Tributary Trade and 's Relations with the West Author(s): J. K. Fairbank Reviewed work(s): Source: The Far Eastern Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Feb., 1942), pp. 129-149 Published by: Association for Asian Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2049617 . Accessed: 09/10/2012 18:50

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

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Association for Asian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Far Eastern Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org TRIBUTARY TRADE AND CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST

J.K. FAIRBANK HarvardUniversity

UNTIL a centuryago, China's foreign relations were suzerain-vassal relationsconducted through the ancient forms of thetributary system. This traditionalChinese basis fordiplomacy was finallyturned upside down by the "unequal" treatiesof the period1842-1858, but vestigesof the old Chineseway of dealingwith the survived much longer and today still forma considerablethough latent portion of the heritageof Chinese diplomats.It is ofcourse a truismthat was notexactly what it seemed, and thatboth diplomacy and internationaltrade were conductedwithin the tributaryframework. The followingessay offers a preliminaryinterpretation of theorigin, function, and significanceof thisgreat Chinese institution.'

CHINESE CULTURAL DOMINANCE IN The tributarysystem was a naturalexpression of Chinesecultural ego- centricity.Ever since the bronzeage, when the civilizationof the Shang dynasty(c. 1500-1100 B.C.) had firstappeared as a culture-islandin the Yellow River basin, the inhabitantsof the Chinese had been sur- roundedby barbarianpeoples of inferiorculture. At no timewere theyin directcontact with an equal ,for all of EasternAsia-, ,Annam, Siam-became culturallyaffiliated to the Middle Kingdom, while India and the Near East remainedcut offby the arid land mass of CentralAsia. Separatedfrom the West, the Chineseempire grew by the acculturationof its borders.Its expansionwas theexpansion of a way of life. Where theChinese agrarian way of lifecould not be followed,as uponthe aridpasture land of theMongolian steppe, there the expansion of theempire usuallystopped.2 Over the wet rice land towardthe south it continued throughmany centuries. Fromