And sailing from Pulau Weh in the 12 Loudong Liujiagang Tianfei gong shike tong fan shiji zhi bei 婁東劉家港天妃宮通番事蹟之 碑 (Tablet of ‘Deeds on Visiting Foreign Countries’ in the Tianfei Palace of Liujiagang, Loudong), this monument has been lost. Jiang Weiyan 蔣維錟/Zheng Lihang 鄭麗航 (eds.), Mazu wenxian shiliao huibian 媽祖文獻史料彙編 (Collection of historical documents on Mazu), Series 1, Beijing 2007, 45. 13 Ibid. 14 Tianfei zhi shenling yingji bei 天妃之神靈應記碑 (Stele recording the responses of the goddess Tianfei), discovered in Changle, Fujian in 1930, in: Jiang, Zheng 2007, 45.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

183

Ocean of Lambri to (Namoli Ocean), they arrived in Calicut in the middle of the Indian Ocean. The route from Calicut extended directly to Hormuz at the head of the Persian Gulf, Dhufar, Lasa, Aden at the mouth of the Red Sea, to Mecca and to Mogadishu in East Africa, that is to the west of the Indian Ocean. The above was just a rough sketch of the sea route of Zheng He; the actual route was not so determined but showed multi-directional changes and network-like extensions.15 It should also be noted that the missions of Zheng He showed not only diplomatic, but also commercial and even investigative purposes. These maritime activities connected the Indian Ocean as a whole, but the focus of the navigation was placed on Calicut at the western coast of India.

2.

The Destination of the First Voyage – Guli 古里國 (Calicut)

Calicut was not only a great power of the Western Ocean, but also an important wharf for countries in the Western Ocean. Thus, the Yingya shenglan reads: “[This is] the great country of the Western Ocean”,16 and the Xingcha shenglan: “This is an important [place] of the oceans. It is very close to Ceylon, and it is also a [principal] port for all the foreigners of the Western Ocean.”17 Calicut, nowadays Kozhikode in Kerala, was “one of the outstanding port cities of India in the Middle Ages and an international trade center for spices and textiles.”18 When Zheng He went on voyages to the Western Ocean, Calicut was ruled by the Kingdom of Zamorin. Zheng He erected a stone tablet in Calicut:19 In the 5th year under the reign of Yongle, the Imperial Court appointed Zheng He who was the leader eunuch and others to take an imperial edict and reward the king in Calicut a silver seal in the name of China’s emperor, and reward the top leaders with high-grade crowns and belts. When the treasured ships arrived there, the pavilion and the stele were built, and the stone tablet was erected saying: This 15 Concerning the understanding of network, I was inspired by Professor Chen Zhongping, see Chen Zhongping 陳忠平, Zouxiang quanqiuxing wangluo geming: Zheng He xia Xiyang ji Zhongguo yu Yinduyang shijie de chaogong-maoyi guanxi 走向全球性網络革命：鄭 和下西洋及中國與印度洋世界的朝貢-貿易關係 (Towards a global network revolution: Tributary-trade relationship between Zheng He’s voyages to the Western Seas and the Indian Ocean world), in: Chen Zhongping 陳忠平 (ed.), Zou xiang duoyuan wenhua de quanqiushi: Zheng He xia Xiyang (1405–1433) ji Zhongguo yu Yinduyang shijie de guanxi 走向多元文化的全球史：鄭和下西洋（1405–1433）及中國與印度洋世界的關係 (Global history stepping towards multi-culture: Zheng He’s travels to the Western Ocean (1405–1433) and the relations between China and the world in the Indian Ocean), Beijing 2017, 22–75. 16 Ma Huan/Mills 1970, 137. 17 Fei Xin 1996, 76. 18 K. K. N. Kurup, Foreword, The Zamorins of Calicit, Calicut 1999. 19 Ma Huan, annotated by Wan 2018, 57–58.

184

Wan Ming 萬明

place is more than 100,000 li from China, but people’s affluent life and the rich products here are just like those of China. We have carved the stone in this place for the later generations to know that. Calicut was a country to which the Ming Dynasty attached great importance, however, though labelled a feudatory country, it did not pay tribute.

3.

Guli (Calicut) – From Destination to Transit Point

When Zheng He went to the Western Ocean for the fourth time, the fleet aimed for a new destination, namely Hormuz, situated on the today barren island of Hormuz. Altogether the fleet had been to Hormuz for four times. Going to Hormuz meant that the scope of the maritime policy of the Ming Dynasty was extended to the far West. In the Yingya shenglan and the Xingcha shenglan, five routes with Guli as starting port were recorded: 1) Guli to Hormuz, 2) Guli to Dhufar, 3) Guli to Aden, distribution center of gems and pearls in ancient West Asia, 4) Guli to Lasa, 5) Calicut to Mecca, Mecca via the port of Jiddah.20 These five routes went directly to the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Peninsula, the Red Sea and even to East Africa, and most parts of the Indian Ocean were covered by Chinese ships. It should be stressed that the impact of these voyages was not achieved by force, which was the major difference between the foreign relations of the Ming Dynasty and of the preceding Yuan Empire.

4.

A comprehensive understanding of Guli’s status

Why was Calicut chosen as the destination of Zheng He’s first mission? This significant issue had not been discussed in depth in the past. When Vasco da Gama (1469–1524) sailed from Europe to India around the Cape of Good Hope, he arrived in Calicut at the end of the 15th century and highlighted the unusual status of this port. According to Wang Dayuan’s 汪大淵 Records of Calicut in the Yuan Dynasty, the prosperity of Calicut was obviously less than that of Cochin at that time.21 But until the beginning of the 15th century, Calicut surpassed Cochin and Quilon. The erection of a stone tablet reflected the great attention of the Ming Dynasty to Calicut, as it was a typical aspect of the tributary system. Ma Huan described in detail the local trade market in Calicut, and the missions participated in the fair 20 Wan 2015, 84. 21 Wang Dayuan 汪大淵, ed., annot. by Su Jiqing 蘇繼庼, Daoyi zhilüe jiaoshi 島夷志略校釋 (Annotations to the Daoyi zhilüe), Beijing 1981, 325.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

185

trade there; this aspect should also show one of the main purposes of Zheng He’s voyages. The missions chose Calicut, which was far from the centre of Delhi, but they did not try to contact the Tughluq Dynasty (1320–1413), the third Delhi Sultanate. This shows that Zheng He did not attempt to ‘publicize national prestige’ and fight for political prestige, and thus proves that Zheng He’s nautical diplomacy did not aim to seek political power. It also shows that international affairs in ancient times were not completely influenced by political considerations, but rather by the inherent maritime network and the quest for commercial exchanges between East and West. Ma Huan’s and Fei Xin’s accounts were the first comprehensive survey reports of the Indian Ocean by Chinese people, which comprehensively and systematically introduced the geographical distribution, the ecological and human environment of the various countries, including the routes and ports. They analyzed the characteristics of the countries along the coasts of the Indian Ocean, which laid the foundation for a complete understanding of the Indian Ocean. Zheng He made seven voyages, and the regular routes were shaped by the monsoon; the expeditions lasted for 28 years. Concerning the routes, there were both direct destinations and transits, both fixed routes and temporary routes. Concerning the voyages, there were the main routes and branch routes. The main route referred to the nautical route starting from the South China Sea to countries which served as hub ports and countries which were central ports of the Indian Ocean. These countries were along the central route and included places in India, the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea and East Africa. The so-called branch routes were sea routes connecting the port countries of parts of the whole network. Small vessels connected the ports, which were the important nodes of the routes. Stable diplomatic and trade relations had been established among these port countries, and the maritime international network of the Indian Ocean had been connected through these routes. According to the research done by Xiang Da 向達 (1900–1966), more than 500 place names were collected in Zheng He’s Nautical Chart, about 200 of which were local names of China and 300 were place names of foreign countries, twice more than those in Wang Dayuan’s Daoyi zhilüe 島夷誌略. “Among the geographical maps of Asia and Africa before the fifteenth century, the content of this nautical chart was the richest.”22 It could be added that this nautical chart shows the most abundant content of the Indian Ocean before the Western voyagers came to the East in the 15th century, and it was an important contribution to the marine civilization of the Indian Ocean. In fact, Zheng He’s nautical diplomacy 22 Xiang Da 向達, Zhengli Zheng He hanghaitu xuyan 整理鄭和航海圖序言 (Preface to the arrangement of Zheng He’s nautical charts), in: Xiang Da 向達 (ed.), Zheng He hanghai tu 鄭 和航海圖 (Zheng He’s nautical charts), Beijing 1961, 5.

186

Wan Ming 萬明

connected the Western, Eastern and Southern parts of the Indian Ocean, and connected the Silk Road overland and overseas.23 Since ancient times, the Indian Ocean connected East and West. The ancient Greeks and Romans first entered these seas; then Persians rose up in the 5th century and occupied an important position in the region, later in cooperation with Arab seafarers. But only until Zheng He’s voyages did the countries in the Indian Ocean have a political identity, trade cooperation and cultural integration, based on the ancient tributary relations. The history of the Indian Ocean, written by the western scholars, often spanned directly from Ibn Battuta (1304–1377) to the Portuguese who came to the East in the late 15th and 16th centuries.24

Part Two: Construction of International System of the Indian Ocean in the Early 15th Century ‘System’ generally refers to the integration of same or similar things in accordance with a certain order and internal relations, and ‘international system’ refers to the integration of many interacting international actors. In the international community, actors are divided into two categories: state and non-state. The interaction and impact of actors are mainly manifested in conflicts, competition, cooperation and dependence The international system did not develop with the expansion of capitalism in the world. At the beginning of the 15th century, the nautical diplomatic activities of Zheng He’s missions in the Indian Ocean almost covered the entire Indian Ocean region. The process of going down to the Western Ocean, which connected the vast areas that were partially isolated from each other, was a process of systematizing the international relations in the Indian Ocean, and promoted the formation of a new international system in the space of the Indian Ocean after the Mongol-Yuan Empire.

23 Wan 2012. 24 Kenneth McPherson, The Indian Ocean: A History of People and the Sea, Beijing 2015, translated by Geng Yinzeng; Michael Pearson, The Indian Ocean, Oxford 1993, trans. by Zhu Ming 朱明, Shanghai 2018; Pius Malekandathil (ed.), The Indian Ocean in the Making of Early Modern India, Abingdon 2017.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

1.

187

Geo-politics of the Indian Ocean: The overall promotion of state power

The construction of an international system was first manifested in the overall promotion of state power. Zheng He’s voyage to the Indian Ocean greatly expanded Sino-foreign relations and brought unprecedented exchanges between countries in the Indian Ocean. In the preface to the Yingya shenglan we can read: “The Grand Exemplar The Cultured Emperor issued an imperial order that the principal envoy the grand eunuch Cheng Ho should take general command of the treasure ships and go to the various countries in the Western Ocean to read out the imperial commands and bestow rewards.”25 From the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean, whenever Zheng He’s missions arrived at a country, first the imperial edict was read. After relations with other countries were established, an international political order and a network of international trade cooperation were set up. This was a sound foundation of a new international system of regional cooperation, which promoted exchanges of diverse civilizations. Zheng He’s seven voyages and the other political measures of this period included vast areas of Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia, West Asia, South Asia, East Africa and Europe, and an interactive international community was formed. The missions not only played an important political role in communicating with the countries where they arrived, but also triggered a climax of Sino-foreign exchanges. In the 24 October 1423 (9th month, wuxu), more than 1,200 envoys from 16 countries went to Beijing to pay tribute; they included places like Lambri, Samudra, Aru and Malacca and many others.26 On the basis of peaceful diplomacy, the early Ming Dynasty put the ideal of Chinese order into practice and constructed a new international system in the Indian Ocean, which was “to abide by the rules of propriety and order, not violate the rules, not bully the minority and the weak, so people could share the blessings of peace.”27 The main reason why this international system in the early 15th century embodied this ‘new’ characteristic was the emergence of a diplomatic model of ‘no exploitation’ in the early Ming Dynasty, which formed a remarkable feature of the diplomacy of the Ming Dynasty different from previous dynasties. It became a noticeable turning point in ancient Sino-foreign relations. On the basis of this diplomatic model, the tributary system with different connotations of other dynasties in China emerged, leading to an international peaceful system that did not rely on force, which fully reflected the practice of nautical diplomacy in the Indian Ocean.

25 Ma Huan/Mills 1970, 69. 26 Ming shilu 明實錄, 133 vols., Taipeh 1966, Taizong shilu, j. 263, p. 2403. 27 Jinian weida hanghaijia Zheng He xia xiyang 580 zhounian choubei weiyuanhui, 2.

188

Wan Ming 萬明

The establishment of tributary relations was not a unique phenomenon in China. ‘Paying tribute’ was a long-formed common concept in the area of eastwest exchanges and a symbol of identification in ancient international relations. Once recognized as a kind of consensus, its realization became a kind of international principle. It is inaccurate that academic circles only emphasize the concept of ‘paying tribute’ as a connotation of ‘taking China as the center’ in the past. In fact, the acceptance of the concept of ‘paying tribute’ by all countries was a kind of ‘inter-state identity’, and the tributary relations highlighted the universality of international relations in the Indian Ocean. Xia Xiyang 下西洋 (“Going down to the Western Ocean”) was a long-term direction of foreign policy of the Ming Dynasty. Unlike the extensive expansions and expeditions of the Mongol-Yuan Empire before, and the subsequent explorations of the West which occupied territories and plundered wealth, it was mainly manifested by the fact that by using the concepts of ‘no exploitation’ and ‘sharing altogether’, the countries around the Indian Ocean which could communicate with each other cooperated and established an international order. Thus, they shared the blessings of peace, which played a major role in integrating an international system, and participated in the construction of an international system in which political and cultural diversity coexisted in the Indian Ocean. On the international geopolitical platform of the Indian Ocean in the early fifteenth century, gaining the backing of big powers and international support became the main factor for the rise of some countries. Malacca, for example, guarding the Strait of Malacca, was located at an important intersection of maritime trade between the East and the West. Navigating on the maritime trade route from China to Calicut of India required a transit station, which was chosen in Malacca. According to Ma Huan’s record, this place was only a small fishing village before 1402, “There was no king in the country, [and] it was controlled only by a chief. This territory was subordinate to the jurisdiction of Siam, it paid an annual tribute of forty liang of gold; [and] if it were not [to pay], then Siam would send men to attack it.” Emperor Yongle “ordered the principal envoy the grand eunuch Cheng Ho and others to assume command [of the treasure ships], and to take the imperial edicts and to bestow upon this chief two silver seals, a hat, a girdle, and a robe. [Cheng Ho] set up a stone tablet and raised [the place] to a city; [and] it was subsequently called the ‘country of Man-la-chia’.”28 Going down to the Western Ocean freed the country of Malacca from Siam’s control, it stopped paying tribute to Siam and became a newly independent country. Meanwhile, King Parameswara of Malacca seized the opportunity to establish a close relationship with China and provided a safe place for Zheng He’s fleet to store goods. “Whenever the treasure ships of the Central Country arrived there, 28 Ma Huan/Mills 1970, 108–109.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

189

they at once erected a line of stockading, like a city-wall, and set up towers for the watch-drums at four gates; at night they had patrols of police carrying bells; inside, again, they erected a second stockade, like a small city-wall, [within which] they constructed warehouses and granaries; [and] all the money and provisions were stored in them.”29 This helped the fleet to sail safely to India and further to the West. The vessels of Zheng He’s fleet set out separately to travel to other countries, and eventually converged in Malacca on their return journey. “…they marshalled the foreign goods and loaded them in the ships; waited till the south wind was perfectly favourable. In the middle decade of the fifth moon they put to sea and returned home.”30 Zheng He’s journey to the Western Ocean promoted the prosperity of international trade in the Indian Ocean, and also promoted the country of Malacca to become the most important trading center in the Indian Ocean and the best port and the largest commercial center in Southeast Asia for half a century after its establishment.31 Thus, the Strait of Malacca got its name. In the early 15th century, besides Malacca, countries such as Samudra, Hormuz and Aden and others were all important emporia in the Indian Ocean. They fully agreed with the diplomatic concept of ‘sharing the blessings of peace’ of the Ming Dynasty and cooperated with the Ming Dynasty in order to meet the national interests and their own needs. Cooperation and confrontation among countries in the region often impacted the rule and chaos of their own societies and the international order in this region. The Ming Dynasty’s idea of international order with the aim of active external exchanges and harmonious coexistence with all nations to ‘share the blessings of peace’ adapted to the common needs of all countries in the region, which not only promoted the development of state power in the Indian Ocean, but also promoted international development characterized by peaceful coexistence in the region. In fact, it played an important role for regional integration and promoted a peaceful and stable international order in the Indian Ocean, and constructed a new international system based on cooperation and sharing. Thus, pre-modern globalization was born at sea and made people perceive the most profound influence of the international system in the Indian Ocean. The beginning of the 15th century was a transitional period, with a focus of human communication shifting from land to sea, and was a key step in the process of modern history. 29 Ibid., 113. 30 Ibid., 113–114. 31 D.R. SarDesai, Southeast Asia: Past & Present, Boulder, Co., 2003, 62. Wan Ming 萬明, Zheng He yu Manlajia – Yige shijie wenming heping hudong zhongxin de heping jueqi 鄭和與 滿剌加—一個世界文明和平互動中心的和平崛起 (Zheng He and Malacca – Peaceful rise of a peaceful interactive center of world civilization), in: Zhongguo wenjia yanjiu 中國文化研 究 (Chinese Culture Research) 1 (2005), 100–109.

190

Wan Ming 萬明

Regarding the Indian Ocean, at the beginning of the 15th century, it was not a unified regime that was formed, but a historical process of integration into a new international system was initiated. Previously, the exchanges between the Tang Dynasty and the Arab Empire were significant, but there was no international system. The exchanges during the Song Dynasty developed. and a form of regional integration was formed, perhaps even a preliminary international system. Then the Mongol-Yuan Dynasty was famous for its military power, which resulted in a disastrous defeat of peaceful maritime diplomacy. Only in the early Ming Dynasty, the Indian Ocean was taken as a space for diplomatic operation, a new concept initiated by Emperor Yongle. By confirming the model of ‘no exploitation’, the tributary relationship in the Indian Ocean was mainly a formal or nominal relationship, and a kind of relationship of peaceful cooperation. According to their own interests, these countries recognized the Ming Dynasty missions, but maintained the independence of their realm. An interactive international system was formed, with ‘no acquisition’ and ‘sharing altogether’ as the cornerstones, which could be regarded as a beginning of cooperation of Indian Ocean countries.

2.

Geo-economics in the Indian Ocean: Formation of resource cooperation mechanism

With the reorganization of geopolitics in the Indian Ocean, the establishment of diplomatic relations was closely related to commerce, thus forming a large-scale network of regional international trade. The new order of international trade came into being. During this period, the main body of international trade was the governments of these countries, and official trade dominated the scene. This structure played a positive role in expanding regional trade relations and the expansion in space produced a prosperous trade network. Since ancient times, the term ‘paying tribute’ had the dual meanings of diplomacy and trade. In the early Ming Dynasty, the foreign trade system had been continuously strengthened, and foreign trade was characterized in this way: “The tributary visitors are permitted by the emperor’s law, and the business of their ships is also trade of the government; while the maritime merchants are forbidden by the emperor’s law, and the business of their ships is not permitted, as it is private trade.”32 This shows that tributary relations in the early Ming Dynasty showed a stronger commercial nature than in previous dynasties. 32 Wang Qi 王圻, Xu wenxian tongkao 續文獻通考 (General examination of continued documents), Beijing 1991, vol. 31, Shidi kao 市糴考 (Examination of purchasing grains in the market).

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

191

As Oceania had not been of special significance and the routes of the Cape of Good Hope had not yet been discovered or possibly forgotten as there is some evidence that the Phoenicians knew this route, the Ming Dynasty strongly supported the crucial country of Malacca, sending vessels to open and protect the route of the Malacca Strait. Before the Ming Dynasty, the main protagonists of Sino-foreign trade were basically businessmen, Persians and Arabs playing a major role. The Pu 蒲 family in Quanzhou who had been in charge of the affairs of the shibosi 市舶司 (office dealing with affairs of maritime trade) in the Song and Yuan Dynasties are a famous example. But the official Ming fleets were loaded with silk, porcelain, iron ware and other articles which were deeply appreciated by oversea countries. The trade activities conducted after the arrival of the Chinese ships were recorded by Ma Huan, Fei Xin and Gong Zhen in great detail. Thus good conditions for Sinoforeign material and cultural exchanges were formed.33 The nations’ manpower, material and financial resources were integrated into a political cooperative mechanism and regional integration was established. Even after the downfall of the Mongol-Yuan, its influence on trade remained. Unlike fighting against others with the expeditions of the Yuan Dynasty, the missions were sent out to communicate with each other in the early Ming Dynasty, thus enabling the international exchanges to flourish in the region of the Indian Ocean. In the Ming Dynasty, China promoted the development of state power in the Indian Ocean. By the concept of ‘sharing the blessings of peace’ (gongxiang taiping zhi fu 共享太平之福) with other countries, China maintained the tranquility of the sea routes and the fair dealings with other countries for mutual benefit, and promoted active development of regional international trade. The relationship between China and the world in the Indian Ocean entered a new stage of development, and a new type of international relations was established in the Indian Ocean. Thus an international ‘Indian Ocean system’ came into being.

33 Wan Ming 萬明, Zhengti shiye xia de sichou zhi lu: yi Ming chu Zhongwai wuchan jiaoliu wei zhongxin 整體視野下的絲綢之路：以明初中外物產交流為中心 (The silk road from an overall perspective: focusing on the exchanges of product between China and foreign countries in the early Ming dynasty), in: Zhongguo zhongwai guanxishi xuehui 中 國中外關係學會 (Chinese Society for Historians of China’s Foreign Relations) (ed.), Sichouzhilu yu wenming de duihua 絲綢之路與文明的對話 (Dialogue between silk road and civilization), Urumqi 2007, 143–164.

192

Wan Ming 萬明

Part Three: The international system of the Indian Ocean in the early 15th century: Deconstruction of western hegemonic discourse Western hegemonic discourse is one of the crucial forms of international political discourse, which manifests itself as a colonial discourse in modern times and a kind of power politics in contemporary international reality. The theory of maritime hegemony has been a long-standing thinking pattern. As western scholars mainly adopt this kind of thinking, some non-Western scholars are deeply influenced by this discourse and have always placed the development model of the West at the core of historical interpretation. A set of common paradigms and conventional discourse systems in the international relations have thus been formed. In other words, the hegemonic discourse in history and the power politics in reality have long dominated public reasoning, cutting the integrity of the Indian Ocean history to a certain extent. This is not only the key to the study of western centralism and to the occurrence of various paradoxical phenomena in the study of the Indian Ocean as a whole, but also the internal logic of origin of the ‘China Threat Theory’. As for the evaluation of Zheng He’s expeditions, we find expressions like ‘When China ruled the Seas’,34 and thought that “China enjoyed hegemony along the far-reaching east coast from Japan to Africa.”35 The book ‘Before European Hegemony: The World System A.D. 1250–1350’ written by Janet L. Abu-Lughod pointed out that there existed a world system in the 11th-13th centuries, in which the agricultural empires of Asia and the Middle East were united with the European cities. The world system reached its peak in the 13th century and declined after 1350 due to wars, plagues and other reasons. This book pointed out that “in the early 16th century, when Portuguese who were the new participants entered the Indian Ocean for the world integration at the next stage, many parts of the world system in the 13th century had no trace.”36 Superficially, there were a lot of gaps in the world system between the 13th century and the 16th centuries, but the existence of an international system in the Indian Ocean in the early 15th century is ignored. However, there were also studies of Zheng He which broke through the time limit. In the late 14th century and the 15th century, China was equipped with all the conditions to establish rule in the Indian Ocean, from its coast to the Persian Gulf. This book put forward a question “Why did she turn around and withdraw her fleet, leaving a huge power vacuum?”, and pointed out “As a result, 34 Louise Levathes, When China Ruled the Seas: The Treasure Fleet of the Dragon Throne, 1405–1433, trans. by QIU Zhonglin 邱仲麟, Guilin 2004 (Engl. original Oxford 1997). 35 Ma Huan/Mills 1970, 2–3. 36 Janet L. Abu-Lughod, Before European Hegemony: The World System A.D. 1250–1350, trans. by Du Xianbing 杜憲兵, Ouzhou baquan zhiqian: 1250–1350 nian de shijie tixi 歐洲霸 權之前: 1250–1350年的世界體系, Beijing 2015 (Engl. original Oxford 1989), 43–44.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

193

China withdrew from the sea and concentrated on restructuring the foundation of agricultural economy and restoring the domestic production and market… Accordingly, China also lost the possibility of seeking the world hegemony.”37 This is undoubtedly an expression of the discourse of western hegemonic theory. History was continuous and there was no gap. In this description, the world system of the Indian Ocean was a very loose and totally disintegrated ‘system’, but the voyages of Zheng He, as the representative of the Ming Dynasty in the early 15th century, highlighted the role and significance of diplomatic relations. Close contacts and interactions between China and other countries around the Indian Ocean formed an integrated international system, which was characterized as a peaceful diplomatic model, which could be regarded as a good beginning of regional cooperation in the Indian Ocean. This led to an international system in the Indian Ocean of non-hegemony and non-expansionism, which did not rely on coercion and bullying. After the collapse of the MongolYuan Empire, the international order in the Indian Ocean needed to be urgently rebuilt. The diplomatic decrees at the beginning of the Ming Dynasty showed that, on one hand, the rulers learned from ancient emperors and became ‘the world lord’ to continue the traditional tributary relationship; on the other hand, in the face of the interactive reality of state-to-state diplomacy, they learned the lessons of the failure of expansion of the Mongol-Yuan Empire, and transited from ‘the world’ to ‘the state’ in diplomatic concepts. They adopted ‘no expropriation’ as the basic national policy of foreign relations. ‘No expropriation’ demonstrated that there was no territorial expansion and claim of tribute. The key for establishing relationships between suzerain and affiliated states, which were summoned under the tributary system, was totally different from the previous model of imperial expeditions. ‘Sharing the blessings of peace’ – the concept of peaceful diplomacy was quite common in Zheng He’s seven voyages to the Indian Ocean. It marked the renewal of China’s diplomatic model in the Ming Dynasty, represented the new orientation of development of foreign relations and promoted the overall development of state power in the Indian Ocean and the flourishing development of international trade in the Indian Ocean. China established a new international system and an order for regional cooperation together with other countries in this region. In the construction of the international system of the Indian Ocean, Zheng He’s voyages played an important role of integration, as they promoted interaction of countries along the whole Indian Ocean and reshaped the Indian Ocean area. This profoundly impacted the historical development of the entire Indian Ocean and even the world. Most importantly, an international consensus was 37 Abu-Lughod 2015, 312.

194

Wan Ming 萬明

reached, and an international system of the Indian Ocean was formed from disorder to order. The main characteristics of this international system were as follows: 1) The overall rise of state power. More than 30 countries around the Indian Ocean were involved, and the state actors were all included in this international system. 2) Interdependence among countries. All actors in the system were all in direct contact with each other, which was based on the absence of territorial expansion and land tribute. Expansion and plunder were not subjects of international exchanges. 3) Asymmetric existence. Although there was a gigantic gap between big and small countries, the establishment of cooperative relations and relatively equal trust between countries brought about a certain fairness in the international community. The reorganization and analysis of original materials and documents of going down to the Western Ocean are of great significance to the correct understanding and interpretation of the history of the tributary system in the early 15th century. It has two distinct characteristics: 1) There is no occupation of territory; 2) There was no compulsory demand for tribute. These two points were the basic differences between the international system in the Indian Ocean constructed by China in the early 15th century and the four expeditions of the former Mongol-Yuan Empire and the colonial expansion of the West. Thus, it should not be simply generalized and understood in terms of a traditional tributary system. In the formation of this international system, two factors played a key role: 1) In the traditional practice of tributary relations between East and West, states were the basic unit of communication in the Indian Ocean. The existence and development of ancient countries were closely related to the specific natural environmental system, and natural resources were of decisive significance to the development of countries. During the long period of communication between the East and the West in ancient times, the tradition of paying tribute was gradually formed, which actually included two different concepts: The actual possession and predatory claim of territorial output on the basis of military conquest and territorial expansion; and the international common concept emerging as a form of relations, which formed a legitimate form of international relations.38 The 38 Taken the imperial edicts and documents of the Ming Dynasty as an example, the concept of paying tribute is not only the Chinese emperor’s vision of taking China as the center, but also the common concept recognized by the whole international community in East Asia, or an international practice which has already been formed. With the horizons extended to the East and the West, the tributary relationship is not the product of consciousness opposition between the East and the West. The viewpoint of paying tribute or giving tribute is a common

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

195

formation of tributary tradition had a far-reaching impact on the structure of international community in the Indian Ocean. (2) the impact of geographical environment on the economic and cultural traditions of international community in the Indian Ocean. As a basic political and social unit in the region of the Indian Ocean, the development of each country was inevitably influenced by the Indian Ocean in which it was located, with the specific manifestation that it was deeply exposed to maritime diplomatic activities as a coastal country, which further strengthened the political and economic relations at sea. China’s maritime diplomacy and trade ensured the fact that the countries in the Indian Ocean in the early 15th century achieved a better interactive survival and common development with the absence of political, economic and cultural radical changes. The continuation and development of traditional tributary relations was undoubtedly the key factor to analyze the basic factors of the formation of a maritime international system. In the era of formation of the international system in the Indian Ocean, the countries benefited greatly from the construction of countries acting as the subjects, and the identification of national autonomy undoubtedly played a more crucial role. Starting from researching the data of people who went down to the Western Ocean, this paper observed concretely the existential practical condition of maritime diplomacy in the Indian Ocean, with the political and economic cooperation based on mutual respect, international trade based on fair trade, and interactive exchanges based on cultural symbiosis. This was the operational reality of the international system in the Indian Ocean formed under the influence of the mode of China’s tributary system in the Ming Dynasty in the early 15th century. The vast areas such as today’s Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, Central concept between the East and the West. Therefore, we cannot say that paying tribute is the unique diplomatic model of China, nor can we say that it is only a China-centered diplomatic model, nor can it be called ‘China-centered world order’. In the parts of Introduction of Lifelines from Our Past written by Leften S. Stavrianos (L. S. Stavrianos, Introduction of Lifelines from Our Past: A New World History written of the United States, trans. by Wu Xiangying 吳象嬰/ Tu Di 屠笛/ Ma Xiaoguang 馬曉光, Beijing Press 1992 [Engl. original London 1990]), it is pointed out that “it should be only noticed that all these societies of human being, past and present, fall into three major categories: the kinship societies, including all human societies before 3500 B.C.; the tributary societies (also known as civilizations): first appearing in the Middle East around 3500 B.C. and then gradually spreading or spontaneously appearing on all continents except Australia; the free-market societies, i. e. the capitalist societies: first appearing as early as around 1500 A.D. in Northwest Europe (but the precise date being in dispute) and continuing to expand until it covers the whole world and occupies the first place in the world”. In the book, the author obviously puts all of the tributes together for discussion, but he also talks about the view that “in this long period of time, many different types of tributary societies have developed in different continents”, which is quite enlightening for our research.

196

Wan Ming 萬明

Asia, West Asia, South Asia, East Africa and even Europe and so on became a community of civilized interaction. The concept of China’s peaceful sharing in the Ming Dynasty was recognized and responded by the countries in the Indian Ocean. The interests of all countries merged together and constructed an international system of the Indian Ocean, which could in a sense be regarded as the beginning of regional integration in the Indian Ocean. This international system was not the result of conquest and expansion, but of linking the countries in the Indian Ocean. Whether big or small countries, the cooperation and the sharing in an active trading network became the most effective political choice in the Indian Ocean at that time. In short, focusing on the Indian Ocean and looking at Zheng He’s voyages from the perspective of global history, it was the largest-scale historical incident with direct contacts between China and the overseas world. It marked the emergence of China from a big agricultural country to a big maritime country in the early Ming Dynasty, and ultimately led to the reconstruction of the Indian Ocean and to future globalization. Since ancient times, the Indian Ocean had been the core of convergence between East and West, and developed into a new era in the early 15th century. A new international system emerged based on the single countries as cores. This international system was the product of peaceful exchanges, co-ordinations and interactions among the countries of the Indian Ocean. From anarchy to the joint forging of the international system, it showed that the legitimacy of regimes of all countries was recognized, and the integration of political pluralism on land and sea in the Indian Ocean reached a new historical stage. It was the recognition and cooperation of all countries that dominated the regional development and the prosperity of the Indian Ocean. Furthermore, this was a structural adjustment in the history of human interaction, which had dimly embodied the characteristic of moving towards the transitional stage of modern countries, and gestated the direction of marine development of global integration. People are still experiencing a historical process of globalization today. Peace and development are always the themes of the times. People try to pay attention to the diverse experiences to better understand globalization. The beginning of global history from the mainland to the ocean is not based on the expansion of western navigation as a prelude, but on the construction of a new international system in the Indian Ocean in the early 15th century.

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

197

Bibliography Janet L. Abu-Lughod, Before European Hegemony: The World System A.D. 1250–1350, trans. by Du Xianbing 杜憲兵, Ouzhou baquan zhiqian: 1250–1350 nian de shijie tixi 歐 洲霸權之前: 1250–1350 年的世界體系, Beijing 2015 (Engl. original Oxford 1989). Chen Zhongping 陳忠平, Zouxiang quanqiuxing wangluo geming: Zheng He xia Xiyang ji Zhongguo yu Yinduyang shijie de chaogong-maoyi guanxi 走向全球性網络革命：鄭 和下西洋及中國與印度洋世界的朝貢-貿易關係 (Towards a global network revolution: Tributary-trade relationship between Zheng He’s voyages to the Western Seas and the Indian Ocean world), in: Chen Zhongping 陳忠平 (ed.), Zou xiang duoyuan wenhua de quanqiushi: Zheng He xia Xiyang (1405–1433) ji Zhongguo yu Yinduyang shijie de guanxi 走向多元文化的全球史：鄭和下西洋（1405–1433）及中國與印度 洋世界的關係 (Global history stepping towards multi-culture: Zheng He’s travels to the Western Ocean (1405–1433) and the relations between China and the world in the Indian Ocean), Beijing 2017. John K. Fairbank/Ssu-yu Teng, On the Ch’ing Tributary System, in: John K. Fairbank (ed.), Ch’ing Administration: Three Studies, Cambridge, MA 1961, 107–246. Fei Xin 費信, trans. by J. V. G. Mills, rev., ed., annot. by Roderich Ptak, Hsing-ch’a sheng-lan. The Overall Survey of the Star Raft (South China and Maritime Asia 4), Wiesbaden 1996. James L. Hevia, Cherishing Men from Afar: Qing Guest Ritual and the Macartney Embassy of 1793, trans. by Deng Changchun 鄧常春, Huairou yuan ren: Maga’erni shi Hua de Zhong-Ying liyi zhongtu 懷柔遠人：馬嘎爾尼使華的中英禮儀衝突, Beijing 2002 (Engl. original Chapel Hill 1995). Huang Zhilian 黃枝連, Tianchao lizhi tixi yanjiu. Yazhou de Huaxia chengxu: Zhongguo yu Yazhou guojia guanxi xingtai lun: shang juan 天朝禮治體系研究. 亞洲的華夏秩序: 中國與亞洲國家關係形態論, 上卷， (Researches on the system of the rule of rites of dynastical China. The Chinese order in Asia: Views on the patterns of the relations between China and Asian countries, vol. 1); Dongya de liyi shijie: Zhongguo fengjian wangchao yu chaoxian bandao guanxi xingtai lun: zhong juan東亞的禮義世界: 中國 封建王朝與朝鮮半島關係形態論，中卷 (The ritual world of East Asia: Views on the patterns of the relations between feudal dynasties in China and the Korean Peninsula, vol. 2); Chaoxian de ruhua qingjing gouzao: chaoxian wangchao yu manqing wangchao de guanxi xingtai lun: xia juan 天朝禮治體系研究: 朝鮮的儒化情境構造: 朝鮮王朝與滿清王朝的關係形態論:下卷 (Studies of the dynastical ritual system: Structure of the Confucianization of Korea: Views on the patterns of the relations between Korean dynasties and the Manju-Qing dynasty, vol. 3), Beijing 1992–95. Jiang Weiyan 蔣維錟/Zheng Lihang 鄭麗航 (eds.), Mazu wenxian shiliao huibian 媽祖文 獻史料彙編 (Collection of historical documents on Mazu), Series 1, Beijing 2007. Jinian weida hanghaijia Zheng He xia xiyang 580 zhounian choubei weiyuanhui 紀念偉大航海家鄭和下西洋580週年籌備委員會 (Preparation committee for the 580th anniversary of the voyages to the Western Oceans of the great navigator Zheng He) (ed.), Zheng He jiashi ziliao 鄭和家世資料 (The family data of Zheng He), Beijing 1985.

198

Wan Ming 萬明

Louise Levathes, When China Ruled the Seas: The Treasure Fleet of the Dragon Throne, 1405–1433, trans. by Qiu Zhonglin 邱仲麟, Guilin 2004 (Engl. original Oxford 1997). Pius Malekandathil (ed.), The Indian Ocean in the Making of Early Modern India, Abingdon 2017. Kenneth McPherson, The Indian Ocean: A History of People and the Sea, trans. by Geng Yinzeng 耿引曾, Beijing 2015 (Engl. original Oxford 1997). Ma Huan 馬歡, ed. by Wan Ming, Mingben “Yingya shenglan” jiaozhu 明本《瀛涯勝覽》 校注 (Annotations of the Yingya shenglan of the Ming editions), Guangzhou 2018. Ma Huan, trans., annot. by J. V. G. Mills, Ying-yai Sheng-lan. The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores [1433] (The Hakluyt Society Extra Series 42), Cambridge1970. Michael Pearson, The Indian Ocean, trans. by Zhu Ming 朱明, Shanghai 2018 (Engl. Orig. Oxford 1993). Ming shilu 明實錄, 133 vols., Taipeh 1966. D. R. Sardesai, Southeast Asia: Past & Present, Boulder, CO 2003. L. S. Stavrianos, Introduction of Lifelines from Our Past: A New World History written of the United States, trans. by Wu Xiangying 吳象嬰/Tu Di 屠笛/ Ma Xiaoguang 馬曉光, Beijing Press 1992 (Engl. original London 1990). Wan Ming 萬明, Chongxin sikao chaogong tixi 重新思考朝貢體系 (Rethinking of the Tributary System), in: Zhou Fangyin 周方銀 and Gao Cheng 高程 (ed.), Dongya zhixu: guannian, zhidu yu zhanlüe 東亞秩序：觀念、制度與戰略 (Order in East Asia: Ideas, institutions and strategies). Beijing 2012, 114–129. –, Ma Huan qixia Yindu yang–Ma Huan bixia de “Namoliyang” 鄭和七下印度洋—馬歡 筆下的“那没黎洋” (Zheng He’s seven voyages to the Indian Ocean – the “Namoli Ocean” in Ma Huan’s writings), in: Nanyang wenti yanjiu 南洋問题研究 (Southeast Asian Affairs) 1 (2015), 79–89. –, Mingben Yingya shenglan xiaozhu 明本瀛涯勝覽校注 (Annotations of Yingya shenglan of the Ming dynasty), Guangzhou 2005. –, Mingdai waijiao moshi yu qi tezheng kaolun: jian lun waijiao tese xingcheng yu beifang youmu minzu de guanxi 明代外交模式及其特徵考論：兼論外交特色形成與北方遊 牧民族的關係 (Textual research on the diplomatic model and its characteristics of the Ming dynasty: Concurrently discussing the relation between formation of diplomatic characteristics and nomadic nationalities in the North, in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國史研究 (Journal of Chinese Historical Studies) 4 (2010), 27–57. –, Zheng He yu Manlajia – Yige shijie wenming heping hudong zhongxin de heping jueqi 鄭和與滿剌加—一個世界文明和平互動中心的和平崛起 (Zheng He and Malacca – Peaceful rise of a peaceful interactive center of world civilization), in: Zhongguo wenjia yanjiu 中國文化研究 (Chinese Culture Research) 1 (2005), 100–109. –, Zhengti shiye xia de sichou zhi lu: yi Ming chu Zhongwai wuchan jiaoliu wei zhongxin 整體視野下的絲綢之路： 以明初中外物產交流為中心 (The silk road from an overall perspective: focusing on the exchanges of product between China and foreign countries in the early Ming dynasty), in: Zhongguo zhongwai guanxishi xuehui 中國中外關係學會 (Chinese Society for Historians of China’s Foreign Relations) (ed.), Sichouzhilu yu wenming de duihua 絲綢之路與文明的對話 (Dialogue between silk road and civilization), Urumqi 2007, 143–164. –, Zhongguo rongru shijie de bulü – Ming yu Qing qianqi haiwai zhengce bijiao yanjiu 中 國融入世界的步履—明與清前期海外政策比較研究 (China’s road to the world: A

An Interpretation of the Tributary System in the Early 15th Century

199

comparative study of foreign trade policy in the Ming and the early Qing dynasty), Beijing 2000, 22014. Wang Dayuan 汪大淵, ed., annot. by Su Jiqing 蘇繼庼, Daoyi zhilüe jiaoshi 島夷志略校 釋 (Annotations to the Daoyi zhilüe), Beijing 1981. Wang Qi 王圻, Xu wenxian tongkao 續文獻通考 (General examination of continued documents), Beijing 1991. Xiang Da 向達, Zhengli Zheng He hanghaitu xuyan 整理鄭和航海圖序言 (Preface to the arrangement of Zheng He’s nautical charts), in: Xiang Da 向達 (ed.), Zheng He hanghai tu 鄭和航海圖 (Zheng He’s nautical charts), Beijing 1961. Yang Lien-sheng 楊聯陞, Historical Notes on the Chinese World Order, in: John King Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order, Harvard 1968, 20–33, trans. by Xing Yitian 邢義田, Guoshi tanwei 國史探微 (Exploration of national history), Beijing 2005.

The Tribute

Sally K. Church 程思麗

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠. Diplomatic Expeditions to Herat (1413–1420)

In the very year when representatives of the Sultan of Bengal presented a giraffe as a tribute gift to the Chinese emperor during Zheng He’s 鄭和 maritime expeditions (1405–1433),1 Sha¯hrukh Bahadur (1377–1447), ruler of the Timurid empire from 1409 to 1447, sent his hunters out in the hinterland of his capital Herat (in present-day Afghanistan) to capture a lion as tribute for the same emperor. The year was 1414, and the emperor was Yongle 永樂 (r. 1403–1424). While the presentation of the giraffe from Bengal, which came to China by sea, is clearly documented in the ‘Ming Shilu’ 明實錄 (Veritable Records of the Ming),2 there is no mention of a lion among the gifts from Herat in the entry for 30 November 1415, the date when the ‘Shilu’ records the arrival of their envoys via the overland Silk Road. The passage says: “The various polities of the Western Regions, including Herat, Samarkand, Karakhoja, Turfan, Shiraz, Andkhoy and other places each sent envoys and presented tribute of spotted leopards, Western horses, and other local products.” 西域諸國, 哈烈, 撒馬兒罕, 火州, 土魯番, 失剌思, 俺都淮, 等處, 各遣使, 貢文豹, 西 馬, 方物.3

Given that the ‘Shilu’ is one of the most detailed sources we have concerning foreign relations in the Ming dynasty, and that it tends to mention the most exotic tribute items, such as the giraffe from Bengal, in its entries, it is puzzling why the lion’s arrival is not recorded here. A close examination of the documents that survive from this period and the historical and geographical circumstances 1 See Sally K. Church, The Giraffe of Bengal: A Medieval Encounter in Ming China, in: Medieval History Journal 7 (2004), 1–36. 2 “The Sultan of Bengal, Saifuding [Saifu Din] sent envoys who presented memorials, and offered up a qilin [giraffe] as a gift. They also presented top-quality horses and local products as tribute,” Yongle 12, 9th month, 7th (dingchou) day (20 September 1414), Ming Taizong shilu, juan 155, 1a, 1787. 3 Ming Taizong Shilu, Yongle 13, 10th month, 29th (guisi) day (30 November 1415), juan 169, 2b– 6b, 1884–1892.

204

Sally K. Church 程思麗

surrounding this incident raises the question of whether the lion actually survived the 4,053 mile (6,521 km) journey,4 to be presented as tribute to the emperor, and if it did survive and was presented, why this fact is not recorded in the ‘Shilu’. My immediate interest in this question arose from reading the “Rhapsody on the Lion” (‘Shizi fu’ 獅子賦) by Chen Cheng 陳誠 (1365–1457), a scholar-official who accompanied three diplomatic missions to Herat between 1413 and 1420. He made his first year-long trek from Beijing to that destination in 1413–1414. Along the way, particularly from Suzhou 肅州 (Jiuquan 酒泉) near Jiayuguan 嘉峪關, the westernmost point of the Great Wall, to Herat and back, Chen wrote two works about his journey, ‘Xiyu xingcheng ji’ 西域行程記 and ‘Xiyu fanguo zhi’ 西 域番國志, hereafter referred to as his ‘Diary and Treatise’ respectively. On 30 November 1415, after returning to Beijing, Chen presented these two works to the emperor, along with the ‘Rhapsody on the Lion’, a memorial and some letters from his previous (1396–1397) mission to Annam (Dai Viet). The ‘Rhapsody’ tells of his experience in Herat, witnessing the Timurid emperor’s wish to choose an appropriate tribute gift from his native land for the Chinese emperor, his choice of a lion for that gift, and the process of capturing it, securing it safely and transporting it all the way to Beijing. Having observed, vicariously, through his ‘Diary’, the vicissitudes and difficulties of the long journey, I could not help but feel sympathy for this lion, who would have to endure the long, bumpy road through four seasons of weather from inside a cage, in captivity. When Chen describes him as “bowing his head and hanging it low” (俯首而低垂) (line 48), I began to wonder if it was rather from exhaustion than in submission to the emperor. Moreover, when he said “How can animals raised in Western lands be suitable for life in China?” (何西土之能畜，亦中國之攸宜?, lines 42–43), I began to speculate, perhaps wrongly, that Chen was making a rather modern comment about the wisdom of moving animals out of their natural habitat.5 These ideas motivated me to focus on the two key questions addressed here: whether the lion survived the journey, and if so, why it was not mentioned in the ‘Shilu’ entry for 30 November 1415. These questions do not seem to have been posed before, probably because the lion was not a compelling subject to be taken on until a fuller record could be explored. The main texts highlighting the lion did not come to light until the 1980s, when copies of Chen Cheng’s collected works were found in two of China’s provincial libraries. Before this time, although lions were mentioned, in the letter Yongle wrote to Sha¯hrukh in 1418, in Chen Cheng’s 4 I have calculated this distance according to modern road mileage, using the online distance calculator (https://www.distancecalculator.net, accessed 2 November 2018). 5 There is a more positive interpretation: “If such an animal can be raised in the Western lands, why not in China?”

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

205

chapter on Herat in the ‘Treatise’, and a few times in scattered references in the ‘Shilu’, they were not recognised as a topic worth exploring. It is only in Chen’s collected works that the “Rhapsody on the Lion” comes to light, as well as the short poem entitled “Lion” (shizi 獅子), and it is here that Chen’s memorial to the emperor, ‘Fengshi Xiyu fuming shu’ 奉使西域復命疏 is found, which lists the ‘Rhapsody on the Lion’ among the documents he presented to the emperor at that time. It is easy to overlook this sequence of discovery when we have all the documents put together in such a convenient edition as Zhou Liankuan’s周連寬. It should be pointed out that Chen Cheng’s collected works were not available when the major Western scholars Joseph Fletcher and Morris Rossabi did their seminal research on Sino-Timurid relations in the 1960s and 1970s. If they had been, the topic of the lion presented as tribute might have figured more prominently in their works. After the 1980s, scholars like Wang Jiguang rediscovered Chen’s collected works in two provincial libraries, and in 1991 they were all published together in Zhou Liankuan’s modern annotated edition, ‘Xiyu xingcheng ji’ 西域行程記, ‘Xiyu fanguo zhi’ 西域番國志, and reprinted in 2000.6 However, even in this edition, whereas there are thorough annotations on the ‘Diary’ and ‘Treatise’, there are none on the ‘Rhapsody’, poems or other materials. Michel Didier’s (2012) translation of Chen’s collected works has greatly increased the accessibility of these works to Western audiences.7 Reading a rhapsody (fu 賦), with its flowery, poetic language, full of literary allusion is a rather daunting prospect without some kind of aid. Didier has done most of the hard spadework of uncovering allusions and extracting meaning to make it intelligible. In this paper I have taken a chronological approach to the texts by dividing them into those known before the 1980s, when the collected works became available, and those known only after this date. One cannot fault the pre-1980s scholarship on Chen Cheng and Sino-Central Asian relations, when Chen’s collected works were unknown. Thus, in what follows, I discuss what was known about the lion first in documents available before the 1980s and then those available after that time. Before discussing the other sources that were available before and after 1984, it is necessary to explain why the focus is on the lion here, and not on other tribute goods. Chen’s ‘Treatise’ on the places he visited does not contain as much information about the tribute items presented by individual polities as the accounts 6 Chen Cheng 陳誠/Li Xian 李暹, Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域行程記, 西域番國志 (Records of the Journey to the Western Regions, Gazetteer of the Foreign Countries of the Western Regions), ed. Zhou Liankuan 周連寬 (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan 中外交通史 籍叢刊), Beijing 2000. 7 Michel Didier, Chen Cheng (1365–1457): Ambassadeur des Premiers Empereurs Ming, Paris/ Louvain 2012.

206

Sally K. Church 程思麗

of Ma Huan 馬歡, Fei Xin 費信 or Gong Zhen 鞏珍 do concerning the places visited on Zheng He’s expeditions. There is no closing section at the end of each chapter, as there is in Ma Huan’s account, for example, describing the tribute items presented by the individual polities. Thus, we do not know as much about the trade and tribute exchanged during these visits as we do about those on Zheng He’s expeditions. Chen describes some of the products consumed by the local people – what they ate, wore and manufactured – but we do not know if these were involved in trade or tribute with China. We therefore have to rely on the information in the ‘Ming Shilu’ to know what tribute items were presented by the Central Asian envoys. Unfortunately, the lists in the ‘Shilu’ are not comprehensive. The ‘Shilu’ also tends to group different polities together in the same list, so that one does not know which regime gave which gift. For example, in the entry for the arrival of the Central Asian mission on 23 July 1413, mentioned in section 1 below, it is impossible to know which polity gave the lion.8 The same is true for the ‘Shilu’s records of tribute items that came on Zheng He’s expeditions, but in those cases, Ma Huan’s accounts usually clear up any ambiguity by listing the main items that were given by each polity separately in the different chapters. Thus, in the case of Zheng He’s voyages we have a way of cross-checking the sources of tribute items, which we do not have in the context of Chen Cheng’s expeditions.

1.

Documents Available before the 1980s

In an article he wrote in 2009, Wang Jiguang 王繼光 provides a literature review and chronological survey of the sources now available concerning Chen Cheng’s diplomatic missions to Herat. After his discussion of the discovery in the 1930s of the manuscripts of the ‘Diary’ and ‘Treatise’, and their publication by the Beiping Library (see below), he says, “because of the war and many factors, the study of Chen Cheng and his Western expeditions sank into silence (chenjile 沉寂了) for half a century. Only at the end of the 20th century has it come back to life and become popular, inspired by the discovery of Chen Cheng’s collected works (‘Zhushan wenji’ 竹山文集)”.9 Wang wrote that in 1984, when he was preparing to write a paper for a conference on Central Asia, he visited the Northwestern Department (Xibei wenxian bu 西北文献部) of the Gansu Provincial Library and

8 Ming Taizong shilu, Yongle 11, 6th month, 26th (guiyou) day (23 July 1413), juan 140, 6b (1690). 9 Wang Jiguang, Chen Cheng jiqi xishiji yanjiu shuping 陳誠及其西使記研究述評 (The Study of Chen Cheng and the Records of His Travels to the West), in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu dongtai 中 國史研究動態 (Trends in Recent Research on the History of China) 1 (2009), 17–23.

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

207

found a Qing edition of ‘Zhushan wenji’,10 which led him to research further on the subject. He learned that at the time when the ‘Siku quanshu’ was being compiled, two Ming and two Qing editions of Chen’s collected works were extant. Based on the dates of their prefaces, the Ming editions were probably dated Zhengtong 12 (1447) and Chongzhen 16 (1643),11 while the two Qing editions were Yongzheng 7 (1729) and Jiaqing 24 (1819). By the 1980s, Wang concluded, the two Ming editions had disappeared, but the Qing editions still survived, the 1729 edition in the Jiangxi Provincial Library – which has now been incorporated in the ‘Siku Quanshu cunmu congshu’ 四庫全書存目叢書 collection – and the 1819 edition available in two copies, one in the Gansu Provincial Library and the other in the Jiangxi Provincial Library. The discovery of these editions of Chen Cheng’s collected works was a watershed moment for the study of Chen Cheng and of Sino-Central Asian foreign relations. Wang Jiguang presented his findings at the ‘Academic Conference on the History of Central Asia’ in Suzhou (Suzhou Zhongya shi xueshu yantao hui 蘇州中亞史學術研討會) in May 1986, and his paper, ‘Chen Cheng ji Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi yanjiu’ 陳誠及‘西域行 程記’, ‘西域番國志’研究, published in ‘Zhongya xuekan’ 中亞學刊 3 (1990), had a significant impact in the field.12 The sources known before 1984 include (1) the ‘Ming Shilu’, (2) the letter that Emperor Yongle wrote to the Timurid emperor Sha¯hrukh in 1418, and (3) the ‘Diary’ and the ‘Treatise’ composed by Chen Cheng. The ‘Ming Shilu’ entry for the return of Chen’s first mission has already been mentioned. As for the letter Yongle wrote to Sha¯hrukh, dated October 1418, it is translated into English by Joseph Fletcher in his article ‘China and Central Asia’.13 It expresses thanks to Sha¯hrukh for his previous tribute gifts, including a lion, though we are not told when this particular lion was sent:

10 WANG Jiguang 2009, 20. This was the Jiaqing 24 (1819) edition. 11 These are the dates of their prefaces by Wang Zhi 王直 (1379–1462) (Ming, Zhengtong 12), Liu Tongsheng 刘同升 (1587–1646) (Ming, Chongzhen 16), and Gao Naiting 高乃听 (Qing, Yongzheng 7). Zhou Ta 洲塔/Dong Zhizhen 董知珍, Cong Zhushan xiansheng wenji kan Chen Cheng di er ci chushi xiyu 从《竹山先生文集》看陳誠第二次出使西域 (A Study of Chen Cheng’s Second Mission to the Western Regions Based on his Collected Works, Zhushan Wenji), Lishi jiaoxue 歷史教學 (History Teaching) 10 (2012) (Cumulative No. 647), 28–32. 12 According to Wang Jiguang (2009, 20), The meeting considered that the 40,000-word article “carried out in-depth exploration of certain topics with new ideas and new materials” and “thus filled many gaps [in our research]”. 13 Joseph Fletcher, China and Central Asia, 1368–1884, in: John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968, 206–224 (Bibliography and Notes: 337–368), esp. 212–214. The letter does not survive in the Chinese sources, but only in the Persian. Fletcher’s translation is from ‘Abd al-Razza¯q Samarqandı¯, Kama¯l al-Dı¯n, Matla‘-i sa‘dayn wa majma‘-i bahrayn, completed ca. 1475, China and Central Asia, 352, n. 50.

208

Sally K. Church 程思麗

“We formerly sent as envoys Amı¯r-i Sara¯y Lı¯da¯ with his retinue … who have returned [to China] and have reported. Everything has become right, clear, and evident to us, and [the Sultan’s] envoys, Beg Buqa and the rest, have returned together with Lı¯da¯ and his retinue. They have brought along for us as gifts (hada¯ya¯) a lion, Arabian (Ta¯zı¯) horses, leopards (yu¯za¯n), and other items … to this court … We have viewed them all. They have made manifest the sincerity of [the Sultan’s] affection. We are extremely grateful.”14

One cannot conclude from this letter that the lion mentioned here was the same one sent with the return of Chen Cheng’s first embassy, but there are only a few mentions of lions in the ‘Shilu’ for Yongle’s reign. Rossabi made a survey of all the records in the ‘Shilu’ of embassies arriving from Central Asia during the Yongle period and the tribute gifts they brought (as well as the Chinese gifts given to them in return), and listed them in three tables in his Appendix: (1) those from the Timurid empire, (2) those from other Central Asian polities, and (3) those from Hami.15 Lions are mentioned only in the context of one of these missions, that which arrived on 23 July 1413 from Herat 哈烈, Samarkand 撒馬兒罕, Shiraz 失刺思, Andigan 掩的干 (Andijan), Anduhui 掩都淮 (Andkhoy), Turfan 土魯 番, Karakhojo 火州, Lukchin 柳城, Karasahr [哈實]哈兒 and other places.16 However, this date is too early to be the one sent with Chen Cheng’s return embassy. It was shortly before Chen was ordered out on his first mission to Herat.17 Although two missions were received from the Timurids in 1418, before Yongle wrote the letter, neither of them is recorded to have brought a lion.18 Therefore as of Rossabi’s 1976 article, we are still left in the dark concerning the question of whether the lion that came back with Chen Cheng actually survived the journey. The two works composed by Chen Cheng that were known before 1984 are his ‘Treatise’, a description of eighteen major cities and settlements along his route between the Chinese western border and Herat, and his ‘Diary’, a logbook of his 14 Fletcher 1968, 213. According to Fletcher, the term amı¯r-i sara¯y means ‘Palace Emir’ or ‘eunuch’, 352–353, n. 50. 15 Morris Rossabi 1976, Two Ming Envoys to Inner Asia, in: T’oung Pao 62 (1976) 1–3, 1–34, esp. “Appendix”, 29–34. 16 This mission is mentioned twice in Rossabi’s Appendix because it occurs in two of the tables, one from the Timurids, and one from Central Asia. It is recorded in the Shilu entry for Yongle 11, 6th month, 26th (guiyou) day, Ming Taizong shilu, juan 140, 6b (1690). 17 This was on 12 October 1413. Ming Taizong shilu, Yongle 11, 9th month, 18th ( jiawu) day, juan 143, 2b (1706). 18 Fletcher mentions that an “advance party” arrived on 21 January 1418 (Yongle 15, 12th month, 15th (bingshen) day, Ming Taizong shilu, juan 195, 2a, 2049), bringing tribute of “horses and local products”, and that the ambassador, A’erdusha 阿兒都沙 (Ardashir, Artaxerxes), arrived on 19 September 1418 (Yongle 16, 8th month, 20th [dingyou] day, Ming Taizong shilu, juan 203, 3a–3b, 2101–2102), with “famous horses and spotted leopards” (mingma 名馬, wenbao 文豹). Fletcher 1968, 212.

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

209

first outward journey. Both of these works were presented to the Yongle emperor in 1415 on Chen’s return from his first mission to Herat.19 The former had been known in condensed form (2,307 characters long) as ‘Shi Xiyu ji’ 使西域記 since the mid-15th century, when it was handed over to the historians, who abbreviated it and copied it into the ‘Ming Shilu’. It refers briefly to lions in the description of Herat, as animals native to that area, and gives a few details about them,20 such as that they were born with their eyes closed and did not open them for seven days. It does not mention one being captured or sent as tribute to the Chinese emperor, however. While the ‘Diary’ dropped out of circulation for several hundred years, the ‘Treatise’ survived in this abbreviated form because of its preservation in the ‘Shilu’. Ji Yun 紀昀 (1724–1805), one of the chief editors of the ‘Siku quanshu’ 四庫全 書 (Complete Library of the Four Treasuries), commissioned by Emperor Qianlong 乾隆 (r. 1735–1796) in 1793–1798, considered the ‘Shi Xiyu ji’ for inclusion, but rejected it, explaining that he not only considered the text unreliable, but also did not think Chen’s journey was all that remarkable: “The phonetic transcriptions are full of errors, and the territories he visited were no more than 1,000–2,000 li 里 beyond Jiayuguan 嘉峪關. He did not expand on what he heard and saw, and the whole report is unconvincing and untrustworthy.”21 In 1933, a much fuller version of the ‘Treatise’ (approximately 6,700 characters) was discovered, together with the ‘Diary’, in a manuscript collection purchased by the Beiping Library. Both works were published in 1937 in the ‘Guoli Beiping tushuguan shanben congshu’ 國立北平圖書館善本叢書, diyi ji 第一集 (Beiping Library Rare Books Collection, No. 1).22 This publication attracted the attention of the scholar Xiang Da 向達, who republished them in a typeset version in Volume 2 of the journal ‘Yugong’ 禹貢 (Tribute of Yu) for 1934, issue numbers 3 and 4.23 The lions of Herat are given a much fuller treatment in the long version of the ‘Treatise’, but here again there is no reference to one being captured and 19 We know this from the memorial Chen wrote to the emperor discussed in the following section. 20 Ming Taizong shilu, Yongle 13, 10th month, 29th (guisi) day (30 November 1415), juan 169, 2b–6b. 21 Li Xueqin 李學勤/Lü Wenyu 呂文郁 et al. (eds.), Siku da cidian 四庫大辭典 (Dictionary of the Four Branches of Literature), 2 vols., Changchun 1996, vol. 2, 1007b. 22 According to Wang Jiguang (2009, 18), these were from a collection of four manuscripts called Duwuyuan congchao 独寤园丛钞belonging to a Mr Li 李 of Tianjin. 23 Xiang Da 向達, Xiyu xingcheng ji 西域行程記, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域番國志, Yu Gong 禹貢 2 (1 Oct. 1934) 3, 31–41; 2 (16 Oct. 1934) 4, 18–28. These are available online at: http://contacthi story.com/?p=726, with a link to a scanned version of the article, including the transcriptions of these texts.

210

Sally K. Church 程思麗

transported to China as tribute. The description of their habitat, life-cycle, temperament and handling as provided in the Herat chapter of Chen’s work is translated by Morris Rossabi as follows: “Lions are born on the banks of the A-mu River among rushes and forests. It is said that when they are first born, they cannot see for seven days. One who wishes to obtain and rear them does so during this period. They treat the lions leniently in taming them. If the lions are big, their disposition is fierce and hard, and it is difficult to tame them. Moreover, they are strong, and their claws and teeth are sharp. When they are angry, not even two men can control them. They are able to seize numerous wild beasts and can have 10 chin of meat at one meal. Some people have lions’ tails because they arrange nets and use bows and arrows to kill them. If one wants to capture them alive, it is difficult to do so alone.”24

Lions are also listed in ‘Da Ming yitong zhi’ 大明一統志as products from Herat and Khotan.25 These are the only references to lions on the overland Silk Road in the sources for Yongle’s reign dating from before 1984, and thus the only ones to which Fletcher and Rossabi had access. The letter from Yongle to Sha¯hrukh does not provide conclusive proof that this was the lion presented by Sha¯hrukh in 1414–1415.

2.

Documents Available after 1984

The documents to be discussed in this section are all included in Chen Cheng’s collected works, ‘Chen Zhushan wenji’, which were not rediscovered until the 1980s. I say “rediscovered” because the works were obviously extant in the late 18th century when Ji Yun wrote the entry about it in the ‘Siku quanshu zongmu tiyao’. Ji Yun based his evaluation of the work on a ‘Jiangxi xunfu caijin’ 江西巡 撫採進 edition, noting that it was divided into ‘inner chapters’ (neipian 内篇) and ‘outer chapters’ (waipian 外篇), and briefly describing its contents. The collection seems to have been forgotten after that, until it resurfaced after 1984, in the editions discovered in the provincial libraries of Gansu and Jiangxi.26 Access

24 Morris Rossabi 1983, A Translation of Ch’en Ch’eng’s Hsi-yü fan-kuo chih, Ming Studies 17 (Fall 1983), 49–59, here 55–56. 25 Li Xian 李賢 (ed.), Da Ming yitong zhi 大明一統志 (Gazetteer of the Unified Great Ming, comp. 1461); facsimile of an edition in the collection of Wang Qishu 汪啟淑 (1728–1799); online edition: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in München, Digitale Sammlungen Ostasien (Digital East Asia Collections of the Bavarian State Library, Munich), https://opacplus.bsb -muenchen.de/title/BV037281185, accessed 3 March 2018, juan 89, 14a and 15a. 26 The collection ‘Chen Zhushan wenji’ in four juan 卷 is recorded in Ji Yun 紀昀, Siku quanshu zongmu tiyao 四庫全書總目題要, Shanghai 1933, vol. 4, ce 册 34, juan 175, jibu 集部 28, Bieji lei cunmu 別集類存目2, 78 (cumulative 3778) (Chen 2000, 161–162). It can also be found in

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

211

to these collected works has been greatly facilitated by the publication of Zhou Liankuan’s modern annotated edition, which contains all of the works mentioned below, as well as some others, and includes an introduction by Wang Jiguang.27 The new French translation of his collected works by Michel Didier has also provided access to these materials for Western audiences. The three key texts in Chen’s collected works bearing on the presentation of the lion as tribute in 1415 are (1) the memorial, entitled ‘Fengshi Xiyu fuming shu’, which Chen wrote to accompany the other documents he presented to the emperor when he returned from his first mission in 1415, (2) the long “Rhapsody on the Lion” (‘Shizi fu’), which Chen presented to the emperor at that time, and (3) the short (eight-line) poem entitled “The Lion” (‘Shizi’), which, as far as we know, Chen did not present to the emperor. The remainder of this paper will discuss what these three works have to say about the lion, the question of whether it survived the journey to be presented to Emperor Yongle, and the events of Chen Cheng’s missions to Herat in which it had its context. Ultimately my conclusion is that the lion probably survived the journey, and in what follows I shall take the reader through the arguments that lead to this conclusion. Along the way, I shall introduce and point out the highlights of the texts in question. With regard to the memorial that Chen presented to the emperor in 1415, its only relevance here is the list it provides of the other documents he presented at the same time. By listing these documents, he was committing himself to following through and presenting them to the emperor. This list includes the ‘Treatise’ (which he calls ‘Xiyu ji’ 西域記), in one volume (ce 冊); the “Rhapsody on the Lion” in one volume; the ‘Diary’ in one volume; and a collection of letters from Chen’s diplomatic mission to Annam in 1396–1397.28 The memorial gives us conclusive proof that Chen presented the “Rhapsody on the Lion” to the emperor, and it is highly unlikely that he would have presented this rhapsody if the lion had not survived. Thus, the memorial constitutes strong evidence that the lion survived. The Poem and the Rhapsody will be discussed in the following two sections.

Siku da cidian 四庫大辭典 (Li/Lü 1996, vol. 2, 2498b). Wang Jiguang was the first one to use Chen’s ‘Zhushan wenji’ in his academic research. (Wang Jiguang 2009, 20.) 27 This introduction is dated 1987. See Chen 2000, 1–27. 28 I have discussed the possible reasons why he presented these letters at this time in another article, A New Look at Chen Cheng’s Role in his Diplomatic Missions to Herat (1413–1420), in: Monumenta Serica 67 (2019), 363–395.

212

3.

Sally K. Church 程思麗

The Poem on the Lion

Since the poem Chen Cheng wrote on the lion is shorter than the rhapsody, I shall examine it first, beginning with my attempted translation: 獅子 曾聞此獸群毛長， 今見其形世不常。 皎皎雙瞳秋水碧， 微微一色淡金黃。 威風稍震驚犀象，

The Lion I’ve heard that this animal lives in prides and has long hair, Now I see its form – like nothing else in the world. Bright and shiny, a pair of pupils like jade-green autumn pools, Its body is all one colour, pale golden yellow. Such a majestic bearing, more impressive than the rhinoceros or elephant, 牙爪輕翻怯虎狼。 Its teeth and claws frighten the tigers and wolves away. 自古按圖收遠物， Since ancient times only images of animals could be received from distant lands, 不妨維縶進吾皇。 Who would have thought I’d be presenting a live one to our emperor?

The first couplet provides some general comments about the lion’s long hair and unusual appearance, setting up a contrast between past and present: what he had heard about lions before, and seen in pictures, and what he now sees before his eyes. The second couplet zooms in on its specific features: its bright eyes and golden fur. Its eyes shine with intelligence, while at the same time having a mesmerising effect, with their resemblance to jade-green autumn pools. The third couplet evokes the lion’s charisma and power over other animals; it can terrify other creatures with its sharp teeth and claws. By describing its aweinspiring qualities, the poet subtly draws an analogy between the lion as king of beasts and the emperor as ruler of humanity. In the fourth couplet he brings the subject to a personal level, combining the lion together with the emperor and himself. He returns to the contrast between past and present: in the past he has only viewed it in pictures, but now he sees it in the flesh. His mention of “ancient times” gives the poem a longer time span and thus a more universal message. In the end, he focuses on himself in this moment, asserting that he would never have imagined that such a lowly person as he would have the opportunity to present such an animal to the emperor. It is not likely that Chen would have made this analogy between the allpowerful lion and the majesty of the emperor if the lion had not survived. However, because he did not present the poem to the emperor, it is not certain whether this can be seen as an argument that the lion survived. Furthermore, although we know that the Rhapsody was composed before 30 November 1415, we do not know the date when this poem was composed. This makes it even more difficult to know which lion he was referring to.

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

4.

213

The Rhapsody on the Lion

Almost everything we know about the lion that was given to Emperor Yongle as tribute by Sha¯hrukh, including how it was captured, transported and presented to the emperor, can be gleaned from this long descriptive poem, or rhapsody (fu), by Chen Cheng. The rhapsody can be divided into three parts: a prose introduction, the prosimetric poem itself, and the final poetic coda or encomium.29 In Zhou Liankuan’s edition of the Chinese text, it takes up three pages (118–120),30 occupying a total of 62 lines, of which 23 make up the introduction, 33 comprise the rhapsody itself, and a 6-line coda brings it to a close.31 Of the three sections, the second basically repeats in poetic form what the first one says in poetry, and the final encomium sums up the main themes. The purpose of the rhapsody is to use the appearance of the marvelous animal to sing the praises of the emperor. What follows summarises the contents of the rhapsody and focuses on some of its highlights, particularly those that are relevant to the subject of tribute and/or provide information about Chen Cheng’s embassy to Herat. The prose introduction first sets out the utopian Confucian vision of the Chinese empire in its glory. It all begins with a sage emperor on the throne. When such an emperor is in power in China, all the lands of the world are seen to be at peace. Moreover, they all send envoys to pay tribute to China, as the greatest empire in the world, the one that is most closely allied with Heaven (tian 天) and the one that Heaven smiles upon. The appearance of magical animals such as the qilin 麒麟 (the unicorn, or sometimes the giraffe) and longma 龍馬 (literally, ‘dragon-horse’, but probably referring to horses of the finest quality), both mentioned early in the introduction to the Rhapsody, expresses this resonance with Heaven, and is a sign of Heaven’s approval of the emperor. Such appearances are recorded in the ancient texts, written on bamboo slips, and in history books, and the purpose of these records is to enlighten future generations (lines 1–3). Next, we have the experience of the reign of Emperor Hongwu 洪武 (r. 1368– 1398), founder of the Ming dynasty, as a historical example of the manifestation of this utopian vision in reality. We are told about his benevolence, virtue, intelligence and the auspiciousness of his reign, signalled by the appearance of good omens and magical animals, and the presentation of tribute by envoys from 29 I follow Achilles Fang in choosing these terms for the final section of the fu. Fang used them in his translation of the “Wen fu” 文賦. Rhymeprose on Literature: The Wên-Fu of Lu Chi (A.D. 261–303), in: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 14, 3/4 (1951), 527–566. 30 In Michel Didier’s translation it occupies 27 pages, including the Chinese text, and the French translation and notes. See Didier 2012, 391–417. 31 In Zhou’s edition these sections correspond to the following line numbers, lines 1–23, 24–56, and 57–62 (Chen 2000). In Didier’s version, the entire rhapsody is 230 lines long.

214

Sally K. Church 程思麗

all directions. Although only Hongwu’s reign is mentioned so far, the continuation of these marvellous qualities into the reign of Emperor Yongle is implied (lines 3–9). The prose introduction then continues by bringing into focus the specific events at hand: In the guiji year (1413) of Emperor Yongle’s reign, the sovereign is said first to make an imperial progress to Beijing. This is an important reminder of the dual capital system that was in place during the first part of Yongle’s reign, when the main capital was still in Nanjing, while Yongle was having the new capital built in Beijing, and travelling between the two capitals now and then.32 An embassy comes from Sha¯hrukh to Beijing in the 7th month of that year – the earlier embassies from the Timurids are not mentioned – and this gives rise to the first Chinese mission that Chen Cheng accompanies to Herat in response. The other members of Chen’s entourage are listed by name, providing us with the fullest list we have of those who accompanied the embassy.33 Chen describes the journey briefly, noting the date of departure, first from Beijing in the 9th month of that year, and then from Jiuquan in the first month of the next year. Along the way, Chen says, they were given food and drink by all the regimes through which they passed because of their high esteem for the Chinese empire. He attributes the warm reception from these foreign polities to the “transforming influence of [the Emperor’s] virtue” (dehua 德化). He gives the date of their arrival in Herat as the 10th month. Apart from the date of the departure from Beijing, which is not supplied in the Diary, the other dates presented here are consistent with those in Chen Cheng’s Diary (lines 9–17). Here Chen finally brings us to the immediate context for the “Rhapsody on the Lion”. He begins by noting that Sha¯hrukh gazed upward at the Chinese representatives in admiration for the emperor and performed the kowtow. Given the haughty tone of the letters exchanged between the two world leaders, described by Joseph Fletcher, it is doubtful that Sha¯hrukh performed the full ritual of obeisance, though he was probably polite.34 Chen says that Sha¯hrukh wanted to choose the perfect gift, something from his native land, to give as tribute to the Chinese emperor, and then briefly describes the process of capturing the lion, preparing it for transport and for ultimate presentation to the emperor. He says that Sha¯hrukh sent out his most stalwart warriors into the marshes and hills to flush out the lion, which probably involved surrounding the animal, beating the

32 Edward L. Farmer, Early Ming Government: The Evolution of Dual Capitals. Cambridge, MA 1976. 33 These members of the Chinese mission are: Li Da 李達, Yang Zhong 楊忠, Li Gui 李貴, Commander Halanbo 指揮哈藍伯, Tiemuer Buhua 帖木兒卜花, Mahamu Huozhe 馬哈木火 者, ‘Shizi fu’, 118, lines 11–12. 34 Fletcher 1968, 209–216.

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

215

ground to make noise, and then closing in on it for the capture.35 He notes that the animal was tied with a “golden cord” ( jinsheng 金繩, or perhaps a metal chain), and then put into a large cage. “Three trustworthy ambassadors were sent along, to present it as tribute to the Chinese emperor”. It is not clear how far along the journey Chen’s rhapsody follows the lion, i. e. whether it is actually describing its presentation to the emperor, or just the preparations that are being made for the journey in Herat. Chen makes a point of saying that the lion was not a precious gift just because it was from far away, but because it expressed the foreigners’ admiration for the Chinese empire. He then says, “Of all the officers and people who were there, none could contain their joy and awe” (lines 17–22). I assume he means the people who witnessed the events in Herat rather than in China, but it is not clear. Chen ends his prose introduction here with a statement about his role as scribe, or dian shuji 典書記, (Didier calls him an ‘historian’), a kind of secretary in charge of keeping records and of documents: “It was my duty to make a record, so I humbly submitted to your majesty’s authority and composed the following modest account, to praise its glory and beauty. I respectfully perform my humble obeisances in full and present this rhapsody to your majesty.”

Although his job is just to record events, he humbly dares to present this rhapsody, accompanied by deference and respectful bows of submission (lines 22– 23). The rhapsody itself begins with an expression of the utopian vision, echoing what was said in the introduction: “Civilization shines brightly – all is at peace. The seasons proceed with regularity, the constellations rotate in an orderly fashion,” all because a sage emperor is on the Chinese throne. Thus, the empire is in accord with Heaven and in harmony with nature. Then the rhapsody mentions the signs and omens that show this is the case: the appearance of mythical and magical plants and animals – the zouyu 騶虞, the tortoise, the lingzhi 靈芝 mushrooms of immortality, the different grains, wine and ‘sweet dew’ (ganlu 甘 露). Jade, pearls, exotic textiles all make their appearance; the phoenix and the ‘simurgh’ (luan 鸞) chant in unison (line 27). All these appearances are due to the sagely virtue of the emperor. The people have enough to eat; the foreign envoys come from abroad bringing marvellous gifts. Envoys are sent out to all regions of the world, distributing jewels and other valuables, and waving ‘starry banners’ (xingqi 星旗). They sail ships and drive chariots to the furthest points in all directions and march to the end of the desert in distant campaigns. Travelling ten thousand li through breath-taking mountain passes, they reach the edge of the frontier (lines 24–31). 35 Didier (2012, 406) suggests this method by using the word battirent.

216

Sally K. Church 程思麗

Again, as in the introduction, he moves from the general image-filled utopian situation to the specific description of the immediate context, Chen’s own mission to Herat. A fleeting mention is made of his diplomatic post to Annam and other places, and the point is made that all the foreign states, including the Timurid empire, kneel in supplication to the Chinese emperor, wishing to become vassals of the Chinese state (lines 31–36). Chen then retells in poetic form the events of the hunt. This section begins with a couplet (lines 36–37) using similar wording as in the introduction: 欲殫土地之所有， Sha¯hrukh wanted to take something from his native land, 將以效野人之芹誠。 that could be offered [to the emperor] as modest tribute.

He then sends out stalwart warriors, whom he compares to the mythical warrior of Jupiter, Chi You 蚩尤, to hunt the lion, beating the marshes and flushing it out to capture it. The description here is much longer, but it is full of hyperbole and uses quite a bit of poetic license: 羅弓矢, 緝網罟 (gu), 蒐山澤 行畋圍 (tian). 遂獲異獸 . . .

[Armed with] nets, bows and arrows, ropes and traps, They scour the mountains and swamps, and lead a hunt all around. Then they capture an unusual animal, . . . (lines 37–38)

This passage is followed by an ornate description of the lion, which I will summarise below (lines 136–160). The narrative of its capture and transport continues somewhat later on: 乃命僕臣， 縶之載之， 爰遣信使， 獻於京師。

So, he orders his servants and subordinates To keep it captive and transport it. Thereupon, he sends his trusted envoys, To offer it as tribute in the capital. (line 44)

In his description of the lion, he dwells on its unique features: “neither tiger nor leopard, a head of sparkling jade, golden, lustrous fur, saw-like teeth and sharp fangs, graceful eyes and long eyebrows. It roars like thunder and runs like lightning” (lines 38–39). He notes that to the lion, tigers and wolves are meagre fare, and cows and sheep are just crunchy snacks (lines 40–41). As in the West, the lion is conceived of as the king of beasts: “The warthog stays in his burrow, and the cat bows before him;” . . . he is “the one that the hundred animals take as their authority” (baishou suosi 百獸所司) (line 42). As in his shorter poem, Chen refers to the lion as something that in the past had only been seen in pictures, but that in reality “are similar but different” (bi lei fangfu er cencha 比類彷彿而參差) (line 43). Here he asks the question, mentioned in the beginning of this paper, whether animals raised in Western lands

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

217

can also be suitable for China. Didier’s French translation, “Des animaux qui peuvent être elévés sur les terres d’Occident, / peuvent-ils également convenir a la Chine?”, corroborates this meaning.36 Chen also notes that some of the images of the lion in China were inspired by Buddhism, and that although some are not known in the Chinese language (you fei mingjiao zhi suo zhi 有非名教之所知), they can still be seen with our eyes and heard with our ears (ci ze ermu zhi suo wenjian 此則耳目之所聞見) (line 44). This section seems to be an effort to find a place for the lion as something foreign in Chinese culture. He dwells further on the lion’s supernatural qualities, which make it appear “out of this world”, but there is no need to translate these passages here. After this contemplative section, we have the description of Sha¯hrukh summoning the keepers and envoys to transport the lion to the emperor, translated above. Chen also lists a series of unusual animals that were presented to Chinese emperors in the past, which were recorded in the histories (lines 46–47). At this point we have the following short description of the lion: 閱今所獻， 於性則奇。 純純而馴伏， 俯首而低垂。 似有神靈之默相， 夫豈人力之所為。 眾莫竅其神妙。 實感戴乎聖天子之 德威也。

We observe [the lion] presented in tribute today his [gentle] temperament is very rare. Pure and docile,37 He bows his head and hangs it low. He has an otherworldly look, like an immortal. How could such an animal have been made by human effort? No one can penetrate its divine mystery. [We] can sense that it is because of the morality and prestige of the emperor. (lines 47–49)

The French translation seems quite sympathetic to the ordeal experienced by the lion during this long journey, suggesting that it was suffering. Didier translates the last line, punctuating it after hu 乎, as “En réalité, que subissait-il?” (In reality, what was he undergoing?). While hanging its head could be read as the lion’s submission to the emperor, it could also show the lion’s exhaustion and perhaps that it was in ill health from the long journey. To me, it seems to hint that the lion may be near death, that it may not survive, and that this may be why the lion’s arrival is not included in the ‘Shilu’ entry for 30 November 1415. However, this contradicts other evidence we have that Chen definitely presented the rhapsody to the emperor, and it is not likely that he would have done so unless the lion actually survived, especially because so many parallels are drawn in the rhapsody between the lion and the emperor. The modern facility of searching such texts as the ‘Shilu’ digitally has allowed me to discover another possible solution to this impasse. There is an additional 36 Didier 2012, 408. 37 Didier (2012, 409) has “Immense mais soumis”.

218

Sally K. Church 程思麗

reference in the ‘Shilu’ to the presentation of a lion as tribute, which does not seem to have been noticed before. It is a very short, vague reference in the entry for 16 October 1415, saying in only five characters that a lion was presented as tribute from the ‘Western Regions’ (Xiyu gong shizi 西域貢獅子) on that day, just six weeks before Chen’s first mission returned.38 Presumably, if the lion had been ill and under stress from the long journey, and it was an emergency situation to save its life, a small group including the lion and its keepers could have broken away from the main entourage and pressed on ahead by taking fewer rest breaks, thus reaching Beijing before the others. We have no way of knowing for certain if the 16 October arrival was the same lion that came with Chen Cheng from Herat, as the term ‘Western Regions’ is too non-specific. However, if it is the same one, it would explain why the 30 November passage does not mention the lion; it had already arrived six weeks earlier. This would also explain why the name of the kingdom was not recorded; this small entourage would have been separated from the rest of the embassy, and without a translator, it was perhaps not easily identified as from Herat. If the scribes did not know which country it was from, they might easily have used the general term ‘Western Regions’ to describe its place of origin. Chen then resumes his poetic narrative, some of which is along the same lines as what has been said above. He emphasises that the visits of envoys from distant regions, and their gifts, were recorded in the histories, and of course he identifies with the role of someone who records such events for posterity. He repeats the idea mentioned in the introduction that the lion is special not only because it is from a long distance away, but also because it demonstrates the extent to which the benevolent influence of the emperor has reached foreign lands. Chen ends this section by reasserting that everyone in the world bows to the emperor and that all ministers praise him (lines 49–55). The final encomium or coda returns to the theme of the spiritual role the emperor plays of linking Heaven and Earth. He regulates time, keeps the celestial bodies in order, preserves past accomplishments, and safeguards tradition. He is positioned at the centre with his ministers surrounding him, serving him and doing his bidding. On account of him, all is in good order, everyone is prosperous, riches abound and the world is at peace. The appearance of foreigners from afar submitting to Chinese authority is proof that all is well with the world (lines 57–62). The ultimate purpose of this rhapsody, as we can see, is to praise the emperor, as is the case with other rhapsodies on fantastic, magical animals presented as tribute by foreign envoys, for example on the qilin (giraffe) and ostrich that were 38 Ming Taizong shilu, Yongle 13, 9th month, 14th day (wushen), 16 October 1415, juan 168, 2a (1871).

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

219

presented around the same time on the return voyages of Zheng He’s maritime expeditions.39

5.

Conclusion

In my view the lion whose capture Chen Cheng witnessed in Herat, and about which he wrote the rhapsody, probably survived the journey to Beijing in 1415. The main reason is that, according to his memorial to the emperor, Chen presented his ‘Rhapsody on the Lion’ to Emperor Yongle on 30 November 1415. Presumably, he would not have done so if the lion had expired, especially because the rhapsody contains metaphorical comparisons between the lion as king of beasts and the emperor as ruler of China. Although it is puzzling why the ‘Shilu’ entry for 30 November does not list the lion as a tribute item, there is a plausible explanation for it in the possibility that the lion was rushed ahead of the rest of the embassy on account of its health, arriving on 16 October the same year. This would account for the ‘Shilu’ entry, “Western Regions presented a lion as tribute”, for that day. This is my best guess for what happened. However, I must stress that it is not proved conclusively. Apart from this question, the rhapsody articulates several aspects of the utopian view of the tribute system that deserve consideration. First, when a Chinese sage emperor is on the throne, there is peace throughout the world. Second, when there is such peace, foreign envoys bring local products to China as tribute. Third, sometimes rare and marvellous animals, endowed with magical, supernatural qualities make their appearance, corroborating the emperor’s divine nature and transforming virtue. Such exotic arrivals are recorded in the historical records, and Chen Cheng saw his own role as someone who recorded such things. They are often heralded in poetic works and celebrated in paintings. There are thus parallels between the lion, which is the subject of Chen Cheng’s artistry as discussed here, and other examples, such as the giraffe that came on Zheng He’s voyages. Emphasis is placed on the long distance the envoys had to come, with the claim that “no distance was too far” harkening back to the opening passage of the ‘Analects’ of Confucius, about friends who come to visit, “not thinking a thousand li too far” (buyuan qianli er lai 不遠千里而來). Moreover, the Chinese policy of benevolence to foreigners, expressed as huairou zhi en 懷柔 之恩, which Yongle claimed to practice, is also articulated here. The rhapsody also provides an inside view of the methods used by people in the Timurid empire to hunt lions: they beat the ground in the forest, so the noise 39 J. J. L. Duyvendak 1938, The True Dates of the Chinese Maritime Expeditions in the Early Fifteenth Century, in: T’oung Pao 34 (1938), 341–412, here 402–410.

220

Sally K. Church 程思麗

will flush the wild animal out of its habitat, employing strong warriors to tie it up and put it in a cage. Interestingly, this method of flushing out wild animals is also described in other texts with regard to other times and places, particularly concerning the Mongols. For example, William of Rubruck (fl. 1253–1255) describes a hunt by the Mongols to kill a lion, as follows: When they want to chase wild animals, they gather together in a great multitude and surround the district in which they know the game to be, and gradually they come closer to each other till they have shut up the game in among them as in an enclosure, and then they shoot them with their arrows.40 A final reason for the importance of the ‘Rhapsody’ is that it provides certain information not available elsewhere, such as the names of the individuals who accompanied Chen Cheng’s first mission to Herat. It is also the only source where Chen refers to his job as dian shuji 典書記, which helps us understand the role of record keeper that he saw himself performing on these diplomatic missions. Didier’s term ‘historiographer’ for his role is perhaps rather too grand; he was probably more like a scribe or secretary. He recorded what he heard and saw, and we can see from this work how important he thought it was for him to perform this task well.

Bibliography Chen Cheng 陳誠, Chen Zhushan xiansheng wenji 陳竹山先生文集 (Collected Writings of Mister Chen Zhushan, two inner chapters [neipian erjuan 內篇二卷], and two outer chapters [waipian erjuan 外篇二卷]); facsimile of a Yongzheng 雍正 7 (1729) edition held in Jiangxi provincial library; included in the modern collection Siku quanshu cunmu congshu 四庫全書存目叢書, jibu 集部 26, bieji lei 别集类. Jinan 1995–1997, 308–389. Held in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. Chen Cheng 陳誠/Li Xian 李暹, Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域行程記, 西域番國 志 (Records of the Journey to the Western Regions, Gazetteer of the Foreign Countries of the Western Regions), ed. Zhou Liankuan 周連寬 (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan 中外交通史籍叢刊), Beijing 2000. Sally K. Church, A New Look at Chen Cheng’s Role in his Diplomatic Missions to Herat (1413–1420), in: Monumenta Serica 67 (2019), 363–395. Michel Didier, Chen Cheng (1365–1457): Ambassadeur des Premiers Empereurs Ming, Paris 2012. Distance Calculator: https://www.distancecalculator.net.

40 William of Rubruck, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–1255, translated by Peter Jackson, introduction, notes and appendices by Peter Jackson with David Morgan, London 1990, chapter 5, 84: “The Animals they Eat, Their Clothing, and the Way they Hunt”.

A Lion Presented as Tribute during Chen Cheng’s 陳誠

221

Jan J. L. Duyvendak, The True Dates of the Chinese Maritime Expeditions in the Early Fifteenth Century, in: T’oung Pao 34 (1938), 341–412. John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, MA 1968. Achilles Fang, Rhymeprose on Literature: The Wên-Fu of Lu Chi (A.D. 261–303), in: Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 14, 3/4 (1951), 527–566. Edward L. Farmer, Early Ming Government: The Evolution of Dual Capitals, Cambridge, MA 1976. Joseph Fletcher, China and Central Asia, 1368–1884, in: Fairbank 1968, The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, 206–224 (Bibliography and Notes: 337–368). Guoli Beiping tushuguan shanben congshu 國立北平圖書館善本叢書 (Rare Books Collection of the National Beiping Library), No. 1 (1937), ed. Xie Guozhen 謝國楨. Shanghai 1937. Huihui guan yiyu 回回館譯語 (Vocabulary from the Muslim Hostel), in: Beijing tushuguan guji zhenben congkan 北京圖書館珍本叢刊, jing bu 經部, vol. 6, juan 7, 517–572. Huihui guan zazi 回回館雜字 (Miscellaneous Words from the Muslim Hostel), in: Beijing tushuguan guji zhenben congkan 北京圖書館珍本叢刊, jing bu 經部, vol. 6, juan 6, 465–516. Li Xian 李賢 (ed.), Da Ming yitong zhi 大明一統志 (Gazetteer of the Unified Great Ming, comp. 1461); facsimile of an edition in the collection of Wang Qishu 汪啟淑 (1728– 1799); online edition: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in München, Digitale Sammlungen Ostasien (Digital East Asia Collections of the Bavarian State Library, Munich), https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV037281185, accessed 3 March 2018. John V.G. Mills (trans. and ed.), Ma Huan, Ying-yai sheng-lan: The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores [1433] (Hakluyt Society Extra Series 42), Cambridge 1970. Li Jinhua 李晉華 et al. (eds.), Ming shilu 明實錄 (Ming Veritable Records), Nangang, 1961– 1966. Ming Taizong shilu 明太宗實錄, in: Ming shilu, vols. 9–14. Morris Rossabi, Two Ming Envoys to Inner Asia, T’oung Pao 62 1–3 (1976), 1–34. –, A Translation of Ch’en Ch’eng’s Hsi-yü fan-kuo chih, Ming Studies 17 (1983), 49–59. Li Xueqin 李學勤/Lü Wenyu 呂文郁 et al. (eds.), Siku da cidian 四庫大辭典 (Dictionary of the Four Branches of Literature), 2 vols., Changchun 1996. Siku quanshu zongmu tiyao 四庫全書總目題要 (General Catalogue to the Complete Library of the Four Branches of Literature), Shanghai 1933. William of Rubruck, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–1255, translated by Peter Jackson, introduction, notes and appendices by Peter Jackson with David Morgan, London 1990. Wang Jiguang 王繼光, Guanyu Chen Cheng xishi ji qi Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi (dai qianyan) 關於陳誠西使及其西域行程記, 西域番國志 (代 “前言”) (Introduction: On Chen Cheng’s diplomatic missions to the West and his Xiyu xingcheng ji and Xiyu fanguo zhi), in: Chen/Li 2000, 1–27. –, Chen Cheng xishi ji Hong Yong zhi ji Ming yu Tiemu’er diguo de guanxi 陳誠西使及洪 永之際明與帖木兒帝國的關係 (Chen Cheng’s Westward Missions and Ming-Timurid Relations in the Hongwu and Yongle Periods), in: Xiyu yanjiu 西域研究 1 (2004), 17–27.

222

Sally K. Church 程思麗

–, Xiyu xingcheng ji yu Bieshibali xiqian kao 《西域行程記》與別失八里西遷考 (Record of the Journey to the Western Regions and the Movement of the Polity of Bishbalik to the West), in: Xiyu yanjiu 西域研究 2 (2007), 16–22. –, Chen Cheng jiqi xishiji yanjiu shuping陳誠及其西使記研究述評 (The Study of Chen Cheng and the Records of His Travels to the West), in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu dongtai 中 國史研究動態 (Trends in Recent Research on the History of China) 1 (2009), 17–23. Xiang Da 向達, Xiyu xingcheng ji 西域行程記, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域番國志, in: Yu Gong 禹貢 2 (1 Oct. 1934) 3, 31–41; 2 (16 Oct. 1934) 4, 18–28; see: http://contacthistory.com/? p=726, with a link to a scanned version of the article, including the transcriptions of these texts. Zhou Ta 洲塔/Dong Zhizhen 董知珍, Cong Zhushan xiansheng wenji kan Chen Cheng di er ci chushi xiyu 从《竹山先生文集》看陳誠第二次出使西域 (A Study of Chen Cheng’s Second Mission to the Western Regions Based on his Collected Works, Zhushan Wenji), Lishi jiaoxue 歷史教學 (History Teaching) 10 (2012) (Cumulative No. 647), 28– 32.

Ralph Kauz

Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

When writing an article on Paliuwan 怕六灣 some twenty years ago,1 I was not aware that a painting exists on this cause célèbre which is mentioned in a considerable number of texts of the Ming dynasty (see illustration).2 Unfortunately, I missed the endnote and the depiction of the painting in William Watson’s article on paintings in the Istanbul albums.3 The painting, which may, for convenience, be called here ‘Paliuwan painting’, first appeared in Europe at an auction at ‘Séquestre Worch’ in Paris in 1922, later stored in two collections (Gulbenkian and Essayan), then in a private collection in London, and in 2011, it was on auction at Sotheby’s in Hong Kong.4 Shan Guoqiang 單國强 (Palace Museum, Beijing) and especially Roderick Whitfield (SOAS, University of London) wrote an introduction on the ‘Paliuwan painting’ for this occasion.5 The article of Whitfield is the much longer and more thoroughly researched of the two, and it includes a translation of the rhapsody on top of the painting which was allegedly composed, but not written, by the Chenghua 成化-Emperor himself in 1483. This translation was produced by Glen Dudbridge in the 1970s. 1 Ralph Kauz, Paliuwan 怕六灣: Trader or Traitor? – A Samarqandi in Mediaeval Melaka, in: Nanyang xuebao (Journal of the South Seas Society) 56 (2002), 74–87. Paliuwan is also written as Paluwan and has different characters: 帕六灣, 怕陸/魯灣. 2 See, for example, the History of the Ming dynasty (Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 et al., Ming shi 明史, Beijing 1995), the Veritable Records (Ming shilu 明實錄, 133 vols., Taibei 1966), Yan Congjian 嚴從簡, Shuyu zhou zi lu 殊域周咨錄 [Record of various opinions on distant countries], ed. Yu Sili 余思黎, (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan), Beijing 1993, and other texts. Emil Bretschneider (Mediæveal Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources, 2 vols., London 1910, vol. 2, 265–266) translated the Mingshi text. 3 William Watson, Chinese style in the paintings of the Istanbul albums, in: Islamic Art 1 (1981), 69–76, n. 12 and fig. 80. 4 Rossi & Rossi (ed.), An Exceptional Central Asian Ming Dynasty Painting of a Lioness, n.p. 2018, n.p. 5 Shan Guoqiang 單國强, Appreciating the Tribute Lioness, by an Anonymous Ming Artist (English and Chinese), Roderick Whitfield, The Lioness Painting, in: Vestiges from China’s Imperial History, Hong Kong 2011, Shan Guoqiang 11–12 (English), 17–18 (Chinese), Whitfield, 26–37.

224

Ralph Kauz

The ‘Paliuwan painting’ was again for sale by Rossi & Rossi Ltd. in Maastricht in 2018 and this time I was contacted by the company, became aware of the existence of such a painting and could have a look at it myself. As Whitfield did overlook my article, I believe it worth to add a few notes to my former article and attempt to put the painting and the ‘case Paliuwan’ in the broader framework of the tribute system, international relations, and court politics of the Ming dynasty.

The ‘affair’ Paliuwan The Ming dynasty had somehow recovered after the disaster at Tumu 土木 in 1449, but the Western borders where the Moghuls, the Oirats and further West the Timurids were competing with each other remained an area of concern. China successively lost influence in Turfan and the control over Hami. The last one to the Moghul ruler Yu¯nus Kha¯n who defeated the Oirats in 1472 and conquered Hami one year later, thus the Moghuls took complete control over the Tarim basin. After the death of the Timurid ruler Shahrukh in 1447, the Timurid Empire split into different parts. After several struggles, Abu¯ Sa‘ı¯d occupied the capital ¯ zu¯n Herat and ruled the Timurids until 1467 when he died in a battle against U ¯ q Quyu¯nlu¯. His dominion was split among his various sons, the eldest Hasan A Sulta¯n Ahmad receiving Samarqand where he lived until his death in 1497. Khorasan, with its capital Herat, became the seat of the famous Husayn Ba¯yqara¯ from 1470 until his death in 1506, and he led this area to a last cultural peak.6 In summary, the situation in the ‘Western Regions’ became somewhat confusing as a larger political entity no longer existed. When Zhu Qizhen 朱祁鎮 became for a second time emperor with the new era name Tianshun 天順 in 1457, he did not waste much time to send embassies to Central Asia, the aim was probably the search for allies against the Oirats. These last embassies in the history of the Ming dynasty to the ‘Western Regions’ (Xiyu 西域) were commissioned in 1457 and 1463, but they did not arrive at their destination.7 The 1460s and early 1470s were for some reason crucial for the relations between Central Asia and Ming China as no embassies from Central Asia arrived between 1463 and 1476 at the Chinese court. Perhaps the continuous warfare during these years and the corresponding insecurity of the roads offer an explanation. The first embassy after this uneventful period concerning com6 Morris Rossabi, Ming China and Turfan, 1406–1517, Central Asiatic Journal, 16 (1972), 206– 225, here 215–221; David Morgan, Medieval Persia, 1040–1797, London 1988, 96–98. 7 Ralph Kauz, Politik und Handel zwischen Ming und Timuriden: China, Iran und Zentralasien im Spätmittelalter (Iran – Turan 7), Wiesbaden 2005, 212–219.

Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

225

mercial and diplomatic exchange with Central Asia arrived in early 1476 from Samarqand and Turfan, offering ‘normal’ tribute of horses and camels.8 Following this arrival, embassies from the ‘Western Regions’ became once again a more regular feature coming to China each two, three years, and the ‘tribute system’ featured a new reboot. However, while Herat was a major center of commerce in the first half of the 15th century, Samarqand and Turfan became now the most important starting points of these embassies, and political motivations seem to have given place to solely commercial ones. The embassy lead by Paliuwan was something like a paradigm of these ‘Western Regions’ embassies since the end of the 15th century. Based on my former article, the entrances of this embassy in the ‘Veritable Records’ of the Ming dynasty (Ming shilu 明實錄, abbreviated MSL) and the ‘Standard History of the Ming dynasty’ (Ming shi 明史, abbreviated MS) shall be summarized:9 – Paliuwan must have arrived in 17 May 1483 (4th month, guiyou) at Beijing, as an entry in the ‘Veritable Records’ relates: “Sulta¯n Ahmad and others from Samarqand and Yisuhan sent envoys to present lion(s) to the court.”10 His name is not mentioned here, but, judging from the circumstances, it is almost certain that he arrived at this date. – Even before the arrival in Beijing, this embassy asked at the border in Suzhou (肅州, today Jiuquan 酒泉) to be welcomed by a high official. This demand met the resistance of the ‘director of the bureau of operations’ zhifang langzhong Lu Rong 職方郎中陸容, viz. personnel of the Ministry of War.11 He was even supported by the minister of the Ministry of Rites Zhou Hongmo 周 洪謨, but the Chenghua Emperor finally allowed officials to be sent to welcome these envoys from Samarqand.12 – The ‘tribute envoy’ (gongshi 貢使) from Samarqand Paliuwan – his name is mentioned here first – asked for a higher remuneration on 18 November 1483 (10th month, wuyin). This was first opposed by the Ministry of Rites, but it finally consented. – After staying already for almost one year in the capital, at 13 March 1484 (2nd month, jiaxu), the Samarqandi envoys (here already named ‘official and vice envoys’ zheng fu shi 正副使) claimed that the road to Samarqand would be blocked and they were offered additional rewards. 8 Kauz 2005, 224. 9 Kauz 2002, 76–87. 10 Ming shilu, juan 239, 4055: 撒馬兒罕及亦思罕地面鎖魯檀阿哈麻等遣使貢獅子獻于朝. ‘Yisuhan’ should be Isfahan. See Kauz 2002, 78, n. 20 for a discussion of the problem that Isfahan did not belong to the realm of the Timurids in that period. 11 The year for this incident is in the Shuyu zhou zi lu, 485 given as 1481. 12 For Zhou Hongmo see: Luther Carrington Goodrich (ed.), Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368–1644, 2 vols., New York 1976, 269–270.

226

Ralph Kauz

– Later Paliuwan got the honorary title ‘assistant commissioner-in-chief ’ (dudu qianshi 都督僉事) as he was promoted to ‘vice commissioner-in-chief ’ (dudu tongzhi 都督同知) on 5 October 1484 (9th month, gengzi). Mahama 馬哈痲 (Mohammad) is added to his name in this entry of the Veritable Records, possibly it was his additional name. Because of the blocked road, he asked to return by sea. This was approved. – The Samarqandi envoy arrived in Guangzhou at 30 June 1486, accompanied by the eunuch Wei Luo 韋洛 and the ‘acting aide of the court of state ceremonial’ (honglu si shucheng 鴻臚寺署丞) Hai Bin 海濱. Samarqand got again the somewhat derogatory epithet ‘locality’ (dimian 地面). En route, the envoys bought girls from militia families and Hai Bin was degraded for allowing this, as Wei Luo had denounced him. The entry is only dated 30 June 1486 in the Veritable Records, but the incident must have occurred much earlier. – In Guangzhou, the case of Paliuwan became even more significant for the historiography of the Ming dynasty, as the ‘left administration officer’ (zuo buzheng shi 左布政使) Chen Xuan 陳選 reported to the throne that he would refuse Paliuwan’s request to travel to Melaka and buy more lions there as gifts for the Chinese court. The Ministry of Rites just ordered to send them off (MSL entry: 25 June 1485). Nota bene, lions were never native to the Malayan peninsula. Chen Xuan had the courage to stand against the eunuch in charge of tributary trade Wei Juan 韋眷, who was obviously collaborating with Paliuwan and other envoys or merchants and he was sent to Beijing for punishment. Chen Xuan died en route, but his fame of being an upright official found its way into the history books.13 – However, Samarqandi envoys somehow got lions, before they arrived in Guangzhou from Melaka, as we find an entry in the Veritable Records at 10 December 1489 (11th month, renshen) that such an embassy sent by ‘King Ahmad’ (阿黑痲王) came from Melaka carrying such beasts. The envoys were remunerated, but obviously not allowed to come to the capital. The inappropriate arrival by sea and the tribute of strange animals was harshly criticized by officials, and the famous official, later even minister of several resorts, Ni Yue 倪岳, wrote one of his famous memorials to the throne criticizing the conduct of the Samarqandi envoys and even asked the emperor to send an edict (xiaoyu 曉諭) to Sulta¯n Ahmad protesting against this conduct. This edict can be found in a wide number of sources of the Ming period.14 – Finally, the ‘Ming shi’ tells about an embassy from Huolazha 火剌轧 in 1492. This embassy was related to the ‘Western Regions’ (which means that those envoys were supposed to come overland), but this embassy came overseas, and 13 Goodrich, 159–161. 14 For Ni Yue, see Goodrich, 1094–1096; the edict is cited in the Shuyu zhou zi lu, 487–488.

Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

227

its leader was a Muslim with the name Paluwan 怕魯灣. Could this person have been the same Paliuwan, only transcribed slightly differently? On the background of Paliuwan’s story concepts like ‘Sinocentrism’ and ‘tribute system’ look like a farce.15 Four actors were involved in the whole: the envoys, the officials, the eunuchs and finally the emperor who – when we believe the sources – had the final say. Then envoys obviously came to China for personal gain, and there were not any political or diplomatic reasons involved in their journeys. It seems furthermore that the eunuchs often collaborated with them, as it was the case with the supervisor for tributary trade in Guangzhou, Wei Juan.16 The officials basically opposed tributary trade and complained about the costs for the personnel and the animals.17 This was already the case when Paliuwan arrived at the borders in Gansu where his demands met the opposition of the acting officials. The emperor’s position was often rather conciliatory and tolerant, but not always. One example may illustrate such a conversation. The first is the imperial comment on the ‘Samarqandi’ embassy arriving from Melaka in 1489: “Rare birds and strange animals are not suitable for me to accept as offerings; moreover, they did not come the official route, and should return immediately. The guards violated the rules and should be punished, but we will pardon them.” However, then the Ministry of Rites intervened and recommended to reward them lightly and to give some silks to their king.18 The principal matter of concern to the Chinese court were the strange animals, especially the lions brought as tribute. Paliuwan was not the first such person who presented a lion, rather they were transported to China during the entire 15th century. Lin Yigang 林移剛 lists the following years when lions were brought to the court:19 1413, 1415, 1419, 1439, 1478, 1481, 1483, 1489, 1490 and 1507. Lin argues that the lions in Central Asia became gradually extinct and were thus not any more offered to the emperor. One may argue that if the Chinese court absolutely detested lions there would have been few reasons to bring them there, 15 John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, Mass. 1968, 1–4. 16 Zhang Zhijie 張之傑 considers how the envoys became acquainted with the eunuchs on their long way to the Chinese capital. (Chenghua shijiu nian ‘Sama’erhan gongshi tu’ shishi 成化十 九年《撒馬兒罕貢獅圖》試釋 [Examination of the ‘Painting of Samarqand’s lion tribute’ in the 19th year of the Chenghua era], Kexue wenhua pinglun 科學文化評論 15/4 [2018], 104– 114, here 107). 17 Han Ding’s 韓鼎 memorial of (25 May 1490 (6. Monat, jichou) is only one of the many examples (Xiaozong shilu, juan 39, 823–824). 18 MS, juan 332, 8601. 「珍禽奇獸，朕不受獻，況來非正道，其即卻還。守臣違制宜罪，姑 貸之。」 19 Lin Yigang 林移剛, Shizi ru Hua kao 獅子入華考 [Survey of the lions brought to China], in: Minsu yanjiu 民俗研究 113/1 (2014), 68–74, here 72–73. For a detailed study on lions as tribute see the article of Sally K Church in this volume.

228

Ralph Kauz

and indeed the Kangxi 康熙 emperor of the succeeding Qing dynasty wished to receive such beasts, and the Portuguese embassy of Bento Pereira de Faria transported two African lions to China. The male one, however, died at sea and only the lioness arrived in Beijing.20

The ‘Paliuwan painting’ As the painting is already excellently described and analyzed by Roderick Whitfield,21 only a short summary shall be given here. What is most impressive, is its huge size, as it measures 242 x 287 cm. In the center of the painting is a huge, sad-looking lion, which is held by two ‘Central Asians’ with long garments and turbans on their heads. The lion has a collar around its neck with a small bell and a chain, which is fastened to a blue rope held by one of the ‘Central Asians’. One cannot see where the rope of the other person is fastened because it is behind the beast. On the right side are two trees, a locust and a peach tree, and on their twigs five birds are sitting, one is flying on the left. Quite a large space in middle is left blank. On top of the painting is a rhapsody written on silk and allegedly composed by the Chenghua Emperor himself. On the left of the silk tape is the date (1483) and a huge painted seal reading guangyun zhibao 廣運之寶 (‘Treasure from Vast Territories’ as translated by Whitfield). For the content and context of the rhapsody, one must refer to Dudbridge’s translation cited in Whitfield’s article. The painting is on paper and was once folded in the middle, but painting and calligraphy were obviously designed together as nothing was cut off, as Whitfield stresses.22 He also analyses the art historical context of the painting and its predecessors and successors in great detail. The name of the lion (Husaini 虎塞泥) and the name of the two envoys (zhengshi dudu Paliuwan Maheima 正使都督帕六灣馬黑麻, duhui Huozhe Maheima 指揮火者馬黑麻) are written in golden letters besides the three. They also appear in the rhapsody (the lion’s name shall be neglected) as Paliuwan dudu zhi zhengshi 帕六灣都督正使 and Huozhe Maheima 火者馬黑麻.23 Whitfield refers to Pelliot’s article who supposes that the title dudu derives from the Turkic tutuq (governor).24 However, we have seen that Paliuwan was promoted from 20 Luciano Petech, Some remarks on the Portuguese embassies to China in the K’ang-hsi period, in: T’oung Pao 44 (1956), 227–241, here 233. 21 Whitfield, 26–37. 22 Whitfield, 26. 23 Whitfield, 31. Whitfield is wrong when he writes that the companion of Paliuwan was called Mahmud, as this name is transcribed with the syllable mu at the end (mostly written 木). 24 Paul Pelliot, Le Ho¯ǰa et le Sayyid Husain de l’histoire des Ming, T’oung Pao 38 (1948), 81– ˙ ˘ 292, here 130, n. 97.

Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

229

dudu qianshi to dudu tongzhi and he had the epithet Mahama (Mohammad), in another place also written Maheima as in the golden letters.25 Thus, the full name of Paliuwan was Paliuwan Ma/hei/ha/ma. Paliuwan most certainly is transcribed from Persian pahlava¯n, which is a term or name for strong and courageous men. It is used for men who practice wrestling or perform shows with tamed beasts.26 Thus the name fits perfectly for the Central Asian envoy with his lion. Maybe it was even more an honorific title for the person Mohammad which transformed into something like a name. Huozhe (hwa¯ja) derives certainly from the Persian ˘ term for (religious) master, but also tended to have a name-like connotation. The oddest sentence in the rhapsody may be the mention that it was Sultan Ahmad who “had a picture painted, as a means of offering his tribute.”27 Zhang Zhijie and Whitfield agree that the painting was painted by courtly artists.28 On the basis of their expertise this should be taken as certain. But could such artists have gone with officials to the borders and paint the huge painting there? This seems also rather improbable. However, the ‘Veritable Records’ mentions at 6 June 1490 (5. Monat, gengwu) that another embassy from Sultan Ahmad arrived, bringing again lions and beasts called halahula 哈剌虎剌 (caracal).29 The eunuch Fu De 傅德 and the commander Zhou Yu 周玉 allowed the caracal (and maybe also the lion?) to be painted in order to send first this painting for inspection to the court. They were both admonished for allowing envoys with such beasts to enter China, but a few envoys were allowed to come to the capital, however without the beasts. Nevertheless, the painting ordered by Fu De and Zhou Yu could not have been painted like the ‘Paliuwan painting’. A further hint for the solution of the question whether the painting was executed at the borders or in the capital may be given by the three pairs of birds depicted on it. In the leaflet introducing the painting for the TEFAF exhibition in Maastricht in 2018, Rossi & Rossi name only two of the pairs in a superficial manner: a pair of orioles and a pair of magpies, the same can be found in the Chinese translation: huangli 黃鸝 and xique 喜鵲.30 Zhang Zhijie 張之傑 rightly criticizes this shallowness, but gives himself only one correct name: baitouweng 白頭翁 (light-vented bulbul, Pycnonotus sinensis, better known in China as baitoubei 白頭鵯).31 This pair are the small two birds sitting together on a twig in the middle of the painting. The two large birds on the right side with their red 25 Xianzong shilu, juan 278, 4690. 26 I would like to thank Ms. Kimia Moalemi for giving me detailed information and photos of pahlava¯na¯n. 27 Whitfield, 31, 畫圖象以進貢. 28 Whitfield, 36, Zhang Zhijie, 105, 110–111. 29 Xiaozong shilu, juan 38, 811. 30 Rossi & Rossi, n.p. 31 Zhang Zhijie, 110–111.

230

Ralph Kauz

beaks are not at all magpies, though they belong to the same family Corvidae, but the genus is Urocissa, and the two birds hold the scientific name Urocissa erythroryncha (red-billed blue magpie, hongzuilanque 紅嘴藍鵲). Orioles are indeed found on the painting, one is flying on the left side, just below the rhapsody which cuts a part of its tail, while the other is sitting below of one of the red-billed blue magpies. However, they are black-naped orioles (Oriolus chinensis, heizhenhuangli 黑枕黃鸝). They are yellow in colour, but the colours on the painting seem to have faded, as their other features are very clear. Chinese artists could depict birds very accurately and few doubts remain that these three – obviously auspicious – birds can be seen on the painting. They are still common in East Asia, but are not found in Central Asia. Once again, could court painters portray such birds on a huge painting while in the midst of the desert? The embassy of Paliuwan was from the beginning a nuisance for the Chinese officials, but he still managed to enter China and also reached the court. Here, the lion obviously received the admiration of the emperor who – maybe influenced by eunuchs – commissioned the painting of the lion and the two envoys. Zheng Zhijie ironically writes at the end of his paper that these envoys were staying in China for 2, 3 years, were well fed, were granted numerous presents and were even rewarded with a life-size painting.32 The late embassies were basically regarded as annoyances, but were still welcomed at the court, as Paliuwan was welcomed. These ‘tribute embassies’ did not show any more affiliations with diplomatic exchange, but the whole ‘tribute system’ was reduced to court procedures or rites serving the image of the emperor and its surrounding. Even commercial interests were only on the side of the envoy merchants and probably the eunuchs.

32 Zhang Zhijie, 113.

Fiction, Painting and Reality: Paliuwan in Chinese Sources

Fig. 1. Courtesy Rossi & Rossi

231

232

Ralph Kauz

Bibliography Emil Bretschneider, Mediæveal Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources, 2 vols., London 1910. John K. Fairbank (ed.), The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge, Mass. 1968. Luther Carrington Goodrich (ed.), Dictionary of Ming biography, 1368–1644, 2 vols., New York 1976. Ralph Kauz, Politik und Handel zwischen Ming und Timuriden: China, Iran und Zentralasien im Spätmittelalter (Iran – Turan 7), Wiesbaden 2005. Ralph Kauz, Paliuwan 怕六灣: Trader or Traitor? – A Samarqandi in Mediaeval Melaka, in: Nanyang xuebao (Journal of the South Seas Society) 56 (2002), 74–87. Lin Yigang 林移剛, Shizi ru Hua kao 獅子入華考 [Survey of the lions brought to China], in: Minsu yanjiu 民俗研究 113/1 (2014), 68–74. Ming shilu 明實錄, 133 vols., Taibei 1966. David Morgan, Medieval Persia, 1040–1797, London 1988. Paul Pelliot, Le Ho¯ǰa et le Sayyid Husain de l’histoire des Ming, T’oung Pao 38 (1948), 81– ˙ ˘ 292. Luciano Petech, Some remarks on the Portuguese embassies to China in the K’ang-hsi period, in: T’oung Pao 44 (1956), 227–241. Morris Rossabi, Ming China and Turfan, 1406–1517, Central Asiatic Journal, 16 (1972), 206–225. Rossi & Rossi (ed.), An Exceptional Central Asian Ming Dynasty Painting of a Lioness, n. p. 2018. Shan Guoqiang 單國强, Appreciating the Tribute Lioness, by an Anonymous Ming Artist (English and Chinese), Roderick Whitfield, The Lioness Painting, in: Vestiges from China’s Imperial History, Hong Kong 2011, Shan Guoqiang 11–12 (English), 17–18 (Chinese), Whitfield, 26–37. Geoff Wade, Southeast Asia in the Ming Shi-lu – an open access resource (http://epress.n us.edu.sg/msl/). William Watson, Chinese style in the paintings of the Istanbul albums, in: Islamic Art 1 (1981), 69–76. Yan Congjian 嚴從簡, Shuyu zhou zi lu 殊域周咨錄 [1574, Record of various opinions on distant countries], ed. Yu Sili 余思黎, (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan), Beijing 1993. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 et al., Ming shi 明史, Beijing 1995. Zhang Zhijie 張之傑, Chenghua shijiu nian ‘Sama’erhan gongshi tu’ shishi 成化十九年 《撒馬兒罕貢獅圖》試釋 [Examination of the ‘Painting of Samarqand’s lion tribute’ in the 19th year of the Chenghua era], Kexue wenhua pinglun 科學文化評論 15/4 (2018), 104–114.

Graeme Ford

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

‘Huayiyiyu’ 華夷譯語 is a collection of bilingual word-lists for each of the languages of the translating colleges, Persian, Mongolian, Nüzhen 女真, Tibetan, Gaochang 高昌 (Uighur), Babai 八百, Baiyi 百夷 (Tay), Miandian 緬甸 (Burmese), Xitian 西天 (Indian) and Xianluo 暹羅 (Thai), each accompanied by a small number of laiwen 來文, examples of tributary documents in Chinese and the language of each college. The laiwen which accompany the Persian word lists are the only surviving translated Persian documents from after the Yongle period. They tell us a great deal because they served three different purposes through time. They began as accompanying documents,laiwen jietie來文揭帖, Chinese translations of Persian tribute letters and petitions, presented at the courts of Ming emperors together with their Persian originals.1 At a later time these Chinese translations, together with a larger number of Chinese language tribute lists, were provided with word-for-word Persian glossings, to be used as materials for the regular testing of students and junior translators in the Persian College. A memorial of 1653 recorded in the prologue of ‘Siyiguan ze’ 四夷館則 describes a system of regular testing in use during the Ming dynasty: 舊例， 譯學官生除逐日教習外， 有月課， 有季考， 有歲參， 分別等弟， 開送內 院，凡遇史館，誥敕，謄錄需人，亦於十館職官選用. “According to the old rule, for officers and students of translating, apart from daily teaching and practice, there were monthly tests (yueke 月課), seasonal examinations and yearly inspections, and they were each given grades, which were forwarded to the inner halls (Hanlin Academy). Whenever it happened that men were needed for the History College, the Gaochiguan, or as copyists, they were recruited from the officers of the ten colleges.”2

Still later, when the ‘Huayiyiyu’ was compiled, and laiwen, examples of bilingual court letters were needed, some of these bilingual test texts were used. Thus, a 1 Li Dongyang 李東陽 et al., Da Ming huidian 大明 會典, 5 vols., Taipeh 1963, juan 221, 7r., 2940. 2 Lü Weiqi 呂維祺, Siyiguan ze 四譯館則, Taipeh 1985, introd. 2v., 16.

234

Graeme Ford

number of Chinese tributary documents from the second half of the fifteenth century have come down to us, which provide interesting information about historical events and tributary practice of that time. Accompanied by Persian glossed texts, they tell us about the way students were tested at the Persian College and in the other colleges. Finally, the compilation of ‘Huayiyiyu’ gives us a glimpse of the colleges towards the end of the dynasty. The Ming manuscript ‘Huayiyiyu’ text held in the To¯yo¯ Bunko in Tokyo, which Honda Minobu calls B, or the To¯yo¯ Bunko text, contains the ‘Huihuiguan’ 回回館 vocabulary lists and 30 laiwen. The manuscript is a collaborative product of the translators and calligraphers of the colleges. It contains laiwen for nine colleges, only excluding Xitian (Indian). There are word lists for each language, some complete and others incomplete, indicating the manuscript as it exists is an incomplete set. Each of the languages is written in fine, fluent calligraphy, indicating it was made collaboratively in the palace, by officers of the translating colleges.3 It is the earliest of the manuscripts, possibly even an exemplar from the time the ‘Huayiyiyu’ was first compiled. The inclusion of Thai laiwen indicates that was at some time after the establishment of the Thai College in 1579. The manuscript shows that a high level of calligraphic skill still existed in each of the colleges at that time. The Persian script is written in a practised and fluent way with a wooden pen, a qalam, indicating that B was copied at an earlier time when wooden pens were still being used at the Persian College. The later manuscripts that have been found are all written with a brush.4

Tribute lists Only a small number of the laiwen are Chinese translations of tributary letters or petitions. Seventeen of the twenty-six laiwen are not translations of Persian letters at all, but examples of fangwuzhuang 方物狀, local goods lists, which were lists of tribute items compiled by Board of Rites (libu 禮部) officers to be declaimed at audiences. Edicts of Hongwu prescribing rituals for tribute audiences describe how the tribute lists were declaimed.5 They were an indispensible element of the tribute audience ritual, while the declaiming of a tribute letter could be waived. The lists would have been generated in Chinese within the Board of 3 The Toyo Bunko collection is based on the former library of the Edwardian sinologist George Ernest Morrison, and the manuscript could have come into his possession at the auctions which were held in Beijing following the looting of the imperial palaces in 1900–1901 after the downfall of the Yihetuan 義和團 (Boxer) movement. 4 Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝, “Huihuiguan zazi” yu “Huihuiguan yiyu” yanjiu《回回館雑字》與 《回回館譯語》研究, Beijing 2008, 15. 5 See Chapter 1.

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

235

Rites and would not have existed in Persian form originally. However, many of these lists were later glossed in Persian and other languages to create language testing material, which was still later included in the ‘Huayiyiyu’. ‘Ming shi’ records the procedure whereby these itemised lists were generated. 故事, 諸番貢物至, 邊臣驗上其籍, 禮官為按籍給賜. 籍所不載, 許自行貿易. “According to former practice, when foreigners’ tribute goods arrived, border officers inspected them and entered items into their lists, and the Board of Rites officials gave return gifts on the basis of these lists. Trade was allowed to be carried out freely with those things not included in the lists.”6

Border officers were present at Hami 哈密, Jiayuguan, 嘉峪關, the entry to China proper, Suzhou 肅州, the first major city within the wall, (present-day Jiuquan Municipality 酒泉市 in Gansu Province), where there was an important lodginghouse for foreign envoys (夷館 yiguan), and Ganzhou 甘州 (present-day Zhangye Municipality 張掖市 in Gansu Province). Only a set number of people within an embassy was permitted to go to Beijing, while the rest were forced to sojourn at Suzhou and Ganzhou.7 The account of the embassy sent by Shah Rukh to the court of the Yongle Emperor in 1419–1422 indicates that it was at Ganzhou where the gifts destined for the Emperor were taken away, and it might have been at this location that the lists were first compiled.8

Tribute letters and petitions Only nine of the ‘Huihuiguan’ laiwen are tribute letters and petitions. Four of them are tribute letters from foreign rulers which make complimentary statements about the Emperor, name tribute offerings, and request presents. Five of them are petitions from Hami and elsewhere within the empire. The Chinese texts of these letters are the most interesting of all the laiwen texts because they are authentic translations from original Persian letters, made by the translators of the Persian College for presentation before the Emperor, showing the standard of translating at that time. They also contain intrinsically interesting information. Some contain names and events which enable them to be dated. These Chinese translations are formal and succinct, with personal and place names properly rendered and are admirable examples of translating work. The original Persian

6 Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉, Ming shi 明史, Beijing 1975, juan 332, 8623. 7 Kazuo Enoki, Su-chou in Late Ming, in: Studia Asiatica, The Collected Papers of the Late Dr. Kazuo Enuki Tokyo 1998, 538. 8 Henry Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither. Being a Collection of Medieval Notices of China, ed. Henri Cordier, 2 vols., London 1914, 1915, vol. 1, 278.

236

Graeme Ford

texts from which the translations were made do not appear, but instead they are glossed word for word in Persian in the same way as the tribute lists.

The historical background of the ‘Huihuiguan’ laiwen Several of the Persian laiwen refer to Turfan and Hami. Those desert oases were important because of the great wealth that passed through them, and the cities, still ruled by Uighur princes in the first half of the dynasty, were inhabited by a diverse merchant population of Persians, Turks, Uighurs, Mongolians and other nations and tribespeople.9 Tribute and commerce from all the countries of the west passed through Turfan and then Hami, before making a twenty-five-day desert crossing to Jiayuguan, and then on to Suzhou and Ganzhou. It was important that its rulers should welcome and assist travellers.10 Tribute missions from Turfan did not begin until 1406, the fourth year of Yongle. Thirteen tribute missions arrived one every one, two, or three years until 1430, and then at longer intervals after that.11 To reach Samarkand, travellers passed through Moghulistan. The ‘Tarikh-i Rashidi’, Mirza Haidar Dughlat’s record of the Khans of Moghulistan, describes two parts: Moghulistan proper, which was steppe-land and mountain pastures encompassing the eastern spur of the Tianshan Mountains, northward to the southern shore of Lake Balkash, and eastward to Bishbalik, and a southern part he calls Kashgar, which included Alti-Shahr, the six oasis cities of Kashgar, Yangi Hisar, Yarkand, Khotan, Turfan and Aksu, on the edge of the Tarim Basin. While these cities remained stable and populated, strict adherence to Mongol nomadic custom kept the Khans and their people on the move with their livestock and tents, allowing the fine cities and surrounding towns in Moghulistan proper to become derelict, and putting the cultivated land over to pasture. Chen Cheng, who passed through there in 1414 describes it: “Within its borders there are only a few places, Luchen, Huozhou, Turfan, Kashgar and Almaliq which have something of districts, habitations, fields, gardens and streets. In other locations although there are the former sites of derelict cities, their collapsed walls and ruined ramparts are all overgrown, and most people live among the mountain valleys.”12 9 Morris Rossabi, Ming China and Turfan, 1406–1517, in: Central Asiatic Journal 16/3 (1972), 206–225, here 209. 10 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8513. 11 Rossabi 1972, 211. 12 Chen Cheng 陳誠/Li Xian 李暹, Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域行程記, 西域番國 志, ed. Zhou Liankuan 周連寬 (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan 中外交通史籍叢刊), Beijing 2000, 102–103.

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

237

The Khans and princes moved about, warred, hunted, and feasted and resorted to the six cities, which remained centres of commerce and learning. The Khans of Moghulistan were Islamised since Tughluk-Timur, the first Khan of Moghulistan, became a Muslim at the age of 24, in 1354.13 It was Tughluk-Temür’s youngest son Khizir Khwa¯ja, who became Khan in 1389, who brought Turfan into the Moghul realm, but it was not the only capital. “Khizr-Khwaja Khan made victorious raids on Turfan and Qara Khwaja, which are inside Cathay, and which are the greatest cities in that realm, and brought them into the domains of Islam, as they are now. The capital of the Moghul Khans, after Kashgar, is there.”14

Khan Ways expelled the chief of Turfan in 1422, and we are told of him irrigating crops with well water at Turfan.15 Esen Buqa became ruler of eastern Moghulistan in 1428 followed by his brother Yunus in 1462. A mysterious ruler called Sultan ‘Ali is identified with Yunus, but this is uncertain, as discussed below. Sultan Ahmad, whose name is on one of the tribute letters in the Persian laiwen became ˙ ruler in 1478. His long rule lasted until Sultan Mansur became Khan in 1504. Despite repeated attacks on Hami carried out by these rulers, except for some short periods, tribute missions, compelled by commercial imperatives, continued to arrive throughout this time.16 Both Uighur and Persian were used. Letters in Uighur from Turfan bearing the names of Yunus Wang, Sultan ‘Ali Wang, Sultan Ahmad and Sultan Mansur are collected in ‘Gaochangguan ke’ 高 ˙ 昌館課.17 The practice of enfeoffing the legitimate rulers of Hami as Zhongshun wang 忠順王 (Loyal and Obedient Prince) and giving them patents and a gold seal began during the time of the Yongle Emperor. Hami was also made a wei 衛 or military post, and its princes were made military overseers.18 Thus Hami became the furthest outpost of the Ming Empire in Central Asia. This convenient arrangement continued for thirty-four years after the death of the Yongle Emperor, but was brought to an end in 1460, the fourth year of Tianshun 天順, when the Hami Zhongshun Wang, Bolod Temür, died without leaving a son and his mother

13 Mı¯rza¯ Haidar Dug˙lat, Tarikh-i-rashidi: A History of the Khans of Moghulistan, trans. by Wheeler˙ M. Thackston, Cambridge, MA 1996, 4. 14 Dug˙lat 1996, 18. 15 Dug˙lat 1996, 24. 16 Rossabi 1972, 218, 221–222. 17 Hu Zhenhua 胡振華/Huang Runhua 黄潤華, Mingdai wenxian “Gaochangguan ke”: Ladingwen zimu yizhu 明代文獻《高昌館課》: 拉丁文字母譯注, Xinjiang 1981, 9, 11, 14, 16, 31, 32, 33, 65, 70. 18 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8512.

238

Graeme Ford

Nu’undasiri became regent.19 No acceptable ruler could be found, and the sit˙ uation deteriorated until 1473, when Sultan ‘Ali of Turfan, taking advantage of the situation, attacked Hami, capturing the dowager princess, stealing the gold seal, and taking the former king’s granddaughters as his concubines.20 Laiwen VIII, a petition calling for help against Sultan ‘Ali’s attack on Hami, must date from this year, and it is the earliest date which can be established for any of the Persian laiwen. The identity of Sultan ‘Ali remains a mystery. This laiwen confirms the name used in the Ming records, but the history of the Khans of Moghulistan makes no mention of a Sultan ‘Ali and does not allude in any way to the invasion of Hami. Yunus Khan was the ruler of Moghulistan at that time, and so historians identify him as Sultan ‘Ali, but this cannot explain why, as the Khan, no exploits of Yunus in Hami have been written into the history.21 In fact, there is little to identify Yunus with Turfan. ‘Tarikh-i Rashidi’ records that he wished to stay in Aksu but when the Moghuls threatened to look elsewhere for a chief, the Khan repented and resolved not to pine for towns and cities any more.22 The possibility remains that Yunus did not lead the attack on Hami, and that Sultan ‘Ali is a different person. Among the glossed tribute lists in ‘Gaochangguan ke’, one lists tribute from Sultan ‘Ali Wang, and another from Yunus Wang.23 Yunus was succeeded by his son Sultan Ahmad in 1478 who continued the ˙ attacks on Hami. The court decided to shut off tribute with Turfan in 1495,24 and 172 of Ahmad’s ambassadors were detained. There were three ethnic groups ˙ living in Hami, Muslims (回回 Huihui), Uighurs (畏兀兒 Weiwuer) and Qara Qoi (哈剌灰 Hala hui),25 each having its own dudu 都督. These three peoples of Hami migrated en masse to Ganzhou, within the Jiayuguan barrier. Hanshen’s 罕慎 younger brother, the Uighur Dudu Yanke Bola (Yanke Beila 奄克孛剌) was put in overall charge of Hami matters, with Muslim Dudu Sayyid Husain (Xieyi ˙ Huxian 寫亦虎仙) and Qara Qoi Dudu Baidielimishi 拜迭力迷失 supporting him and leading their own peoples. Sayyid Husain is mentioned in one and ˙ possibly more of the Persian laiwen. He was possibly the author of Laiwen II, a petition requesting temple status for a newly renovated mosque in Ganzhou,

19 These events are summarised in Lam, Yuan-chu, Memoir on the Campaign against Turfan: An Annotated Translation of Hsü Chin’s P’ing-fan shih-mo written in 1503, in: Journal of Asian History 24, 2 (1990), 110–112. 20 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8516. 21 Kauz 2005, 222. 22 Dug˙lat 1996, 33. 23 Hu Zhenhua/Huang Runhua 1981, 31, 32. 24 Rossabi 1972, 220. Cf. Kauz 2005, 238–239. 25 Wang Zongzai 王宗載, Siyiguan kao 四夷館考, n.p. 1924, juan 2, 3. Pelliot discusses this group in Paul Pelliot, Le Ho¯ja et le Sayyid Husain de l’histoire des Ming. Leiden 1948, 132. ˙ ˘

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

239

which possibly dates from this period, as it is a time when Muslims were fleeing Hami and moving to the safety of the Chinese cities. The Turfan ambassadors, who had been detained since tribute relations were shut off in 1495, were released and sent home in 1499.26 Laiwen III, in which an ambassador sent by Ahmad, who has been living at the Court’s expense, seeks an ˙ extension of his and other ambassadors’ stipends until they have left China, could be from this year, which is the latest definite date for any of the laiwen. Sultan Ahmad died and his brother Mansur became Sultan of Turfan in 1504. It ˙ would have been as Shanba’s envoy that Sayyid Husain sent another tribute ˙ mission in 1508, the third year of Zhengde. ‘Ming shi’ records that in 1511, the sixth year of Zhengde, following a thaw in relations between Mansur and the Court, Sayyid Husain and Dudu Manhalasan ˙ were ordered to escort back to Turfan Zhen Tiemuer 真帖木兒, a royal prince, Sultan Ahmad’s son, who as an envoy of Turfan had been detained at the Chinese ˙ border during the closure of tribute relations with Turfan.27 The name Manhalasan 滿哈剌三 in the Chinese records appears to be a transposition of Manla Hasan 滿剌哈三, which is the name of Maula Hasan, the writer of Laiwen VI, a petition seeking documentary verification of his dudu status. As ‘Ming shi’ records that he was a dudu in 1511, then the petition must be from some time before this and can be no later than this. In winter of 1515, the tenth year of Zhengde, Sayyid Husain brought tribute to the court at Beijing again,28 probably for the last ˙ time. This is the latest possible date for the mosque petition, and for the short tribute form bearing the name Husain, and the latest possible date which can be ˙ proposed for any of the laiwen. Thus, the earliest date for the Persian laiwen is 1473, the year Sultan ‘Ali invaded Hami, and the latest is 1515, Sayyid Husain’s last tribute mission, which ˙ could relate to any of the Husain letters. This period of forty-two years represents ˙ a time frame within which the dates of the other letters can be guessed at, and the date of compilation of the ‘Huihuiguan ke’ 回回館課 and other ke 課 collections, and the subsequent ‘Huayiyiyu’ compilations must be later than this. In 1516, the eleventh year of Zhengde, Sayyid Husain and Maula Hasan were ˙ ordered to Turfan again, this time to return a hostage and a seal which had been 29 stolen. It was apparently at this time that Sayyid Husain formed a close asso˙ ciation with Mansur, which led to accusations of treason against him. The following year, 1517, the twelfth year of Zhengde, he was imprisoned for treason (neiying 內應), taken to Beijing in fetters and put in the Board of Punishments 26 27 28 29

Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8532. Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8521. Wang Zongzai, 1924, juan 2, 5. Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8522.

240

Graeme Ford

prison, where he languished for two years. In 1519, he managed through bribery to obtain a meeting with the Emperor. He and his nephew Mı¯r Muhammad ˙ somehow became immediate favourites, were given the Imperial Surname Zhu 朱, and accompanied the Emperor on his progress south to Nanjing. He remained under the Emperor’s personal protection for three years. It wasn’t until the Zhengde Emperor died and the Jiaqing Emperor took over in 1522 that Sayyid Husain was executed together with his nephew.30 ˙

The ‘Huihuiguan’ laiwen texts The following are the Chinese and Persian texts in the Toyo Bunko manuscript,31 and some of Honda Minobu’s transcriptions.32 The translations are from the Chinese text. The Persian glossings cannot be grammatically translated and can only be understood by following the Chinese text word by word.

Laiwen I Tribute letter from Sultan Ahmad ˙ No country name appears in this laiwen but it is evidently from Ahmad, who ˙ became Sultan of Turfan after the death of his father Sultan ‘Ali in 1478.33 He sent tribute missions to the Ming Court until 1488, when the Emperor gave orders for Turfan embassies to be detained at Ganzhou, following Ahmad’s attack on Hami ˙ and his killing of the Hami ruler Hanshen. It was not until 1497 that regular tribute relations were resumed, continuing until Ahmad’s death in 1504. The ˙ letter must date either from the period 1478–1488 or the later period 1497–1504. 大明皇帝前, 速壇阿黑麻王奏. 我情願與朝廷出氣力, 今奏討金甲, 金盔, 金鞘刀, 撒 袋, 箭描, 金弓, 各樣顏色粧的車, 各樣顏色粧的磁瓶. 琵琶, 箏, 笛, 等件. 今差使臣火 只馬黑麻副（ ）阿力等, 進貢阿魯骨馬二匹, 韃靼馬二匹, 騸馬三匹, 去了怎生恩 賜. 奏得聖旨知道. Before the Great Ming Emperor, Sultan Ahmad Wang makes a petition. I am willing to ˙ exert strength with the Court. Now a petition is made requesting golden armour, golden helmets, sa¯da¯f and arrows, gold painted bows, carts decorated in all colours, porcelain vases decorated in all colours, pipas, guitars, flutes, and other items. Now I send am30 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8523. Bret Hinsch suggests there was a sexual relationship between the Emperor and Sayyid Husain, but doesn’t provide any evidence for it (Bret Hinsch, Passions of the Cut Sleeve, the ˙Male Homosexual Tradition in China, Berkeley 1990, 142). 31 Rare manuscript Huayi yiyu chaoben 華夷譯語抄本, 18 ce 册XI-5–2 Toyo Bunko, Tokyo. 32 Honda Minobu 本田 實信, 「回回館譯語」に就いて (On the Hui-hui-kuan I-yü [ChinesePersian Vocabulary]), Sapporo 1963, 64–73. 33 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8515.

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

241

bassador ilchi Khwajah Ma¯hma¯, Ambassador Far’ ‘Alı¯, and others to bring tribute of ˙ argumaq horses, two; Mongolian horses two; and geldings, three. When they have gone, how will generosity be bestowed. Petitioning for the sacred command to be known. ‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺗﻠﺒﯿﺪﻩ ﺟﻮﺷﻦ‬،‫ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﺿﯽ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﻗﻮﺕ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ‬،‫ﭘﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﯾﺪ‬ ‫ ﻫﺮ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻥ‬،‫ ﻫﺮﺍﻟﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﻧﮑﻬﺎﻉ ﺁﺭﺍﯾﺸﯽ ﺩﯼ ﮐﺮﺩﻭﻥ‬،‫ ﺯﺭ ﻧﻘﺶ ﮐﻤﺎﻥ‬،‫ ﺳﺎﺩﺍﻕ ﺗﯿﺮ‬،‫ ﺯﺭ ﻧﯿﺎﻡ ﮐﺎﺭﺩ‬،‫ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺯﺭﺭﯾﻦ‬،‫ﺯﺭﺭﯾﻦ‬ ‫ﺍ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﻓﺮﻉ‬،‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﺧﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﺎﺣﻢ‬،‫ ﺩﯾﮑﺮﺍﻟﻮﺍﻉ‬،‫ ﻧﺎﯼ‬،‫ ﺍﯾﺘﻐﺎﻥ‬،‫ ﺭﺑﺎﺏ‬،‫ ﻻﺟﻮﺩﯼ‬،‫ﺭﻧﮑﻬﺎﻉ ﺍﺭﺍﯾﺸﯽ ﺩﯼ ﮐﻮﺯﻩ‬ ‫ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻎ‬،‫ ﺟﮑﻮﻧﻪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺩﻫﺪ‬،‫ ﺑﺮﻭ ﺷﺪ‬،‫ ﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺳﺮ‬،‫ ﺍﺳﺐ ﻣﻐﻮﻝ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺎﺭ‬،‫ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺍﺭﻋﻮﻣﺎﻕ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺮ‬،‫ﻋﻠﯽ ﻏﯿﺮﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬

Laiwen II Petition from Sayyid Husain about a mosque ˙ Sayyid Husain, a Muslim prince of Hami, first appears in 1491, the fourth year of ˙ Hongzhi, when the ‘Siyiguan kao’ 四夷館考 records that he was sent from Hami to Turfan bearing an imperial letter for Ahmad.34 He must already have been a ˙ member of the Garrison personnel at that time, to be sent on that errand by the Ming court, but it is not until 1494 that we read of his being enfeoffed, like many of the Muslim, Uighur and Qara Qoi elite of Hami, as a military overseer with the title of dudu.35 Thus, 1494 is the earliest possible date for this letter. The latest is 1515, Sayyid Husain’s last tribute mission. This petition could have been made at ˙ any time until then. The mosque cannot be identified. A possible candidate is the “multicolored mosque” huase qingzhensi 花色清真寺 in Linxia City 臨夏市 in Gansu, built during Chenghua 1465–1487.36 哈密使臣都督寫亦虎仙, 大明皇帝前奏. 有各處城裏蓋的禮拜寺, 蒙朝廷都與了寺 額. 今肅州城外原有舊蓋的禮拜寺, 有好日期, 回回人去寺裏焚修, 拜天祝延聖壽萬 萬年. 今仰望朝廷可憐見, 將這禮拜寺給與寺額, 都是朝廷的福利, 奏得聖旨知道. Hami ambassador Dudu Sayyid Husain memorialises before the Great Ming Emperor. ˙ There are mosques built within cities in some places which have been given temple status by the Court. Now at an old-built mosque which was outside the city of Suzhou, on auspicious days, Muslims have gone into the mosque and burned incense and disciplined themselves, to worship heaven and pray for your Divine Life to be extended for thousands of years. Now we look up to you beseeching that the Court will view us with pity and give this mosque temple status. This is all the Court’s welfare. Petitioning for the sacred command to be known. ‫ﻗﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﺩﻭﺩﻭ ﺳﯿﺪ ﺣﺴﯿﻦ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﯾﺪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻫﺮ ﺟﺎﯼ ﺷﻬﺮﺍﺳﺘﺮﻗﺎﻉ ﺩﯼ ﺍﺩﺍﺏ ﻧﯿﺎﺯ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﻋﻨﺎﯾﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﺑﯿﺸﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺳﻮ ﺟﯿﻮﺷﻬﺮ ﺑﯿﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻫﺴﺖ ﮐﻬﻨﻪ ﻗﺎﻉ ﺩﯼ ﺍﺩﺏ ﻧﯿﺎﺯ ﺑﻮﯼ ﺑﺴﻮﺯﺩ ﻧﯿﺎﺯﺍﺳﺘﻤﺎﻥ‬

34 Wang Zongzai, 1924, juan 2, 3. 35 L. Carrington Goodrich (ed.), Dictionary of Ming Biography, New York, NY 1976, 1152. 36 Michael Dillon, China’s Muslim Hui Community: Migration, Settlement and Sects, Richmond 1999, 119.

242

Graeme Ford

‫ﺩﻋﺎﮐﻮ ﮐﻮﯾﻨﺪﻩ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺗﻤﻦ ﺗﻤﻦ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﻭﺍﺭﯼ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﺭﺣﻢ ﻧﻤﺎﻉ ﺯﯾﺎﻧﮏ ﺍﯾﻦ ﺁﺩﺏ ﻧﯿﺎﺯ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﺑﯿﺸﺎﻧﯽ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﺩﯼ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺳﻮﺩ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻎ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬

Laiwen III Petition about an ambassador’s stipend This second letter bearing Ahmad’s name is a petition by an ambassador of ˙ Sultan Ahmad who has been living at the expense of the court, seeking an ˙ extension of the court stipend for himself and other ambassadors who will be leaving China. He could have been one of the 127 ambassadors who were detained in 1492 and released in 1499. That would date this petition to 1499, as it is from the ambassadors at the time they are leaving. That there were a number of ambassadors concerned in this petition is shown by the translator’s use of the pluraliser mei 每 in “your servants” nubimei 奴婢每,37 glossed in Persian as banda[g]a¯n, plural of bandah. 迤西土魯番王差來使臣撒里把失, 大明皇帝洪福前奏, 有速壇阿黑麻王差奴婢, 為 歸順朝廷, 赴金闕下叩頭進貢. 蒙重賞賜了, 奴婢每自入境來穿的喫的都是朝廷 的.今仰望朝廷可憐見, 奴婢每若到甘州, 將廩給休住了, 待奴婢每出境. 奏得聖旨知 道. Sa¯li-ba¯shı¯, an ambassador sent here by the Wang of Turfan in the west, petitions before the flooding happiness of the Great Ming Emperor. It was Sultan Ahmad Wang who sent ˙ your servant, acting in obedience to the court, to proceed beneath the Golden Doorway and knock my head and bring tribute. We have been well-treated. Everything your servants have worn and eaten since entering the border is from the Court. Now it is hoped that the Court will have pity on us. When your servants arrive at Ganzhou, may our stipends not be stopped until your servants have gone outside the border. Petitioning so that the sacred command will be known. ‫ﻃﺮﻑ ﻣﻐﺮﺏ ﻃﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﺳﺎﻟﯽ ﺑﺎﺛﯽ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺑﺰﺭﮎ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻫﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﯼ ﺍﻧﻘﯿﺎﺩ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺯﯾﺮﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﻪ ﺯﺭﺭﯾﻦ ﺳﺮ ﺯﺩﻩ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﻋﻨﺎﯾﺖ ﮐﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﺸﺮﯾﻘﻬﺎﻉ ﺷﺪ ﺑﻨﺪﮐﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﯽ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﭘﻮﺷﺶ ﺩﯼ ﺣﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺩﯼ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﺩﯼ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﻭﺍﺭﻡ ﺩﺭﮐﺎﻩ ﺭﻫﻢ ﻧﻤﺎﻉ ﺑﻨﺪﮐﺎﻥ ﺍﮐﺮ ﺭﺳﯿﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻗﻤﺠﯽ ﺯﯾﺎﻧﮏ ﻋﻠﻮﻓﻪ ﻣﮑﻦ ﺑﺎﺵ ﺷﺪ ﺻﯿﺎﻓﺖ ﺑﻨﺪﮐﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﯽ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻎ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬

Laiwen IV Tribute letter from Sulta¯n Zama¯n Wang of the land of Balkh ˙ Abu¯ Sa‘ı¯d’s son Sulta¯n Ahmad ruled the Timurid Empire 1469–94, so Zama¯n, ˙ ˙ whose identity is unknown, must be his subordinate in Balkh.

37 Hu/Huang 1981, 115 and elsewhere gives examples of this plural, and also nimei 你每; you, plural, 144.

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

243

白勒黑地面速壇宰蠻王, 奏大命皇帝. 國土永昌, 公道如唐太宗一般. 奴婢蒙本國王 照舊道理而行, 不敢悖逆. 今差奴婢進貢, 西馬二匹, 望乞收受便益. Sulta¯n Zama¯n Wang of the land of Balkh petitions the Great Ming Emperor. Your ˙ empire’s lands eternally flourish. Your justice and reason are equal to Taizong of Tang (Noshirwan the Just). Your servant acts according to the old principle, not daring to rebel or disobey. Now your servant has been sent to bring tribute of western (Arabian) horses, two head; hoping and beseeching to receive benefits. ‫ﺩﯾﺎﺭ ﺑﻠﺦ ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻣﻤﻠﮑﺖ ﺧﺎﮎ ﯾﻮﻧﮏ ﭼﺎﻧﮏ ﻋﺪﻝ ﻃﺮﯾﻘﺖ ﺟﻮﻥ ﻧﻮﺷﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﯾﮑﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﻋﻨﺎﯾﺖ ﻋﯿﻦ ﻣﻤﻠﮑﺖ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﺑﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﮐﻬﻨﻪ ﻃﺮﯾﻘﺘﻬﺎﻉ ﺭﻩ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻧﻪ ﯾﺎﺭﻧﺪ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﯾﺎﻏﯽ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺐ ﺗﺎﺯﯼ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺮ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺑﻐﻨﺪﺍﺭﯾﺪ ﺍﺳﺎﻧﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‬

“Nu¯shva¯n yaksa¯n” (equal to Noshirwan the Just). We cannot know to which historical figure the original Persian letter alluded. The translator rendered it as 唐太宗 Taizong of Tang. In the Persian gloss it is nu¯shva¯n, which must be an abbreviated or miscopied form of noshı¯rva¯n, which goes with the previous word justice, ‘adl, to form an allusion to Noshirwan-i ‘Adil or Noshirwan the Just, one of the titles of Khosrau I, the twentieth Sassanid Emperor, during whose reign from 531 to 579 the Sassanid Empire reached its peak of glory and prosperity.38 This is the only instance of the translation of a culturally bound idiom in the laiwen. The translator who did the Persian glossing must have known or been able to guess the original Persian allusion.

Laiwen V Khwa¯jah Hamdu¯ng’s request for a travel permit This is the only example of a petition from beyond the tributary circle, although Khwa¯jah Hamdu¯ng might have travelled to China with a diplomatic mission. There is no way to date it. 敵米石地面火只罕東, 大明皇帝前奏, 奴婢是出家人, 經今四十餘年不用煙火食, 只 用果子. 今望聖恩憐憫與奴婢一紙文書, 各處遊方行走. 祝延聖壽萬萬歲. Khwa¯ja Hamdu¯n(g) of the land of Damascus petitions before the Great Ming Emperor. Your servant is a devotee. For more than forty years until now I have not used fire to prepare food but have only eaten fruits. Now I hope that the royal kindness will have pity and give your servant a written letter to travel everywhere for religious purposes. Wishing the sacred lifetime will last for myriads of years. ‫ﺩﯾﺎﺭ ﺩﻣﺸﻖ ﺧﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻫﻤﺪﻭﻧﮏ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ ﺩﺭﻭﯾﺸﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺟﻬﻞ ﺯﯾﺎﺩﺕ ﺳﺎﻝ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﯾﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﺨﺎﺭ ﺁﺗﺶ ﻧﻌﻤﺖ ﻫﻤﯿﻦ ﺑﺎﯾﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﯿﻮﻩ ﻫﺎﻉ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺷﺎﻫﯽ ﺭﻫﻢ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﯾﮏ ﮐﺎﻏﺰ ﻧﺎﻣﻬﺎﻉ ﻫﺮﺟﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺳﯿﺎﺣﺘﻪ ﺍﻃﺮﺍﻑ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﻭﯾﺪﻩ ﺩﻋﺎﮐﻮﯾﻨﺪ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺷﺎﻫﯽ ﺗﻤﻦ ﺗﻤﻦ ﺳﺎﻟﮑﯽ‬

38 Percy Molesworth Sykes, A History of Persia, London 1930, 449ff.

244

Graeme Ford

VI Personnel request from Maula¯ Hasan of Hami Garrison ˙ Maula¯ Hasan is a prince of Hami, enfeoffed by the court as dudu, senior military ˙ officer in charge of the wei at Hami, who petitioned the court in Persian, seeking official confirmation of his status. ‘Ming shi’ records a mission by Dudu Maula¯ Hasan to Turfan in 1511, so this letter is from before that year. ˙

哈密衞使臣滿剌哈三, 上位前奏, 奴婢原是都督簽事職事, 今蒙聖恩陞奴婢都督職 事, 有例該更敕, 換名, 乞照舊例便益.

Ambassador Manla¯ or Maula¯ Hasan of Hami garrison before the high throne petitions: ˙ your servant originally had the office of assistant chief commissioner (dudu qianshi). Now royal kindness has been received, promoting your servant to the office of chief commissioner (dudu). There is the rule that the imperial orders should be re-issued and the names changed. I beg to receive favour according to the old rule. ‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﯾﺖ‬،‫ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ ﺩﻭﺩﻭ ﺳﯿﺎﻡ ﺷﯽ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﮐﺎﺭ‬،‫ﻗﺎﻣﻞ ﻭﯼ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﻣﻨﻼ ﺣﺴﻦ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺑﺎﻻﻉ ﺗﺨﺖ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﻗﻮﻟﯽ ﮐﻬﻨﻪ ﺍﺳﺎﻧﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‬،‫ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻧﺎﻡ‬،‫ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻗﻮﻟﯽ ﻻﯾﻖ ﭘﺎﺱ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻥ‬.‫ ﻣﻨﺼﺐ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﻭﺩﻭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ ﮐﺎﺭ‬،‫ﻟﻄﻒ ﺷﺎﻫﯽ‬

Laiwen VII Tribute letter from Ja’far Sa¯diq Wang of Basra ˙ ˙ This is Amiot’s ‘15ème supplique’. The monarch Ja’far Sa¯diq can’t be identified, ˙ but he was probably a ruler of Basra before it was incorporated into the Savafid Empire in 1508. It is an example of a composite tribute letter, where the initial diplomatic flourishes are evidently translated from the Basra sovereign’s letter, while the latter part consists of standard tribute list phrases. 大明皇帝, 明同日月, 志過乾坤, 天下遠近, 無所不至, 奴婢是白思勒地面, 者法兒撒 的革王差來使臣買模, 今進金錢豹一對, 乞照例給賞便益. The Great Ming Emperor is as bright as the sun and moon. His will surpasses earth and sky, far and near under heaven there is no place where it does not reach. Your servant is Ambassador Maimu¯n sent here by Ja’far Sa¯diq Wang of the land of Basra now bringing ˙ ˙ to court gold coin (spotted) leopards, one pair; entreating according to the rule to be rewarded with benefits. ‫ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ‬.‫ ﻧﯿﺴﺖ ﺷﻮﯼ ﻧﻪ ﺭﺳﯿﺪ‬،‫ ﺭﻭﯼ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻧﺰﺩﯾﮏ‬،‫ ﻫﻤﺖ ﮐﺪﺷﺘﻪ ﺳﻤﺂﻉ ﺍﺭﺽ‬،‫ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ‬ ‫ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﻗﻮﻟﯽ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ‬،‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﮐﺸﺶ ﯾﻮﺯ ﻗﺎﺭ ﯾﮏ ﺩﻭﻉ‬،‫ ﺟﻔﺎﺭ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﻣﯿﻤﻮﻥ‬،‫ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ ﺩﯾﺎﺭ ﺑﺼﺮﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﺸﺮﯾﻔﻬﺎﯼ ﺁﺳﺎﻧﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‬

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

245

Laiwen VIII Hami’s appeal for help against the attack by Sultan ‘Ali This letter refers to the invasion of Hami in 1473. 上天化生,乾坤之主, 護佑, 大明洪福皇帝, 福壽延長. 奴婢是哈密差來使臣虎仙, 今 有土魯番地面速壇阿力王, 引兵攻圍哈密城池, 殺死人眾. 今望聖恩慈恤遠人, 遣將 前去救濟生靈. 奏得聖旨知道. Born of highest heaven, heaven and earth’s master and protector, Great Ming Immense Fortune Emperor, may your fortune and life last long. Your servant is ilchi Husain, sent here from Hami. Now Sultan Ali Wang of the land of Turfan has led an army and attacked the city and reservoirs of Hami, killing many people. Now royal kindness and pity z¯ı su¯ (cixu慈恤,) for far off people are hoped for, for a general to be sent to go there ˙ to help. Making the petition to know the command. ‫ ﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺯﺍﻧﯽ‬،‫ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻋﻤﺮ ﭘﺎﯾﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺭﺍﺯ‬،‫ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺑﺰﺭﮎ ﺧﺎﻥ‬،‫ﺧﺰﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺳﻤﺂﻉ ﺍﺭﺽ ﺟﯽ ﺧﺎﻭﻧﺪ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺖ‬ ‫ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺳﭙﺎﻩ ﮐﺮﺩ ﺑﯿﺞ ﺭﻣﯿﺪﻩ‬،‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﻫﺴﺖ ﺩﯾﺎﺭ ﻃﺮﻓﺎﻥ ﺳﻠﻄﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ‬،‫ﻗﺎﻡ ﻝ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻗﺎﻣﻞ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﺣﺴﯿﻦ‬ ‫ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺑﺮﻭ ﻓﺮﯾﺎﺩ ﺭﺱ‬،‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺷﺎﻫﯽ ﺻﯽ ﺳﻮﻉ ﺩﻭﺭ ﮐﺴﺎﻥ‬،‫ ﮐﺸﺘﻪ ﻣﺮﺩﻩ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺟﻤﻊ‬،‫ﺧﻮﺿﭽﻪ‬ ‫ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻊ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬،‫ﺧﻼﯾﻘﺎﻥ‬

Laiwen IX Tribute letter from Egypt Within the period identified by the other laiwen, the sender of this laiwen is probably Al-Malik al-Ashraf Sayf al-dı¯n Qa¯ytba¯y, who was the eighteenth Burji Mamluk Sultan of Egypt from 1468 to 1496. His reign fell into two parts, first a period of consolidation of power and travel and rich patronage of cities up to 1481, then a period of internal rebellion, outbreaks of plague, which decimated the population, and attacks by the Ottoman Empire, which was eventually to conquer Egypt.39 It is likely the embassy bearing this letter was sent in the earlier period. Qa¯ytba¯y’s title of honour Malik ‫ﻣﻠﮏ‬, king (mailike 脉力克) would have appeared first on his letter and was evidently chosen by the ‘Huihuiguan’ translator to serve as a shortened form of his name in the Chinese translation. The phrase “according to the example of my father and grandfather” could refer to two earlier tribute missions from Egypt recorded in ‘Ming shi’, one in the middle of Yongle, and another in 1441, the sixth year of Zhengtong 正統.40 The monarch who sent the first embassy is not named. It could have been al-Malik alNa¯sir Faraj, who ruled from 1399 to 1412, the son of al-Malik al-Za¯hir Barqu¯q (the ˙ founder of the regime of the Circassian Mamlu¯ks or Burji Sultans who ruled Egypt from 1382 to 1517), or his successor al-Malik al-Mu’ayyad Shaykh who 39 Carl F. Petry, Twilight of Majesty: The Reigns of the Mamlu¯k Sultans al-Ashra¯f Qa¯ytba¯y and Qa¯nsu¯h al-Ghawrı¯ in Egypt, Seattle 1993, 73–88. ˙ 40 Zhang 1975, juan 332, 8619.

246

Graeme Ford

ruled from 1412 to 1421.41 The 1441 embassy is recorded as from Prince Sultan Ashraf, (Wang suolutan Ashilafu 王鎖魯檀阿失剌福), who can be identified as Ashraf Sayf al-dı¯n Barsba¯y, who was the ninth Burji Mamluk sultan of Egypt from AD 1422 to 1438.42 Barsba¯y’s title of honour Ashra¯f ‫ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻑ‬exalted, noble, which would have appeared first on his letter, was chosen by the ‘Huihuiguan’ translator to represent his full name. There is a problem with the date of this mission, which Bretschneider tries to explain by observing that although this monarch died in June 1438, it is not unlikely that the envoy did not reach China until three years later.43 However, this same mission is mentioned in the Turfan chapter in ‘Ming shi’ as passing through Turfan on its return journey in 1441,44 and it is possible that the date is mixed up, and it arrived in China earlier. The record informs us that the Egyptian missions travelled by the overland, not the sea route. 世主皇帝統理天下生民, 罔不悅服, 咸得膽仰. 微小蜜思兒國王脉力克奏, 今照我父 祖的例, 特差使臣古禮, 進阿魯骨馬三匹. 望照例收受便益. Master of the world, the Emperor rules all living people in the world; none does not gladly submit. All obtain courage and faith. Mailike, King of the small country of Misr petitions (zou). Now according to the example of my fathers and grandfathers I have specially sent Ambassador Guri to bring argumak horses, three, hoping to receive benefits according to the rule. ‫ ﮐﻤﺘﺮﻩ ﻣﺼﺮ ﻣﻤﻠﮑﺖ‬،‫ ﻫﻤﮑﺎﻥ ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﻩ‬،‫ ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻧﻪ ﺧﺸﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﻮ‬،‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﻭﻧﺪ ﺿﺒﺖ ﻃﺮﯾﻘﺘﻪ ﺭﻭﯼ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﺯﺍﺩﻩ ﺭﻋﯿﺖ‬ ‫ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﻓﺮﺳﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﮐﺮﯼ ﮐﺸﺶ ﺍﺭﻋﻮﻣﺎﻕ ﺳﻪ‬،‫ ﺍﮐﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﻣﺎ ﭘﺪﺭ ﺟﺪ ﺩﯼ ﻗﻮﻟﯽ‬،‫ﻭﺍﻧﮏ ﻣﻠﮑﻪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﯿﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﺑﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﻗﻮﻟﯽ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺑﻐﻨﺪﺍﺭﯾﺪ ﺁﺳﺎﻧﯽ ﺷﻮﺩ‬،‫ﺳﺮ‬

Short tribute forms The remaining seventeen laiwen, Laiwen X–XXIV are not letters, but are all examples of shorter and longer form tribute lists, fangwuzhuang in which the same formula is used, with the insertion of different information. Twelve of the laiwen are examples of the same shorter tribute form, and five are examples of the same longer tribute form.

41 Jean-Claude Garcin, The Regime of the Circassian Mamlu¯ks, in: Carl F. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, Cambridge 1998, 291–292. 42 Garcin 1998, 293–294. 43 Emil Bretschneider, Mediaeval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources fragm. towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of Central and Western Asia from the 13th to the 17th Century, Osnabrück 1987, 308–309. 44 Zhang 1975, juan 329, 8529.

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

247

Laiwen X 撒馬兒罕阿力使臣, 大明皇帝前, 進貢駝二隻, 玉石五十斤, 望乞收受. 求討各色段 子, 熱藥. 望乞恩賜. 奏得聖旨知道. Ambassador ‘Ali of Samarkand before the Great Ming Emperor presents two camels and fifty jin of jade hoping they are acceptable, and requesting coloured silks and fever medicine, hoping that kindness will be shown. Petitioning for the sacred command to be known. ‫ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻦ ﻫﺮ‬،‫ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﺑﻐﻨﺪﺍﺭﯾﺪ‬،‫ ﯾﺸﻢ ﺳﻨﮏ ﺑﻨﺠﺎﻩ ﻣﻦ‬،‫ﺳﻤﺮﻗﻨﺪ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺍﺷﺘﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺟﯽ‬ ‫ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻊ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬،‫ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺩﻫﺪ‬،‫ ﮐﺮﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﻭ‬،‫ﺭﻧﮏ ﺗﻮﺍﺭ‬

Laiwen XV 天方國使臣阿老丁, 大明皇帝前, 進貢梭甫十段, 玉石五十斤, 眼鏡二十副, 求討織金 各色羅段茶葉酒金箋紙望乞恩賜奏得聖旨知道. Ambassador ‘Ala¯’u’d-dı¯n of Mecca before the Great Ming Emperor presents ten pieces of su¯f, fifty catties of jade and twenty pairs of eyeglasses, and requesting gold woven cloth, gauze of all colours, wine, and gold document paper, hoping that kindness will be shown. Petitioning for the sacred command to be known. ،‫ ﻋﻨﺎﯾﺖ ﺑﯿﺴﺖ ﻓﻮ‬،‫ ﯾﺸﻢ ﺳﻨﮏ ﺑﻨﺠﺎﻩ ﻣﻦ‬،‫ﻣﻤﻠﮑﺖ ﮐﻌﺒﻪ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﻋﻠﯽ ﺍﻟﺪﯾﻦ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺻﻮﻑ ﺩﻩ ﻗﻄﻌﻪ‬ ‫ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻊ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬،‫ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺩﻫﺪ‬،‫ ﮐﺎﻏﺰ ﺯﺭ ﺷﺎﺵ‬،‫ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻦ ﺯﺭﺑﻔﺖ ﻫﺮ ﺭﻧﮏ ﻻﯼ ﻗﻄﻌﻪ‬

Laiwen XXI 哈密使臣虎仙, 大明皇帝前, 進貢駝二隻, 西馬十匹, 求討織金羅段, 夏布. 望乞恩賜, 奏得聖旨知道. Ambassador Husain of Hami before the Great Ming Emperor presents two camels and ˙ ten western horses, and requesting gold woven cloth, gauze and summer cloth, hoping that kindness will be shown. Petitioning for the sacred command to be known. ‫ ﺍﻣﯿﺪ‬،‫ ﻗﻄﻊ ﮐﻨﺪﯾﺮ‬،‫ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻦ ﺯﺭﺑﻔﺖ ﻻﯼ‬،‫ ﺍﺳﺐ ﺗﺎﺯﯼ ﺩﻩ ﺳﺮ‬،‫ﻗﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﯾﻠﺠﯽ ﺣﺴﯿﻦ ﺑﯿﺶ ﺩﺍﯾﻤﯿﻨﮏ ﺧﺎﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺍﺷﺘﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺟﯽ‬ ‫ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﯾﺮﻟﯿﻊ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﯽ‬،‫ﮐﻪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﺩﻫﺪ‬

248

Graeme Ford

Longer tribute forms There are five tribute forms all in the same longer format for Turfan and Samarkand: These don’t appear in the Toyo Bunko manuscript. The transcriptions were made by Honda Minobu from the copy of ‘Huihuiguan yiyu’ 回回館譯語 in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, which he calls text A, or the Berlin text.

Laiwen XXII 土魯番使臣阿力等, 大明皇帝前奏. 今奴婢照舊例赴金門下叩頭, 進貢阿魯骨馬五 匹, 玉石一百斤, 望乞收受. 朝廷前求討織金段子, 高麗布, 各色絨線,茶葉等物. 望乞 恩賜, 奏得聖旨知道. Ambassador Ali of Turfa¯n, with others, before the Great Ming Emperor, makes a pe˙ tition, and now your servant, in accordance with the old rule, goes beneath the golden gateway, knocks his head and makes tribute of five argumaq horses and one hundred catties of jade, hoping that they are acceptable, requesting before the court gold-woven cloth, Korean cloth, coloured soft woollen cloth and tea leaves, hoping that kindness will be shown, making a petition to know the command. turfa¯n ¯ılchı¯ ‘alı¯ ghairah (p)ı¯sh da¯¯ımin(g) kha¯n ‘arzah mı¯-da¯rad, aknu¯n ba-misa¯l qaulı¯ ˙ kuhna bah zı¯r dar zarrı¯n sar zadah taqdı¯m ‘aru¯ma¯q (p)anj sar yashm san(g) yak sad mann u¯mı¯d kih qabu¯l bi-ghanda¯rı¯d pish dar-ga¯h dar-khwa¯stan tuvar zar-baft har ran(g) abrishim rishtah (cha yah u¯mı¯d kih) lutf dihad, ‘arza da¯shta¯h yarlı¯g bi-da¯ni ˙ ˙

Laiwen XXIII 撒馬兒罕地面奴婢哈非子, 大明皇帝前奏. 今奴婢照舊例赴金門下叩頭, 進貢西馬, 達馬, 鋼鑽等物. 望乞收受, 朝廷前求討織金花樣段子, 酒, 金箋紙等物. 望乞恩賜, 奏 得聖旨知道. Your servant Ha¯fiz of the land of Samarkand, before the Great Ming Emperor, makes a ˙ petition, and now your servant, in accordance with the old rule, goes beneath the golden gateway, knocks his head and makes tribute of western horses, Mongolian horses, diamonds and other goods, hoping that they are acceptable, requesting before the court floral patterned gold-woven silk, wine and gold document paper, hoping that kindness will be shown, making a petition to know the command. samarqand bandah ¯ılchı¯ Ha¯fiz (p)ı¯sh da¯¯ımin(g) kha¯n ‘arzah mı¯-da¯rad, aknu¯n ba-misa¯l ˙ ˙ qaulı¯ kuhna bah zı¯r dar zarrı¯n sar zadah taqdı¯m asb ta¯zı¯ asb mughu¯l alma¯s (ch)ı¯zı¯ dı¯(g)ar u¯mı¯d kih qabu¯l bi-ghanda¯rı¯d pish dar-ga¯h dar-khwa¯stan zar-baft (g)ulda¯r tuva¯r ka¯ghaz zar sha¯sh dı¯g)ar (ch)ı¯zı¯ u¯mı¯d kih lutf dihad ‘arza da¯shta¯h yarlı¯g bi-da¯ni ˙ ˙

The Persian College Exemplary Letters in the Late Ming ‘Huayiyiyu’ Dictionary

249

Conclusion The texts in ‘Huayiyiyu’ show that Persian was used for tributary and petition purposes with Hami, and for tributary purposes with Moghulistan, Samarkand, and other westward countries throughout the second half of the fifteenth century. It was after the appointment of Translating College Supervisors in 1494 that the keeping of records and uniform testing of students began. The method of testing using word-for-word glossed texts doesn’t indicate that the translators had fallen into bad grammar. On the contrary, the translations into Chinese show that the linguists still knew their languages and cultural knowledge and practised the same exact style of translating in that direction as their predecessors had done. No translations into Persian survive by which we can judge their skills in the other direction. Harsh judgement of the Persian glossings is out of place. They simply show us a method of language testing which was used in the colleges through the second half of the Ming era. The compilation of ‘Huayiyiyu’ in the reign of the Wanli Emperor shows that all the colleges were still active and able to put word lists together, but the numbers of exemplary texts needed in each language were unavailable at that time when few tribute missions came, so the old collections of ke tests had to be used. However, the fine, fluent calligraphy in each language in the Ming manuscript copy shows that skill at least was still practised to a high standard in the colleges after 1579.

Bibliography Emil Bretschneider, Mediaeval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources fragm. towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of Central and Western Asia from the 13th to the 17th Century, Osnabrück 1987. Chen Cheng 陳誠/Li Xian 李暹, Xiyu xingcheng ji, Xiyu fanguo zhi 西域行程記, 西域番國 志, ed. Zhou Liankuan 周連寬 (Zhongwai jiaotong shiji congkan 中外交通史籍叢刊), Beijing 2000. Michael Dillon, China’s Muslim Hui Community: Migration, Settlement and Sects, Richmond 1999. Mı¯rza¯ Haidar Dug˙lat, Tarikh-i-rashidi: A History of the Khans of Moghulistan, trans. by ˙ Wheeler M. Thackston, Cambridge, MA 1996. Jean-Claude Garcin, The regime of the Circassian Mamlu¯ks, in: Carl F. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, Cambridge 1998. L. Carrington Goodrich (ed.), Dictionary of Ming Biography, New York 1976. Bret Hinsch, Passions of the Cut Sleeve, the Male Homosexual Tradition in China, Berkeley 1990. Honda Minobu 本田 實信, 「回回館譯語」に就いて (On the Hui-hui-kuan I-yü [Chinese-Persian Vocabulary]), Sapporo 1963.

250

Graeme Ford

Hu Zhenhua 胡振华, Huang Runhua 黄润华, Mingdai wenxian “Gaochangguan ke”: Ladingwen zimu yizhu 明代文献《高昌馆课》: 拉丁文字母译注, Xinjiang 1981. Ralph Kauz, Politik und Handel zwischen Ming und Timuriden, Wiesbaden 2005. Kazuo Enoki, Su-chou in Late Ming, in: Studia Asiatica. The Collected Papers of the Late Dr. Kazuo Enuki, Tokyo 1998. Lam Yuan-chu, Memoir on the Campaign against Turfan: An Annotated Translation of Hsü Chin’s P’ing-fan shih-mo written in 1503, in: Journal of Asian History 24/2 (1990). Li Dongyang 李東陽et al., Da Ming huidian 大明會典, 5 vols., Taipeh 1963. Liu Yingsheng 劉迎勝, “Huihuiguan zazi” yu “Huihuiguan yiyu” yanjiu《回回館雑字》 與《回回館譯語》研究, Beijing 2008. Lü Weiqi 呂維祺, Siyiguan ze 四譯館則, Taipeh 1985. Paul Pelliot, Le Ho¯ja et le Sayyid Husain de l’histoire des Ming, Leiden 1948. ˙ ˘ Carl F. Petry, Twilight of Majesty: The Reigns of the Mamlu¯k Sultans al-Ashra¯f Qa¯ytba¯y and Qa¯nsu¯h al-Ghawrı¯ in Egypt, Seattle 1993. ˙ Morris Rossabi, Ming China and Turfan, 1406–1517, in: Central Asiatic Journal 16/3 (1972), 206–225. Percy Molesworth Sykes, A History of Persia, London 1930. Wang Zongzai 王宗載, Siyiguan kao 四夷館考, n.p. 1924. Henry Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither. Being a Collection of Medieval Notices of China, ed. Henri Cordier, 2 vols., London 1914, 1915. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉, Ming shi 明史, Beijing 1975.

James K. Chin

Envoys, Brokers and Interpreters: Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

Entrepôts, commodities, ships, and merchants are the four key themes in any discussion of the maritime history of Asia. Coastal Chinese feature largely in the fourth theme, but in diverse capacities that stretch the boundaries of the category. While they frequently functioned as maritime merchants, peddlers, artisans of various trades and farmers in entrepôts overseas, some of them occasionally played the roles of diplomatic envoys, brokers for the imperial government of China, foreign regimes and commercial companies, as well as piratescum-merchants in the waters of Southeast Asia and East Asia. Based mainly on Chinese sources, this chapter attempts to flesh out three major roles, i. e. envoys, brokers, and interpreters that were frequently assumed by Chinese maritime merchants from South China, those from southern Fujian better known as ‘Hokkiens’ in particular, in the hope of revealing different facets of the roles played by Chinese merchants in both historical maritime Asia and the tribute system of imperial China.

The Korean Peninsula Chinese maritime merchants, especially the Hokkiens, were actively involved in diplomatic affairs between the Song Empire and the Kingdom of Korea. Occasionally, they functioned as diplomatic envoys or agents for the two countries. In 1068, for example, two Hokkien merchants from Quanzhou 泉州, Huang Shen 黃 慎 and Hong Wanlai 洪萬來, were sent to Korea by the Song government, with a confidential letter written by the Emperor Shenzong 神宗 asking for the establishment of friendly relations with the Kingdom of Korea. Huang Shen and Hong Wanlai were warmly received by the Korean authorities, and they returned the following year with an official reply from the Ceremonial Ministry of Korea.1 The 1 Jeong In Ji 鄭麟趾 (comp.), Ko-ryo sa 高麗史 (A History of Korea), Taipei 1972 (reprint), juan 8, Wenzong shijia (Genealogy of Wenzong), Pt. 2; Tuo Tuo 脫脫/Ouyang Xuan 歐陽玄, Song

252

James K. Chin

Chinese records revealed that Huang Shen was dispatched to the Kingdom of Korea again in 1070, but remained silent on the aim and outcome of his second mission.2 Having assumed the throne in 1068, it is likely that the new Song emperor was eager to establish a new diplomatic scenario in East Asia for both Song China and the region. However, the Chinese government had no existing diplomatic channel available to communicate with Korea at that time; hence the Hokkien merchants who regularly plied between Quanzhou and Korea were chosen to transmit important messages between the two regimes. Another case occurred in 1075, when a Quanzhou Hokkien merchant named Fu Xuan 傅旋 requested, with an official document issued by the Ceremonial Ministry of the Korean Kingdom, for the loan of a band of Chinese musicians from the Song court to perform at the Korean court.3 The story of Fu Xuan is quite interesting. Due to huge pressure from the Kingdom of Liao 遼國, located in today’s Northeast China, the Korean Kingdom refrained from maintaining official relations with Song China for 43 years until 1069, when Fu Xuan privately conveyed a message from the Korean king to the Song Emperor Shenzong via the ‘Fujianlu zhuanyunshi’ 福建路轉運使 or Transport Commissioner of Fujian, Zhang Hui 張徽, indicating that the Korean Kingdom was enthusiastically expecting to resume diplomatic connections with the Song dynasty.4 In the meantime, the two Hokkien merchants mentioned above brought back an official letter from the Korean court, asking to re-establish friendly ties with Song China, which further confirmed what Fu Xuan relayed to the Chinese emperor. In other words, the resumption of diplomatic relations between Song China and the Kingdom of Korea, which had been interrupted for 43 years, has to be ascribed to contributions made by Chinese maritime traders. In early Ming, the first country overseas that sent a tributary embassy to China was also Korea. In 1373, Xie Changshou 偰長壽 headed a diplomatic mission to the Ming court to congratulate the Crown Prince on his birthday but was blocked by the Japanese pirates on their way to Nanjing 南京 and the first effort from the Korean Peninsula to be admitted into Ming China’s tribute system thus failed.5 Xie Changshou was an ethnic Uighur from the well-known Xie family of Gaochang 高昌 which is found in today’s Xinjiang. His father Xie Xun 偰遜 had been

2 3

4 5

shi 宋史 (A History of the Song Dynasty), c. 1345, Beijing 1977 (reprint), juan 331, Biography of Luo Zheng. Tuo Tuo/Ouyang Xuan 1977, juan 487, Biography of Korea. Pang Yuanying 龐元英, Wenchang zalu 文昌雜錄 (Things Seen and Heard by an Official at Court), c. 1086, Xuejin Taoyuan Edition 學津討原, Taipei 1985, (reprint), juan 5; Li Tao 李燾, Xu zizhi tongjian changbian 續資治通鑒長編 (Continuation of the Comprehensive Mirror of History for Aid in Government), Beijing 1980, (reprint), juan 261. Pang Yuanying 1985, juan 5. Jeong In Ji 1972, juan 44.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

253

a scholar of the Hanlin Academy 翰林院 during the Yuan dynasty before emigrating to Korea in 1358 to escape from the chaos in China. In 1387, Xie Changshou led another Korean embassy to formally visit China in the hope of negotiating the migrants’ issue between the two countries.6 As shown by the Korean archival documents, Xie Changshou spoke Chinese quite fluently, though he was a Uighur by ethnicity rather than a Han Chinese. What is interesting is the long chat between the founding Emperor Hongwu 洪 武 and the Korean envoy as the dialogue was conducted in plain spoken Chinese rather than genteel and sophisticated classical written Chinese. Emperor Hongwu told Xie Changshou that previously a couple of Korean interpreters had been sent to the Chinese court but he simply could not communicate with those interpreters due to the language barrier. “You (Xie Changshou) were, however, totally different as your father emigrated to Korea from China, and we two could easily understand each other while chatting in Chinese Mandarin. As such, you were able to convey clearly what I said to the Korean King.” The Ming emperor demanded that the Korean kingdom be loyal to the Ming court while Xie Changshou asked for imperial approval to introduce the court ceremony and official costume of Ming China to Korea, which was kindly granted shortly afterwards by Emperor Hong Wu.7 The envoy role played by the Xie family for the court of the Korean Kingdom lasted for two generations. Xie Changshou’s young brother Xie Meishou 偰眉壽 was recruited to the foreign service shortly after Changshou’s death in 1399 and was frequently sent to the Ming court in his capacity as Korean envoy in the early 15th century. As a result, Xie Changshou’s two sons Xie Nai 偰耐 and Xie Zhen 偰 振 also served the Korean government in diplomatic negotiations.8

Japan Japan perhaps entered the tributary system of imperial China as early as A. D. 57.9 Initiated by the Japanese ruler Ashikaga Yoshimitsu 足利义满 (1358–1408), the third shogun of the Muromachi bakufu 室町幕府, bilateral relations between Ming China and Japan were regulated and became normal again. Yoshimitsu was 6 Jeong In Ji 1972, juan 136. 7 Jeong In Ji 1972, juan 136. 8 For the details and relevant analysis, see Chen Shangsheng, Xieshi jiazu yu mingchu d zhonghan guanxi (The Xie Family and the Sino-Korean Bilateral Relations in Early Ming), in: Chen Shangsheng, Zhonghan guanxishi lun (A Study on the History of Sino-Korean Relations), Jinan 1977, 135–170. 9 Jurgis Elisonas, The Inseparable Trinity: Japan’s Relations with China and Korea, in: John Whitney Hall (ed.), The Cambridge History of Japan, vol. 4, New York 1991, 235.

254

James K. Chin

an ardent seeker of Chinese luxury goods. Between 1401 and 1405, he sponsored four embassies to China in pursuit of these commodities. As a result, he was invested with the title “King of Japan” by the Ming emperors Jianwen 建文 (reign 1398–1402) and Yongle 永樂 (reign 1402–1424). An agreement was endorsed that acknowledged Japan’s status as Ming China’s vassal, while the Japanese were permitted to send periodic missions with tribute to China. These diplomatic missions were legitimized with licenses issued in the form of tallies by the Ming court. Thus, the trade that was part and parcel of such embassies was called kanhe maoyi 勘合貿易 (kango¯ trade or tally trade). In other words, Yoshimitsu’s eager acceptance of the Chinese norms of international relations opened the door to bilateral commerce, which the Japanese pursued under cover of obeisance. Ningbo 寧波 was the leading trade port of Zhejiang province, and it was assigned to the Japanese missions as their port of entry into China. From there, the embassy would proceed to the Ming capital, which from 1421 was Beijing. There the envoys presented their tribute such as sulfur, gilt fans, and painted screens, and the chief ambassador was received in audience by the Ming emperor, while the embassy was given gifts for the “King of Japan” (i. e. the Shogun), including sumptuous silken fabrics, porcelain, and other precious objets d’art, as well as large sums of copper cash. The Ming government made official purchases from the cargoes of the Japanese ships and also allowed the Japanese envoys and their accompaniment of merchants to carry on private trade with licensed Chinese merchants. Tribute ships were sent not only by the shogunate itself but also by religious institutions and regional daimyo¯. Thus, for instance, a Japanese tribute fleet headed by the monks To¯yo¯ Inho¯ 東洋允澎 and Nyosan Ho¯tei 如三芳 貞 sailed into Ningbo harbor in 1453. This large-scale mission consisted of 1,200 persons on nine vessels, carrying over one million catties’ weight of sulfur, copper ore, sapanwood, and other commodities.10 The growing volume of imports from Japan, as demonstrated by this large fleet, evidently alarmed the Ming authorities, and the imperial court decided to limit the size of subsequent Japanese missions to three ships. The tally trade was the sole legal channel for the direct exchange of commodities between China and Japan, and for almost a century and a half, i. e. from 1404 to 1549, bilateral relations between the two countries were conducted within such a tributary framework. The first Chinese appointed to be an envoy to Japan sent by the shogunate, however, was not a merchant but a monk known by his Japanese name Ryu¯shitsu Do¯en 龍室道淵. Ryu¯shitsu Do¯en was a native of Ningbo, Zhejiang, who took up residence at the Tenryu¯ji 天龍寺. In 1432, he was dispatched to head a tributary mission to China by Shogun Ashikaga Yoshinori 足利義教. The Ming govern10 Wang Yi-T’ung, Official Relations between China and Japan 1368–1549, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1953, 64.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

255

ment was delighted with the visit of the Japanese embassy headed by an ethnic Chinese, and Emperor Xuande 宣德皇帝 (reign 1428–1436) immediately appointed Ryu¯shitsu Do¯en as abbot of Tenryu¯ji while according him lavish gifts. Moreover, the Ming court dispatched a group of Chinese officials headed by Pan Ci 潘賜 to accompany the Japanese embassy back to Japan.11 An interpreter in the 1432 Japanese embassy named Yuan Gui 元貴was also a sojourning Chinese. Yuan Gui was a native of Yongping 永平, Hebei 河北, and his real Chinese name was Qu Xiang 麯祥. He was abducted by the Japanese wako in coastal Zhejiang when he was young and sold as a slave to Japan. Shogun Ashikaga Yoshimitsu 足 利義滿 found him and recruited him as an interpreter to serve the shogunate bakufu.12 From that time onwards, it became a practice of the shogunate to appoint sojourning Chinese to the tributary missions, though most of them served as interpreters. By the beginning of the 16th century, Japan was experiencing a breakdown of authority, and the Ashikaga shoguns had been reduced to utter powerlessness by ¯ nin War 應仁之亂 (1467– the internal strife that had swept Japan ever since the O 1477), and various influential families and the daimyo¯ rose to compete for political hegemony. Control over the official trade with China had long since slipped out of their hands and became a bone of contention between two of their prin¯ uchi 大內 family. cipal vassals, especially the Hosokawa 細川 family and the O Both of the families tried to send their own embassies to China not only for the sake of profit, but also to gain formal recognition as the official delegate of the King of Japan. Song Suqing 宋素卿 or So¯ Sokyo in Japanese thus came to the fore in the early 16th century. Song Suqing was a native of Ningbo, and his real Chinese name was Zhu Gao 朱縞. When he was a boy, he was sold by his father, who was a lacquer artisan, to meet the payment of a debt to a Japanese envoy in China.13 He was taken to Japan in 1498, where he won the favor of Hosokawa Takakuni 細川高國. The 1510 mission was sent on three ships, bearing three Hongzhi 弘治 tallies issued by the Ming court in 1498. Tallies No. 1 and No.3 were assigned to the ¯ uchi family, and No. 2 was given to the Hosokawa family. While the retired O abbot Ryo¯an Keigo 了菴桂悟 of To¯fukuji 東福寺 was chosen as the chief envoy by 11 Ming shilu 明實錄 (Veritable Records of Ming Dynasty, hereafter MSL), Taipei 1966 (reprint), The Xuanzong Reign 宣宗朝, juan 103, 3b. 12 Ye Xianggao 葉向高, Cangxia cao 蒼霞草, juan 12, Qu Xiang zhuan 麯祥傳 (Biography of Qu Xiang). 13 Zheng Shungong 鄭舜功, Riben yijian: qionghe huahai 日本一鑑: 窮河話海 (An Account of Japan: Anecdotes about Maritime Affairs), Shanghai 1939 (reprint), juan 7, Shibo 市舶 (Maritime trade), 18b; MSL, The Wuzong Reign 武宗朝, juan 60, 1321; juan 62, 1360; Anonymous, Song Suqing zhuan 宋素卿傳 (Biography of Song Suqing), in: Zheng Zhenduo 鄭振鐸 (ed.), Xuanlantang congshu xuji 玄覽堂叢書續集 (The Xuanlantang Series: Series Two), Shanghai 1948, Book 15, 69a–71b.

256

James K. Chin

¯ uchi family, Song Suqing was appointed by the Hosokawa family to head a the O tribute mission to China. Following his lord’s instruction, Song in his capacity of chief envoy led his mission and quietly set sail by way of the route around ¯ uchi mission was still in Japan. According to the southern Kyushu while the O Chinese sources, Song arrived at the Ming court in early 1510 and, after bribing Liu Jin 劉瑾, an influential eunuch at the court, was feasted and given presents by ¯ uchi mission finally reached Ningbo in the autumn of the Emperor. When the O 1511, it was too late for the mission to obtain the permission to proceed to Beijing, and the Ming government did not allow all 292 staff of the mission led by Ryo¯an Keigo to go to the Chinese capital.14 The struggle between the two powerful families became increasingly fierce. In 1523, when Japan decided to dispatch a new mission to China, the two families sent rival embassies to Ningbo. This time, Shu¯setsu Gendo¯ 宗設謙道, the envoy ¯ uchi family, arrived in Ningbo several days ahead of Song Suqing, who of the O came again as the deputy envoy of the Hosokawa family. The two competed for recognition as the bona fide representative of the Japanese King and vied with each other for trading privileges. After bribing the Superintendent of Maritime Trade (shibo taijian) Lai En 市舶太監賴恩, Song Suqing succeeded in having his ship examined in advance, whereby he was assigned in a position of higher honor than Shu¯setsu Gendo¯. During the feast served by the Chinese authorities, the two men started a quarrel, which soon developed into a riot. In the ensuing heated melee, the chief envoy of the Hosokawa embassy, the priest Ranko¯ Zuisa 鸞岡瑞 佐, was killed. In unabated fury, Shu¯setsu Gendo¯ pillaged Ningbo city, rampaging through the streets, chasing Song Suqing as far as the city of Shaoxing 紹興. ¯ uchi embassy sailed away in Having burned and looted its way to the harbor, the O commandeered vessels, carrying with it a kidnapped Chinese garrison official Yuan Jin 袁璡, and fought off a Chinese pursuit squadron, killing its commander Liu Jin 劉錦. The Ming court was furious and threw Song Suqing into jail, where he died in 1544.15 In the aftermath of this riot, the Ming authorities further tightened the procedures governing the tally trade, and the tributary missions from Japan were rejected for sixteen years until 1539, when a new embassy reached Beijing. The practice of appointing Chinese residents as interpreters to the Japanese tribute embassies to China, however, was maintained by the shogunate bakufu. A

14 Ming shi 明史 (History of Ming Dynasty), juan 324, Biography of Japan; Wang Yi-T’ung 1953, 75–76. 15 Hu Zongxian 胡宗憲, Chouhai tubian 籌海圖編 (Collections of Documents and Maps on the Coastal Defense), Shanghai 1987 (reprint), juan 2, 27a–27b; Ming shi 明史 (History of Ming Dynasty), juan 322, 8348–8349.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

257

number of Chinese interpreters, such as Wu Rong 吳榮, Zhou Wenyuan 周文苑 and Qian Zongxun 錢宗詢, came to China as part of the 1539 Japanese embassy.16

The Ryukyu Archipelago The rapid rise of the Ryukyu Kingdom as an active and important maritime polity in the late 14th and early 15th centuries had much to do with the tributary system promoted by the Ming government. In 1392, the founding Emperor Zhu Yuanzhang 朱元璋 issued a special order, sending 36 Hokkien families who were good at navigation, shipbuilding, and Chinese language and literature to the Ryukyu Kingdom in order to facilitate its maritime activities while assisting Ryukyu to organize its tribute missions.17 Then, junks and merchants from the Ryukyuan Archipelago suddenly became active in the East and Southeast Asian waters. The residential quarter assigned by the Ryukyuan king was a place named Jiumi 九米 or Kumemura Village 久米村 in today’s Naha 那霸 of Okinawa 沖繩. The reason the Hokkien migrants’ quarter was named Jiumi was perhaps that it was the transliteration for Zhuming 朱明 or the Ming dynasty ruled by the Zhu family. What needs to be emphasized is that a few Hokkien migrants had already sojourned in the Ryukyu Kingdom prior to the official emigration wave launched and organized by the Ming authorities in the 1390s. In the Ryukyuan embassy paying tribute to the Ming court in late 1374, for example, there was a Chinese interpreter, though the Ming taizu shilu 明太祖實錄 does not record his Chinese name. A number of Chinese historians examined the so-called 36 migrant families with different surnames whose descendants became the backbone of tributary officials, and their studies reveal that in fact there were 41 leading Hokkien migrant families residing in Ryukyu, such as Liang 梁, Zheng 鄭, Jin 金, Cai 蔡, Mao 毛, Chen 陳, Lin 林, Cheng 程, Gao 高, Wu 吳, Li 李, Ruan 阮, Shen 沈, Wei 魏, Tian 田, Wang 王, Ma 馬, Qian 錢, Weng 翁, Mu 穆, Yu 于, Wei 衛, Han 韓, Zong 宗, Kun 昆, Hong 紅, Yin 尹, Zha 查, Wu 伍, Xiang 向, Wu 武, Ji 吉, Ying 英, Tao 陶, Wu 鄔, Jia 賈, Yu 俞, Song 宋, Zhou 周, Sun 孫 and Zeng 曾. After several generations or around 200 years, most of the migrant families declined. They either died overseas, returned to their home villages in southern Fujian, or even disappeared completely. In 1606, for instance, the Ming envoy Xia Ziyang 夏子陽 16 For a detailed study, see Zheng Liangsheng 鄭樑生, Zhongri guanxishi yanjiu lunji 中日關係 史研究論集 (Collected Research on the History of Sino-Japanese Relations), vol. 1, Taipei 1990, 56–61. 17 Zheng Xiao 鄭曉, Huangming siyi kao 皇明四夷考 (An Account of the Barbarians of the Four Directions in the Imperial Ming Dynasty); Chen Kan 陳侃, Shi liuqiu lu 使琉球錄 (A Record of an Embassy to Ryukyu), Siku quanshu edition, 25.

258

James K. Chin

submitted a memorial to the emperor after his mission to the Ryukyu Kingdom, pointing out that of the 36 Hokkien families allocated by the court, only six were left in the kingdom, namely Cai 蔡, Zheng 鄭, Lin 林, Cheng 程, Liang 梁 and Jin 金. Their residential quarter was sparsely populated, and the majority of the buildings had fallen into ruins.18 The Ming court had to move some coastal families from Fujian to the Ryukyu Archipelago to maintain the nonstop tributary mission stream regularly coming from the island kingdom. A couple of emigration waves initiated and organized by the Ming government occurred in the reigns of the emperors Yongle and Wanli 萬曆. A huge number of Chinese envoys, interpreters and officials from the Hokkien migrant families listed above are recorded in both the Ming documents and the royal Ryukyuan record Rekidai Hoan 歷代寶案. Cheng Fu 程復, who headed a tributary mission to China in 1411, is such a case in point. Cheng was a native of Raozhou 饒州, Jiangxi 江西, and his family moved from Raozhou to Zhangzhou 漳州 of southern Fujian before emigrating to the Ryukyu Archipelago. Cheng served the Ryukyuan king for more than forty years and was senior minister at the Ryukyuan court. While he was in China, Cheng Fu memorialized the Ming court, saying that he was already 81 and begging permission to retire. His request was granted by the emperor.19 Another distinguished Ryukyu envoy of Hokkien origin was Cai Jing 蔡璟. The Cai family was from Nan’an 南安 of southern Fujian and was part of the 36 families sent to the Ryukyu Kingdom by Emperor Hongwu 洪武 in the late 14th century with the mission of guiding and assisting the tribute embassies from the island kingdom. Cai Jing’s grandfather and father were both interpreters while Cai Jing himself visited China as envoy in 1467, 1469, and 1471.20 Cai Jing’s grandson, Cai Tinghui 蔡廷會, serving the Ryukyu king in the same capacity, also came to China thrice as envoy in 1547, 1557, and 1560. While staying in the capital, Cai Tinghui secretly communicated with his relative Huang Zonggai 黃宗槩, who was a senior censor at the court, which unfortunately violated the court regulation forbidding foreign envoys from making private contacts with Chinese officials. Because he was the chief envoy of the Ryukyu tributary embassy, the Ming court only revoked his rewards in lieu of imprisonment.21 In Ryukyu, it was a normal practice that several generations of a Hokkien migrant family served the indigenous royal court as tributary officials.

18 Xia Ziyang 夏子陽 and Wang Shizhen 王士禎, Shi Liuqiu lu 使琉球錄 (A Record of an Embassy to Ryukyu), Xuxiu siku quanshu edition, juan B, 9b. 19 MSL, The Taizong Reign 太宗朝, juan 105, 1365–1366; juan 115, 1464; juan 175, 1919. 20 Zhou Huang 周煌, Liuqiu guo zhilue 琉球國志略 (A Brief Account of the Kingdom of Ryukyu), juan 3, 23a–24b. 21 MSL, The Shizong Reign 世宗朝, juan 330, 6064; juan 331, 6076–6077; juan 454, 7692; juan 482, 8044–8046; Zhou Huang, Liuqiu guo zhilue, Ibid., 31b–33a.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

259

In short, during the 277 years of the Ming dynasty, the Ryukyu kingdom sent more than 300 tribute embassies to China, and almost every embassy was either headed or involved by a group of ethnic Chinese of Hokkien origin in their respective capacities, including envoys, interpreters, captains, pilots, and sailors.

Siam During the 12th and 13th centuries, Chinese merchants regularly sailed to Siam to barter with indigenous people. Gradually a large number of Chinese sojourned or settled down there, giving birth to Chinese migrant villages of different sizes in the kingdom. Of the polities of Southeast Asia, Siam probably was the first one to entrust and appoint sojourning Chinese merchants to be envoys and interpreters of the tribute embassies dispatched from the kingdom of mainland Southeast Asia. Li Qingxing 李清興, for instance, was the interpreter of the 1372 Siamese mission, and Chen Juying 陳舉應 was deputy envoy of the 1373 embassy. And in 1381, Chen Ziren 陳子仁 headed another Siamese tribute mission to visit China in his capacity as chief envoy, followed by Zeng Shouxian 曾壽賢 (1405, 1411, chief envoy), Chen Bao 陳珤 (1426), Huang Zishun黃子順 (1427, chief envoy), Wan Zhi萬直 (1434, envoy), Ruan Ai 阮靄 (1434, interpreter), Luo Jianxin 羅漸 信 (1438, envoy), Xie Wenbin 謝文彬 (1477, deputy envoy), Nai Luo奈羅 and Wan Guishang 萬軌商 (1497, both of them were interpreters). Of the Chinese envoys and interpreters from Siam, perhaps the most noticeable one was Xie Wenbin because this Hokkien merchant-cum-envoy was thrown into jail by the Ming government. Xie Wenbin was originally a salt merchant from Tingzhou 汀州, western Fujian, and he drifted to Siam while peddling salt on coastal China. In Siam, Xie was recruited by the Siamese government and given a Thai name Nai-ying-bi-mei-ya 奈英必美亞. Gradually he became a Thai court official reaching the rank of ockans, which was No.4 in the ranking of Siamese nobility.22 In 1477, during the reign of King Boromo Trailokanat (1448–1488), Xie Wenbin was appointed to head a tribute mission to China. While in Nanjing, he came across his nephew Xie Zan 謝瓚, and the two became business partners in trading brocaded satin, sapanwood, ivory, and other foreign commodities the tribute missions brought from Siam. It was only when he was caught by local authorities that his real identity of Siamese envoy was revealed. During the Ming 22 Wang Zongzai 王宗載, Siyiguan kao 四夷館考 (A Study of the Board of Foreign Affairs) 1580, Shanghai 1924 (reprint), Part B, 23; Jeremias van Vliet’s Description of the Kingdom of Siam, 1692, translated by L. F. van Ravenswaay, in: Journal of Siam Society, Bangkok 7/1 (1910), 1–108, here 58. According to the Dutch VOC staff Jeremias van Vliet based in Siam, the Siamese nobility community consisted of nine strata, including Opans, Omans, Ockans, Olaanghs, Opraas and Oyas. Of them, Oyas was the highest official title.

260

James K. Chin

period, foreign diplomatic missions were forbidden from collaborating with Chinese civilians in doing illicit business by Ming law, and what Xie Wenbin and his nephew did obviously violate the law, and they should have been put behind bars. Nevertheless, since Xie Wenbin was a senior Siamese official in addition to an envoy of the tribute embassy, the Ming court had no way out, but to let him return to Siam without any punishment.23

Archipelago Southeast Asia The roles played by merchants in different areas as official envoys, quasi-official delegates or guides in cementing bilateral political-economic relations have attracted some attention. However, the occurrence of such phenomena in the early history of maritime Asia has been little noticed, including the active role played by Chinese maritime merchants. In A.D. 977 , for instance, an official mission from the Kingdom of Boni 渤泥 or Borneo arrived at the South China coast under the guidance of a Chinese merchant named Pu Luxie 蒲盧歇, who had drifted to the Borneo coast on his way to Java.24 Given that the surname of this merchant Pu 蒲 is shared by other wealthy and influential Muslim merchants who were wellestablished on the South China coast in the 10th and 13th centuries, there is reason to suspect that this Pu Luxie, recorded in Song documents, was not a Han ethnic Chinese but rather a descendant of Arabic or Persian merchants, or a businessman emigrated from Champa of mainland Southeast Asia. Fifteen years later, in A.D. 992, and again in the waters of Southeast Asia, Mao Xu 毛旭, a wellto-do Hokkien merchant, led a tribute mission from the Kingdom of Shepo 闍婆 on Java Island, on a visit to China. According to Song records, this was because Mao Xu had regularly travelled to Java on business and was thus familiar with the ruler of the kingdom.25 As indicated, when sending tribute missions to imperial China, Southeast Asian indigenous regimes usually employed sojourning Chinese maritime merchants, who maintained close relations with local rulers, to play the role of envoys or interpreters. Having been away from their home villages for many years, these pseudo-Southeast Asian envoys would normally be eager to visit their 23 Yan Congjian 嚴從簡, Shuyu zhouzhilu 殊域周咨錄 (Account of Foreign Countries) 1574, Beijing 1993 (reprint), juan 8, Xianluo (Siam), 278–290. For a detailed analysis, see Chan Hok-lam 陳學霖, Xianluo gongshi Xie Wenbin shijian pouxi 暹羅貢使謝文彬事件剖析 (An Exploration into the Case of Siamese Envoy Xie Wenbin), in: Chan Hok-lam, Mingdai renwu yu chuanshuo 明代人物與傳說 (Figures and Legends of the Ming Dynasty), Hong Kong 1997, 275–306. 24 Tuo Tuo/Ouyang Xuan 1977, juan 489, Biography of Foreign Countries: Bo Ni. 25 Tuo Tuo/Ouyang Xuan 1977, juan 489, Biography of Foreign Countries: Shepo.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

261

families in southern Fujian when they returned to China. In 1436, for example, a Javanese envoy by the name of Caifu bazhi manrong 財富八致滿榮 told the Ming court that he was a Zhangzhou 漳州 Hokkien and his original Chinese name was Hong Maozai 洪茂仔. He had been captured at sea by a band of pirates and worked for them for some years before he managed to escape to Java. He suggested to the Ming court that he would be very happy if the court could send him back to his homeland. As expected, the court provided him with food and silver and sent him back to Zhangzhou in southern Fujian.26 Two years later, another Javanese tribute mission led by three Hokkien sojourners reached the Ming court. The envoy, named Yalie Ma Yongliang 亞烈馬用良, together with his two fellow villagers, Liang Yin 良殷 and Nan Wendan 南文旦, who were also interpreters of the Javanese tribute mission, requested the Ming emperor to allow them and their families to return to Zhangzhou prefecture to build ancestral shrines and offer sacrifices. Thereafter, Liang Yin decided to abandon the commercial sojourning life in Java in favour of staying in his home village permanently.27 Another interesting case in point is the Sulu Archipelago in the southern Philippine Islands. Unlike other indigenous regimes and kingdoms of maritime Asia, the Sulu Kingdom did not always maintain its tribute relations with imperial China, though as early as the 13th century Chinese junks already sailed to the Sulu Archipelago to barter with local islanders, and the year 1417 saw a huge tribute mission from Sulu led by three kings (East King, West King and Dong King 峒王) reaching China. Comprising more than 340 people, this tribute mission offered the Ming emperor a large quantity of pearls, precious stones, tortoise shells, and other tropical marine products in exchange for silver, gold, silk, satin, paper notes, and court costumes from China.28 The flow of official tribute missions from the Sulu Archipelago, nevertheless, stopped abruptly thereafter, and the name of Sulu disappeared from the list of tribute countries of imperial China for more than 250 years until 1674 when the Sulu Sultan sent a 26 MSL, The Yingzong Reign, juan 19, 385. 27 MSL, The Yingzong Reign, juan 19, 374; juan 43, 831; juan 99, 1985. The titles prefixed their names as recorded in the Ming sources were Javanese official titles. According to Wada Hisanori (和田久德), 八致 refers to Patih, a senior Javanese officer in charge of financial affairs while 亞烈 was a transliteration for Arya, meaning Regent or Pangeran. See Wada Hisanori, Jugo-seiki no Jawa ni Okeru Chugoku-jin no Tushou Katsudo 十五世紀のジヤワ における中國人の通商活動 (The Chinese Commercial Activities in 15th Century Java), in: Ronshuu Kindai Chugoku Kenkyu 論集近代中國研究 (Essays on Modern Chinese Studies), Ichiko Kyoujyu Taikan Kinen Ronsou Henshuu Iinkai 市古教授退官記念論叢編集委員會 (ed.), Tokyo 1981, 581–609. For a detailed introduction to the official titles of early Java, see B. Schrieke, Indonesian Sociological Studies, The Hague 1955, Pt. 2, 370, note 378. 28 Wang Dayuan 王大淵, Daoyi zhilue 島夷志略 (Description of Islands and Barbarians Overseas) 1349, Beijing 1981 (reprint), 178; Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉, Ming Shi 明史 (History of the Ming Dynasty) 1739, Beijing 1976 (reprint), juan 325, Biography of Sulu.

262

James K. Chin

small tribute mission of three officials to visit Qing China via Guangdong, heralding the rise of another heyday of tribute missions from the Sulu Sea.29 Given that indigenous islanders only had small boats to navigate between different islands nearby and that they had no knowledge of navigation routes and tide changes between the Sulu Archipelago and China, Chinese sailors and junks, those from southern Fujian in particular, became the only means to be relied on if tribute relations with China were to be maintained. In the summer of 1726, a Sulu tribute mission sent by Sultan Mu-han-wei-mula-lu-lin 母漢末母拉律林 (Badur-u-Din I) landed at Muhu harbor 目湖港, Quanzhou, southern Fujian. It was led by envoy Gong Tingcai 龔廷彩 who was a Hokkien merchant from Jinjiang 晉江, accompanied by a deputy envoy A-shidan 阿石丹who obviously was an indigenous Sulu official, and interpreter Yang Peining 楊佩寧 who was also a Hokkien merchant sojourning in Sulu. According to the translated memorial submitted by the Sulu Sultan Badur-u-Din I, the Sulu Kingdom had to employ Chinese merchants and sailors to be envoys and interpreters for tribute missions because they had no idea how to travel to China. Moreover, the tribute missions had to sail via Spanish Manila on their way to China, and potential danger would be posed as the Castilians based in Manila were their adversaries for centuries. Hokkien merchants, however, sailed to Manila and Sulu regularly, and they knew which route was safe. Meanwhile, it would be interesting to have a look at the tribute items listed in the memorial, which included 2 pearls, 12 pieces of tortoiseshell, one bolt of gilded colorful cloth, two bolts of cloth with gold foils, two bolts of exotic white cloth, two bolts of local produced cloth, one case of edible bird’s nest, one pair of Malay kris decorated with dragon heads, one pair of spears, one pair of Sulu knifes, and two pieces of rattan mat, as well as two living monkeys.30 In return for these tropical products, the Qing court gave the Sulu mission a large quantity of silk, satin, and brocades of various kinds, in line with the rules applying to the tribute missions from the Ryukyuan Kingdom, in addition to three banquets hosted by the Board of Rites and the Fujian local authorities, respectively.31 More tribute missions were sent from Sulu on a regular basis. From 1726 to 1762, eleven Sulu tribute missions in total guided by Hokkien merchants visited the Qing court. The British East Indian Company official Alexander Dalrymple provides an insightful explanation for the Sulu Sultan’s interest in the Chinese tribute system:

29 Liang Shaoxian 梁紹獻, Nanhai Xianzhi 南海縣志 (Gazetteer of Nanhai County), Guangzhou 1872, Taipei 1967 (reprint), juan 26, 5a. 30 Chen Shouqi 陳壽祺, Fujian tongzhi 福建通志 (Gazetteer of Fujian), Fuzhou 1871, juan 269, 15b–18a. 31 Chen Shouqi 1871, juan 269, 17a–18a.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

263

“The Sultan, Bantilan, more than once sent an ambassador to Pekin; which was, properly speaking, a commercial speculation: for the Emperor of China considers the presents, brought by ambassadors, as a tribute from a vassal; and the presents, sent in return, being made with liberality. Bantilan found it a profitable commerce. His ambassadors always went on board the China junks to Amoy.”32

Apart from the role of envoys and interpreters, Chinese merchants would frequently be asked to be business agents or brokers for the Sulu Sultanate. In 1742, for instance, kapitan or chieftain of Chinese migrants in Sulu, Shao Shiqi 邵士奇, a native of Ningbo in Zhejiang, was entrusted by the Sulu Sultan to purchase Chinese commodities such as silk, satin, brocade, and cotton textiles in Suzhou and Hangzhou. A large quantity of edible bird’s nest and high-quality pearls collected from the Sulu Sea worth of 3730 taels of silver was thus consigned to Shao by the Sulu authorities. The Sulu tribute mission was shocked to find out shortly afterwards that this Chinese kapitan sold all the consigned goods in the market, fleeing to his home village in Ningbo with all the stolen silver and disappeared. The Sulu mission appealed to the Qing court for urgent assistance, and Shao Shiqi was soon arrested by the Qing government. Most of the silver, however, had already been squandered by the swindler. The frustrated provincial senior officials had no alternative but to allocate 3730 taels of silver in cash to the Sulu mission from the emperor’s treasury as compensation.33 What needs to be noted is that Chinese merchants sojourned in the Sulu Archipelago were not only envoys, interpreters, and business brokers for the Sulu Kingdom while visiting China, but frequently they had to negotiate with the Spanish colonial government in Manila on behalf of the Sulu Sultanate. In 1725, for example, Sultan Badar-ud-Din I wished to have a peace agreement to be negotiated and signed with the Manila authorities, and the person he invited to be his representative was Ki-kua, a wealthy Hokkien merchant and a Chinese kapitan based in Jolo Island. Lots of messages and requests sent to the Spanish authorities of Manila were relayed through this Hokkien merchant.34

32 Alexander Dalrymple, Essays towards an Account of Sooloo, Oriental Repertory, 2 Volumes, London 1808, Volume 1, 568. 33 Memorial Submitted by the Zhejiang Viceroy Chang An on 26th August 1743 乾隆八年八月 二十六日浙江巡撫常安奏折, Beijing: The First Chinese Archives, the Grand Council Archives, No.1261–3. 34 Juan de la Concepción, Historia General de Filipinas, Volume 10, 1790, 134–148, cited in Cesar Adib Majul, Chinese Relationship with the Sultanate of Sulu, in: Jr. Alfonso Felix (ed.), The Chinese in the Philippines, Manila/Bombay 1966, vol. 1, 143–159.

264

James K. Chin

South Asia Meanwhile, countries in the Indian Ocean also sent their tributary embassies with ethnic Chinese as envoy and interpreters. In 1438, for instance, Chen Deqing 陳得清 was appointed as interpreter by the Kingdom of Bengal 榜葛剌國 and accompanied the Bengali mission to pay tribute to Ming China. A number of exotic animals, among other local products, were brought as tribute to the Chinese emperor, including the so-called kylin 麒麟 or Indian horses, white parrots, red parrots, and white turtledoves. While in the capital, Chen requested the Ming government to grant the mission cotton-padded clothes as the winter in Nanjing was too cold for people from tropical Bengal. Chen’s request was understandable and quickly approved by the Ming court.35 The next year, 1439, saw Song Yun 宋允 heading another Bengali tributary mission visiting the Ming court in his capacity of deputy envoy. Unfortunately, the mission’s vessel crashed on its way to China, and Song Yun thus asked Emperor Yingzong 英宗皇帝 to build a new one for the Bengali mission. Song Yun’s request was approved by the emperor on the ground that “Song Yun is a Chinese, and he is able to solicit a foreign country to pay tribute to China. Therefore, what he requested should be approved and granted”.36

Faked Tribute Missions Benefits and rewards reaped from the Chinese government could considerably easier be enjoyed if one adopted the role of an official envoy or agent of tribute missions from countries overseas. As a result, a number of Chinese smugglers found a means to profit in countries overseas by disguising themselves as imperial envoys from the Chinese Empire. A fraud was exposed in 1471, when a group of Hokkien merchants, led by Qiu Hongmin 丘弘敏, secretly embarked for Melaka and traded there. While transiting at Siam, they claimed to be imperial envoys from China. Very quickly, they were introduced to meet the King of Siam. Meanwhile Qiu Hongmin’s wife, Mrs. Feng 馮氏, was entertained by the Queen of Siam and was given a large number of valuable items as presents. The happy adventure, nevertheless, ended sadly. On their way back to their home village in southern Fujian, they were captured by Ming naval forces patrolling off the Fujian coast. Qiu and 29 of his fellow villagers were beheaded by the Ming government while his wife was given as a family slave to the local gentry. The fortune defrauded from the Siamese royal house was confiscated. The four in35 MSL, The Yingzong Reign, juan 47, 1a–6a. 36 MSL, The Yingzong Reign, juan 54, 7b.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

265

digenous Southeast Asian people Qiu Hongmin had purchased as slaves from overseas, however, were sent to the Ming court, but there is no information in contemporary Chinese sources about their fates.37 Very likely, they were sent back to Siam, though, by other Chinese maritime traders trusted by the Ming government.

The Europeans and the Chinese Tribute System The sudden intrusion of new and dangerous “Red Barbarians” (hongmao fan 紅 毛番), the VOC or the Dutch East Indian Company, in the early 17th century greatly alarmed the Ming court. In 1622 Dutch troops, under the command of Cornelis Reijersen, attacked Macau and then occupied the Pescadores or Penghu Islands lying off the Bay of Xiamen, directly in front of Fujian’s outlet of foreign trade. The Dutch initially wished to gain permission from the Fujian local authorities to engage in free trade with Hokkien merchants inhabiting the coast, which was attempted by peaceful means in the first two years, and later by harassing, raiding, and plundering Chinese coastal villages and shipping.38 The big gap in cultural understanding led to serious military conflicts off the Fujian coast. To their surprise, force of arms did not result in panic among and submission from Chinese Ming officials as they had experienced in other port polities of Southeast Asia. On the contrary, in the summer of 1624, the Dutch in the Pescadores fortress found themselves beleaguered by a large Chinese fleet of 10,000 troops under the command of the Fujian governor Nan Juyi 南居益. And this is where Li Dan 李旦 and his capable assistant Nicholas Iquan一官 came on the diplomatic scene in the Taiwan Strait with the aim of assisting the Dutch in becoming accepted by the established Chinese tribute system. Somehow the Fujian local authorities were informed that the Hokkien pirate chief Li Dan was on friendly terms with the Dutch trading company officials in Hirado, and they blackmailed him into cooperation with the Ming government by detaining his trade partner in Xiamen, Xu Xinsu 許心素, as hostage, while sending an urgent message to Hirado, informing Li Dan that Xu was to be freed only when he could persuade the Dutch to withdraw from the Pescadores to

37 MSL, The Xianzong Reign, juan 97, 7b. 38 W. P. Groeneveldt, De Nederlanders in China, Eerste Stuk: De Eerste Bemoeiingen om Den Handel in China en de Vestiging in de Pescadores, 1601–1624, in: Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië 48, ‘S-Gravenhage 1898, 11–23; Mingji Helanren qinju Penghu candang 明季荷蘭人侵據澎湖殘檔 (Taiwan wenxian congkan No. 154), Taipei 1962, 1–10.

266

James K. Chin

Taiwan.39 Li Dan had no way out, but to come down to the Pescadores to mediate between the Dutch and the Ming officials in the years 1623 and 1624, together with the young Nicholas Iquan as his assistant and interpreter to communicate with the Dutch in Portuguese. As a result, Nicholas Iquan entered the service of the VOC, and a Dutch account shows that for a very short period Nicholas Gaspard or Zheng Zhilong 鄭芝龍 was on the payroll of the VOC as an interpreter.40 A peaceful agreement was finally reached between the Dutch and the Ming government through the mediation of Li Dan and Iquan. The Chinese Governor Nan Juyi promised that if the Dutch withdrew to Taiwan Island, a regular supply of Chinese goods, such as silk and porcelain, would be guaranteed, in exchange for alien products from Southeast Asia and Japan supplied by the Dutch company. It was against such a complex historical background that Taiwan soon became a valuable commercial entrepôt between Japan and Southeast Asia for the Dutch East India Company, with more and more Hokkien merchants sailing from the southern Fujian coast, and all of them were merchants under the control of Xu Xinsu or belonging to the Li Dan smuggling trade network. A similar relationship can also be observed in the collaborative business activities between coastal Chinese merchants and the Dutch. For example, it is recorded that a well-known Hokkien merchant leader, Andrea Dittus or Li Dan, came to the Pescadores or Penghu Islands 澎湖列島 in August 1624 and volunteered to broker negotiations between the Dutch and the Fujian authorities, at a point when the Dutch were in a political and economic quandary in dealing with the Chinese authorities. The Dutch had tried for two years without success to force the latter to open up trade. With Li Dan’s skillful mediation, the Dutch were granted permission from the Fujian government to resettle in Taiwan in return for a promise given by the Chinese authorities that allowed Hokkien merchants to trade legally with them in the island thereafter.41 This case demonstrates convincingly that Hokkien private merchants played a crucial role in the early conflicts and negotiations between the Europeans and the Chinese government. Moreover, they peacefully resolved a diplomatic crisis by moving the Dutch away from the Pescadores. Again, it was the Hokkien merchants based in the port polities of Southeast Asia who advised the Dutch and led them to the China coast. According to Zhang Xie張燮, whose Dongxiyang Kao 東西洋考 was written in 1616 and printed the following year in Zhangzhou of southern Fujian, many Hokkien merchants from 39 Mingji Helanren Qinju Penghu candang 明季荷蘭人侵據澎湖殘檔 (Remnants of the Official Records on the Dutch Invasion of Ming-Dynasty Penghu) 1962, 1–10. 40 Iwao Seiichi, Li Tan, Chief of the Chinese Residents at Hirado, Japan, in the Last Days of the Ming Dynasty, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, Tokyo 1958, vol. 17, 27–83. 41 For a comprehensive account of the event, see W. P. Groeneveldt 1898, ibid.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

267

Haicheng 海澄 sojourned in Patani for years and were involved with the Dutch in daily business transactions. Amongst them, a person named Li Jin 李錦 proposed to the Dutch fleet commander, Wijbrant van Warwijck, that the Dutch should set up a commercial factory on the Pescadores before opening up trade relations with Zhangzhou or Chincheo. When Wijbrant van Warwijck hesitated, asking what the Dutch should do if the request was rejected by the local Chinese government authorities, Li Jin advised him to bribe Gao Cai 高寀, a senior eunuch sent by the Ming court to oversee the maritime duty collection of Fujian, as the Fujian authorities considered him to be powerful. Li Jin even drafted three Chinese letters for the Dutch and asked his fellow villagers, Pan Xiu 潘秀 and Guo Zhen 郭震, to send the letters to the eunuch and two generals who were in charge of coastal defense.42 After the Dutch East India Company (VOC) settled in Taiwan, two groups of Chinese quickly emerged to become their intermediary traders. One group consisted of influential and well-to-do merchants, such as Li Dan, Xu Xinsu, and Zheng Zhilong 鄭芝龍, alias Iquan, who was mentioned above, while the other consisted of small, individual merchants. In 1624, for example, the Dutch signed a contract with Li Dan, asking the latter to provide the VOC with 15,000 catties of silk.43 Another example concerns Xu Xinsu, Li Dan’s able assistant and intimate friend based in Xiamen or Amoy, who was also involved in the negotiations of 1624 between the Dutch and the Fujian authorities. Li Dan maintained close relations with the senior government officials of Fujian by bribing them, and the key person who did the dirty work for Li Dan was Xu Xinsu.44 As the latter enjoyed special relations with local Ming senior officials in Fujian, he was granted a monopoly of the China trade with Taiwan by the Fujian authorities as soon as the 42 Zhang Xie, Dongxiyang Kao, Ibid., 127–128; Leonard Blussé has provided a detailed study of the Dutch occupation of the Pescadores and the brokerage role played by the Chinese merchants in their early relations with the Dutch. See, for example, Bao Leshi 包樂史 (Leonard Blussé), Mingmo Penghu Shishi Tantao 明末澎湖史實探討 (An Analysis of “Historical Facts” Concerning Penghu in the Late Ming Dynasty), in: Taiwan Wenxian 台灣文獻 24, 3 (1973), 49–53; Leonard Blussé, The Dutch Occupation of the Pescadores (1622–1624), in: Transactions of the International Conference of Orientalists in Japan, Tokyo 1973, 28–44; Leonard Blussé, Impo, Chinese Merchant in Pattani, in: Proceedings of the Seventh IAHA Conference, Bangkok 1979, 290–309; Leonard Blussé, Paradise Lost: A Seventeenth Century Account of Pattani, in: Historical Documents and Literary Evidence: International Conference on Thai Studies, Bangkok 1984, 17; and Leonard Blussé, Mingnan-jen or Cosmopolitan? The Rise of Cheng Chihlung alias Nicolas Iquan, in: E. Vermeer (ed.), Development and Decline of Fukien Province in the 17th and 18th Centuries, Leiden 1990, 245–269. 43 Groeneveldt 1898, 495–6. 44 Nan Juyi 南居益, Bingbu Tixing Tiaochen Penghu Shanhou Shiyi Cangao 兵部題行條陳澎 湖善後事宜殘稿 (An Incomplete Memorial Manuscript on the Penghu Crisis Kept by the Military Board), in: Mingqing Shiliao 明清史料 (Primary Sources of the Ming and Qing Dynasties), Taipei 1972, Series B, Book 7, 605.

268

James K. Chin

Dutch had retreated to the island. In the meantime, in 1625, the Dutch also entrusted him with a deposit of 40,000 reals to purchase silk. Xu Xinsu kept his word; he sent shipments on five Hokkien junks at a time and delivered hundreds of piculs of silk to the Dutch in Taiwan. The total turnover ran up to 800 piculs a year, which was more than two and a half times as much as the total amount shipped by the Chinese ships to Banten each year, according to the Dutch Governor at Batavia, Jan Pieterszoon Coen.45 In other words, Chinese merchants sojourning in port polities of Southeast Asia tried their best to assist the Europeans to become involved in the tribute system of Ming China while setting up their trade factories on or off the south China coast. They guided the European fleets sailing up along the coast from the Malay Peninsula all the way to Macau, Guangdong, Fujian, and Zhejiang and actively mediated between Chinese government and Europeans.

Concluding Remarks The emergence of Chinese envoys, interpreters, and brokers in the tribute system of imperial China was closely related with the formation of Chinese sojourning communities overseas. Large numbers of tribute missions from Southeast Asia, for instance, Srivijaya based on Sumatra Island, visited China during the Tang period (618–907) but none of them had ethnic Chinese appointed as envoys and interpreters. With the development of Chinese shipbuilding technology and navigation experiences and skills accumulated over the centuries, the scope of China’s maritime trade had expanded rapidly, and more and more Chinese merchants chose to sojourn or even settle down in foreign port polities. The Southern Song period (1127–1279 A.D.) is a typical case in point, as Chinese junks were exceptionally active in the waters of the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean during that period. Gradually, Chinese envoys, brokers, and interpreters took part in the tribute missions from regimes overseas, and this phenomenon became very popular during the Ming dynasty. Almost all the tribute missions from maritime Asia incorporated Chinese merchants in their capacities as envoys and interpreters. Three different patterns could be discerned insofar as the Chinese merchantcum-envoy involved in the Chinese tribute system was concerned. Pattern A is concerned with Chinese migrants who were sent to countries overseas by the Chinese government, and their emigration was arranged by the imperial court. 45 H. T. Colenbrander/W. Ph. Coolhaas, Jan Pietersz. Coen, Bescheiden Omtrent Zijn Bedrijf in Indië Deel 5, The Hague 1919–1923, 35, 71, 83, 149, 162, 169, 271, 273, 281, 321–2, 489.

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

269

The 36 Hokkien families relocated to the Ryukyu Kingdom in early Ming is a telling example in this regard. In other words, their role as envoys and interpreters in the tribute missions was arranged on purpose by the Chinese government in order to facilitate tribute stream flowing to China. As a result, Chinese migrants based in Ryukyu not only visited China in their capacities as envoys and interpreters but also regularly paid visits to other indigenous kingdoms of maritime Asia, such as Siam and Melaka. A relatively small tribute trade system modeled upon imperial China’s practice was thus gradually established by the Ryukyu Kingdom. Such an interesting point needs to be explored further if possible. Pattern B deals with the community of sojourning Chinese merchants residing in different trade ports and commercial centers of maritime Asia. Given that the number of Chinese merchants overseas was large and many of them were experienced merchants with intimate ties with local ruling elites abroad on the one hand and Chinese government at home on the other hand, foreign rulers would habitually choose envoys and interpreters from these people when organizing a tribute mission to visit China. Pattern C is related to the maritime merchants from southern Fujian, eastern Guangdong, and coastal Zhejiang, who were well connected with foreign markets and trader groups and as a consequence they would frequently be asked by either Chinese government or indigenous regimes overseas to be their diplomatic messengers or representatives to participate in negotiations. In short, Chinese sojourning merchants were speculative, though they were adventurous entrepreneurs. Unconsciously, they played important roles in the operation of imperial China’s tribute system while making their unique contributions. They were indispensable to and urgently needed by indigenous regimes, but they themselves doubtlessly would be much pleased to return to their homeland in their capacities as foreign envoys or diplomatic mission staff, which could greatly enhance their social status either in Chinese migrant communities overseas or in their respective home villages.

Bibliography Anonymous, Song Suqing zhuan 宋素卿傳 (Biography of Song Suqing), in: Zheng Zhenduo 鄭振鐸 (ed.), Xuanlantang congshu xuji 玄覽堂叢書續集 (The Xuanlantang Series: Series Two), Shanghai 1948. Bao Leshi 包樂史 (Leonard Blussé), Mingmo Penghu Shishi Tantao 明末澎湖史實探討 (An Analysis of “Historical Facts” Concerning Penghu in the Late Ming Dynasty), in: Taiwan Wenxian 台灣文獻 24/3 (1973). Leonard Blussé, The Dutch Occupation of the Pescadores (1622–1624), in: Transactions of the International Conference of Orientalists in Japan, Tokyo 1973, 28–44.

270

James K. Chin

Leonard Blussé, Impo, Chinese Merchant in Pattani, in: Proceedings of the Seventh IAHA Conference, Bangkok 1979, 290–309. Leonard Blussé, Paradise Lost: A Seventeenth Century Account of Pattani, in: Historical Documents and Literary Evidence: International Conference on Thai Studies, Bangkok 1984. Leonard Blussé, Mingnan-jen or Cosmopolitan? The Rise of Cheng Chihlung alias Nicolas Iquan, in: E. Vermeer (ed.), Development and Decline of Fukien Province in the 17th and 18th Centuries, Leiden 1990, 245–269. Chan Hok-lam 陳學霖, Xianluo gongshi Xie Wenbin shijian pouxi 暹羅貢使謝文彬事件 剖析 (An Exploration into the Case of Siamese Envoy Xie Wenbin), in: Chan Hok-lam, Mingdai renwu yu chuanshuo 明代人物與傳說 (Figures and Legends of the Ming Dynasty), Hong Kong 1997. Chen Kan 陳侃, Shi liuqiu lu 使琉球錄 (A Record of an Embassy to Ryukyu), Siku quanshu edition. Chen Shangsheng, Xieshi jiazu yu mingchu d zhonghan guanxi (The Xie Family and the Sino-Korean Bilateral Relations in Early Ming), in: Chen Shangsheng, Zhonghan guanxishi lun (A Study of the History of Sino-Korean Relations), Jinan 1977. Chen Shouqi 陳壽祺, Fujian tongzhi 福建通志 (Gazetteer of Fujian), Fuzhou 1871. H. T. Colenbrander and W. Ph. Coolhaas, Jan Pietersz. Coen, Bescheiden Omtrent Zijn Bedrijf in Indië Deel 5, The Hague 1919–1923. Alexander Dalrymple, Essays towards an Account of Sooloo, Oriental Repertory, 2 vols, London 1808. Jurgis Elisonas, The Inseparable Trinity: Japan’s Relations with China and Korea, in: John Whitney Hall (ed.), The Cambridge History of Japan, vol. 4, New York 1991. W. P. Groeneveldt, De Nederlanders in China, Eerste Stuk: De Eerste Bemoeiingen om Den Handel in China en de Vestiging in de Pescadores, 1601–1624, in: Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië 48, ‘S-Gravenhage 1898, 11–23. Hu Zongxian 胡宗憲, Chouhai tubian 籌海圖編 (Collections of Documents and Maps on the Coastal Defense), Shanghai 1987 (reprint). Iwao Seiichi, Li Tan, Chief of the Chinese Residents at Hirado, Japan, in the Last Days of the Ming Dynasty, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, vol. 17, Tokyo 1958. Jeong In Ji 鄭麟趾 (comp.), Ko-ryo sa 高麗史 (A History of Korea), Taipei 1972 (reprint). Li Tao 李燾, Xu zizhi tongjian changbian 續資治通鑒長編 (Continuation of the Comprehensive Mirror of History for Aid in Government), Beijing 1980 (reprint). Liang Shaoxian 梁紹獻, Nanhai Xianzhi 南海縣志 (Gazetteer of Nanhai County), Guangzhou: Fuwenzhai printing house 1872, Taipei 1967 (reprint). Cesar Adib Majul, Chinese Relationship with the Sultanate of Sulu, in: Jr. Alfonso Felix (ed.), The Chinese in the Philippines, vol. 1, Manila/Bombay 1966, 143–159. Mingji Helanren qinju Penghu candang 明季荷蘭人侵據澎湖殘檔 (Remnants of the Official Records on the Dutch Invasion of Ming-Dynasty Penghu) (Taiwan wenxian congkan, No.154), Taipei 1962, 1–10. Ming shilu 明實錄 (Veritable Records of Ming Dynasty, hereafter MSL). Taipei 1966 (reprint). Nan Juyi 南居益, Bingbu tixing tiaochen Penghu shanhou shiyi cangao 兵部題行條陳澎 湖善後事宜殘稿 (An Incomplete Memorial Manuscript on the Penghu Crisis Kept by

Chinese Merchants in the Tribute System of Imperial China

271

the Military Board), in: Mingqing Shiliao 明清史料 (Primary Sources of the Ming and Qing Dynasties), Taipei 1972, Series B, Book 7. Pang Yuanying 龐元英, Wenchang zalu 文昌雜錄 (Things Seen and Heard by an Official at Court) c. 1086, Xuejin Taoyuan Edition 學津討原, Taipei 1985 (reprint). L.F. van Ravenswaay (Translator), Jeremias van Vliet’s Description of the Kingdom of Siam, 1692, in: Journal of Siam Society, Bangkok 7/1 (1910), 1–108. B. Schrieke, Indonesian Sociological Studies, The Hague 1955. Tuo Tuo 脫脫/Ouyang Xuan 玄歐陽, Song shi宋史 (A History of the Song Dynasty) c. 1345, Beijing 1977 (reprint). Wada Hisanori, Jugo-seiki no Jawa ni Okeru Chugoku-jin no Tushou Katsudo 十五世紀の ジヤワにおける中國人の通商活動 (The Chinese Commercial Activities in 15th Century Java), in: Ronshuu Kindai Chugoku Kenkyu 論集近代中國研究 (Essays on Modern Chinese Studies), Ichiko Kyoujyu Taikan Kinen Ronsou Henshuu Iinkai 市古 教授退官記念論叢編集委員會 (ed.), Tokyo 1981. Wang Dayuan 王大淵, Daoyi zhilue 島夷志略 (Description of Islands and Barbarians Overseas) 1349, Beijing 1981 (reprint). Wang Yi-T’ung, Official Relations between China and Japan 1368–1549, Cambridge, MA 1953. Wang Zongzai 王宗載, Siyiguan kao 四夷館考 (A Study of the Board of Foreign Affairs) 1580, Shanghai 1924 (reprint). Xia Ziyang 夏子陽 /Wang Shizhen 王士禎, Shi Liuqiu lu 使琉球錄 (A Record of an Embassy to Ryukyu), Xuxiu siku quanshu edition, Shanghai 1995–2002. Yan Congjian 嚴從簡, Shuyu zhouzhilu 殊域周咨錄 (Account of Foreign Countries) 1574, Beijing 1993 (reprint). Ye Xianggao 葉向高, Cangxia cao蒼霞草 1606. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉, Ming Shi 明史 (History of the Ming Dynasty) 1739, Beijing 1976 (reprint). Zhang Xie, Dongxiyang Kao 東西洋考 (On the Eastern and Western Ocean) 1606, n. p. 1934 (reprint). Zheng Liangsheng 鄭樑生, Zhongri guanxishi yanjiu lunji 中日關係史研究論集 (Collected Research on the History of Sino-Japanese Relations), vol. 1, Taipei 1990. Zheng Shungong 鄭舜功, Riben yijian: qionghe huahai 日本一鑑: 窮河話海 (An Account of Japan: Anecdotes about Maritime Affairs), Shanghai 1939. Zheng Xiao 鄭曉, Huangming siyi kao 皇明四夷考 (An Account of the Four Barbarians in the Imperial Ming Dynasty), n. p. 1933. Zhou Huang 周煌, Liuqiu guo zhilue 琉球國志略 (A Brief Account of the Kingdom of Ryukyu).

Roderich Ptak

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000– 1550). With Special Consideration of Selected Animal Products

1.

Xiangshan: The Topographical Setting and Its Changes

One segment of China’s exchange with foreign countries was tribute trade. Countless studies have been devoted to this theme and its many ramifications. In nearly all cases, these studies make use of data contained in the dynastic annals, books on geography, so-called lishi dili 歷史地理 records (roughly ethnographical accounts), documentary collections (for example, the shilu 實錄 or ‘veritable records’), biji 筆記 works, and many other texts. Besides discussing the structure of tribute trade, its institutional and political aspects, the fate of individual tribute missions and the development of China’s relations with particular polities, historians have also devoted much attention to the products involved therein. This applies to exchange across China’s northern and western borderlands, along the frontiers of modern Yunnan and Guangxi, and in the coastal regions. Here, I shall look at one maritime location – the former county of Xiangshan 香山, much of which belongs to the area of modern Zhuhai 珠海. I intend to provide a sketch of Xiangshan’s development in the period circa 1000 to 1500 and to link this issue to the question of overseas trade and local tribute payments. In earlier times, the topography of Xiangshan / Zhuhai was different from what it is now. Today, Zhuhai forms part of the Guangdong mainland. Modern highways, small roads, and some channels link the special economic zone of Zhuhai to its neighbourhood. It takes about two hours by car to drive from the urban center of that zone, near the Macau border, to the city of Guangzhou. Under the Song, Yuan, and Ming, old Xiangshan was a peripheral region. At that time, Xiangshan consisted of one or two major islands surrounded by several smaller ones; traffic to Guangzhou was by boat, and there were no bridges between the principal island and the regions farther to the north. In fact, much of the low area around the modern Zhuhai-Zhongshan 中山 border then belonged to the sea. This was a flat bay known as Shiqihai 石岐海. The Shiqihai was a space adjacent to the so-called Lingdingyang 伶仃洋, which designates the area be-

274

Roderich Ptak

tween the east coast of old Xiangshan and the west coast of modern Shenzhen 深 圳 / Hong Kong, including the waters around the islands near the southern coast of Hong Kong’s New Territories.1 In olden times, several branches of the Pearl River emptied into the Shiqihai. As these branches or canals carried considerable sand and mud, parts of the Shiqihai started to silt. This led to the formation of semi-dry areas used for the production of salt or gradually turned into dry land for agriculture. Inevitably, the Shiqihai began to disappear. However, that process took several centuries, and it was only under the Qing dynasty that Xiangshan really lost its island appearance by becoming more closely connected to its northern and western hinterland. Up until the mid-Ming period Xiangshan had preserved its island character, although the landscape along its western and northern sides had already changed in a significant manner. Scholars disagree on essential details regarding the topographical alterations in and around the coastal regions of Xiangshan, but there can be no doubt that these changes had implications for international trade converging in Guangzhou. More generally, ships could approach this port by sailing through the Lingdingyang or by following the western shore of Xiangshan; the second route led into the Shiqihai and from there farther to the north. Presumably, when ocean-going vessels increased in size and the Shiqihai became less navigable, due to continued silting, captains and pilots preferred the Lingdingyang option to the other access system in order to reach Guangzhou. These developments become particularly evident in later periods.2 1 General studies on the history of Zhuhai / Xiangshan include the following titles: Huang Xiaodong 黄曉東 (ed.), Zhuhai jianshi 珠海簡史 (The Brief History of Zhuhai), Beijing 2011, as well as several works by Hu Bo 胡波, for example, Xiangshan wenhua yu haiyang wenming 香山文化與海洋文明 (Xiangshan’s Culture and Maritime Civilisation), in: Lin Youneng 林有 能 et al. (eds.), Xiangshan wenhua yu haiyang wenming. Di liu ci haiyang wenhua yantaohui wenji 香山文化與海洋文明: 第六次海洋文化研討會文集 (Xiangshan’s Culture and Maritime Civilisation: Collected Papers of the Sixth Conference on Maritime Culture), Guangzhou 2009, 19–46; Hu Bo, Zhongshan shihua 中山史話 (A History of Zhongshan), Bejing 2014; Hu Bo, Lun Xiangshan yu “Haishang sichou zhi lu” 論香山與《海上絲綢之路》(The Xiangshan Area and the Maritime Silk Roads), in: Li Qingxin 李慶新/Hu Bo (eds.), Dongya haiyu jiaoliu yu nan Zhongguo haiyang kaifa 東亞海域交流與南中國海洋開發 (Maritime Communication in East Asia and Sea Exploration in South China), 2 vols., Beijing: Kexue chubanshe 2017, vol. 2, 841–866; Wang Yuanming 王遠明 / Hu Bo, Xiangshan wenhua jianlun 香山文化簡論 (A Brief History of Xiangshan Culture) (= no. 60 of the journal Zhongshan wenshi 中山文史), Zhongshan 2007. – Also see Roderich Ptak, Wegbereiter für Macau: Der Kreis Xiangshan, seine mutmaßliche Entwicklung und allmähliche Einbettung in den Seehandel (ca. 1000– 1500), in: Saeculum 1/71 (2021), 3–48. 2 On topographical changes see, for example, Wang Ting 王頲, Mingdai Xiangshan lu hai xingshi yu Aomen kaifu 明代香山陸海形勢與澳門開埠 (The Maritime and Continental Topography of Xiangshan under the Ming and the Foundation of Macao), Zhongguo lishi dili yanjiu 中國歷史地理研究 (Studies on the Historical Geography of China) 1 (2005), 207–226. A

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

275

In the course of time, more and more tribute ships coming from Southeast Asia passed through the waters off Xiangshan’s southern and eastern shores. These zones are dotted with islands, many of which provided shelter in the event of storms. This includes such places as Gaolan Island 高欄島 (second character also 闌), Sanzao Island 三竈島 (now connected to the mainland) and the two Hengqin Islands 横琴島 (now one large area), as well as many locations in the Wanshan Archipelago 萬山群島, for example Dawanshan Island 大萬山島, formerly called Nantingshan 南停山. The islands near the coast of modern Guanghai 廣海, especially Shangchuan 上川島, Xiachuan 下川島 and Wuzhu 烏 豬洲, were important landmarks as well. Furthermore, hidden bays offered opportunities to conduct illegal activities. The area now called Macau, with the islands of Taipa 氹仔島 and Coloane 九澳島 (Luhuandao 路環島), falls into this category. Throughout the Song, Yuan, and Ming periods military and civil authorities in Xiangshan and on the eastern side of the Lingdingyang had great difficulties in controlling such activities.3 In sum, old Xiangshan was a location at the periphery of Guangzhou. Owing to the natural conditions prevalent in these zones, maritime exchange – in the form of legal private trade, smuggling and / or tribute trade – became one aspect of this county’s local economy. The changing topography influenced this trade. The following sections will discuss other aspects possibly involved in the rise of Xiangshan’s external links.

2.

From Song to Early Ming: Demography, Economy, Maritime Relations

Written records pertaining to the Tang period or earlier times provide little information about Xiangshan. Presumably there were small villages in that region whose inhabitants made a living by fishing, as farmers and hunters, or as small-scale traders. Sources also suggest that Xiangshan and much of the Lingdingyang area fell under the jurisdiction of the authorities on the eastern side of the Pearl River delta. From their point of view, Xiangshan probably constituted ‘classical’ work is Zeng Zhaoxuan 曾昭璇/Huang Shaomin 黄少敏, Zhujiang sanjiaozhou lishi dimaoxue yanjiu 珠江三角洲歷史地貌學研究 (Historical and Geomorphological Study on the Pearl River Delta), Guangzhou 1987. For a few notes in English, see, for example, Robert B. Marks, Tigers, Rice, Silk, and Silt: Environment and Economy in Late Imperial South China, Cambridge 1998, especially 66–79. 3 A recent monograph on the Lingdingyang in Ming and Qing times is Lu Yanzhao 魯延召, Ming Qing Lingdingyang quyu haifang dili yanjiu 明清伶仃洋區域海防地理研究 (A Study of Coastal Defence and Geography in the Lingdingyang Region under the Ming and Qing), Beijing 2014.

276

Roderich Ptak

one of several outlying islands. Moreover, we know that Xiangshan was a zhen 鎭. This suggests that it was of military importance, because the term zhen usually indicates the presence of military installations (therefore this term is sometimes translated as ‘defence command’). However, there are no records on Xiangshan internal organisation and precise military functions. Under the Song and Yuan dynasties, several waves of migrants moved to Guangdong, including Xiangshan. Initially, these people came from Central China or even from the north. The northern regions in particular were then controlled by the Jin dynasty and later by the Mongols whose activities compelled many families to search for new homes in the far south. When the Mongols took Fujian, Song troops withdrew to Guangdong, and the final battles between both sides were fought in and around the Xiangshan area. After the defeat of the Song, soldiers serving the Song secretly stayed behind. In all likelihood, most of these men came from Fujian. Some scholars believe that small groups even moved to the Macau peninsula. Their numbers and all further details are unknown, but probably several thousand former followers of the Song settled in different locations of the Xiangshan region.4 Taken together, these developments suggest a number of demographic changes: First, Xiangshan’s total population grew, especially under the Song. Second, this was a very mixed population, essentially consisting of three groups: locally born people, migrants from the interior of China (these came first), and migrants who originated from other coastal regions (most of them arrived later). One may add that written records also refer to the presence of Dan groups (often called Tanka 蛋家 in older European works), but we cannot tell to what extent they had settled on the principal island of Xiangshan. Moreover, the origin of these nomads of the sea is still disputed. In addition to demographic changes, there were a number of important administrative and economic changes. Under the Song, Xiangshan was upgraded from a zhen to a county or district (xian 縣). This suggests that it had become more important in terms of economic activities and location. Regarding the latter, presumably the proximity to international trade routes now began to matter much more than before. One reason was that Guangzhou had become one of China’s leading ports, a position which it also maintained under the Yuan (in spite of Quanzhou’s 泉州 spectacular take-off). Regarding Xiangshan’s ‘domestic’ economy, the production of salt, agriculture, fishing, and some mining were the most important income sectors. For long periods, the central govern4 See, for example, Wang Yuanming/Hu Bo 2007, 92, 107; Wu Hongqi 吳宏岐, Shikong jiaozhi de shi ye: Aomen diqu lishi dili yanjiu 時空交織的視野: 澳門地區歷史地理研究 (Historical Geography of Macao) (Colecção Cultura de Macau/Aomen wenhua congshu), Beijing 2014, 191–192.

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

277

ment had a monopoly on salt; as it drew taxes from that trade, it certainly kept an eye on the development of new salt fields (so-called shatian 沙田). However, not too many details are available in local sources related to the Song and Yuan dynasties, and the impact of specific factors on this branch of Xiangshan’s economy remain under dispute.5 It is possible that the salt sector began to stagnate or even to contract during the Yuan. Apparently, many settlers were not ready to work for their new masters. Dissent between different groups led to unrest, and more people became involved in illegal activities. Poverty, was apparently a recurrent problem. Indeed, it is not unlikely that some families left Xiangshan for other locations. However, once again, information is scarce, and written documents do not allow us to draw a full panorama of the situation. The Ming period provides more details. This is especially true for the sixteenth century. The Jiajing edition of the ‘Xiangshan xianzhi’ 香山縣志 (originally 1548; now XSXZ) is particularly useful in that regard. Besides providing demographic and economic data, this work refers to many small islands, rivers, mountains, and other locations, the infrastructural setting, various government institutions, important events, temples, schools, points of public interest, local products, the flora and fauna of Xianshan, and so forth.6 From the XSXZ and other material, we also learn that smugglers met on Sanzao, Hengqin, and other islands. Under the Hongwu emperor, when the central government began to enact the so-called ‘sea prohibition’ or haijin 海禁 policy, local authorities undertook several measures to stop illegal trading. However, as before, Xiangshan had too many islands and too many hidden bays, so that it was impossible to seal all its shores. Smuggling continued, and even harsh interventions could not control the problem.

5 On the foregoing paragraphs, i. e., on Xiangshan in Tang, Song and Yuan times, see, for example, the relevant parts in the sources cited in note 1. Also see Yang Qin 楊芹, Song Yuan shiqi Xiangshandao de haiyang kaifa 宋元時期香山島的海洋開發 (The Maritime Development of Xiangshan under the Song and Yuan), in: Li Qingxin/Hu Bo 2017, vol. 2, 867–875. For the salt sector, also see Duan Xueyu 段雪玉, Song Yuan yi jiang Huanan yanchang shehui bianqian chutan – yi Xiangshan yanchang wei li 宋元以降華南鹽場社會變遷初探 – 以香山 鹽場爲例 (Social Changes and Salt Production in South China during the Song and Yuan Periods: Taking Xiangshan as an Example), in: Zhongguo shehui jingji shi yanjiu 中國社會經 濟史研究 (The Journal of Chinese Social and Economic History) 1 (2012), 37–48. 6 See Jiajing Xiangshan xianzhi 嘉靖香山縣志 (now XSXZ), by Deng Qian 鄧遷, ed. Huang Zuo 黄佐 (Riben zangben Zhongguo hanjian difangzhi congkan), Beijing 1991. – Bibliographical Notes on Xiangshan local chronicles are in Li Mo 李默, Guangdong fangzhi yaolu 廣 東方志要錄 (Catalogue of Guangdong Gazetteers), [Guangzhou] 1987 (date of preface), 71– 77. Also see Zhang Shitai 張世泰/Feng Weixun 馮偉勛/Ni Junming 倪俊明, Guancang Guangdong difangzhi mulu 館藏廣東地方志目錄 (Catalogue of Guangdong Gazetteers Kept in Arquives), Guangzhou 1986, 39, 93–94, 180.

278

Roderich Ptak

Under the Yongle and Xuande emperors, during the Zheng He 鄭和 voyages, private trade remained forbidden, and the situation in Xiangshan may not have changed very much. There are several reasons for this assumption: Differing from some ports along the Fujian coast, Xiangshan did not function as a regular stopover for the official Ming fleets. While the local economy in coastal Fujian, and especially the labour market, was closely linked to the national fleet programme, Xiangshan had nothing or very little to do with the early Ming expeditions. Fujian built several of Zheng He’s ships; it offered technological knowhow, naval expertise. and manpower. Merchants and sailors now served the government sector, which in turn reduced their inclination to take part in illegal activities. In Xiangshan the situation was different. From what we can tell, the government did not promote shipbuilding, nor did it recruit local sailors for the official fleets. In other words, Xiangshan, like certain other coastal areas, was not among the privileged locations that profited from the government sector.7 On the east side of the Pearl River delta and in Guangzhou, the conditions were again different. Occasionally foreign tribute envoys arriving in the wake of Zheng He’s returning fleets entered China by way of the empire’s southern metropolis. Indeed, Guangzhou served as one of several official gates to the Ming state; this is why it had all the staff required to deal with incoming tribute vessels. Furthermore, we know that government vessels departing from that port to destinations in Southeast Asia often made an early stopover near Chiwan 赤灣. There are references to such stopovers in the middle of the fifteenth century, and probably they occurred quite regularly in the days of Zheng He as well. Chiwan is a location near old Nantou 南頭, on the west side of modern Shenzhen, in the area of Shekou 蛇口. There was (and still is) an important temple in Chiwan. We cannot tell when it was first built, but we know that it was an active religious site through much of the fifteenth century. The principal deity, until the present, worshipped in that temple is Mazu 媽祖 / Tianfei 天妃, the Chinese goddess of sailors.8 Zheng He himself had honoured this deity whose 7 An early ‘classic’ on the haijin policy and its consequences is Bodo Wiethoff, Die chinesische Seeverbotspolitik und der private Überseehandel von 1368–1567 (Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens 45), Hamburg 1963. A more recent account is Li Kangying 李康英, The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368–1567 (East Asian Economic and Socio-cultural Studies / East Asian Maritime History 8), Wiesbaden 2010. On Xiangshan and the sea under the early Ming, see, for example, Roderich Ptak, Shiwu shiji Xiangshan diqu de haiwai maoyi 十五世紀香山地區的海外貿易 (The Overseas Trade in the Xiangshan Area in the Fifteenth Century), trans. by Cai Jiehua 蔡潔華, in: Guangdong shehui kexue 廣東社會科學 (Social Sciences in Guangdong) 143 (3/2010), 101–108. Also see the relevant parts in the studies quoted in note 1, above. 8 For Chiwan and the local Mazu temple, see Long Hui 龍輝, Chiwan Mazu wenhua gailan 赤灣 媽祖文化概覽 (A Brief Survey of the Mazu Cult in Chiwan), Shanghai 2007; Roderich Ptak/ Cai Jiehua, The Mazu Inscription of Chiwan (1464) and the Early Ming Voyages, in: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 167.1 (2017), 191–214.

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

279

cult, according to tradition, originated from a small island administered by Putian 莆田 county in Fujian. Presumably, Fujianese migrants transmitted this belief in Mazu to Xiangshan, possibly as early as Song or Yuan times, but under the early Ming Xiangshan had no Mazu temple comparable in size and importance to that of Chiwan.9 What does all this tell us? While one or two selected locations along the east side of the Pearl River, and of course Guangzhou itself, were connected to the official trade sector, Xiangshan remained outside of the state system. This system had two major components: an active part, i. e., the voyages directed by Zheng He and other court eunuchs, and a passive element, which implied the management of incoming tribute missions. Regarding the second element, one should not forget that, besides sending gifts to the imperial court, foreign envoys could trade in the tribute ports. In sum, the state sector provided jobs and opportunities for profit. If true, then we may assume that local officials and merchants in Xiangshan, especially those involved in small-scale subsistence trade, were not pleased that the central government had excluded them from enjoying the privileges granted to other locations. At the same time, China’s laws forbade private activities overseas. Xiangshan was officially cut off from the sea although it certainly would have liked to involve itself much more in maritime affairs.

3.

Xiangshan’s Maritime Orientation after the End of Zheng He’s Voyages

The gap between the central government’s restrictive policy and the desire of China’s coastal population to conduct sea trade had severe implications for hundreds of ports and coastal villages from Shandong and Jiangsu down to Guangdong and Hainan. Essentially, this situation lasted until 1567, when the imperial authorities decided to lift or at least ease haijin regulations. True, already before that date, local administrators, merchants and other influential persons often found ways to evade the laws, but the fundamental paradox remained, i. e., free private trade was not allowed. 9 For migrants going to Xiangshan and for the belief in Mazu, see, for example, Hu Bo 2009, 30– 31, and a short notice on the Huang 黄 clan in Huang Xiaodong 2011, 66 (with references to Zhuhai wenshi 珠海文史). Some more general remarks are in Wang Yuanming/Hu Bo 2007, 9–15. – For the Mazu cult in Guangdong, see, for example Li Qingxin 李慶新/Luo Yiying 羅燚 英, Guangdong Mazu xinyang ji qi liubian chutan 廣東媽祖信仰及其流變初探 (A Study on the Mazu Belief in Guangdong and Its Evolution), in: Shanghai Haishi daxue, Zhongguo haiyang xuehui 上海海事大學, 中國海洋學會 (=Shi Ping 時平 et al.; eds.), Zhongguo minjian haiyang xinyang yanjiu 中國民間海洋信仰研究 (Studies on China’s Maritime Cults), Beijing 2013, 42–55. However, this article mostly deals with later periods.

280

Roderich Ptak

Under such circumstances, black markets and other illegal activities began to emerge. This also happened along the shores of Guangdong, albeit not to the same extent as it happened along the coastal segments of Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian. Be that as it may, Xiangshan was no exception in this regard. Written sources refer to some unrest and to illegal contacts between the local population and foreign traders. The last point is particularly significant. After the end of Zheng He’s expeditions, the active part of the state sector began to contract very rapidly; what was left was tribute trade. However, in the course of time, the number of tribute ships (or gongbo 貢舶) decreased as well. Only vessels from Melaka, Java, Champa, Siam and other Southeast Asian polities still went to Guangzhou on a regular basis. These ships took the same route as before: They closely followed the coast of modern Vietnam, thus bypassing the Xisha qundao 西沙群島 (Paracel Islands). Then they moved along the south coast of Hainan. From the so-called Qizhouyang 七洲洋, the sea around the eastern tip Hainan, they continued their voyage towards the central Guangdong coast. When Xiachuan, Shangchuan and Wuzhu came in sight, captains and pilots had to decide whether they should approach Guangzhou by going through the narrow waterway along Xiangshan’s western shore, or whether the longer passage through the Wanshan qundao and the Lingdingyang was the better option.10 Probably, if the secret intention of the ship’s crew was to conduct some private trade in China, beyond legal limits, then the second option was the more advantageous one. There were military installations on the main island of Xiangshan, but, just as in earlier periods, local troops, now structured in the form of a battalion (qianhusuo 千户所), could not control all the distant islands and bays along Xiangshan’s southern and eastern rim.11 The same may be said of the area 10 Detailed descriptions of the route are found, for example, in Pierre-Yves Manguin, Les Portugais sur les côtes du Vieˆt-nam et du Campa¯: Étude sur les routes maritimes et les ˙ les sources portugaises (XVIe, XVIIe, XVIIIe siècles) (Pubrelations commerciales, d’après lications de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 81), Paris 1972; Luís Jorge Rodrigues Semedo de Matos, Roteiros e rotas portuguesas do Oriente nos séculos XVI e XVII. Lisboa 2015 (dissertation; http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/23631; 01. 12. 2017); and in several older articles by Han Zhenhua 韓振華 in his Nanhai zhudao shidi lunzheng 南海諸島史地論證 (Studies on the Historical Geography of the Nanhai Islands), ed. Han Zhenhua zhuzuo zhengli xiaozu 韓振華著作整理小組 (=Xie Fang 謝方 et al.) (Centre of Asian Studies Occasional Papers and Monographs 134.4), Hong Kong 2003 (this is vol. 4 of the collection Han Zhenhua xuanji 韓振華選集). 11 Ideally, a qianhusuo had one thousand men. The one in Xiangshan appears on the famous Zheng He sea chart. This suggests that military installations on Xiangshan were important from the navy’s point of view. See Xinbian Zheng He hanghai tuji 新編鄭和航海圖集 (New Edition of the Zheng He Map), ed. Haijun haiyang cehui yanjiusuo… 海軍海洋測繪研究 所…, Beijing 1988, 40. – Different sources provide different dates for the establishment of the Xiangshan battalion. See, for example, Foon Ming Liew, The Treatises on Military Affairs of

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

281

under Dongguan 東莞, on the opposite side of the Pearl River delta. It was impossible for regional authorities to monitor remote locations; even the large island of Lantau 大濠島, then usually called Daxishan 大奚山, was a ‘dark zone’. This is why we encounter scattered references to the presence of foreigners in some of these regions. Here we may add an important point: In terms of geography, individual locations in the Wanshan qundao – to the south and west of Hong Kong Island, Lantau and the rest of the New Territories – certainly constituted the best platforms for clandestine exchanges. But officials and chroniclers knew close to nothing about these places, which may explain why most islands rarely get mentioned in Ming works (unlike Daxishan, Sanzao, Hengqin, etc.). The level of illegal maritime activities in and around Xiangshan was supposedly much higher than suggested through contemporary material. While Southeast Asians were found all around the Lingdingyang, as also in certain other en route locations, for example on Hainan, the occasional presence of merchants from the Ryukyu Islands in Xiangshan seems less obvious. We may explain their activities in the following way: Taking advantage of the haijin policy, the small Ryukyu state had gradually developed its own trading network through which it channelled Southeast Asian and many local products to Fujian – not illegally, but within the tribute system. In fact, after the end of Zheng He’s expeditions, Ryukyu had become an important bridge between Fujian and the overseas world. We also know that Ryukyu received official support through the authorities in Fujian. Migrants and settlers from that province taught Ryukyuans how to build large ocean-going vessels and assisted them in other ways as well. However, what we cannot tell is the extent to which Fujianese merchants and mariners began to abuse the privileged status of Sino-Ryukyu relations for their own advantage and thus against China’s haijin laws. Here we can return to Xiangshan: Shipwreck was certainly one reason for foreigners, including Ryukyuans, to seek assistance from the local authorities of that county. Trying to increase profits through additional trade, beyond the tight frame set by tribute regulations, was another possible motive. On their return voyages from Melaka, Patani and other Southeast Asian ports, Ryukyu ships carried pepper, precious timber, aromatic substances, exotic animals, mineral products, and other goods; evidently small amounts of such commodities sold

the Ming Dynastic History (1368–1644): An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs, Chapter 89 and Chapter 90, 2 vols. (Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Naturund Völkerkunde Ostasiens 129), Hamburg 1998, vol. 2, nos. 590 and 610. An earlier source is the Jiajing edition of the Guangdong tongzhi 廣東通志 (Guangdong Provincial Gazetteer), ed. Huang Zuo 黄佐, 4 vols., Hongkong 1977; see vol. 2, 31.6b (795).

282

Roderich Ptak

well in Xiangshan, whence they were probably passed on to major urban markets. Of course, all this was against the law.12 Earlier we had mentioned that some people of Fujianese origin had stayed behind in Xiangshan, especially after the end Song-Yuan hostilities. It is not impossible that their descendants became secret partners of those who would travel on board Ryukyuan vessels. Again, sources provide no details, but probably the continued existence of a Fujianese ‘nucleus’ in Xiangshan was one element that strongly contributed to this county’s clandestine involvement in maritime affairs.

4.

Xiangshan and the tugong System

Apparently, several long-term factors favoured Xiangshan’s growing maritime orientation: (a) Topographic changes, especially silting in the Shiqihai, led to a gradual rise in importance of the shipping corridor around Xiangshan’s southern and eastern shores; simultaneously, international traffic along Xiangshan’s western board became less important. (b) Xiangshan’s early population growth accelerated with the influx of migrants from continental China; in later periods, migrants also came from other coastal regions, including Fujian. For these people the sea was essential. That also applies to local Dan groups who were involved in small-scale trade and fishing. (c) Presumably, Xiangshan’s merchants knew how to profit from the growth of Guangzhou and its position in both the private trade sector and the official segment, including tribute trade. When the Ming forbade private exchange, Xiangshan county increased its activities in the illegal sector. (d) As a kind of ‘multicultural’ society made up of different immigrant groups, it foreshadowed the rise of Portuguese Macau because this place also hosted people of different ethnic backgrounds.13 To this hypothetical picture, we may now add one additional component: the tradition of submitting local tribute, or tugong 土貢. While European sinologists have paid much attention to tribute trade involving foreign envoys, much less has been written on the tugong system and its ramifications.14 One may summarize 12 There are many studies on the early Ryukyu network. See, for example, Roderich Ptak, The Ryukyu Network in the Fifteenth and Early Sixteenth Centuries, in: Revista de Cultura (international edition) 6 (2003), 7–23. Also see Roderich Ptak, The Fujianese, Ryukyuans and Portuguese (c. 1511 to 1540s): Allies or Competitors?, in: Anais de História de Além-Mar 3 (2002), 447–467. For Ryukyu traders in Xiangshan, see Roderich Ptak 2010, 105 13 See Roderich Ptak 2020, last part. 14 There are several Chinese studies on the tugong system, including dissertations and works discussing individual regions or periods. One example is: Dan Peng 單鵬, Songdai tugong zhidu kaolüe – yi changgong wei zhongxin 宋代土貢制度考略 – 以常貢為中心 (The System of Paying Local Tribute under the Song Dynasty), in: Jiangsu keji daxue xuebao (sheke ban)

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

283

the most important features of this arrangement in the following way: The central government required certain regions, in particular those at the empire’s periphery, to send ‘gifts’. Offering local products was an established way of expressing one’s loyalty to the imperial court; at the same time, this was one form of paying taxes. The receiving side determined the kind of objects and the amounts each place had to deliver, periodically adjusting the relevant rules and regulations to changing conditions. Several areas in modern Guangxi and Hainan had to comply with this system, to mention just two important cases. Among the items submitted as tribute were horses, because China was always short of these animals.15 The relevant details have survived in geographical accounts, local chronicles, and other historical records. Naturally, written sources also contain data on other areas. A quick review of this material tells us that products differed from one region to the next: There were extremely valuable items like precious stones or medicinal substances; in other cases, one finds references to manufactured objects, pieces of art, exotic animals, and even some perishable goods such as fruits. While we know something about the products themselves, we usually cannot tell to what extent individual items circulated from the area of production to different markets and collecting centres, which items reached the imperial capital, and which were the ones that would stay behind for regional consumption. However, in some cases the rarity of a product appears to have been of significance. Local authorities often preferred a small quantity of highly expensive objects to a large basket of goods that were also available in other places. Submitting local tribute, therefore, must have had a symbolic dimension: The singularity of a particular item, so it seems, mattered very much. How does Xiangshan fit into this picture? During the Song period, the tugong system did not yet include this county, but the reasons remain unknown. Probably Xiangshan was unimportant or simply too far away from Guangzhou, which had to collect all incoming tribute items. Under the Yuan, government authorities required symbolic amounts of medicinal substances; that was all. Thus, according to the fragmentary ‘Nanhai zhi’ 南海志 (usually dated 1304; now abbreviated NHZ), Xiangshan had to deliver seventy pairs of geckoes (gejie 蛤

江蘇科技大學學報（社科版） (Journal of Jiangsu University of Science and Technology [Social Science Edition]) 7.3 (2007), 27–32; also available on https://www.xueshu.com/jskjd xxb/200703/25831050.html (06. 08. 2018). 15 The shipment of horses from Hainan to the mainland is one case. See, for example, Roderich Ptak, Hainan and the Trade in Horses (Song to Early Ming), in: Roderich Ptak, Birds and Beasts in Chinese Texts and Trade. Lectures Related to South China and the Overseas World (Maritime Asia 22), Wiesbaden 2011, 57–73.

284

Roderich Ptak

蚧).16 The XSXZ of the Jiajing period repeats this information, adding that Xiangshan’s residents were not pleased with such a regulation. At first sight, this looks like a trivial affair, but farther below we shall see that geckoes played an important role in medicine, and that may have mattered.17 However, there is more to say. The NHZ tells us that Song administrators had demanded yiwu 異物 (rare items or even mirabilia) from their subjects in the greater Guangzhou region, while the ruling elite of the Yuan had no use for such things, thus avoiding burdening the local population with unnecessary duties.18 Apparently, the last point contradicts the brief observation found in XSXZ. Several explanations are possible to understand the riddle: By emphasizing that Yuan-China had put pressure on Xiangshan’s residents, the authors of the Ming gazetteer wanted to expose the bad sides of Mongol rule. Similarly, by creating a strong contrast between Song and Yuan demands, the NHZ tried to express solidarity with the Yuan. Finally, the NHZ statement suggests a further point: Perhaps Xiangshan had nothing to offer in Song times that would have fallen into the yiwu category; therefore, the Song had exempted this county from the tugong system. Under the early Ming, there were new developments. According to the XSXZ, Xiangshan had to submit two hundred hides (per year?) taken from three kinds of animals: the Chinese muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi, in the text: jing 麖), other deer (lu 鹿) and oxen (niu 牛, i. e., water buffaloes).19 In addition, locally appointed community heads (lizhang 里长) would ask influential persons to collect a total of “33,190 bird feathers” (翎毛三萬三千一百九十根). This is a bewildering statement: First, the classifier gen suggests that these were individual feathers and not bird skins, but that is debatable; second, the text does not tell us how the

16 Yuan Dade Nanhai zhi canben 元大德南海志殘本 (Fragmentary Chronicle of Nanhai from the Dade Period of the Yuan Dynasty; now NHZ), by Chen Dazhen 陳大震, ed. Guangzhoushi difangzhi bianzuan weiyuanhui bangongshi 廣州市地方志編篡委員會 辦公室, Guangzhou 1991, 6.9. 17 XSXZ, 2.7b (312). 18 NHZ, 6.8. 19 The XSXZ mentions these animals more than once, but we cannot decide to which kind of deer the term lu should refer in that source. Regarding niu, there are two “kinds”: shuiniu 水 牛 and boniu 㹀牛. The first character in the second term has been interpreted as zi 牸 (which designates female animals). For the animals see XSXZ, especially 2.7b (312), 16b–17a (316– 317), 18b (317), 20a, 20b (318). The earlier NHZ, 7.40, lists niu, lu, jing, zhang 麞, mi 麋 and ji 麂. – Note, some passages of the tugong entry in XSXZ were wrongly translated in Tan Shibao 譚世寶, The History of the Ama Temple in Macao: New Archaeological Findings, trans. by Justin Watkins. See http://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/20030/1192 (no pagination; 06. 08. 2018). For the Chinese version see Tan’s Aomen Mazu gemiao de lishi kaogu yanjiu xin faxian 澳門媽祖閣廟的歷史考古研究新發現, http://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/10029/491 (06. 08. 2018). Again, there is no pagination, but the relevant passage is near note 39.

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

285

number was calculated; third, it gives no explanation regarding the bird species from which the feathers came.20 Eventually new regulations substituted for the old ones. The XSXZ furnishes no date, but we learn that Xiangshan had to pay a sum equivalent to the old value of the hides as part of the so-called junpingqian 均平錢. The junpingqian was one kind of service / tax, which the government asked for. Later on, Xiangshan also had to submit different products in kind. These additional items did not originate from Xiangshan, therefore they did not qualify as local products (tuchan 土產). One item mentioned in the list is cuimao 翠毛, literately “kingfisher feathers”. The entry on Xiangshan’s tugong in XSXZ ends with a general remark: Formerly all tribute items had to be locally produced goods, but at present people would buy the requested objects in other places. Influential merchants took advantage by raising prices; community heads and others were involved in this system as well. The last point relates to the so-called lijia 里甲 structure, an organisational form on the community level often described in sinological works.21 There is not much more we can say with respect to Xiangshan’s role within the tugong apparatus of the Song, Yuan, and early Ming periods. However, some points call for comments: First, the NHZ contains a list of aromatic, medicinal, and other substances (the list bears the title xiangyao 香藥), which were produced in and around Guangzhou during the Mongol era. This list mentions geckoes / gejie and a brief textual note confirms the quantity of seventy pairs submitted each year.22 In other words, Xiangshan was the only district under Guangzhou to deliver these creatures and, obviously, they all went to the imperial capital. Moreover, historical records do not report gecko imports from foreign countries, which suggests that Xiangshan relied on its own ‘production’ without purchasing geckoes from other locations to meet the quota set up by the imperial authorities. Second, the XSXZ also lists geckoes as a product of Xiangshan, but the Ming no longer required these animals.23 Regarding muntjacs, deer and oxen – presumably these animals were only available on the main islands. Given that agriculture had already reduced the natural habitat of wild deer, continued demand, if kept at high levels for several years, probably caused some problems – 20 XSXZ, 2.7b–8a (312). Generally, traditional references to the quantity of bird feathers often make it difficult to identify the correct unit of calculation. 21 XSXZ, 2.8a (312: tugong), 2.12b–13a (314–315: pingjun and lijia). For lijia, also see, for example, Denis Twitchett/Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1369–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998, especially 134–138. 22 NHZ, 7.30. 23 XSXZ, 2.23b (320); there is a detailed description of the animal. Also see Guangdong tongzhi, vol.2, 24.21b (635).

286

Roderich Ptak

even to the degree that certain species were in danger of disappearing from the island. Would this help to explain the change of rules introduced in later times? Third, in traditional Chinese texts references to bird feathers submitted as tribute are usually references to blue kingfisher feathers. Such feathers served as decorative elements and for adornments. From lishi dili works and other records, we know that bird hunters tried to obtain large numbers of feathers, or even living birds, to satisfy China’s appetite for this ‘product’.24 If that is what the Ming government wanted from Xiangshan, then, once again, the requested amounts were quite high. There can be no doubt, kingfishers were locally available, but one must keep in mind that these birds usually need a larger terrain near rivers and ponds for survival. Therefore, the population density of kingfishers cannot exceed certain limits, which may imply that continuous demand for their feathers led to a strong reduction in resources. If so, then Xiangshan had good reasons to obtain fresh supplies from other regions, or even from abroad. Alternatively, it may have offered fake feathers, artificially coloured with blue dye. The above deals with a small number of animal products submitted to the state within the tugong system. Evidently, individual conditions for Xiangshan changed with the transition from Yuan to Ming. Kingfisher feathers, not listed as a local product of the Guangzhou region in Mongol times, but only as a precious item (baowu 寶物) brought by foreign ships, suddenly became a commodity, which the Ming wished to obtain in larger quantities.25 Similar circumstances may apply to other products as well. Taken together, this could mean that Xiangshan had to acquire certain goods from foreign merchants to fulfil the quota regulations imposed by the Ming. Of course, all this is hypothetical. However, if the above is correct, then Xiangshan found itself in a paradoxical situation: On the one side, the Ming administration restricted private overseas trade, decreeing that only tribute ships should come to Guangzhou; on the other side, it put pressure on various coastal communities to deliver rare substances. It thus seems that tugong regulations contributed to Xiangshan’s growing maritime orientation and forced this county to become involved in illegal transactions, something that was not in the interest of the central authorities. Although expensive goods only required limited amounts of space on carts and ships, they mattered and carried a strong symbolic value. Apparently, the combination of foreign tribute trade and the local tugong system led to unwanted consequences.

24 For details see Roderich Ptak, Eisvögel und Eisvogelfedern in China: Beschreibungen und Einfuhr aus maritimen Gebieten (ca. 500–1500), in: Saeculum 2/55 (2004), 291–322; same, Chinese Bird Imports from Maritime Southeast Asia, c. 1000–1500, in: Archipel 84 (2012), 197–245, here 213–220. 25 For kingfisher feathers in Guangzhou under the Yuan, see NHZ, 7.44.

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

5.

287

Additional Remarks on Gejie and Feicui and General Conclusion

To round off these jottings, some additional remarks on the products themselves, as a kind of short appendix, should be mentioned. This mainly concerns geckoes and kingfisher birds. From Wen Rongsheng’s 文榕生 voluminous source book on the distribution of animals in imperial times, we can gather that these creatures belonged to the fauna of various Guangdong regions. Ming chronicles dealing with the prefectures of Chaozhou 潮州, Huizhou 惠州 and Gaozhou 高州 mention them, and even the ‘Da Ming yitong zhi’ 大明一統志 (completed in 1461) records feicui, for example as a ‘product’ of the Zhaoqing 肇慶 region. Selected Qing chronicles, also quoted in Wen’s work, list these animals as well.26 Geckoes / gejie are important in Chinese medicine. Countless internet entries, printed books and articles discuss the relevant details. Today the term gejie refers to both the animal and the substance made from it. One of the earliest descriptions of the animal comes from the ‘Lingbiao lu yi’ 嶺表錄異 (end of Tang). Later sources, including several leishu 類書 compendia, also mention geckoes. As expected, a very substantial entry is included in Li Shizhen’s 李時珍 ‘Bencao gangmu’ 本草綱目 of the sixteenth century. This text cites many works now only available in fragmentary form. More important for us, it summarizes the medicinal properties of gejie in a systematic way.27 Generally, there are several applications of gejie, for example against asthma and lung problems; specialists have confirmed that this substance is quite effective against such illnesses. In addition, traditional sources list further names for the animal: xianchan 仙 蟾, duoge 多格, haxie 哈蟹, gejieshe 蛤蚧蛇, dabihu 大壁虎, dashougong 大守 宮, etc. Modern studies also investigate various zoological dimensions, and they tell us that imitations of gejie products circulate in great numbers, in spite of regular controls. The true gejie substance is made from Gekko gecko Linnaeus, a 26 See Wen Rongsheng (ed., author), Zhongguo gudai yesheng dongwu dili fenbu 中國古代野 生動物地理分布 (Geographical Distribution of Wild Animals in Ancient China), Ji’nan 2013, especially 707, 715, 722, 723, 725, 732, 736, 740; Da Ming yitong zhi (Comprehensive Gazetteer of the Great Ming), by Li Xian 李賢 et al., 10 vols., Taibei 1965, vol. 9, 81.9a (4983). 27 See Lingbiao lu yi jiaobu 嶺表錄異校補 (Records of Strange Things in Lingbiao, with Annotations) (Guiyuan shulin), by Liu Xun 劉恂, ed. Shang Bi 商壁/Pan Bo 潘博, Nanning, Guangxi minzu chubanshe 1988, 167–168; Marie-Claude Guignard, Aufzeichnungen über die Wunder des Südens. Übersetzung und Interpretation des Lingbiao-luyi von Liu Xun, Hamburg 1982, 76, 77, 127 (University of Hamburg, M.A. thesis, unpublished); Bencao gangmu (Materia Medica), by Li Shizhen, 2 vols., Beijing 1982, vol. 2, 43.2392–2394; Bernard E. Read, Chinese Materia Medica: Dragon and Snake Drugs, Taipei 1977, 30–32 no. 109 (originally in: Peking Natural History Bulletin 1934). One leishu: Taiping yulan 太平御覽 (Taiping Imperial Encyclopaedia), Li Fang 李昉 et al., 4 vols. Beijing 1985, vol. 4, 951.9a (4225).

288

Roderich Ptak

species under the Gekkonidae.28 Its English name, tokay gecko, as well as several Asian names, seem to derive from the mating call which this animal makes; it is sometimes described as token, gekk-gekk, poo-kay, etc. Geckoes can change their colour. This helps to explain why they are easily confused with other species.29 However, it certainly was not too difficult for people in Xiangshan to locate and catch these creatures. The request for collecting seventy pairs as tribute gifts, therefore, was not an exorbitantly high demand.30 Keeping these creatures in captivity is another matter. Perhaps this was the more difficult part, if the Yuan authorities wished to obtain live animals. Regarding kingfisher birds, there are hundreds of references to these beautiful animals in a multitude of sources. Modern zoology distinguishes between several species now usually grouped under the families Halcyonidae, Alcedinidae and Cerylidae.31 Lishi dili works and other records of the Song, Yuan, and Ming periods regularly refer to imports of feicui (feathers / skins / living birds?) within the tribute system. Continental Southeast Asia was one important source for this ‘product’. Song works describe them in the context of modern Guangxi, Guangdong, and Hainan. The earliest references to kingfishers derive from Han records. Besides feicui several other terms designated these birds, one being yugou 魚狗. Today this term appears in the modern zoological names for the (lesser) pied kingfisher (Ceryle rudis; ban yugou 斑魚狗) and the crested / pied kingfisher (Ceryle lugubris or Megaceryle lugubris; guan yugou 冠魚狗). These two species are mostly white, but they have large black parts and many black dots on their bodies and wings. As they lack the beautiful blue feathers typical for some of the Alcedinidae and Halcyonidae, we may safely exclude them from the list of tribute animals. While the NHZ does not list feicui and yugou birds as local products of the greater Guangzhou region, the XSXZ of the Jiajing period and later versions of that chronicle do mention them.32 Modern catalogues also confirm the presence 28 For a modern study see: Shen Lin 申琳/Zou Aiying 鄒愛英/Meng Qing’an 孟慶安, Gejie de bianxi 蛤蚧的辨析 (Analysing Geckos), in: Tianjin Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine 天津中医药 27 (December 2010), 518–519. Also available under http://www.tjzhongyiyao.c om/tjzyy/ch/reader/create_pdf.aspx?file_no=20100637 (06. 08. 2018). Today a standard medicine is called gejie dingchuan wan 蛤蚧定喘丸. – Also note: Most Chinese zoologists use the name dabihu for G. gecko. 29 One modern monograph with many practical aspects is: Wolfgang Grossmann, Der Tokeh. Gekko gecko, Münster 2004. 30 Apparently gejie animals also appear in local Xiangshan legends. One example: Chen Jinhua 陳錦華 (collector, ed.), ‘Xincun’ ye jiao ‘Gejiedun’ ‘新村’也叫‘蛤蚧墩’ (‘Xincun’ is also called ‘Gejiedun’). See http://120.25.67.33:83/list-detail.aspx?id=163&classid=4 (06. 08. 2018). 31 During the last two or three decades the taxonomy of kingfishers went through several adjustments, but this is of no importance here. 32 Roderich Ptak, Xiangshan dongwu lishi yi pie: Jiajing “Xiangshan xianzhi” li de yulei yanjiu 香山動物歷史一瞥: 嘉靖《香山縣志》裡的羽類研究 (A Glimpse into the History of

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

289

of several species in the Macau territory. This is quite surprising because much of Macau and even its two adjacent islands Taipa and Coloane are now covered with buildings. There are comparatively few green areas left, mostly on Coloane, but the Macau administration tries to preserve these zones and, evidently, there is still enough space for all kinds of birds. According to a zoological catalogue published in 2010, the following species were then at home in Macau: the white-throated / white-breasted kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis; baixiong feicui 白胸翡翠), the black-capped kingfisher (H. pileata; lan feicui 藍翡翠), the common kingfisher (Alcedo attis; putong cuiniao 普通翠鳥) and the pied kingfisher.33 This seems to be in line with the distribution of kingfisher birds across the area now called Zhuhai. The first three species have many blue parts and most likely it was these animals which provided the feathers that Xiangshan had to present as one tugong item to the Ming. Sources of the Song, Yuan, and early Ming periods say nothing about the uses of feicui feathers in Guangzhou. Probably local artisans needed them for the production of decorative objects and to adorn jewels, but it is also possible that all the ‘raw material’ went to other locations, or even to the imperial court, to be processed there. This is a point that awaits clarification. The same applies to gejie. So far, we cannot tell how the living animals (or the dried creatures and / or the medicinal substance obtained from them) circulated in those early days. Indeed, the domestic transportation and distribution of certain tugong products and other things pose many questions. Just as its predecessors, the Qing state was also interested in obtaining precious and rare products. Today we know that thousands of manufactured curiosities filled the imperial collection in Beijing where these items were highly treasured. However, it seems that the ruling elites of the Manchu period no longer required large amounts of feicui from Xiangshan. If so, this could help to explain why some of the feicui species managed to survive in that region, as also in several other Guangdong counties. In conclusion, the following may be said: We started with a general description of Xiangshan’s changing topography and we also discussed essential demoXiangshan’s Fauna: Fowl Data in the Jiajing Xiangshan Local Chronicle), trans. by Cai Jiehua, in: Aomen ligong xuebao 澳门理工學報 (Revista do Instituto Politécnico de Macau) 45/1 (2012), 173–184, here 180, 183. – Provincial chronicles of Guangdong also list kingfishers. See, for example, Guangdong tongzhi, vol. 2, 24.11a–b (630). 33 Serviços de Zonas Verdes e Jardins do Instituto para os Assuntos Cívicos e Municipais… / Aomen tebie xingzhengqu Minzheng zongshu Yuanlin lühua bu… 澳門特别行政區民政總 署園林綠化部… / Department of Gardens and Green Areas, Civic and Municipal Affairs Bureau… (=Lei Wai Nong 李偉農 et al. [eds.]), Aves de Macau / Aomen niaolei 澳門鳥類/ Birds of Macau, Macau 2010, 142–148. For an earlier list, see L(eonel) Barros, Manual de identificação das aves de Macau: aves residentes e migradoras, Macau n.d. (c. 1984), 81–82 (here only A. attis is mentioned).

290

Roderich Ptak

graphic and economic features. Several factors strengthened Xiangshan’s maritime orientation. Under the Ming, the combined effects of the haijin policy, regular tribute trade and tugong regulations intensified this trend. Within that context, one may examine the role of different local and other products. In the case of plants and animals – and the products made from them – it is essential to consider the nature of each item, its properties, and how one may explain changing demand for it. Here, we briefly examined two cases through which it became possible to link the tugong system to other ‘institutions’, and indeed to a longue-durée perspective.

6.

Literature: Primary Sources (quoted by title)

Jiajing Guangdong tongzhi 嘉靖廣東通志 (Guangdong Provincial Gazetteer), ed. by Huang Zuo 黄佐, 4 vols., Hongkong 1977. Jiajing Xiangshan xianzhi 嘉靖香山縣志 (Ganzetteer of Xiangshan County), by Deng Qian 鄧遷, ed. by Huang Zuo 黄佐 (ser. Riben zangben Zhongguo hanjian difangzhi congkan), Beijing 1991. Xinbian Zheng He hanghai tuji 新編鄭和航海圖集 (New Edition of the Zheng He Map), ed. by Haijun haiyang cehui yanjiusuo… 海軍海洋測繪研究所…, Beijing 1988. Yuan Dade Nanhai zhi canben 元大德南海志殘本 (Fragmentary Chronicle of Nanhai from the Dade Period of the Yuan Dynasty), by Chen Dazhen 陳大震, ed. by Guangzhoushi difangzhi bianzuan weiyuanhui bangongshi 廣州市地方志編篡委員會 辦公室, Guangzhou 1991. Da Ming yitong zhi 大明一統志 (Comprehensive Gazetteer of the Great Ming), by Li Xian 李賢 et al., 10 vols., Taibei 1965. Lingbiao lu yi jiaobu 嶺表錄異校補 (Records of Strange Things in Lingbiao, with Annotations) by Liu Xun 劉恂, ed. by Shang Bi 商壁/Pan Bo 潘博 (ser. Guiyuan shulin), Nanning 1988. Bencao gangmu 本草綱目 (Materia Medica), by Li Shizhen 李時珍, 2 vols., Beijing 1982. Taiping yulan 太平御覽 (Taiping Imperial Encyclopaedia), by Li Fang 李昉 et al., 4 vols., Beijing 1985.

7.

Literature: Secondary Sources

Dan Peng 單鵬, Songdai tugong zhidu kaolüe – yi changgong wei zhongxin 宋代土貢制度 考略 – 以常貢為中心 (The System of Paying Local Tribute under the Song Dynasty), in: Jiangsu keji daxue xuebao (sheke ban) 江蘇科技大學學報（社科版） (Journal of Jiangsu University of Science and Technology [Social Science Edition]) 7/3 (2007), 27– 32; also available on https://www.xueshu.com/jskjdxxb/200703/25831050.html (06. 08. 2018).

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

291

Duan Xueyu 段雪玉, Song Yuan yi jiang Huanan yanchang shehui bianqian chutan – yi Xiangshan yanchang wei li 宋元以降華南鹽場社會變遷初探 – 以香山鹽場爲例 (Social Changes and Salt Production in South China during the Song and Yuan Periods: Taking Xiangshan as an Example), Zhongguo shehui jingji shi yanjiu 中國社會經濟史 研究 (The Journal of Chinese Social and Economic History) 1 (2012), 37–48. Wolfgang Grossmann, Der Tokeh. Gekko gecko, Münster 2004. Marie-Claude Guignard, Aufzeichnungen über die Wunder des Südens. Übersetzung und Interpretation des Lingbiao-luyi von Liu Xun, Hamburg 1982 (University of Hamburg, M. A. thesis, unpublished). Han Zhenhua 韓振華, Nanhai zhudao shidi lunzheng 南海諸島史地論證 (Studies on the Historical Geography of the Nanhai Islands), ed. by Han Zhenhua zhuzuo zhengli xiaozu 韓振華著作整理小組 (=Xie Fang 謝方 et al.) (Centre of Asian Studies Occasional Papers and Monographs 134.4), Hong Kong 2003. Huang Xiaodong 黄曉東 (ed.), Zhuhai jianshi 珠海簡史 (The Brief History of Zhuhai), Beijing 2011. Huang Zuo 黄佐 (ed.), Jiajing edition of the Guangdong tongzhi 廣東通志 (Guangdong Provincial Gazetteer), 4 vols., Hongkong 1977. Hu Bo 胡波, Xiangshan wenhua yu haiyang wenming 香山文化與海洋文明 (Xiangshan’s Culture and Maritime Civilisation), in: Lin Youneng 林有能 et al. (eds.), Xiangshan wenhua yu haiyang wenming. Di liu ci haiyang wenhua yantaohui wenji 香山文化與海 洋文明: 第六次海洋文化研討會文集 (Xiangshan’s Culture and Maritime Civilisation: Collected Papers of the Sixth Conference on Maritime Culture), Guangzhou 2009, 19– 46. Hu Bo胡波, Zhongshan shihua 中山史話 (A History of Zhongshan), Bejing 2014. Hu Bo胡波, Lun Xiangshan yu “Haishang sichou zhi lu” 論香山與《海上絲綢之路 (The Xiangshan Area and the Maritime Silk Roads), in: Li Qingxin 李慶新/Hu Bo (eds.), Dongya haiyu jiaoliu yu nan Zhongguo haiyang kaifa 東亞海域交流與南中國海洋開 發 (Maritime Communication in East Asia and Sea Exploration in South China), 2 vols., Beijing 2017, vol. 2, 841–866. Lei Wai Nong 李偉農 et al. (eds.), Aves de Macau / Aomen niaolei 澳門鳥類 /Birds of Macau, Macau 2010. Foon Ming Liew, The Treatises on Military Affairs of the Ming Dynastic History (1368– 1644): An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs, Chapter 89 and Chapter 90, 2 vols. (Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens 129), Hamburg 1998, vol. 2, nos. 590 and 610. Li Kangying 李康英, The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368–1567 (East Asian Economic and Socio-cultural Studies/East Asian Maritime History 8), Wiesbaden 2010. Li Mo 李默, Guangdong fangzhi yaolu 廣東方志要錄 (Catalogue of Guangdong Gazetteers), [Guangzhou] 1987. Li Qingxin 李慶新/Luo Yiying 羅燚英, Guangdong Mazu xinyang ji qi liubian chutan 廣東 媽祖信仰及其流變初探 (A Study on the Mazu Belief in Guangdong and Its Evolution), in: Shanghai Haishi daxue, Zhongguo haiyang xuehui 上海海事大學, 中國海洋學會 (=Shi Ping 時平 et al.; eds.), Zhongguo minjian haiyang xinyang yanjiu 中國民間海洋 信仰研究 (Studies on China’s Maritime Cults), Beijing 2013, 42–55. Long Hui 龍輝, Chiwan Mazu wenhua gailan 赤灣媽祖文化概覽 (A Brief Survey of the Mazu Cult in Chiwan), Shanghai 2007.

292

Roderich Ptak

Lu Yanzhao 魯延昭, Ming Qing Lingdingyang quyu haifang dili yanjiu 明清伶仃洋區域海 防地理研究 (A Study of Coastal Defence and Geography in the Lingdingyang Region under the Ming and Qing), Beijing 2014. Pierre-Yves Manguin, Les Portugais sur les côtes du Vieˆt-nam et du Campa¯: Étude sur les ˙ routes maritimes et les relations commerciales, d’après les sources portugaises (XVIe, XVIIe, XVIIIe siècles) (Publications de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 81), Paris 1972. Robert B. Marks, Tigers, Rice, Silk, and Silt: Environment and Economy in Late Imperial South China, Cambridge 1998. Luís Jorge Rodrigues Semedo de Matos, Roteiros e rotas portuguesas do Oriente nos séculos XVI e XVII. Lisboa 2015, http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/23631 (01. 12. 2017). Roderich Ptak, The Fujianese, Ryukyuans and Portuguese (c. 1511 to 1540s): Allies or Competitors?, in: Anais de História de Além-Mar 3 (2002), 447–467. Roderich Ptak, The Ryukyu Network in the Fifteenth and Early Sixteenth Centuries, in: Revista de Cultura (international edition) 6 (2003), 7–23. Roderich Ptak, Eisvögel und Eisvogelfedern in China: Beschreibungen und Einfuhr aus maritimen Gebieten (ca. 500–1500), in: Saeculum 2/55 (2004), 291–322. Roderich Ptak, Shiwu shiji Xiangshan diqu de haiwai maoyi 十五世紀香山地區的海外貿 易 (The Overseas Trade in the Xiangshan Area in the Fifteenth Century), trans. by Cai Jiehua 蔡潔華, in: Guangdong shehui kexue 廣東社會科學 (Social Sciences in Guangdong) 3/143 (2010), 101–108. Roderich Ptak, Hainan and the Trade in Horses (Song to Early Ming), in: Roderich Ptak, Birds and Beasts in Chinese Texts and Trade. Lectures Related to South China and the Overseas World (Maritime Asia 22), Wiesbaden 2011, 57–73. Roderich Ptak, Chinese Bird Imports from Maritime Southeast Asia, c. 1000–1500, in: Archipel 84 (2012), 197–245. Roderich Ptak, Xiangshan dongwu lishi yi pie: Jiajing “Xiangshan xianzhi” li de yulei yanjiu 香山動物歷史一瞥: 嘉靖《香山縣志》裡的羽類研究 (A Glimpse into the History of Xiangshan’s Fauna: Fowl Data in the Jiajing Xiangshan Local Chronicle), trans. by Cai Jiehua蔡潔華, in: Aomen ligong xuebao 澳门理工學報 (Revista do Instituto Politécnico de Macau) 1/45 (2012), 173–184. Roderich Ptak/Cai Jiehua 蔡潔華, The Mazu Inscription of Chiwan (1464) and the Early Ming Voyages, in: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 1/167 (2017), 191–214. Roderich Ptak, Wegbereiter für Macau: Der Kreis Xiangshan, seine mutmaßliche Entwicklung und allmähliche Einbettung in den Seehandel (ca. 1000–1500), in: Saeculum 1/ 71 (2021), 3–48. Bernard E. Read, Chinese Materia Medica: Dragon and Snake Drugs, Taipei 1977 (originally in: Peking Natural History Bulletin 1934). Shen Lin 申琳/Zou Aiying 鄒愛英/Meng Qing’an 孟慶安, Gejie de bianxi 蛤蚧的辨析 (Analysing Geckos), in: Tianjin Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine 天津中医药 27 (2010), 518–519. Tan Shibao 譚世寶, The History of the Ama Temple in Macao: New Archaeological Findings, trans. by Justin Watkins. See http://www.icm.gov.mo/rc/viewer/20030/1192 (no pagination; 06. 08. 2018).

Xiangshan County, Maritime Trade and Local Tribute (c. 1000–1550)

293

Denis Twitchett, Frederick W. Mote (eds.), The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1369–1644, Part 2, Cambridge 1998. Wang Ting 王頲, Mingdai Xiangshan lu hai xingshi yu Aomen kaifu 明代香山陸海形勢與 澳門開埠 (The Maritime and Continental Topography of Xiangshan under the Ming and the Foundation of Macao), in: Zhongguo lishi dili yanjiu 中國歷史地理研究 (Studies on the Historical Geography of China) 1 (2005), 207–226. Wang Yuanming 王遠明/Hu Bo 胡波, Xiangshan wenhua jianlun 香山文化簡論 (A Brief History of Xiangshan Culture) (= no. 60 of the journal Zhongshan wenshi 中山文史), Zhongshan 2007. Wen Rongsheng (ed., author), Zhongguo gudai yesheng dongwu dili fenbu 中國古代野生 動物地理分布 (Geographical Distribution of Wild Animals in Ancient China), Ji’nan 2013. Bodo Wiethoff, Die chinesische Seeverbotspolitik und der private Überseehandel von 1368– 1567 (Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens 45), Hamburg 1963. Wu Hongqi 吳宏岐, Shikong jiaozhi de shi ye: Aomen diqu lishi dili yanjiu 時空交織的視: 澳門地區歷史地理研究 (Historical Geography of Macao) (Colecção Cultura de Macau / Aomen wenhua congshu), Beijing 2014. Yang Qin 楊芹, Song Yuan shiqi Xiangshandao de haiyang kaifa 宋元時期香山島的海洋 開發 (The Maritime Development of Xiangshan under the Song and Yuan), in: Li Qingxin 李慶新/Hu Bo (eds.), Dongya haiyu jiaoliu yu nan Zhongguo haiyang kaifa 東 亞海域交流與南中國海洋開發 (Maritime Communication in East Asia and Sea Exploration in South China), 2 vols., Beijing 2017, vol. 2, 867–875. Zeng Zhaoxuan 曾昭璇/Huang Shaomin 黄少敏, Zhujiang sanjiaozhou lishi dimaoxue yanjiu 珠江三角洲歷史地貌學研究 (Historical and Geomorphological Study on the Pearl River Delta), Guangzhou 1987. Zhang Shitai 張世泰/Feng Weixun 馮偉勛/Ni Junming 倪俊明, Guancang Guangdong difangzhi mulu 館藏廣東地方志目錄 (Catalogue of Guangdong Gazetteers Kept in Arquives), Guangzhou 1986.

Csaba Olah

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

Introduction In the Ming period legal foreign trade was only possible via tribute missions, and trade outside the framework of the tribute system was regarded as illegal. One of the most exact and explicit definitions of illegal foreign trade can be found in the Chouhai tubian 籌海圖編 (An Illustrated Compendium on Maritime Security).1 In this late-Ming work, the author Zheng Ruozeng 鄭若曾 defines trade that was carried out with imperial permission and supervised by the Maritime Trade Office (Shibosi 市舶司) as official, or legal, and trade without imperial permission and supervision of the Maritime Trade Office as private, or illegal. When explaining the basic structure of foreign trade within the tribute system, this definition has often been used by scholars. For example Bodo Wiethoff refers to it when he explains Ming foreign trade, translating the former as ‘öffentlicher (legaler) Handel’ and the latter as ‘privater (illegaler) Handel’.2 His explanation suggests that private trade was always illegal. Although the distinction between legal and illegal foreign trade seems to be clear in the Ming period, we should be careful about this explanation. Looking at trade patterns within the framework of the Ming tribute system, it seems that acts regarded as ‘private trade’ in the Ming period belong to a more complex category, which includes both legal forms of private trade and illegal forms such as smuggling, and that the Chinese had no special terminology for these two forms of trade. This is why we need to be careful with the explanation in the Chouhai tubian and to avoid simply interpreting it as an explicit statement that clearly defines ‘official trade’ as the only ‘legal’ form of trade and ‘private trade’ as always ‘illegal’. 1 Chouhai tubian 籌海圖編 (An Illustrated Compendium on Maritime Security), Beijing 2007, juan 12, 852. 2 Bodo Wiethoff, Die chinesische Seeverbotspolitik und der private Überseehandel von 1368 bis 1567, Wiesbaden 1963, 22–23.

296

Csaba Olah

To give one example, sources on trade transactions between Chinese merchant-brokers and members of Japanese tribute missions describe private trade transactions in Ningbo that were officially approved by Ming authorities and took place under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office.3 In other words, private trade was not always illegal and a legal form of private trade existed which was conducted within the framework of the tribute system under the surveillance of Chinese authorities. Such trade transactions between foreign traders and Chinese merchants, based on the principles of supply and demand, can be regarded as private but legal. On the other hand, the term ‘private trade’ as it is used by modern historians in this context is problematic as well. The problem is that the expression ‘private trade’ does not distinguish between legal and illegal forms of trade. For example, modern Chinese historians often make a distinction between ‘tributary trade’ (chaogong maoyi 朝貢貿易) and ‘private foreign trade’ (siren haiwai maoyi 私人 海外貿易), but it is not clear what kind of private trade they are referring to. Depending on the context, the category ‘private foreign trade’ may include both officially approved, legal trade but smuggling as well. For a better understanding of foreign trade during the Ming period, we need to clarify what constituted legal private trade within the framework of the tribute system, how and why it developed, and what we can know about its practices. Chao Zhongchen recently argued that ‘tributary trade’ declined after the Zhengde 正德 period and at the same time ‘private foreign trade’ “obviously developed”.4 He also pointed out a gradual shift from official trade to private trade from around the late 15th century and explained this phenomenon as a result of the decrease of profit during official trade because of the decrease of money paid by the Ming court for foreign commodities. The decline of official trade was seen as the reason for the emergence of private trade – and this was true not only for illegal forms of trade but also for legal forms. 3 Csaba Olah, Troubles During Trading Activities between Japanese and Chinese in the Ming Period, in: Angela Schottenhammer (ed.), The East Asian ‘Mediterranean’: Maritime Crossroads of Culture, Commerce and Human Migration, Wiesbaden 2008, 317–330, Csaba ¯ uchi shi Nihon shisetsu to sono bo¯eki katsudo¯ 天文八年の大内 Olah, Tenbun hachinen no O ¯ uchi to O ¯ tomo – Chu¯sei nishi Nihon no ni dai 氏日本使節とその貿易活動, in: Olah, O daimyo 大内と大友–中世西日本の二大大名, ed. Kage Toshio 鹿毛敏夫, Tokyo 2013, 439– 477, Csaba Olah, Chinese brokers and Sino-Japanese trade during the Ming period – A case study from 1539, in: Olah, Tribute, Trade and Smuggling. Commercial, Scientific and Human Interaction in the Middle Period and Early Modern World, ed. Angela Schottenhammer, Wiesbaden 2014, 23–39. 4 Chao Zhongchen 晁中辰, Mingdai haijin yu haiwai maoyi 明代海禁與海外貿易, Beijing 2005 (Renmin chubanshe), 157–160. On the transformation of foreign trade in the Ming tribute system see Nakajima Gakusho¯, The Structure and Transformation of the Ming Tribute Trade System, in: Nakajima, Global History and New Polycentric Approaches, ed. Manuel Perez Garcia/Lucio de Sousa, Singapore 2018, 137–162.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

297

The ‘obvious development’ of private trade – as Chao Zhongchen emphasizes this process – is now commonly accepted among scholars, and ‘private trade’ is basically associated with smuggling, probably influenced by the explanation in the Chouhai tubian of official trade as legal and private trade as illegal. Therefore, when discussing private trade, scholars often overlook the fact that a legal form of private trade also existed and it developed parallel to illegal trade because of the decline of official trade, but – unlike illegal trade – it took place with the permission of Ming authorities. For example, Roland L. Higgins argues that when restrictions were placed on tribute missions, trade developed independently of the missions; then he explains the development of illegal private trade in the context of piracy as a reaction against the rigid tribute system.5 Ng Chin-keong also proposes a flexible understanding of the tribute system.6 According to Ng, in this flexible tribute system private trade was illegal but tolerated by the authorities because it satisfied their personal interest and hunger for profit. Both authors refer to private trade as illegal when they discuss this issue within the context of smuggling and piracy. Compared to illegal private trade and smuggling, topics that have already been extensively discussed in Ming maritime history, it has not yet been explained how legal private trade developed and functioned within the tribute system. The aim of this article is to investigate the environment of foreign trade in Ming China using the examples of trading activities of Japanese tribute missions. First, I will define what legal private trade is, and next I will explain the general historical conditions that made the emergence of legal private trade possible. By using case studies from the Ming Sino-Japanese trade, I will discuss the emergence, development, and practices of legal private trade that show how official trade shifted to private trade after the late 15th century.

5 Roland L. Higgins, Piracy and coastal defense in the Ming period, Government response to Coastal disturbances, 1523–1549 (Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota), 1981, 19. 6 He is emphasizing that in real terms ‘illegal’, or as one might call it ‘private’, trade flourished on the basis of a tacit understanding between the authorized or unauthorized ‘tribute-bearers’, foreign and Chinese merchants, and provincial officials. “…As long as the form of the tribute institution was preserved and coastal security was not threatened, the state and the provincial authorities tolerated such flexibility.” Ng Chin-keong, Boundaries and Beyond – China’s Maritime Southeast in Late Imperial Times, Singapore 2016, 134–135.

298

Csaba Olah

Legal private trade – Definition and historical development According to the Chouhai tubian, legal trade always took place under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office. This above mentioned explanation is true for the category of ‘official trade’ when authorities purchased foreign products for an officially fixed price after the inspection of the quality of the cargo.7 But as I have already argued elsewhere, there are sources that describe private trade between Chinese merchant-brokers and members of Japanese tribute missions that were officially approved by the Maritime Trade Office as legal as well.8 This trade was private but legal because the Japanese had permission and the trade took place under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office. This proves that legal private trade took place within the framework of the tribute system. It is difficult to examine this form of trade, however, because the Chinese had no specific term for legal private trade in the Ming period. One term that was often used in the context of the tribute system for private trade was hushi 互市, a general term referring to trade between two parties, often translated as ‘mutual trade’. It was used both with a negative connotation for expressing illegal private trade and with a positive one, for legal private trade, as well. For example, in Chouhai tubian the term hushi is defined as private trade with private people under the supervision of officially established brokers. The text also states that hushi was only allowed if tribute was delivered, which means that tribute and hushi were a combination of measures within the framework of the tribute system.9 This shows that private trade existed if those who did so presented tribute. Thus during the Ming period there were three legal forms of foreign trade within the tribute system. First, tribute itself was a form of trade because it involved an exchange of foreign products for Chinese goods (imperial gifts). The second was official trade, in which officials purchased foreign commodities (fuda huowu 附搭貨物) for the court at an official price. The third was ‘legal private trade’ – sometimes called hushi in Chinese sources – during which foreign trade commodities were traded under the supervision of Chinese authorities. Tanaka Takeo has already pointed out the existence of these three categories, devising a term for each. He calls the first one ‘shinko¯ bo¯eki 進貢貿易’ (tributary trade), the second one ‘ko¯bo¯eki 公貿易’ (official trade) and the third one ‘shi-

7 Csaba Olah, On the Inspection of Foreign Products during the Ming Period, in: Crossroads 15 (2017), 49–76. 8 Olah 2008, 317–330, Olah 2013, 439–477, Olah 2014, 23–39. 9 Chouhai tubian, juan 12, 852, Chen Yuying 陳玉英, Mingdai gongbo maoyi yanjiu 明代貢舶 貿易研究, in: Wu Zhihe 呉智和 (ed.) Mingshi yanjiu luncong 明史研究論叢 2 vols., Taibei 1984, vol. 2, 360–362.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

299

bo¯eki 私貿易’ (private trade).10 Although Tanaka defined these three categories, he did not examine the second and third categories individually. He only mentioned that they were additional forms of trade, in addition to the first category of tributary trade. Contemporary Chinese scholarship does not emphasize these distinctions with specific terminology. Chinese historians do mention, however, that trade of foreign commodities took place once tribute had been presented. They assert that the court first purchased the foreign commodities (official trade), then foreigners were allowed to engage in further private trade in what was – as I would call it – the legal private trade.11 In official trade, officials determine the value of foreign commodities and decided whether to accept them. The value and the actual market price were not an important factor. In order to show its generousness toward foreign tribute missions, the Chinese court paid an amount several times higher than the actual market price for foreign products.12 The court recognized that the tributary trade ran a deficit, with an enormous expenditure for the foreign missions (such as official trade, gifts, food, transportation) and only modest revenue (tribute), which made it difficult to maintain it in its original form.13 The gradual decline of the tribute trade system can already be seen from around the Zhengtong 正統 period. The volume of tributary trade decreased, and the initial form of the tributary trade system began to erode. The significant change in the Zhengde period was that officials asked brokers to estimate the actual price and pay no more than the estimated price. After that period, official trade was conducted on a commercial basis. Since brokers valued foreign commodities on a commercial basis, the valuations for foreign products were generally lower than in earlier times. But officials maintained the fiction that there had been no change in the tribute system. Foreigners who had earlier received a generous payment for their private products became dissatisfied and were less enthusiastic in paying tribute to the Ming court.14 Chinese sources contain almost no references to the legal private trade until the late 15th century. It seems that legal private trade – compared to the official trade where officials purchased foreign commodities for an official price – was

10 Tanaka Takeo 田中健夫, Chu¯sei taigai kankeishi 中世對外關係史, Tokyo 1975, 162. In order to make a distinction between legal and illegal ‘private trade’ he uses the term mitsubo¯eki 密貿易 (smuggling) for illegal private trade. 11 Chen 1984, 370. 12 Zheng Youguo 鄭有國, Zhongguo shibo zhidu yanjiu 中國市舶制度研究, Fujian 2004, 234– 235. 13 Li Jinming 李金明, Mingdai haiwai maoyi shi 明代海外貿易史, Beijing 1990, 54–58. 14 Chao 2005, 158.

300

Csaba Olah

less significant until around the late 15th century, and it existed more as a possibility for foreigners who wanted to sell the rest of their commodities.15 Zheng Youguo, however, offers a different interpretation. According to Zheng, legal private trade was not permitted at the beginning of the Ming period. The court limited the purchase of foreign commodities entirely to official trade and would not allow private trade. Because tributary missions increased and the amount of their commodities also increased, however, the court was unable to purchase all of the goods. The court then decided to allow foreigners to engage in private trade with their remaining goods. Zheng emphasizes that this system developed after the Hongzhi 弘治 period, when foreigners became more interested in private trade rather than official trade because they were not satisfied with the prices.16 Japanese diaries and documents provide the first clear references to legal private trade in Japanese tribute missions to China from the 1480s on, which supports the theory that the shift from official trade to legal private trade occurred roughly around the Hongzhi–Zhengde period. The only way to maintain the façade of the tribute system while keeping it attractive to foreigners was to offer opportunities for private trade. That appears to explain why small-scale private trade expanded to a larger scale from the late15th century on. At the same time, the supervision of foreign tribute missions became looser and the misconduct of officials involved in the missions also increased. Officials were not able to control private trade, and instead they tolerated it tacitly, leading to the expansion of illegal trade.17 Recently, Nakajima Gakusho¯ also asserted that officials at the border tacitly permitted foreign private trade because the costs of official trade and the exchange of tribute-gifts were too high.18 Thus the tribute system did not have a coherent structure during the whole Ming period. It was transformed because of the strong demand of those who were involved (central government, local officials, foreigners) and this transformation began as early as the mid-15th century.19 The development of legal private trade can be regarded as one stage in the transformation of the Ming tribute system, a 15 Chao 2005, 53, Chen 1984, 370, Ng 2016, 134. 16 Zheng 2004, 230–237. 17 Katayama Seijiro¯ 片山誠二郎, Mindai kaijo¯ mitsubo¯eki to enkai chiho¯ kyo¯shinso¯ 明代海上 密貿易と沿海地方郷紳層, in: Rekishigaku kenkyu¯ 歷史學研究 164 (1953), 23–27, Lin Renchuan 林仁川, Mingdai siren haishang maoyi shangren yu “wokou” 明代私人海上貿易 商人與《倭寇》, in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國歷史研究 4 (1980), 99–102, Li 1990, 85–95, Chao 2005, 132–138, 157–160, Ng 2016, 133–140, 261–291. 18 Nakajima Gakusho¯ 中島樂章, 14–16 seiki, Higashi Ajia bo¯eki chitsujo no hen’yo¯ to saihen – Cho¯ko¯ taisei kara 1570 nen shisutemu e 14–16 世紀、東アジア貿易秩序の變容と再編–朝 貢體制から1570年システムへ, in: Shakai keizai shigaku 社會經濟史学4/76 (2011), 17. 19 Nakajima 2018, 139.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

301

response to the reality that Ming China faced while trying to maintain the original structure of the maritime prohibition policy and the tribute system. The question was, how was it possible to maintain the tribute system, which was restrictive, and how could the growing volume of foreign trade be regulated within this framework?

Foreign trade environment in the Ming period – Official trade vs. legal private trade To understand the reasons for the development of legal private trade and its actual form in the Ming period, we need to reexamine the trade environment around the late 15th to mid-16th century. This chapter provides examples relating to the Japanese tribute missions and Sino-Japanese trade. The early Ming court was quite generous in commercial relationships with the Japanese. During the Yongle 永樂 and Xuande 宣德 periods, Japanese trade commodities (fuda huowu 附搭貨物) were purchased by the Ming court at a very high price, even when the quantity of the commodities was larger than the authorities expected. The Emperors Yongle and Xuande were generally not concerned about the increase in the volume of official trade. Yongle, for example, emphasized that foreigners came from distant places to pay tribute, and the court should therefore be generous and allow them to sell their commodities during official trade.20 Official trade was regarded as a tool for pacifying foreigners who would then come again to pay tribute. In other words, official trade was necessary for maintaining the tribute system, even if its costs were high and precipitated financial difficulties. Because of this generous attitude, the shogunate in Japan ordered further tribute missions organized by temples, shrines, and merchants to be sent to China. The missions often arrived in China with a plethora of goods and occasionally with more than two ships, which actually exceeded the allowed parameters established by the Ming court.21 After the mid-15th century, however, changes in the attitude of the Ming court may be observed. Because of fiscal problems, the court started to reduce the number of goods that could be purchased within the framework of official trade and/or reduced the official price to be offered by the court for these items.

20 Sun Guangqi 孫光圻, Lun Ming Yongle shiqi de “haiwai kaifang” 論明永樂時期的《海外開 放》, in: Zhongwai guanxishi luncong 中外關係史論叢3 (1991), 51–54, Chao 2005, 131, Li 1990, 35–38. 21 Csaba Olah, Räuberische Chinesen und tückische Japaner. Die diplomatischen Beziehungen zwischen China und Japan im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Wiesbaden 2009, 38–39, 41–43, 133– 136.

302

Csaba Olah

Yingzong shilu 英宗實錄 (Veritable Records of the Emperor Yingzong) contains an interesting and well-known account relating to the official purchase of Japanese commodities that illustrates the degree of price reduction by the court. This account from 1453 is especially valuable because it contains the official price for different items for both of the years 1433 and 1453. The reason the Ming court set a new price for each trade item was because the quantity of goods for trade was several tens of times higher than before. The chief-ambassador of Japan claimed that the price offered by the court was low and insisted on the ‘old price’ from 1433. If we compare the prices during the official trade in 1433 and 1453, then we can see a price reduction of 40–80 %.22 The Japanese sources cite the refusal to purchase Japanese trade commodities in official trade. For example, in Sho¯un nyu¯minki 笑雲入明記, a diary of the Japanese tribute mission between 1453–1454, it is recorded that Japanese goods purchased by local officials in Ningbo during official trade were sent to the capital and those that were refused for purchase were returned to the owners.23 This account shows that in the case of the Japanese tribute mission the decision was made in Ningbo about whether to make an official purchase, and commodities were sent to the capital after the selection process. This process was influenced by the court’s growing financial difficulties as it continued to make an effort to maintain the tribute system in its existing form, while reducing the expenses of official trade. As it became clear that the tribute system in its original form was not sustainable, the court introduced minor changes, which did not affect the basic structure of the tribute system but had an influence on the system as a whole. The most important change was the restriction of the number of foreign tributary missions and the reduction in the amount of foreign products purchased by the authorities during official trade. At the same time, many local and court officials perceived that trade was an indispensable part of the tribute system, and that foreigners were sending tribute missions to China because they wanted to sell their commodities and buy Chinese products. It was also clear that the tribute system could not be maintained if the court reduced expenditures on official trade by reducing the official price of foreign commodities or by refusing to purchase them. By the mid-15th century the tribute system based on the Sino-centric ideology did not fit reality, and the only question was how to maintain the tribute system and manage foreign trade at the same time.

22 Li 1990, 30, Olah 2009, 279–289, Zheng 2004, 234–235. Yingzong shilu 英宗實錄, juan 236, 5139–5141. 23 Sho¯un nyu¯minki 笑雲入明記, 1453 (kyo¯toku 享徳 2). 7. 13, in: Murai Sho¯suke 村井章介/ Suda Makiko 須田牧子(eds.), Sho¯un Nyu¯minki – Nihon so¯ no mita Mindai Chu¯goku 笑雲入 明記–日本僧の見た明代中國, To¯kyo¯ 2010, 194.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

303

Previous scholarship has not given an answer to the question of what happened to the trade commodities that were not purchased by the officials during official trade but that foreigners were allowed to exchange in the form of private trade. There is no doubt that they tried to sell them in other ways because they did not want to take them back to their own country. Zheng Youguo pointed out that the surplus of foreign commodities, in other words those that were not purchased by the court, were instead sold during private trade,24 but he provides us with no further details about what happened to these commodities and what kind of system was invented by the Ming court that provided assistance for foreigners to sell the rest of their trade commodities. In Riben yijian 日本一鑑 (A Mirror of Japan) we find a passage that can help us get closer to the answer of this question.25 According to that source, foreigners who came to have an audience with the Emperor received imperial permission to bring commodities with them and to engage in trade (hushi) in China. The Maritime Trade Office was established because the Emperor was concerned that ‘wicked people’ could deceive foreigners during trade, and then foreigners would lose motivation to send tribute missions in the future. Those who secured the safe trade environment were the official brokers (hangren 行人) appointed to the Maritime Trade Office. These brokers were hired by the authorities because they were specialists in trade and experts in estimating the quality and value of foreign products. They provided their knowledge to the authorities during official trade,26 supervised the legal private trade of the tribute missions, and helped foreigners sell their products and find partners among Chinese merchants and private brokers. The term for ‘trade’ in Riben yijian is hushi. As mentioned above, Chouhai tubian explains hushi in the context of tribute trade as private trade with private people under the supervision of officially established brokers, which is legal private trade. Because of the similar explanation, there is no doubt that hushi is used in Riben yijian to refer to legal private trade as well. The authorities provided this opportunity for trade in order to help foreigners to sell their remaining commodities that were not purchased during official trade. This led to the shift from official trade to legal private trade, and the beginning of a new era based on market rules and not on ceremonies. Official trade and the prices set by the court were not attractive enough anymore, however, and the only way to maintain at least the façade of the existing tribute system was for the court to allow foreigners

24 Zheng 2004, 234–236. 25 Riben yijian 日本一鑑 (A Mirror of Japan), Manuscript (Reprint, published in 1939), vol. 7, 18b. 26 Olah 2014, 25–30.

304

Csaba Olah

to come to China and to engage in private trade under official supervision. This is the reason for the emergence of legal private trade. According to the explanations in Riben yijian and Chouhai tubian, both official trade and legal private trade had existed since the foundation of the Ming dynasty. The problem is that both of these sources were written in the sixteenth century, and there are no sources that date from the early Ming period that mention legal private trade within the framework of the tribute system. We have to consider the possibility that legal private trade – as Zheng Youguo has already pointed out – did not exist in the original tribute system in the early Ming period and was established and developed later from around the mid-fifteenth to the late fifteenth century, at the same time that official trade lost its appeal. Other sources that provide us with further details about legal private trade also derive from the sixteenth century. These sources also suggest that the idea of legal private trade under official supervision was implemented in the structure of the tribute system, at least in the sixteenth century. According to the Wanli-edition of Da Ming huidian 大明會典 (Collected Statues of the Ming Dynasty), if trade commodities were not accepted for official purchase, foreigners were allowed to sell them by themselves during private trade.27 Authorities carried out a cargo inspection (panyan 盤驗) to evaluate the quality of the foreign commodities (both tribute items and trade commodities) and to decide which commodities were good enough for official purchase and which were inferior.28 The Shuyu zhouzilu 殊域周咨錄 (Record of Dispatches Concerning Different Countries) mentions that the officials first inspected foreign products and chose those of good quality, and then the authorities allowed private trade of products of poorer quality that were not purchased officially.29 This contradicts Zheng Youguo’s theory, and it suggests that both official trade and legal private trade were part of the tribute system from the beginning, and that official trade was followed by legal private trade. The sources unfortunately do not state definitely whether legal private trade was already part of the tribute system from the early Ming, or whether it was a later development of the late 15th or early 16th century that was affected by the decline of official trade. It is, however, beyond any doubt that those commodities that Ming officials refused to purchase or offered a low price for during the official trade remained in the hands of foreigners. The only solution that would satisfy them was to provide them an opportunity to sell their commodities in the

27 Da Ming huidian 大明會典 (Collected Statues of the Ming Dynasty), Beijing 1989, juan 111, 592; Chao 2005, 53; Olah 2017, 53. 28 Olah 2017, 49–76. 29 Shuyu zhouzi lu 殊域周咨錄 (Record of Dispatches Concerning Different Countries), Beijing 1993, juan 9, 323.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

305

form of private trade under the supervision of the Ming authorities – and that was legal private trade.

Legal private trade as a source for troubles As mentioned in Da Ming huidian and Shuyu zhouzi lu, those commodities that were not accepted by the authorities could be traded with official permission in the form of private trade. Foreigners who did not want to provide their commodities for low official prices, or whose commodities were refused by the authorities, had no other choice than to turn to private trade with the assistance of the officials of the Maritime Trade Office or the Official Guesthouse (Huitong guan 會同舘) in Beijing. They were motivated by this opportunity to continue sending tribute missions to Ming China, and at the same time this system was beneficial for the Ming authorities as well. Officials in charge could theoretically control the trade transactions since they always had the opportunity to intervene if necessary. Official supervision of private trade was essential to avoid incidents, but it did not always work well. Legal private trade had its risks and was a source of troubles. The authorities were powerless when it came to troubles with Chinese merchants and/or brokers during trade transactions, and foreigners required the help of the officials. The increase in the number of records on legal private trade and the problems that happened show that this form of trade became significant around the late fifteenth to the early sixteenth centuries. What then were the problems with such private trade? Why did incidents happen? The problems generally occurred because transactions were carried out based on credit. Foreigners entrusted their money and/or their products to Chinese broker-merchants and asked them to purchase Chinese commodities. In this kind of credit transaction, mutual trust was essential. If we examine Japanese records on tribute missions to China, we find several references to troubles when Japanese were betrayed by the Chinese during legal private trade.30 The first account concerns an incident that happened in the 1480s during a trade transaction with ‘Southern merchants’ (probably Chinese merchants from South China).31 The Japanese traded on credit with these merchants in Beijing. They paid the Chinese an amount of money in advance and asked them to 30 For a detailed analysis of such accounts see Csaba Olah, Nihon no kenmin shisetsu to Sekko¯ junbu Shu Gan 日本の遣明使節と浙江巡撫朱紈, in: To¯ho¯gaku 東方学 122 (2011), 70–74; Csaba Olah, Nichimin bo¯eki ni okeru sho¯kanshu¯ to shin’yo¯ torihiki ni tsuite 日明貿易にお ける商慣習と信用取引について, in: Rekishigaku kenkyu¯ 歷史學研究 928 (2015); Olah 2013, 443–455. 31 Olah 2015, 39–40.

306

Csaba Olah

purchase Chinese commodities. According to the agreement, the Chinese merchants should have waited for them with the ordered commodities in ‘the South’, probably in Ningbo, Hangzhou or another city around that area, but when the Japanese went to their residences, they were not at home and had not prepared any commodities at all. The reason the Japanese decided to pick up the commodities in South China, probably in Ningbo or a city nearby, was because of ‘the lack of laborers’, probably including transporting facilities in general, who would carry the commodities from Beijing back to Ningbo, the port of disembarkation for Japanese tribute ships. This transaction was probably legal private trade (hushi) that took place in the Huitong guan. Despite the supervision of the affiliated officials, the Japanese were deceived by the Chinese. Because a number of foreigners came to Beijing every year for an audience and to trade in the Huitong guan, it is not difficult to imagine that transporting the Chinese commodities which the foreigners acquired in Beijing was difficult because of the lack of transportation facilities and personnel. Credit trade would seem to be a reasonable and attractive solution. On the other hand, Chinese merchants may have taken advantage of the difficult situation of the foreigners and defrauded them. Such troubles during legal private trade in Huitong guan frequently occurred.32 All the other documented incidents during legal private trade between Japanese and Chinese happened in Ningbo. In 1496 a Chinese lacquerware craftsman engaged in a transaction with a Japanese who came on a tributary mission to China. He received an amount of money in advance and agreed to buy Chinese commodities for the Japanese. But, in collaboration with an official of the Maritime Trade Office, he used the money for another purpose and thus he could not deliver the commodities to the Japanese. It seems that the craftsman participated in this transaction as an official broker and was probably asked to prepare the commodities ordered by the Japanese because he was a specialist in lacquerware.33 Some official brokers were affiliated with the Maritime Trade Office. This craftsman was perhaps affiliated with the Maritime Trade Office as a broker, and that is why he could engage in a business transaction with the Japanese. The fact that he conspired with an official of the Maritime Trade Office also supports this idea. It is, however, also possible that he was not affiliated with the Office and he was simply asked by the Office to trade with the Japanese as a private broker and specialist. When the Japanese told him that they would report the case to the 32 Csaba Olah, Sekko¯ junbu Shu Gan no kenmin shisetsu hogo, to¯sei saku to ’shinpyo¯’ no do¯nyu¯ 浙江巡撫朱紈の遣明使節保護・統制策と「信票」の導入, in Shigaku zasshi 史學 雜誌9/120 (2011), 44–45; Olah 2013, 454. 33 Olah 2013, 446–447.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

307

Maritime Trade Office, the craftsman asked them not to do so, which suggests that this was a legal private trade transaction that involved a broker-specialist and the Maritime Trade Office. This fits the explanation of the Maritime Trade Office that we find in Chinese sources, which emphasize that it was established to help foreign traders to do business in China in a safe trade environment. The duties of affiliated officials and official brokers were clearly defined regarding trade activities. They were in charge of supervising foreign trade, responsible for hindering illegal exchange, keeping dishonest merchants from approaching foreigners and thus guaranteeing trade without troubles.34 In fact, however, affiliated members of the Maritime Trade Office were sometimes involved in illegal trade activities and deceived foreigners. Japanese sources provide information about another similar incident that happened a few years later, between 1511–12.35 In that year a few members of the Japanese tributary embassy conducted a transaction with Chinese merchantbrokers. Similar to the previous case, this time the Japanese also entrusted to the Chinese copper cash, gold, red copper, and other items in advance and asked them to buy Chinese commodities such as white powder for cosmetics and medicine for them. Part of the ordered commodities was delivered but a few of the Chinese trading partners disappeared with the cash and the other items the Japanese had entrusted to them. The Japanese wrote several letters to the Maritime Trade Office and the Prefect of Ningbo in which they explained the details of the transaction and asked for the criminals to be captured. The fact that the Japanese reported this case to the authorities suggests that the transaction was an official one. They expected to engage in legal private trade under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office and that it would be conducted according to the Ming rules, but the Chinese merchant-brokers defrauded the Japanese of the money and trade items that they entrusted to them. Further, we know that the Japanese referred to one of the culprits, Sun Zan (孫瓚), as ‘lao gong-gong’ (老公々), an honorific title that is used for high-ranking officials. According to the Japanese letters, Sun Zan returned to Hangzhou after the transaction. This fragmentary information suggests that Sun Zan was an official who came from Hangzhou to oversee the transactions by the Japanese. As trade was supervised not only by the Maritime Trade Office but also by the Three Provincial Offices (Sansi 三司), it is highly possible that Sun Zan was an official of the Three Provincial Offices who was sent from Hangzhou to Ningbo.

34 Mingshi 明史 (Standard History of the Ming), Beijing 1974, juan 75, 1848, Chouhai tubian, juan 12, 854. 35 Olah 2013, 450–455.

308

Csaba Olah

As we can see from these examples, members of Japanese tribute missions were eager to participate in legal private trade, both in Beijing and Ningbo, that was generally based on credit. Chinese officials supervised the trade and helped the Japanese to make transactions with merchant-brokers, thus providing them with a safe trading environment. The Japanese probably believed that the environment was safe, and they chose to engage in legal private trade with the Chinese because they had no other choice to secure profit from trade since the official trade was no longer beneficial for foreigners. Still, incidents occurred, and the culprits were ironically those merchant-brokers and officials who were expected to help the foreigners and guarantee trade without incident. The existence of such credit trade proves that legal private trade existed. The sources suggest that members of the Japanese tribute missions were keen to pursue private trade under the supervision of the authorities even if it sometimes ended up in a betrayal by the Chinese. Based on this data and considering the high number of participants in these tribute missions, we also may suppose that the Japanese participated in many more transactions in China in the same form of legal private trade that were successful and for that very reason were not mentioned in the sources. Despite the possibility of engaging in legal private trade, the number of illegal transactions during tribute trade increased in the sixteenth century. Trade in very high quality products was only possible before the official cargo inspection. After that, the only commodities that remained in the hands of foreigners were mainly items of lower quality that they could sell during legal private trade. Foreigners understood that they could acquire more profit from precious commodities if they sold them before cargo inspection, and the local officials also seem to have been interested in engaging in such illegal trade. Official trade was not profitable because of the fiscal burdens, but legal private trade also caused problems because it carried the risk of being defrauded. It was probably not always clear to the Japanese who their trading partners were. Sources give no reference about how Japanese established contact with their trading partners, thus we may suppose that the authorities introduced the merchants and brokers to the Japanese. Still, it is also possible that the Japanese established contacts by themselves, when Chinese approached them with an offer to purchase Chinese products for them if they paid the price in advance. Such transactions should be classified as illegal private trade, because they happened without the approval of the authorities. Tribute missions increasingly became a simple contrivance for foreigners to enter and trade in China. This included engaging in illegal trade with precious tribute items and trade commodities before cargo inspection. Some foreigners, such as the Japanese, trusted the Chinese authorities and the broker-merchants, but there were other foreigners who discovered that precious commodities could

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

309

be sold before cargo inspection for more profit. Their partners in such illegal trade were the officials who were actually in charge for providing a safe and legal trade environment. According to an account in Xiaozong shilu 孝宗實錄 (Veritable Records of Emperor Xiaozong), foreigners often traded with merchants and officials affiliated with the Huitong guan before the Ministry of Rites allowed a public market for private trade to be opened. In 1490 there were foreigners from Hami and other countries who brought jade and other commodities with them and sold them to ‘wicked people’ on credit (shemai 賖賣). This means that the foreigners entrusted their commodities to the Chinese based on trust, expecting to receive payment after the commodities were sold. In fact, the foreigners never received the money for the entrusted goods.36 It became obvious that legal private trade posed a risk both because it was based on trust and the authorities could not prevent defrauding, and because the officials who were supposed to protect the foreigners conspired with unscrupulous merchant-brokers. Ming officials appear to have been aware of the risks of legal private trade because of the increasing number of incidents during legal private trade and the increasing number of illegal transactions that happened before cargo inspection, often with the participation of Ming officials. We can see these problems in official documents, sent by Ming authorities to the Japanese tribute mission after their arrival in Ningbo in 1539, that have been preserved as copies in Shotoshu¯ 初渡集, the Japanese diary written during the tribute mission between 1539–1541. The officials called on the Japanese to pay attention to the risks during trade transactions and warned them against dishonest trading partners. The authorities explained that they would allow private trade after the cargo inspection had taken place and also promised to protect the Japanese against ‘dishonest brokers’ (wuji yahang ren 無藉牙行人) and ‘greedy people’ ( jiantan zhi tu 奸貪之徒) who would otherwise ‘lure’ (gouyin 勾引) them into trade with the intention of deceiving them.37 These documents warned against the same kind of defrauding mentioned above when dishonest merchantbrokers – taking advantage of legal private trade – persuaded the Japanese to engage in credit trade (she 賖) but disappeared with the money or the Japanese products they were entrusted with. It seems that the warning by the Ming authorities was effective. Entries relating to trade issues in the Shotoshu¯ indicate that the Japanese were obviously cautious during this mission. For example, when they negotiated with a broker, they asked for samples and a price offer, and they also visited several merchants and artisans 36 Olah 2013, 455. 37 Shotoshu¯ 初渡集, in: Dai Nihon bukkyo¯ zensho 大日本佛教全書 116, Yu¯ho¯den so¯sho 遊方傳 叢書 4, To¯kyo¯, 1980–83, 18. 5. 1539 (Jiajing 嘉靖 18), Shotoshu¯, 23. 5. 1539 (Jiajing 18).

310

Csaba Olah

and tried to verify the quality of commodities before deciding about a transaction.38 Based on the information from Chinese and Japanese sources, we may say that legal private trade was a kind of ‘free trade’ based on the commercial principles of supply and demand. Trading partners were responsible for the success of the transactions; they decided on the number of goods to be purchased and/or sold, inspected the quality of the commodities, and negotiated the price. Despite the formal supervision by the authorities, incidents occurred during legal private trade. The problem was probably that Ming authorities did not think about creating a system and regulations that would guarantee a safe trade environment. There was no documentation and no data about the transactions, thus if an incident occurred the authorities were not able to find the culprits. It was Zhu Wan 朱紈 who tried to change this situation in the case of the Japanese tribute missions. He was aware that there were problems, but he continued to insist on maintaining legal private trade and the old principles of the tribute system because he had a “positive attitude toward tributary relations and tributary trade”.39 At the same time, however, he decided to establish a safer environment by creating a register of transactions that the authorities recorded and by issuing trade permits (xinpiao 信票) to the participants. He strengthened control over the Chinese merchants by recording their names and ages, and the products that they traded.40 His ultimate goal was to stop illegal trade both within and beyond the tribute system.

Final remarks Previous scholarship has already noted that the volume of official trade within the tribute system gradually decreased from the mid-fifteenth century onwards because the Ming court largely limited the quantity of foreign commodities that the court officially purchased. In the early decades, the Ming court was able to attract foreign countries by paying generous sums for foreign products during official trade, and foreign countries were willing to send tribute missions to establish a tributary relationship with China because of the attractive profits from official trade. As a result, the limitation on official trade from the midfifteenth century onward resulted in foreigners losing interest in paying tribute

38 Olah 2014, 31–37. 39 Ng 2016, 141. For Zhu Wan’s activities relating to foreign trade see Kwan-wai So, Japanese Piracy in Ming China during the 16th century, Michigan, 1975, 51–72, Higgins 1981, 149–201. 40 Olah 2011b, 39–60.

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

311

and private trade emerged as an alternative. Private trade has been generally understood in this context, however, as illegal private trade and smuggling. By contrast, if we investigate sources relating to the Japanese tribute missions, we find accounts of private trade, conducted under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office, which was regarded as legal private trade. Chinese sources also explain that the Maritime Trade Offices were established for assisting and supervising private trade by foreign tribute missions, but these sources were compiled in the sixteenth-seventeenth century, and there is no reliable information about the situation in the early Ming period. It is not clear whether legal private trade was implemented within the tribute system from the beginning as an option for tribute missions to sell their trade products or whether it was invented later because of the decline of official trade. Thus, the general question is whether a shift from official trade toward legal private trade as a more profitable option can be observed around the Hongzhi and Zhengde periods, or whether legal private trade was a new Ming court initiative that started with the purpose of encouraging foreigners to begin paying tribute as well. This question will require further investigation, however, and I am not yet able to give a final answer. My purpose here is to point out the importance of this detail to suggest that it may contribute to a better understanding the forms of trade that took place within the framework of the Ming tribute system Incidents relating to trade transactions between foreign tribute missions and Chinese during legal private trade, such as the case of the Japanese who were deceived by Chinese merchant-brokers, increased after the late 15th century. The number of accounts of illegal trade activities during tribute missions, when Chinese officials approached foreigners with offers to purchase high-quality tribute products before the cargo inspection, also increased. The early Ming court regarded trade as harmful and suppressed domestic consumption in general but later on the court’s opinion changed as production and consumption in China increased and foreign trade became important for both consumers and merchants.41 As a result, we can see an opposition between officials who looked at trade positively and those who looked at it negatively. Officials at the borderland were generally flexible and allowed trade or were even involved in it. As the importance of foreign trade increased, it was impossible to stop their involvement. By contrast, the court made private trade legally possible in order to encourage foreigners to continue paying tribute, to maintain a safe trading environment, and to hinder illegal trade and smuggling. A well-organized and safe environment for legal private trade was an attractive option for foreign tribute missions, 41 Li Kangying, The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368 to 1567, Wiesbaden 2010, 38–42, 62–66.

312

Csaba Olah

as official trade became more unappealing. Legal private trade also created an opportunity for Chinese merchants, brokers, and local officials to establish direct trade contact with foreigners. Trade became freer and at the same time riskier. Officials and official brokers affiliated with the Maritime Trade Office played an essential role in maintaining order and preventing trouble but in fact legal private trade became a hotbed for illegal trade activities. As documents in Japanese sources show, many ‘wicked people’ (generally merchants and brokers) targeted foreign tribute missions in private trade in sixteenth-century China. Incidents happened despite the warnings, and the Japanese sources suggest that Chinese authorities possessed only limited capacity to stop unscrupulous merchants and brokers from deceiving the Japanese. Further, if an incident happened, the authorities were quite inefficient and were not able to find the culprits. The Japanese asked the Chinese to conduct an investigation and find a solution to compensate them for their losses. There is no information about the results of their efforts, but it is likely that the Japanese had to leave China without receiving any compensation. In general, legal private trade was not attractive because officials and official brokers often abused their position and deceived foreigners who suffered financial losses. Even when foreign trade was supervised, merchants and officials were not satisfied with the results because of the strict rules, such as restrictions on the frequency of tribute missions and the items that could be used for tribute itself, that were an indispensable condition for foreign trade. Further, the volume of legal private trade was also not sufficient to meet the increasing demand for foreign trade on both the Chinese and the foreign side. The gap between ideology and pragmatic reality and the increase of supply and demand within China and the inadequate levels of legal private trade accelerated the gradual development of smuggling and other forms of illegal trade. Officials such as Zhu Wan tried to initiate reforms by making further improvements to legal private trade. He was aware that legal private trade was risky because of dishonest merchants, brokers, and local Chinese gentry and the officials who supported them. He invented a new type of certificate (xinpiao) to make trade more secure, for example by registering Chinese traders by listing their names and physical appearance, and by recording the details of the transactions with Japanese traders. His measures were short-lived, too late and ineffective, and in the end legal private trade was gradually completely replaced by illegal private trade. The decision of the Ming court to promote legal private trade under the supervision of the Maritime Trade Office instead of official trade seems to have been a late decision that was unable to prevent the emergence of smuggling. Although it was invented to help to maintain the tribute system, it was ineffective and did not last long, but it was nevertheless an important stage in the decline of

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

313

the tribute system. The promotion of legal private trade satisfied foreign tribute missions only for a short time, but it was not adequate to compete with Southeast Asian, Portuguese, Japanese, and Chinese illegal traders who had already started to form their own “highly sophisticated and very complex illegal private trade sector”42 on islands near the southern Chinese coastline. After the arrival of the Portuguese in the 1510s and the Ningbo Incident in 1523, court officials and local officials repeatedly discussed the tribute system, the role and necessity of the Maritime Trade Offices, and tribute as a formal etiquette. Some pragmatic officials considered foreign trade as an important source of revenue and proposed to impose a tax on foreign trade. Others – especially those who supported the Portuguese presence – questioned the necessity of tribute. As a result, officials in Canton gradually began to give their tacit approval to non-tributary ships, allowing them to trade in China. Thus another form of legal ‘private trade’ (hushi) became established outside of the framework of the tribute system. Under this new system, officials in Canton imposed taxes on non-tributary ships, which was impossible under the original tribute system. Tax income was essential for Canton at that time, and it was used for military campaigns against rebels in Canton Province.43 Thus, after the mid-sixteenth century, a new system emerged to replace the old tribute system, which is called by Iwai Shigeki as ‘goshi taisei 互市體制’, the system of ‘mutual trade’. This new system was based on legal and free private trade on a commercial basis,44 and it was an important influence on the court’s decision to relax the maritime prohibitions in 1567 which led to the establishment of what Nakajima Gakusho¯ calls ‘the 1570 System’.

42 Roderich Ptak, Merchants and Maximization: Notes on Chinese and Portuguese Entrepreneurship in Maritime Asia, c. 1350–1600, in: Roderich Ptak, China and the Asian seas: trade, travel and visions of the other (1400–1750), Aldershot/Brookfield 1998, 36. 43 Inoue To¯ru 井上徹, Mincho¯ no taigai seisaku to Ryo¯ko¯ shakai 明朝の對外政策と兩廣社會, in: Inoue, Kaiiki ko¯ryu¯ to seiji kenryoku no taio¯ 海域交流と政治権力の對應, ed. Inoue To¯ru, Tokyo 2010, 104–114. 44 Iwai Shigeki 岩井茂樹, 16 seiki Chu¯goku ni okeru ko¯eki chitsujo no mosaku – Goshi no genjitsu to sono ninshiki 十六世紀中國における交易秩序の模索–互市の現實とその認 識, in Iwai, Chu¯goku kinsei shakai no chitsujo keisei 中國近世社會の秩序形成, ed. Iwai Shigeki, Kyoto 2004, 97–142.

314

Csaba Olah

Bibliography Primary sources Chouhai tubian 籌海圖編 (An Illustrated Compendium on Maritime Security), Beijing 2007. Da Ming huidian 大明會典 (Collected Statues of the Ming Dynasty), Beijing 1989. Mingshi 明史 (Standard History of the Ming), Beijing 1974. Sho¯un nyu¯minki 笑雲入明記, in: Murai Sho¯suke 村井章介/Suda Makiko 須田牧子 (eds.), Sho¯un Nyu¯minki – Nihon so¯ no mita Mindai Chu¯goku 笑雲入明記–日本僧の見 た明代中國, To¯kyo¯ 2010. Riben yijian 日本一鑑 (A Mirror of Japan), Manuscript (Reprint, published in 1939). Shotoshu¯ 初渡集, in: Dai Nihon bukkyo¯ zensho 大日本佛教全書 116, Yu¯ho¯den so¯sho 遊方 傳叢書 4, To¯kyo¯ 1980–83. Shuyu zhouzi lu 殊域周咨錄 (Record of Dispatches Concerning Different Countries), Beijing 1993. Yingzong shilu 英宗實錄, Taibei 1967.

Secondary sources Chao Zhongchen 晁中辰, Mingdai haijin yu haiwai maoyi 明代海禁與海外貿易, Beijing 2005. Chen Yuying 陳玉英, Mingdai gongbo maoyi yanjiu 明代貢舶貿易研究, in: Wu Zhihe 呉 智和 (ed.) Mingshi yanjiu luncong 明史研究論叢 2 vols., Taibei 1984, vol. 2, 360–362. Roland L. Higgins, Piracy and coastal defense in the Ming period, Government response to Coastal disturbances, 1523–1549 (Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota), 1981. Inoue To¯ru 井上徹, Mincho¯ no taigai seisaku to Ryo¯ko¯ shakai 明朝の對外政策と兩廣社 會, in: Inoue, Kaiiki ko¯ryu¯ to seiji kenryoku no taio¯ 海域交流と政治権力の對應, Tokyo 2010. Iwai Shigeki 岩井茂樹, 16 seiki Chu¯goku ni okeru ko¯eki chitsujo no mosaku – Goshi no genjitsu to sono ninshiki 十六世紀中國における交易秩序の模索–互市の現實とそ の認識, in Iwai, Chu¯goku kinsei shakai no chitsujo keisei 中國近世社會の秩序形成, Kyoto 2004. Katayama Seijiro¯ 片山誠二郎, Mindai kaijo¯ mitsubo¯eki to enkai chiho¯ kyo¯shinso¯ 明代海 上密貿易と沿海地方郷紳層, in: Rekishigaku kenkyu¯ 歷史學研究 164 (1953). Li Jinming 李金明, Mingdai haiwai maoyi shi 明代海外貿易史, Beijing 1990. Li Kangying, The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368 to 1567, Wiesbaden 2010. Lin Renchuan 林仁川, Mingdai siren haishang maoyi shangren yu “wokou” 明代私人海 上貿易商人與《倭寇》, in: Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國歷史研究 4 (1980). Nakajima Gakusho¯ 中島樂章, 14–16 seiki, Higashi Ajia bo¯eki chitsujo no hen’yo¯ to saihen – Cho¯ko¯ taisei kara 1570 nen shisutemu e 14–16 世紀、東アジア貿易秩序の變容と再 編–朝貢體制から1570年システムへ, in: Shakai keizai shigaku 社會經濟史学 4/76 (2011).

Legal Private Trade within the Framework of the Ming Tribute System

315

Nakajima Gakusho¯, The Structure and Transformation of the Ming Tribute Trade System, in: Nakajima, Global History and New Polycentric Approaches, ed. Manuel Perez Garcia/Lucio de Sousa, Singapore 2018. Ng Chin-keong, Boundaries and Beyond – China’s Maritime Southeast in Late Imperial Times, Singapore 2016. Csaba Olah, Troubles During Trading Activities between Japanese and Chinese in the Ming Period, in: Angela Schottenhammer (ed.), The East Asian ‘Mediterranean’: Maritime Crossroads of Culture, Commerce and Human Migration, Wiesbaden 2008. Csaba Olah, Räuberische Chinesen und tückische Japaner. Die diplomatischen Beziehungen zwischen China und Japan im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Wiesbaden 2009. Csaba Olah, Nihon no kenmin shisetsu to Sekko¯ junbu Shu Gan 日本の遣明使節と浙江 巡撫朱紈, in: To¯ho¯gaku 東方学 122, 70–74 (2011a). Csaba Olah, Sekko¯ junbu Shu Gan no kenmin shisetsu hogo, to¯sei saku to ’shinpyo¯’ no do¯nyu¯ 浙江巡撫朱紈の遣明使節保護・統制策と「信票」の導入, in Shigaku zasshi 史學雜誌9/120, 39–60 (2011b). ¯ uchi shi Nihon shisetsu to sono bo¯eki katsudo¯ 天文八 Csaba Olah, Tenbun hachinen no O ¯ uchi to 年の大内氏日本使節とその貿易活動, in: Kage Toshio 鹿毛敏夫 (ed.), O ¯ tomo – Chu¯sei nishi Nihon no ni dai daimyo 大内と大友–中世西日本の二大大名, O Tokyo 2013. Csaba Olah, Chinese brokers and Sino-Japanese trade during the Ming period – A case study from 1539, in: Angela Schottenhammer (ed.), Tribute, Trade and Smuggling. Commercial, Scientific and Human Interaction in the Middle Period and Early Modern World, Wiesbaden 2014. Csaba Olah, Nichimin bo¯eki ni okeru sho¯kanshu¯ to shin’yo¯ torihiki ni tsuite 日明貿易に おける商慣習と信用取引について, in: Rekishigaku kenkyu¯ 歷史學研究 928 (2015). Csaba Olah, On the Inspection of Foreign Products during the Ming Period, in: Crossroads 15 (2017), 49–76. Roderich Ptak, Merchants and Maximization: Notes on Chinese and Portuguese Entrepreneurship in Maritime Asia, c. 1350–1600, in Roderich Ptak, China and the Asian seas: trade, travel and visions of the other (1400–1750), Aldershot/Brookfield 1998. Kwan-wai So, Japanese Piracy in Ming China during the 16th century, Michigan, 1975. Sun Guangqi 孫光圻, Lun Ming Yongle shiqi de “haiwai kaifang” 論明永樂時期的《海外 開放》, in: Zhongwai guanxishi luncong 中外關係史論叢3 (1991), 51–54. Tanaka Takeo 田中健夫, Chu¯sei taigai kankeishi 中世對外關係史, Tokyo 1975. Bodo Wiethoff, Die chinesische Seeverbotspolitik und der private Überseehandel von 1368 bis 1567, Wiesbaden 1963. Zheng Youguo 鄭有國, Zhongguo shibo zhidu yanjiu 中國市舶制度研究, Fujian 2004.

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’: Wooden Goblets with Nesting Cups in the Qing Court Translated by Ta-chung Cheng

1.

Preface

At the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen there is an exhibit of a 17th Century cabinet of curiosities known as ‘Kunstkammer’. In this exhibit, a series of nesting cups are placed horizontally on their side and fanned out, showing that the cups are nested and stacked within each other; the cups gradually increase in size for each subsequent layer and are finally contained within a wooden goblet (fig. 1). The Copenhagen cups and wooden goblet are displayed along with various other curiosities to recreate the display of a Kunstkammer as it would have appeared in an European aristocratic home or noble palace of the 17th century.1 The display not only replicates a typical European Kunstkammer of the 17th and 18th century (fig. 2), but also demonstrates how these nesting cups were eventually subsumed into a Kunstkammer collection even though they were originally crafted as an individual work of art.2 The fanning out of the cups as presented at the National Museum of Denmark not only reveals the unique 1 The ‘cabinet of curiosities’ or Kunstkammer was the collection of natural and manmade objects by European aristocrats in the 16th and 17th centuries; the Kunstkammer has become an important subject of study in historical research and was the precursor to the modern museum. The contents and meaning of the Kunstkammer collection has become an important subject in the research into the materiality and cultural exchange between the east and the west. See Krzysztof Pomian, trans. Elizabeth Wiles Potier, Collector and Curiosities: Paris and Venice 1500–1800, Cambridge 1990 (French Orig. , Paris 1987); Lai Yu-chih 賴毓芝, Kangxi de suanxue dao Audili Anbuliesibao shoucang de yixie sikao 康熙的算學到奧地 利安布列斯堡收藏的一些思考 (Some considerations from Kanxi’s mathematics to the collections aud Ambras Castle in Austria), in: Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊276 (2006), 106–118. 2 There is also the possibility that nesting goblets were commissioned with the intention to become a component of the Kunstkammer. In my research, I have been able to observe glass goblets similar in shape to the nesting goblets in depictions of the Kunstkammer but have yet to find a representation of a wooden nesting goblet in any of these images.

318

Ching-fei Shih

nesting feature of the set, but also demonstrates the high level of craftsmanship that must have been required to create them, as well as showing the high value attached to these objects. This leads the viewers to the questions – How were they made? How many cups does the stack contain? We now turn our attention away from Europe, looking across the Eurasian continent towards China; in the Palace Museum, Beijing, where we will find a similar wooden goblet with nesting cups to the one exhibited at the National Museum of Denmark (fig. 3). The goblet with nesting cups housed in the Palace Museum, Beijing, now located in the storage room, has its own custom fitted wooden case which would have originally included a sheet glass cover (now missing). Although the Beijing nesting cups are not currently displayed in their original setting, we can gain some understanding of their original arrangement within the Qing palace during the 18th and 19th centuries by looking at the restored interiors of palaces at the Forbidden City, Beijing (fig. 4). Investigating the Qing court collection in the Palace Museum, Beijing and National Palace Museum, Taipei, reveals a total of 6 sets of nesting cups contained within a wooden goblet still remaining in the Qing imperial collection (table I). These goblets with a tall stand usually contained 50, 100 paper-thin stacked cups that are graduated in size; they are made entirely from wood and assembled within the wooden goblet. Two sets are held at the National Palace Museum, Taipei, and four sets at the Palace Museum, Beijing. At the Palace Museum, one set is stored in the antiquities department, two complete goblet sets are in the palaces department. However, there is a set where only the outer box is left.3 During the late 17th to early 18th century, these nesting goblets were still a rare Western curiosity to the Chinese court, traveling great distances to reach Beijing, the glass sheet cover was also most likely imported from the West; however, while the individual components of the nesting goblet set may have had foreign origins, the nesting cups, wooden box and glass cover were eventually integrated into the interior décor of the Qing Imperial palace seamlessly. The study and discussion on the materiality, visuality, history of usage and cultural exchange of art works have become common lines of research and inquiry for art historians and are the result of a turn in attention towards global history and material culture over the past 20 some years. In his studies of Eastern/ Western material and cultural exchanges, Craig Clunas has mentioned that past research in this area was focused on the ‘production’ of cultural objects, but this attention on production had the unfortunate tendency to divest the cultural 3 The numbering method of these set of nesting cups follows Guo Fuxiang. Guo Fuxiang 郭福 祥, Gugong shoucang xiyang mutaobei de faxian: Qinggong xiyang mutaobei buyi 故宮收藏 西洋木套杯的發現—清宮西洋木套杯補遺 (The discovery of Western wooden goblets in the Palace Museum), in: Forbidden City 紫禁城, 215 (2012), 82–87.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

319

object from its visual and material cultural context. However, he states that current research is increasingly turning away from an emphasis on the ‘production’ to the study of the reception and consumption of the cultural object itself.4 Under this shift towards the study of material culture, in addition to questions how they were produced, many academics have tended to question further the function and meaning of the objects. It is most remarkable that these goblets came from Europe, and were viewed as desirable and exotic artefacts by the Qing court in the early modern period. Exceptional objects were exchanged through missionaries, merchants and embassies, representing the most important mediums of economic and political exchange between China and Europe. The circulation of the cups around the world represented the universal desire and search for exotic and spectacular objects, connecting Europe with Africa and Asia. If we regard the Qing court as a ‘trading zone’, we could ask the following questions.5 Why would the National Museum of Denmark hold a similar set of nesting cups as the Palace Museum, Beijing? When and where and how were these sets of nesting cups made? Along which routes did they travel, how did they find their way to Denmark and under what circumstances did they enter the Imperial palace in China? Why was a fitted display case made for the nesting cups set? In Françoise Forster-Hahn’s discussion on reading artefacts on collecting and display, she suggests “Whether from a historical, anthropological, sociological, theoretical, or psychological position, studies of collecting and display from Wunderkammer to world’s fair are intricately bound up with such issues as patronage, marketing, and consumption. In this sense, the display of artefacts – defined here as a visual narrative – is then just another medium with which to construct histories”.6 The manners in which the artefacts are displayed in contemporary museums reflect how they are viewed, interpreted, and organized by curators today. Nesting cups are displayed in the National Museum of Denmark refers to the restoration of a 17th century of cabinet of curiosities (Kunst4 Craig Clunas (柯律格), Wuzhi wenhua – zai dong xi eryuanlun zhiwai 物質文化—在東西二 元論之外 (Material Culture Beyond the East/West Binary), in: Xin Shixue 新史學 17 (2006), 200–201. For a discussion on ‘reception’ see Sharon J. Macdonald, Museums, National, Postnational and Transcultural Identities, in: Museum and Society, 1 (2003), 1–16. For ‘Reception Theory’ see also Grove Art Online (https://www.oxfordartonline.com/groveart/) s. v. 5 The concept of ‘trading zone’ was brought out by Thijs Weststeijn, when we worked together for the research project “Working group 2: ‘Boundary objects’” in the frame of the project under ‘Creating of a Knowledge Society (1450–1800)’ in 2016. This project was a cooperation between the Descartes Centre (University of Utrecht), the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science and the Huygens ING (Hague), and it was launched and directed by Wijnand Mijnhardt and Sven Dupré. It involved the following issues: What was traded and by whom and where? How did people communicate about new objects in their historical context? 6 Françoise Forster-Hahn, The Politics of Display or the Display of Politics?, in: Art Bulletin 2/77 (1995), 174–179.

320

Ching-fei Shih

kammer) context. Similarly, examining the presence of these wooden nesting goblets at the Qing court and the location and manner of their display within the palace grounds provides insight as to how they were collected and regarded in their own period, and how the Qing court constructed histories through the collecting and display of artefacts of new curiosities from Europe. What impact did these new unique objects have on the interaction between China and Europe, at the time of their appearance and in later history? These are some of the specific questions this study will explore. The greater objectives of this study are twofold. First, it aims to use the stacked wooden cups as a case study to promote the interdisciplinary dialogue across the fields of global history, art history, and material culture studies. Second, our study attempts to analyse the Qing court’s (especially Qianlong emperor’s) general attitude towards objects from the ‘Western Ocean’ and, by specifically exploring the context in which the wooden nesting cups found themselves at the Qing court, we wish to determine the thoughts underpinning that attitude.

2.

Nürnberg goblet? The case of a global history

I have already given an introduction on the wooden nesting goblets, including basic information such as where and when were they made, possible routes for them to enter China etc.7 The wooden nesting goblets of the Qing court now housed in the Palace Museum, Beijing and National Palace Museum, Taipei are a series of stacked cups (50, 100 in a set), paper-thin and graduated in size, they are turned and carved on a lathe entirely from wood and assembled within a wooden goblet. One will normally find carved linear patterns on each cup except the 20 smallest, with a progression of Arabic numerals between the linear patterns, the numerals read 100 for the largest and subsequently, 99, 98, 97 as the cups become smaller (fig. 5). On the base of the outer box is the Roman numeral ‘XXXXXXXXXX’, which stands for one hundred. In all but a very few cases, the cups are made as a set of 100; exceptions are found occasionally however, there is another known example containing 50 cups in a set (now 43 remain, (table I-5). In the latter case, the base of the outer box has a carved marking of the roman numerals representing the number fifty ‘XXXXX’ (fig. 6). Additional information from an old exhibition catalogue in the Netherlands suggest that there was a 150cup goblet.8 7 Shih, Ching-fei, A Hundred-layered Goblet from the West Ocean, in: Orientations 48/4 (2015), 2–6. 8 I thank Dr. Anna Grasskamp for providing this rare precious information. The original text was written in ancient Dutch, translated into English by Dr. Grasskamp for me. E. Bergvelt/

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

321

Wooden nesting cups held within a goblet such as those found at the National Museum of Denmark or the Palace Museums were most likely crafted in southern Germany. They were traded extensively, traveling along various trade routes, from Europe to China in the 17th and 18th centuries. Please see table I for a complete list of the wooden nesting cups housed in the Palace Museum, Beijing and National Palace Museum, Taipei; table II for the examples of the wooden nesting cups housed in European collections. Although we know the goblets originated somewhere in Bavaria, we are not yet able to pinpoint the exact origin of manufacture according to the available evidence so far. The goblets all have traces of having been turned on a lathe, most likely in Nuremberg,9 an important craft making centre during the period, and the shape also refers to the glasswork produced in Nuremberg (fig. 7). However, a new suggestion of the production for wooden stacking-cup points to Berchtesgaden, also in Bavaria, where wooden toys production was very popular.10 This suggestion has now been well received by scholars as shown in the labels for such objects in relevant museums. Regardless of their precise origin of manufacture, it is undoubtable that such turned wooden goblets were considered a curiosity and played a part in the formation of the European Kunstkammer, examples have been preserved in collections in Denmark (fig. 1 & 8), France (fig. 9), Austria, Germany (fig. 10), the Netherlands and even in Russia (table II). There are at least three in the National Museum of Denmark, two of which are dated 1650 and 1653 (fig. 8),11 and thus

R. Kistemaker, De wereld binnen handbereik. Nederlandse kunst-en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585–1735, exh. cat. , Amsterdam 1992, 71. 1) “Een gedraide bosch/met een kelk/waar in hondert dunne kelkxkens/ als papier” (A turned box[?]/ with a cup/ in which a hundred thin small cups/ [as thin] as paper). 2) “Een seer curieuse gedrayede houte beker/ met over de 150 kleine beckergens” (A very curious turned wooden cup/ with more than 150 small cups). It states that these two objects appeared in two 17th century auction catalogues at Amsterdam. 1) Catalogue of the Collections of Jan Jacobsz. Swammerdam (1606–1678), published in Catalogus van een seer wel gestoffeerde konstkamer en Catalogus musei instrumentissimi (…), Amsterdam, 1679; veiling: 14-81679: Lugt (UBA 637 G 5[1]), 84. 2) Catalogue of the Collections of Johann Christian van Kretschmar (1650–1693), published in Catalogus van een curieus Kabinet nagelaten van de heer J. van Kretschmar, Delft 1694: veiling 18-10-1694 (UBA 637 G 5) 1694, 43. 9 The name of ‘Nuremberg goblet’ was circulated among scholars but with no further evidence. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann consulted further with scholars at Nuremberg and suggested the Zick family who were good at lathe-turning technology was the very likely candidate for the manufacture of such nesting cups. See Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Scratching the Surface. On the Dutch in Taiwan and China, in: Michael North/Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (eds.), Mediating Netherlandish Art and Material Culture in Asia, Amsterdam/Chicago/London 2014, 221. 10 http://www.kunstkammer.com/index.phpen/kunstkammer-objects (accessed on 2017/ 11/08). 11 Bente Gundestrup, Det Kongelige danske Kunstkammer 1737, vol. 1, Copenhagen 1991, 324.

322

Ching-fei Shih

these cups could have been made around the mid-17th century and in the same context. Such nesting cups are richly endowed in meanings from the perspectives of global history and would have influenced visual culture and related knowledge across a wide range of regions. In the past, these wooden nesting cups were mentioned in the catalogues of European Kunstkammers, but unfortunately there is no further study or knowledge about these objects. It was not until the publication of the wooden nesting cups housed in the Palace Museums in Beijing and Taipei, when they began to attract more attention. In my previous short article, I discussed how the nesting cups entered the collection of the Qing court, possibly via Dutch embassies or Jesuit missionaries during the Kangxi (1662–1722) and Yongzheng reigns (1723–1736).12 In the Qing court archives, there is a gift list detailing the reception of spectacular objects from the Western Ocean, Gifts List of Exceptional Objects (qiqi 奇器) from Westerners, including Ignaz Kögler, Dominique Parrenin, Andreas Pereira, Teodorico Pedrini and others; the list included a response from the Yongzheng emperor in vermillion.13 One of the items on the list could refer to a nesting cup set ‘Western wooden nesting cups goblet one’ Yangmu tao bei yi zun 洋木套盃壹 尊. As mentioned above, DaCosta Kaufmann provides further information of such objects possibly appearing in the documents from the places where the VOC was stationed, such as in Cape Town, South Africa and Sri Lanka, South Asia.14 Through these records we learn that these curiosity items, regardless of whether they specifically referred to wooden nesting cups, were an important component in the networks of global trade.

3.

New Curiosities: Objects to the Qing Court

We now focus our attention back to China and look at the history, reception and transformation of the nesting goblets within the context of the Qing court. As mentioned in the previous chapter, these nesting cups within a wooden goblet were ‘traded’ widely in the 17th to 18th centuries and became an object of diplomatic exchange within the various European states of the time. The ‘trade’ of 12 Shih 2015, 2–6. 13 Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives) (ed.), Qing zhongqi Xiyang tianzhujiao zai Hua huodong dangan shiliao 清中前期西洋天主教在 華活動檔案史料 (Archives of the Catholic Missions of the early-mid Qing China), Beijing 2003, vol. 1, 72. 14 On the gift list of the Dutch Embassy there is an entry for ‘Nuremberg curiosities/toys’, perhaps indicating such objects. Here I thank Prof. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann from Princeton University for his advice in these two references. DaCosta Kaufmann 2014, 221.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

323

these goblets was not limited to the physical transportation of these objects but also included the exchange of people and the dissemination of knowledge, and it not only illustrates the passionate interest and desire to acquire novelties and rare curiosities throughout the 17th and 18th century, but also, through the transmission of the goblets to the Qing court, via Dutch embassies or missionary activities, entered the Qing imperial collection. This demonstrates how China became a central component of this global network of knowledge and exchange. Due to the relatively large amount of documents preserved by the Qing court, we could thus regard it as a ‘trading zone’ matrixed with Jesuit missionaries’ or merchants’ embassies, craftsmen, high officials and even emperors, and it is possible for us to study and interpret these original source materials under the framework of global history, material culture and exchange, building a reference for future research into the global material culture of the early modern period. In this chapter we wish to look beyond the sphere of the global exchange network by exploring the craftsmanship of the nesting cups and its possible effects on the Qing court, especially the Chinese conceptualisation of nested artworks and the appropriation of the ‘nesting’ idea in Chinese art works. Next, we look at the display and collection of nesting cups at the Qing court and compare it with contemporaneous collections in Europe. We hope thus to understand the Qing court’s interpretation and re-appropriation of the nesting cups. In addition to the nesting qualities of the cups; the cups play with the expectations of the viewer, creating a sense of wonder by the contrast between the outward appearance and the graduated cups concealed inside. This challenging of the viewer’s expectation leads to a sense of astonishment, for what on the surface appears to be a normal goblet, may actually hold 100 layers (sometimes 50 or 150) of nested cups. In the notes on three foreign curiosity objects by Gao Shihqi 高士奇 (1664–1703), a high official during Kangxi’s reign, the nesting cups are an exception because “they are so thin that they could be blown away by a blow of breath but remain functional enough to hold wine”. These are Gao’s notes about marvels of the palace:15 “I went to the inner court of the palace and saw three wondrous objects. The first was a small golden box measuring 1.6 inches, containing a myriad of miniature ivory figures, including tables and beds, ships and carts, dishes and basins, brushes and inkstones, touhu 投壺 pots, chess sets, musical instruments, containers, and abacuses. Every detail is faithfully represented despite the diminished size. Being too delicate to handle, they should be viewed with the aid of golden tweezers. 15 Gao Shihqi 高士奇, Jingjin wengao 經進文稾, juan 5, zaji 雜記, in: Guojia Qingshi bianzuan weiyuanhui 國家清史編纂委員會(ed.), Qingdai shiwenji huibian 清代詩文 集彙編 (Lanrentang 朗潤堂 edition of the Kangxi period), Qingyintang quanji 清吟堂全 集 Shanghai 2011, vol. 166, 301. English translation of the text with the assistance of Tsai Yichien and Cheng Ta-chung.

324

Ching-fei Shih

Another marvel I saw was a type of carved ivory ball perforated with many holes. Most balls were assembled from 9 layers of carved ivory but some were made with 7 layers and others 5. When inserting a hairpin through one of the holes, the ball will rotate and spin. Each layer is identical to the one underneath and the surface is polished to a mirror sheen. A small die is hidden within each sphere, glimmering with brilliant red and green light. The surface of each ball is smooth and white without a trace of a joint or seam. This style of ivory ball is called guigongqiu 鬼功球 (ghostly crafted ball). The last item of amazement was a collection of 24 cups. Arranged in a single file from large to small, they stand as if advancing against a wave or torrent. The cups are around 2 inches in height and are made from wood shavings. The material is as thin as paper and yellow in colour with a wood grain texture. The cups are light enough to blow away but can still be used to serve wine. All three objects are so fine and intricate that even a master craftsman would be mindboggled by their complexity; one wonders how they were originally crafted? The palace guard told me these were received as tributes from across the sea, and that, it was said they were made by ghostly craftsmen. They are exotic treasures and it is a waste for them to be hidden away like this.”

Many artworks held at the Qing palace are made using the similar concepts as the nesting cups, eliciting a sense of amazement and wonder for the viewer through their exceptional level of craftsmanship, these same qualities of astounding craftsmanship are apparent in the ‘ivory puzzle ball’ from Guangzhou (layered of thin) or the lathe turned ‘ghostly crafted ivory ball’ (five in a set, fig. 11).16 The literature of the time also contains descriptions of similarly crafted objects and the excitement they provoked. The famous Qing dynasty novel ‘Dream of the Red Chamber’ describes a set of nesting cups made from bamboo or Chinese box wood. In one scene from the novel, the Auntie Liu saw a set of 10 nested cups made of Chinese boxwood. It seems that the forms of the nesting cups were similar to the nested forms and carved decoration of the western nesting goblets. “When she saw (the cups) she became both surprised and delighted, she was surprised that the cups, 10 graduated in size, the largest the size of a bowl and the smallest still

16 Shih Ching-fei 施靜菲, Xiangyaqio suojian zhi gongyi jishu jiaoliou: Guangdong Qiangong yu Shensheng Luoma digguo 象牙球所見之工藝技術交流：廣東、清宮與神聖羅馬帝國 (Concentric Spheres and the Exchange of Craft Techniques: Canton, the Qing Court and the Holy Roman Empire), in: Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 (The National Palace Museum Research Quarterly, 25/2 (2007), 87–138; id. Yeshi bolai pin: Qinggong zhong de Xiyang xuanchuang 也是舶來品: 清宮中的西洋鏇床 (Another Item from Over the Sea: Ornamental Lathes at the Qing Court), in: Meishi shi yanjiu jikan 美術史 研究集刊 (Journal of Art History), 32 (2012), 171–238.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

325

large enough to hold in her hand; she was delighted by the intricate carving on the cups’ surface depicting trees and figures.”17

Even though literary sources may give us some insight on the subject as above, the same example also illustrates one of the common difficulties encountered in the research of cultural exchange: the source does not mention the equipment used or the crucial technology required for manufacturing. In the case of the nesting/ stacking cups, the concept and principles of their manufacture were probably developed independently in various cultures. Therefore, it is particularly difficult to trace the origin of the art work and discuss whether cultural exchange was involved. This difficulty is even more apparent in the case of China; it has a long history, a vast area and a constant cultural exchange with neighbouring cultures. It is even more difficult to know whether the particular technology was not already available to the traditional craftsman. In my own experience, while researching subjects relating to cross cultural exchange, my colleagues would constantly question whether the technology was already available in China, or whether the idea had not already existed, but must have been introduced from the outside. The ‘nesting idea’ was certainly known in East Asia and had been employed by Chinese craftsmen long before the Qing dynasty. An example of this implementation is the set of five ‘quintuple nesting bronze cups’ excavated from one of the imperial tombs of the Han dynasty in Mancheng 滿城, Hebei province (dated 113 BCE, fig. 12). A later example is the set of six Yixing stoneware nested tea cups with a teapot from a late 16th century tomb (fig. 13).18 Other similar examples are a set of five Yixing stoneware nested cups with golden inlay,19 and a set of six copper painted enamel nesting cups of the Yongzheng period, kept in the National Palace Museum, Taipei (fig. 14). In summary, the idea of creating nested art works in China cannot be entirely attributed to foreign influence and was frequently found in indigenous works passed down through the generations. These early nested artworks were made according to indigenous handicraft traditions in East Asia and tended to emphasize the nested, graduated feature of the object, and the storing of these objects into a set. The functional aspects probably were: convenience (some of them might be used for traveling), ease of storage and protection offered by the ‘nesting’. On the other hand, while the 17 Cao Xueqin 曹學芹, Gao E 高鶚, Qianlong chaoben baiershi hui Hongloumeng gao 乾隆抄 本百二十回紅樓夢稿 (The Dream of the Red Chamber in the Qianlong Transcript of the Hundred and Twenty Chapters Version), Shanghai 2006, vol. 5, chapter 41, 1. 18 Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo 北京市文物研究所 (ed.), Beijing Gongshang daxue Mingdai taijian mu 北京工商大学明代太监墓 (Tombs of Ming dynasty eunuchs at the Beijing Technology and Business University), Beijing 2005, 25. I thank Prof. Ming-jiang Hsieh for providing this information. 19 http://antiquities.npm.gov.tw/Utensils_Page.aspx?ItemId=314224 (accessed on 2017/8/12).

326

Ching-fei Shih

nesting goblets from the ‘Western Ocean’ are also crafted in a nesting and graduated shape showed similar advantages for storage and protection, they have the additional element of virtuosity and curiosity (on technology, concealed inside) displayed by the foreign craftsmen. The flamboyancy is evident through the craftsmen’s attempt to make the cup wall exceptionally thin and by making the smallest cups extraordinarily miniscule. These features show an astounding level of craftsmanship, indicating that the creators of the western nesting goblets were more concerned about demonstrating their sensational craftsmanship rather than the functional advantages offered by nesting. We are able to observe a similar emphasis on display and exhibition in the ‘wooden goblet from the Western Ocean’ at the Qing palace via their placement in a specially made redwood box and glass cover. Though the proclivity to treasure and collect ‘curiosities’ are the same both in China and the West, possibly a universal human desire, we should still seek to look at the different ways in which these desires are manifested and the degree of influence they have within each culture. Unfortunately, this is a vast topic for future research and beyond the scope of this article. From our above discussion on the foreign elements of the nesting goblets and the influence they exerted on the artisans at the Qing court, it would be too simplified to view related art works manufactured at the Qing palace workshops or local workshops as mere ‘copies’ but it would be rather more appropriate to view these works as taking inspiration or appropriation of the idea, as both these terms emphasise the interconnection of different cultures under the context of global history. In addition, the extended concepts of display, curiosities, and trickery shall be attributed possibly to the newness mediated by the new curiosity objects ‘wooden goblet from the Western Ocean’.

4.

The Qing court context: Translation and Construction

How were these nesting goblets housed at the Qing Palaces? What was their original setting and how did the placement and display evolve? As we previously mentioned, the nesting goblet of the Qing palace was one of the ‘three treasures’ that Gao Shiqi witnessed at the imperial palace; from his description, we know that he was completely amazed by the astonishing craftsmanship; we can also see similar amazement in literary sources as in the Dream of the Red Chamber. Through these two examples, we can understand how a viewer would typically react when viewing a nesting goblet for the first time. These reactions recall our previous observation that the desire and pursuit for exotic artefacts are universal across cultures.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

327

On the other hand, even while Gao praised the ‘three treasures’, he nevertheless rejects these items through the orthodox values of Confucian ethics, proposing that a wise emperor should value frugality and not waste resources in the pursuit of frivolity to the detriment of one’s productivity, and not value foreign exotic artefacts whilst not disdaining the practical products of one’s own nation. Gao’s views reflect the traditional literati stance on curiosities and reiterate the typical rapprochement given to the ruler by a virtuous minister.20 “Our current emperor arrives at the palace early every morning. He first discusses matters of state with his ministers and councillors and then pays his respects to the dowager empress. Afterwards, if he has any time left, the emperor will examine the philosophy of ethics and morals with his ministers. The emperor pursues the study of the classics and reviews historical records every day and does not pay any attention to crafty artefacts. Someone once mentioned to the emperor the three artefacts you see today and the emperor moved these to another location after only briefly viewing the objects, judging that they were frivolous objects; if it were not for this incident, you would have not been able to see these today. So I said the emperor has a very wise and grand strategy. As it is said in the Book of Documents: ‘If we were not enslaved by our lust for visual and auditory sensation, all our thoughts will become pure and altruistic.’ It is further said, ‘Do not engage in useless tasks to the detriment of meaningful work and we will be able to accomplish our goals. And also, do not value precious and rare items nor dismiss the quotidian and mundane objects so that the populace will be content. In former times, under the rule of the ancient sage kings, people from both far and near would not dare offer to them anything other than functional utensils.’ The three objects I saw today are indeed rare and exotic but also useless and purposeless. If they were to be cherished as priceless treasures, everyone would think that the imperial court favours exotic artefacts and would compete to bring exotic tributes to the court. Our wise emperor is heeding advice from the ‘Book of Documents’ and thus does not treasure these objects.”

From here we observe how Gao attempts to cast the Kangxi emperor in the mould of the sage emperors of antiquity: via the rejection of frivolity and craftiness, and in doing so, displaying the moral gravity of a saintly ruler. Gao’s fixation on moral values demonstrates the divergence of viewpoints across different cultures even when they share some universal values, such as the desire to acquire exotic objects. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that this Confucian rejection of frivolity was not limited to foreign goods, but would include any ‘exceptionally crafted’, ‘ghostly crafted’ item produced indigenously as well, even though there was a general tendency to link ‘ghostly crafted’ with the exotic and foreign in the general perception.21 20 Gao 2011, vol. 166, 301. 21 Shih Chingfei 施靜菲, Zishi guigong shou nanchuan xianke qing: Qianlongchao gongting de xianya ‘xiangong’ 自是鬼工手， 能傳仙客情： 乾隆朝宮廷的象牙「仙工」 (From the Hands of Spirits, Conveying the Quality of Immortals: Ivory ‘Immortal Works’ from

328

Ching-fei Shih

In addition to Gao’s experience of the nesting goblets, we should further examine the nomenclature of these objects at the Qing palace to understand how they were received and appropriated by the Qing court in a slightly later period. Although we do not have texts from the period which can provide insight on how these goblets would have been conceptualized or how a viewer would have reacted or responded to the collection and exhibition of the goblets as an integral component of the palaces’ interior decoration, we can use several sources to conclude the reception: – Gao’s revelation of his amazement and wonder when first viewing the cups – The mentioning of ‘amazing artefacts from the Western Oceans’ of the European missionary tribute list of the Yongzheng period – The Imperial workshop archive’s statement to keep the ‘spectacularly crafted wooden layered goblet’ in reserve22 These examples allow us to imagine that these ‘marvellous artefacts’, ‘amazing craftsmanship’ nesting goblets must have made a lasting impression on the aristocrats of the Qing court through their wondrous lathe turning technique. They must have questioned how many nesting layers there were and marvelled at the thinness of the cup walls. The traditional Chinese conception of qiqi 奇器 (amazing objects) share many traits with the European conception of curiosities. These similarities are apparent through the Qing courts’ nomenclature of these objects labelling them as ‘amazing artefacts’ with ‘immortal craftsmanship’ and echoes the universal desire to acquire exotic objects when looked at through the context of global history. There is also a twist here that emperor Qianlong, grandson of the Kangxi emperor, though claiming that he followed the doctrine of his ancestors rejecting wondrous curiosity objects as a crucial requirement for becoming a sage king, sought a way to collect and display such objects under the umbrella of ‘immortal works’. As in my previous work on the wondrous ivory miniature objects made in the Qing court, I argue that with the Qianlong emperor, who described them as “from the hands of spirits, conveying the quality of immortals”, we can see how the term ‘immortal works’ appeared and resolved the dichotomy between “human wishes follow heavenly principles” and “human ingenuity is like the heavens,” which raised the status of this type of art.23 The Qianlong emperor also reckoned using the term ‘immortal works’ like the heaven itself to package this fascinating art he admired with a theoretical underpinning, giving this product of culture an orthodox status. the Qianlong Court), in: Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 (National Palace Museum Research Quarterly) 34/1 (2016), 93–151. 22 First Historical Archives 2003, vol. 1, 72. 23 Shih 2016, 93–151.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

329

The ‘100 layered wooden nesting goblet’ with an outer cylindrical wooden case is one of two sets of nesting goblets held in the collection of the Palace Museum, Taipei (fig. 5). It has the old inventory number Tian 天 no. 1278. When checked with the ‘Imperial Palace inventory report’, we found that they were originally housed in the western wing of the Palace of Heavenly Purity and classified as ‘second class Western cups with wooden case’.24 The classification clearly designates their Western origin, as well as indicating there was an outer case included in the set. What is even more interesting is the classification ‘second class old collection’. To further examine the meaning of this term, we should look at the Palace Museum Beijing’s archives. There we find in the Qianqing gong 乾清宮 (Palace of Heavenly Purity) in the “storage display archives of second class antique collection” (Kucun ru gucideng chenshe dangan 庫存入古次等陳設檔 案) (15th day, 7th month, 15th year of the 道光Daoguang era [1835]) a ‘nesting goblet from the Western Ocean’, held in a wooden rosewood (zitan 紫檀) box with glass cover mentioned.25 The importance of the Palace of Heavenly Purity can be seen in both its location within the Imperial Palace complex and in its pivotal political importance. After the removal of his bedroom from the palace of Heavenly Purity to the Hall for Mental Cultivation (Yangxindian 養心殿) the Yongzheng emperor and his successors used the Palace of Heavenly Purity as a place to receive officials and foreign envoys, to deal with daily administrative works, and to hold festival celebrations and official banquets. Recent scholars have studied in detail the cataloguing of the imperial porcelain collection in the early Qianlong reign, helping us to understand how important artefacts in the art collection of the Qing Palace were regarded and the procedures that each item underwent before being stored or displayed. These procedures included: identifying, sorting, naming, grading, making of custom containers, and finally, reconfiguring – a very complex process, indeed.26 The nesting goblet from the Western Ocean was 24 The inventories of objects housed in the Forbidden City were compiled and published between 1925 and 1930, when the last emperor moved out. See Qingshi shanhou weiyuanhui 清室善後委員會 (ed.), Gugong diancha baogao 故宮物品點查報告 (Report on the inspected objects), Beiping 1925–30. The cataloguing system employed as the Qianziwen 千字 文 (One Thousand Characters) marking sequence, following the location of palaces. We could therefore trace back the original palaces housing certain objects. These old systems of cataloguing objects were thus regarded as their ID. See Chi Johsin 嵇若昕, Wenwu de ID 文物的 ID (The ID of objects), in: Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 (National Palace Museum Monthly Journal) 272 (2005), 80–91. 25 Gugong bowuyuan 故宮博物院 (ed.), Gugong bowuyuan cang Qinggong chenshe dangan 故宮博物院藏清宮陳設檔案 (Furnishing Archives of Qing Palace in the Collection of the Palace Museum), Beijing 2013, vol. 38, 44. 26 Yu Pei-chin 余佩瑾, Qianlong huangdi yu Qinggong ciqi diancang: yi huafalang yu Yangcai weilie 乾隆皇帝與清宮瓷器典藏： 以畫琺瑯與洋彩為例 (Porcelain Repositories of Emperor Qianlong and the Qing palace, taking coloured enamel and foreign colours as

330

Ching-fei Shih

classified as ‘second class’, possibly, as it was recognised as having originated in the West and was judged to be second class for quality during the identification process. The next step was to craft a rosewood case and glass cover for its presentation and display. Additionally, the purposely-made cases used for the storage or preservation of the nesting cups can be used to speculate on how the nesting cups were displayed and presented at the Qing palace. The rosewood case and other redwood cases with glass cover mentioned earlier can also be seen on the Palace Museum Beijing’s second set of nesting cups. The set is archived as lu 呂 no.31 and was originally displayed at the Hall of Mental Cultivation, the studio of emperors after the Yongzheng reign. The Hall of Mental Cultivation stands in a large compound south of the Six Western Palaces of the Forbidden City. During the Qing Dynasty it was one of the most important places in the Imperial Palace. The front part of the hall was used as office and the rear part as bedroom of the emperor. In the West Warm Chamber and East Warm Chamber of the Hall of Mental Cultivation, the emperor read official reports and met high-ranking officials. We could thus speculate that curiosity objects of such were likely appreciated by the Qing emperors in the collection of exotic objects during their spare time. In addition, according to the records in the same archive, we see in the 41st year of the Qianlong era (1776), that imperial workshops cleared out displays at the Changchunyuan 暢春園 (Comfort Spring Garden, near Yuanmingyuan 圆 明园) and the house of Empress Chongqing 崇慶皇太后, mother of the Qianlong emperor. Most of the objects were sent to be sold at the Congwenmen 崇文門 (Advocating Literature Gate), except a qigong mutao bei 奇工木套盃 (spectacularly crafted wooden layered goblet) which was kept in reserve by imperial decree.27 The records of the ‘Imperial Archive of Household’ (Huojidang 活計檔) mention that the emperor ordered to have wooden cases with one-sided glass covers constructed for six sets of nesting cups.28 This ‘spectacularly crafted wooden layered goblet’ record should refer to one of the turned wooden goblets currently held at either the Palace Museum in Beijing or Taipei. This particular style of wooden case with a single glass cover was commonly used at the Qing examples), in: Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 (National Palace Museum Monthly Journal), 369 (2013), 44–55. 27 See the Neiwufu zaobanchu huoji qingdang 內務府造辦處活計清檔 (abb. Huojidang 活計 檔 archive) (12th month, 41st year of Qianlong’s reign), Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Art Museum, Qinggong neiwufu zaobanchu dangan zonghui 清宮內務府造辦處檔案總匯 (Compilation of the Qing Imperial Household Archives), Beijing 2005, vol. 39, 473. 28 Huojidang 活計檔 archive (4th month, 51st year of Qianlong’s reign), Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Art Museum 2005, vol. 49, 398.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

331

palaces, but we should note that there was also an alternative display design used for displaying the nesting cups (according to the imperial archive). This alternative design used a rosewood case but had four-sided glass panels. After the cups were fitted into these boxes, they were ordered to be displayed at the Shuifadian 水法殿 (Fountain Hall) in the Yuanmingyuan 圓明園.29 Around the same time of the ordering of the rosewood cases, the Qianlong Emperor also ordered Chinese cedar wood cases made to store his 12 sets of wooden nesting goblets from the Western Ocean, these were also displayed at the Fountain Hall.30 It should be noted that the choice of material was carefully selected when making these displays. When cedar wooden casings were used, the item was usually intended for storage or for traveling; examples are the large amount of painted enamel works at the Qing palace. These are all held in strong boxes made of cedar wood with the item name carved on top and collectively stored in the annexes of the Palace of Heavenly Purity.31 In the aforementioned ‘Imperial Archive of Household’ we have read that a four-sided glass panelled rosewood case was specifically ordered to store the Western wooden layered goblet, before it was sent to be displayed at the Fountain Hall.32 If we look at the records of contemporary western missionaries in China, it is interesting to note that these missionaries described how the Qianlong emperor placed all manners of western objects in the compound of Western style mansions (Xiyang lou 西洋樓) quarter of the Yuanmingyuan. These would have also included Chinese imitations of western style artworks.33 The western style mansions designed by western missionaries for the Qianlong emperor parallel similar developments in Europe, where ‘Chinese houses’ in European palace gardens were en vogue in the 18th century.34 In addition to the Qianlong emperor’s request for the imitation of European architectural styles on the façade of his palace, he moved most of his collection of foreign exotic wares and western style objects made at the Imperial workshops to decorate the palace interiors and to compete the two categories of artworks with each other. 29 Huojidang 活計檔 archive (4th month, 51st year of Qianlong’s reign), Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Art Museum 2005, vol. 24, 451–452. 30 Huojidang 活計檔 archive (4th month, 51st year of Qianlong’s reign), Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Art Museum 2005, vol. 23, 762. 31 Shih Ching-fei, Reyue kuanghua – Qinggong huafalang 日月光華: 清宮畫琺瑯 (Radiant Luminance: The Painted Enamelware of the Qing Imperial Court), Taipei 2012, 9–12. 32 Yu 2013, 44–55. 33 Fang Hao方豪, Zhongxi jiaotong shi 中西交通史 (History of Exchanges between China and the West), Taipei 1983, 759–760. 34 Such similarities have been noted by Kang Wuwei 康無為, Qianlong chao de hongwei qixiang yu yiguo qizhen 乾隆朝的宏偉氣象與異國奇珍 (Qianlong’s magnificent surroundings and exotic treasures), in: Dushi oude 讀史偶得, Taipei 1993, 70–71.

332

Ching-fei Shih

Let us come back to the nesting cups with the redwood case originally housed in the Hall for Mental Cultivation (fig. 5). As mentioned, at the time of the Qianlong Emperor, these nesting goblets were new foreign imports from the West and the glass covers used for the wooden casings were also most likely foreign imports. When we look at the fitting and furnishings inside these wooden casings, we can see how the palace workshops added Western stylistic elements to match the goblets’ Western origins. In the casing there is a special rosewood pedestal made by the Qing palace, possibly customised for securing the nesting cups, Western style ornamentation was added to the cylindrical barrier and the fence tops, which are made of ivory. These Western style architectural ornaments are sometimes used in other works made by the imperial workshop, such as the ‘Round bamboo-veneered curio box with lotus blossom décor’ (containing 27 curios, fig. 15), which was also part of the curious artefacts housed in the Qianlong emperor’s Hall for Mental Cultivation. In short, these casings, especially commissioned for the display of nesting goblets, show how these goblets were integrated under the context of the Qing court (fig. 4). When the palace workshops constructed the ‘redwood box with a single glass cover’ to house the nesting goblets, the items were transformed into an object for display under the context of the Qing court, allowing the goblets to play a part in constructing the interior décor of the Qing palace, along with other objects displayed. This idea borrows from Anna Grasskamp’s analysis of Chinese export porcelain with European metal mountings (‘framing’). She argues that the adding of metal mountings transformed Chinese export porcelains into the context of European Kunstkammer.35 In addition to using cedar wood cases for storage or traveling, another important difference in the display of the nesting goblet collection was the two different styles of glass covers used on the wooden casing. The casing either had a one-sided glass cover or a four-sided glass cover (actually five). The choice of cover used in the display sets limitations for the viewer. A single glass cover suggests that the displayed item would be set against a wall or stand, and only allows a frontal view. However, the four-sided glass covers encourage the viewers to encircle the object, taking in all angles. Regardless of whether the wooden case uses a single glass or four/five glasses, they both isolate the object and emphasize the visual impact. The glass cover allows the item to be seen, but prohibits the touching of the displayed object. The wooden cases for viewing with one glass cover can only be viewed frontally and would be similar to a curio stand laid against the wall similar to the one seen in ‘Twelve Beauties’, a painting attributed to Yongzheng Emperor’s commission in the early 18th century (fig. 16). Here we 35 See Anna Grasskamp, Objects in Frames: Displaying Foreign Collectibles in Early Modern China and Europe. Berlin 2019.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

333

see a multi-tiered display cabinet set against a wall. In another painting of the Yongzheng period, the ‘Cosplays of the Yongzheng Emperor’ (fig. 17), there is a large segmented display shelf in the background with individual glass panels for each display. In both examples, the items in these display cabinets are meant to be viewed frontally and therefore have a defined ‘front facing’. Even if the displayed object is round or cylindrical a casing will still define the preferred viewing angle. The effects of the wooden casing extend beyond the viewing angle, on the red wood case the barrier fence is decorated in Western architectural style ornamentation (with ivory fence tops), a detail that not only recalls the nesting goblets origin from the ‘Western Ocean’, but have an additional effect of making the whole work seem sacrosanct, confining it like a religious relic. On the other hand, we should ask how the removal of the cylindrical outer box has affected the viewer. By discarding the cylindrical outer box, leaving the goblet on its own, the high standing goblet is left alone with a glass lid showing its surface markings and carved decoration. Under this context, the tongs fitted into the interior will help to secure and stabilize the high standing goblet; this method of display was meant to balance the needs of secure storage and open display, and is very different from the East Asian ‘nesting’ tradition which emphasised the functional aspects of the nesting feature, notably the security and strength gained by nesting the object in layers. In the previous example of the ‘Twelve Beauties’ painting there is a tall and thin bronze hu 壺 with a custom wooden stand used to secure and store this item. Its overall appearance is very similar to the ‘Chaekgeori 冊架圖/冊巨里 segmented display shelf painting’ popular in the Choson dynasty (fig. 18);36 the items are held individually in each wooden segment. The relationship of this style of display with its European counterpart, the Kunstkammer, is a very interesting topic (fig. 2), but would require further research in this area in the future. In comparison to the nesting goblet in the wood case displayed in the interior setting of the Qing palaces, there is an item of opposite manufacture held at the Dresden Castle and now exhibited in the restored ‘Elfenbeinzimmer’ (Ivory Room) of the ‘Grünes Gewölbe’ (Green Vault) in Dresden. This is a turned ivory cup (lid now missing) crafted by the famous ivory turner Georg Wecker (1566– 1636) and resembles a set of four nested cups in outward appearance, however, this is a visual illusion created by the artist and the piece is in fact a single cup (fig. 19). The visual trickery in this example aims to confound the viewer, using a similar concept to the nesting goblets; where on first observation, it appears to be a single goblet on a long stand, but upon closer inspection may actually contain 100 nested cups. According to the study on the scenic illusion painting of the Qing palaces by Kristina Kleutghen, the Qianlong emperor was assumed to be the 36 This is a style of painting where a wooden display shelf holding many books and objects are shown.

334

Ching-fei Shih

viewer.37 The most attractive part of the illusion is the procedure of experiencing delusion, perception and eventually distinguished from the illusion. Only the intelligent one could differentiate the illusion from the reality. In the case of the scenic illusion painting in the Qing court, Qianlong emperor (perhaps together with high officials close to him) was the one who is able to tell the truth from the illusion and the other viewers could not. This could also link to the Auntie Liu’s case when she was cheated by a series of visual trickery in the interior setting of the grand house she visited, including portraits in Western perspective style, standing mirror and life-size illusion painting of shelves with books and objects, etc. As a person from the lower class, she would not be able to tell the illusion from the reality, but the residents of the grand house would. These above examples enable us to suggest that it is perhaps these concepts of display, visual trickery and curious that really distinguished these nesting cups from East Asian tradition and show the ‘newness’ traded, exchanged and reinvented in the Qing court context.

5.

Conclusion

From the above surviving nesting goblet examples and source material, we have learned that the goblets were originally crafted in southern Germany and travelled extensively, along various trade routes between Europe and China in the 17th and 18th centuries. Such nesting cups are richly endowed in meanings from the perspectives of global history and would have impacted the visual culture and related knowledge across a wide range of regions. We have gained some understanding of the display and collection of the European nesting goblets under the context of the Qing imperial palaces and can summarize these observations: 1) The nesting cups had some influence on the Qing palace’s artisanal workmanship and provided visual inspiration; this can be observed from the copying of the nesting concept and appropriation of the design, examples include the palace workshop versions of the goblet made from different materials and the boxwood layered goblet in the ‘Dream of the Red Chamber’. 2) At the Qing palace, especially during the Qianlong period, the nesting goblets had undergone the process of identification, ranking, classification, sorting and had custom casings made for them, before they were subsumed into the overall decoration and display of the palace interior. Through the nomenclature and the commissioning of the glass cover and wooden casings, we can 37 Kristina Kleuthgen, Imperial Illusions: Crossing Pictorial Boundaries in the Qing Palaces. Seattle and London 2015.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

335

see that the Qing court had already devised plans for the collection and display of these objects, and had carefully considered their arrangement beforehand. So what conclusions can we draw from the collection and display of the nesting cups at the Qing court? Given the vast amount of art works in the collection of the Qing palaces, these western nesting goblets, though they may not be the most prominent works within the collection, have fulfilled an important role in global history and became an important medium in the cross cultural exchange of material, ideas and knowledge in the early modern era. They illustrate the Qing courts’ connection to Europe. The history of the western nesting goblets at the Qing court also illustrates how the Qing court organizes, understands and appropriates these foreign objects, allowing us to look at the imperial collection from a cross cultural perspective. We have acknowledged that the display and collection of the Qing court was fluid and several strategies were employed for the display of western objects. In the previous example of the Fountain Hall of the Yuanmingyuan, the four-sided glass rosewood case was displayed and stored with other Western artefacts, showing the exotic and foreign nature of these objects. The one-sided redwood case with single glass panel was on the other hand placed at the Hall of Mental Cultivation in the Qianlong emperor’s study room, along with other exceptional objects. The manufacture and circulation of the nesting cups in Europe was originally due to the sensational nature of these works; the virtuoso craftsmanship and the desire to acquire amazing and wondrous objects under the social and cultural background at the time. After travelling under the global network of trade and entering the Qing palace, the sensational nature and virtuoso craftsmanship was still recognized and understood to a certain extent. However, the Qianlong Emperor reinterpreted the nesting goblets from the Western Ocean under his own terms. This included the display of exotic foreign objects at the Fountain Hall and the Hall of Mental Cultivation, as well as the archiving and documentation process at the Palace of Heavenly Purity. Through these processes and transformation of the goblets were appropriated and given a different meaning. What at first seemed most remarkable, was that fact these goblets came from Europe, and were viewed as desirable and exotic artefacts by the Chinese court. The exceptional objects were exchanged through missionaries, merchants and embassies and represented important mediums of economic and political exchange between China and Europe. The circulation of the cups around the world represent the universal desire and search for exotic and spectacular objects, connecting Europe with Asia.

336

Ching-fei Shih

Looking back at the many sets of wooden nesting goblets exhibited in various museum collections, these items are so numerous that they may seem inconsequential, however, when examined under a global context we can observe the abundant ways in which the nesting goblets were adapted and reinterpreted by different cultures. Therefore, the study of these nesting cups should be seen as an important case study using the global historical perspective, where new understanding is gained from the cross cultural dissemination of ideas and technology under global history. The nesting goblets were not only created and collected for artistic appreciation, but also for the curiosity, amazement and exoticism they elicited from the viewer; these universal emotions were prevalent in the premodern world, in addition to the connections established by cross cultural exchange, via the dissemination of knowledge and the appropriation of the display, ‘visual illusion’ and trickery of the stacked cups, there is the more progressive and determined ‘translation’ and ‘construction’, this included the ambivalent attitude towards western nesting cups, on the one hand, there was the desire to acquire foreign exotic objects but on the opposite end, there existed the orthodox Confucian values of frugality and austerity as espoused by Gao Shiqi; these opposing forces coexisted at the Qing palace. This brief analysis has left us with more unanswered questions, and would be worth looking into in a future study.

337

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Tables and Figures Table 1: Wooden goblet with nesting cups in the National Palace Museum and Palace Museum No.

Reg. No. 1 NPM Gudiao Cup 故雕 No.1 110

Old Reg. No./ Location Tian 天 1278/ Qian Qing 乾清 Palace

Image

Note 79 stacking cups H:15.8 cm MD: 5.8 cm Box H: 25 cm

2 NPM Gudiao Li 麗 Cup 故雕91 990–7/ No.2 Gu dong fang 古董房

88 Stacking cups

3 PM Liu Cup Ping No.1 留平 85466

H:25.3 cm D: 8.5 cm After Guo, Fuxian, p. 83

Gu wu chen lei shuo 古物 陳列所 (original collection of Summer Palace of Rehe 熱河）

H: 16.3 cm MD: 5.7 cm BD: 6.2 cm

338

Ching-fei Shih

Table 1 (Continued) No. 4 NPM Cup No.2

5 PM Cup No.3

Reg. No.

Old Reg. No./ Location Lu 呂 31/ Yang xin 養心 Palace

Lu 呂 3361/ Yang Xin Palace (Tishun 體順 Hall and other chambers)

Image

Note H:24.6 cm D:7.2 cm After Guo, Fuxian, p. 84

50 Stacking cups H:20.5 cm D:5.8 cm Box H: 25c D: 9.1 cm After Guo, Fuxian, p. 86

339

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Table 1 (Continued) No. 6 PM Cup No.4

Reg. No.

Old Reg. No./ Location Tun 邨 122/ Gu wu chen lei shuo (original collection of Summer Palace of Rehe 熱河）

Image

Note Box only H:20 cm D: 10 cm After Guo, Fuxian, p. 87

340

Ching-fei Shih

Table 2: The examples of the wooden goblet with wooden nesting cups housed in European Collections No. 1

Collection The National Museum of Denmark -1 Notes Courtesy: The National Museum of Denmark Bente Gundestrup, Det Kongelige danske Kunstkammer 1737 (The Royal Danish Knustkammer 1737) I (Copenhagen, A. Busck, 1991), p. 322.

Collection The National Museum of Denmark -2, 3 Notes

Courtesy: The National Museum of Denmark Bente Gundestrup, Det Kongelige danske Kunstkammer 1737 (The Royal Danish Knustkammer 1737) I (Copenhagen, A. Busck, 1991), p. 323.

Collection The National Museum of Denmark -4 Notes

Courtesy: The National Museum of Denmark Bente Gundestrup, Det Kongelige danske Kunstkammer 1737 (The Royal Danish Knustkammer 1737) I (Copenhagen, A. Busck, 1991), p. 324.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

341

No. 2

Collection Ambrass Castle, Innsbruck Notes Courtesy: KHM-Museumsverband No. 3

Collection Kunstgewerbemuseum (Museum of Decorative Arts), Berlin Notes Courtesy: © Kunstgewerbemuseum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Photo: Lothar Lambacher

342

Ching-fei Shih

No. 4

Collection Museum Schloss Wilhelmshöhe, Kassel Notes

Courtesy: Museumslandschaft Hessen Kassel E. Schmidberger et al., Schatz Kunst 800 bis 1800. Kunsthandwerk und Plastik der Staatlichen Museen Kassel im Hessischen Landesmuseum Kassel (Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Edition Minerva, 2001), pp. 236–237.

No. 5

Collection JK II 270: Grünes Gewölbe, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden; Foto: Jürgen Karpinski Notes

Courtesy: Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden

No. 6

Collection Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, Braunschweig Notes Courtesy: Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum Weltenharmonie: Die Kunstkammer und die Ordnung des Wissens, pp. 217–218 Kat.-Nr. 238–239

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

No. 7

Collection Friedenstein Castle Museum, Gotha Notes Courtesy: Stiftung Schloss Friedenstein Gothar No. 8

Collection Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nürnberg Notes

Courtesy: Germanisches Nationalmuseum

No. 9

Collection Kunstkammer Georg Laue, Munich Notes Courtesy: Kunstkammer Georg Laue, Munich

343

344

Ching-fei Shih

No. 10

Collection Unknown Location (auction catalogue, Amsterdam) Notes

E. Bergvelt, R. Kistemaker, De wereldbinnenhandbereik. Nederlandsekunst-en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585–1735, exh. cat., Amsterdam Historisch Museum, 1992, p. 71.

No. 11

Collection Musée des beaux-arts de Rennes Cabinet de curiosité du marquis de Robien (1698–1756) Notes

Courtesy: Musée des beaux-arts de Rennes Photo: Jean-Manuel Salingue

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

No. 12

Collection Private Collection, France Notes

Courtesy: Jean Claude Charpignon The upper part is modern restoration

No. 13

Collection Collection of Peter the great, St. Petersburg (2 pieces) Notes ΚАΤАΛΟΓΒБΙСΤАВΚИ,ОСНОВАТЕΛЮ ПЕТЕРБУРГА (САНΚΤ-ΙΙΕΤΕΡБΥΡΤ, 2003), p. 207.

345

346

Fig. 1

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 2

347

348

Fig. 3

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

349

350

Fig. 6

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 7

351

352

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 10

Fig. 11

353

354

Fig. 12

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 13

355

356

Fig. 14

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 15

357

358

Fig. 16

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 17

359

360

Fig. 18

Ching-fei Shih

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

Fig. 19

361

362

Ching-fei Shih

Literature Beijing shi wenwu yanjiusuo北京市文物研究所 (ed.), Beijing Gongshang daxue Mingdai taijian mu 北京工商大学明代太监墓 (Tombs of Ming dynasty eunuchs at the Beijing Technology and Business University), Beijing 2005. E. Bergvelt, R. Kistemaker, De wereld binnen handbereik. Nederlandse kunst-en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585–1735, exh. cat., Amsterdam 1992. Cao Xueqin 曹學芹, Gao E 高鶚, Qianlong chaoben baiershi hui Hongloumeng gao 乾隆 抄本百二十回紅樓夢稿 (The Dream of the Red Chamber in the Qianlong Transcript of the Hundred and Twenty Chapters Version), Shanghai 2006. Catalogus van een seer wel gestoffeerde konstkamer en Catalogus musei instrumentissimi (…), Amsterdam, 1679; veiling: 14-8-1679: Lugt (UBA 637 G 5[1]). Catalogus van een curieus Kabinet nagelaten van de heer J. van Kretschmar, Delft 1694: veiling 18-10-1694 (UBA 637 G 5) 1694. Chi Johsin 嵇若昕, Wenwu de ID 文物的ID (The ID of objects), in: Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 (National Palace Museum Monthly Journal) 272 (2005), 80–91. Craig Clunas (柯律格), Wuzhi wenhua – zai dong xi eryuanlun zhiwai 物質文化—在東西 二元論之外 (Material Culture Beyond the East/West Binary), in: Xin Shixue 新史學 17 (2006), 200–201. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Scratching the Surface. On the Dutch in Taiwan and China, in: Michael North and Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (eds.), Mediating Netherlandish Art and Material Culture in Asia, Amsterdam, Chicago and London 2014). Fang Hao方豪, Zhongxi jiaotong shi 中西交通史 (History of Exchanges between China and the West), Taipei 1983. Françoise Forster-Hahn, The Politics of Display or the Display of Politics?, in: Art Bulletin 77/2 (1995),174–179. Gao Shihqi 高士奇, Jingjin wengao 經進文稾, juan 5, zaji 雜記, in: Guojia Qingshi bianzuan weiyuanhui 國家清史編纂委員會(ed.), Qingdai shiwenji huibian清代 詩文集彙編 (Lanrentang 朗潤堂 edition of the Kangxi period), Qingyintang quanji 清吟堂全集 Shanghai 2011. Anna Grasskamp, Objects in Frames: Displaying Foreign Collectibles in Early Modern China and Europe, Berlin 2019. Gugong bowuyuan 故宮博物院 (ed.), Gugong bowuyuan cang Qinggong chenshe dangan 故宮博物院藏清宮陳設檔案 (Furnishing Archives of Qing Palace in the Collection of the Palace Museum), Beijing 2013, vol. 38, 44. Bente Gundestrup, Det Kongelige danske Kunstkammer 1737, vol. 1, Copenhagen 1991, 324. Guo Fuxiang 郭福祥, Gugong shoucang xiyang mutaobei de faxian: Qinggong xiyang mutaobei buyi 故宮收藏西洋木套杯的發現—清宮西洋木套杯補遺 (The discovery of Western wooden goblets in the Palace Museum), in: Forbidden City 紫禁城 215 (2012), 82–87. Kang Wuwei 康無為, Qianlong chao de hongwei qixiang yu yiguo qizhen 乾隆朝的宏偉氣 象與異國奇珍 (Qianlong’s magnificent surroundings and exotic treasures), in: Dushi oude 讀史偶得, Taipei 1993, 70–71.

A Case Study of Tribute Gift from the ‘Western Ocean’

363

Kristina Kleuthgen, Imperial Illusions: Crossing Pictorial Boundaries in the Qing Palaces. Seattle and London 2015. Lai Yu-chih 賴毓芝, Kangxi de suanxue dao Audili Anbuliesibao shoucang de yixie sikao 康 熙的算學到奧地利安布列斯堡收藏的一些思考 (Some considerations from Kanxi’s mathematics to the collections aud Ambras Castle in Austria), in: Gukong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊276 (2006), 106–118. Sharon J. Macdonald, Museums, National, Postnational and Transcultural Identities, in: Museum and Society, 1 (2003), 1–16. Krzysztof Pomian, trans. Elizabeth Wiles Potier, Collector and Curiosities: Paris and Venice 1500–1800, Cambridge 1990 (French Orig. , Paris 1987). Qingshi shanhou weiyuanhui 清室善後委員會(ed.), Gugong diancha baogao 故宮物 品點查報告 (Report on the inspected objects), Beiping 1925–30. Shih, Ching-fei 施靜菲, A Hundred-layered Goblet from the West Ocean, in: Orientations 48/4 (2015), 2–6. –, Reyue kuanghua – Qinggong huafalang日月光華: 清宮畫琺瑯 (Radiant Luminance: The Painted Enamelware of the Qing Imperial Court), Taipei 2012. –, Xiangyaqio suojian zhi gongyi jishu jiaoliou: Guangdong Qiangong yu Shensheng Luoma digguo 象牙球所見之工藝技術交流： 廣東、 清宮與神聖羅馬帝國 (Concentric Spheres and the Exchange of Craft Techniques: Canton, the Qing Court and the Holy Roman Empire), in: Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 (The National Palace Museum Research Quarterly, 25/2 (2007), 87–138. –, Yeshi bolai pin: Qinggong zhong de Xiyang xuanchuang 也是舶來品: 清宮中的西洋鏇 床 (Another Item from Over the Sea: Ornamental Lathes at the Qing Court), in: Meishi shi yanjiu jikan 美術史研究集刊 (Journal of Art History) 32 (2012), 171–238. –, Zishi guigong shou nanchuan xianke qing: Qianlongchao gongting de xianya ‘xiangong’ 自是鬼工手，能傳仙客情：乾隆朝宮廷的象牙「仙工」 (From the Hands of Spirits, Conveying the Quality of Immortals: Ivory “Immortal Works” from the Qianlong Court), in: Gugong xueshu jikan故宮學術季刊 (National Palace Museum Research Quarterly) 34/1 (2016), 93–151. Yu Pei-chin 余佩瑾, Qianlong huangdi yu Qinggong ciqi diancang: yi huafalang yu Yangcai weilie 乾隆皇帝與清宮瓷器典藏：以畫琺瑯與洋彩為例 (Porcelain Repositories of Emperor Qianlong and the Qing palace, taken coloured enamel and foreign colours as examples), in: Gugong wenwu yuekan 故宮文物月刊 (National Palace Museum Monthly Journal), 369 (2013), 44–55. Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives) (ed.), Qing zhongqi Xiyang tianzhujiao zai Hua huodong dangan shiliao 清中前期 西洋天主教在華活動檔案史料 (Archives of the Catholic Missions of the early-mid Qing China), Beijing 2003. Zhongguo diyi lishi danganguan 中國第一歷史檔案館 (First Historical Archives), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Art Museum, Qinggong neiwufu zaobanchu dangan zonghui 清宮內務府造辦處檔案總匯 (Compilation of the Qing Imperial Household Archives), Beijing 2005.

List of Contributors

Li, Wen, [email protected] Beijing Language and Culture University, Beijing Liu, Yingsheng, [email protected] Nanjing University, Nanjing He, Xinhua, [email protected] Jinan University, Guangzhou Chia, Ning, [email protected] Central College, Pella, Iowa Bakhyt Ezhenkhan-uli, [email protected] People’s University of China, Beijing Zsombor Rajkai, [email protected] Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto Morris Rossabi, [email protected] Columbia University, New York Britta-Maria Gruber, [email protected] University of Bonn, Bonn Rui Manuel Loureiro, [email protected] Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon Wan, Ming, [email protected] Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing Sally K. Church, [email protected] University of Cambridge, Cambridge Ralph Kauz, [email protected] University of Bonn, Bonn Graeme Ford, [email protected] Macquarie University, Sydney James Chin, [email protected] Jinan University, Guangzhou

366

List of Contributors

Roderich Ptak, [email protected] LMU München, München Csaba Olah, [email protected] International Christian University, Tokyo Shih, Ching-fei, [email protected] Taiwan University, Taipeh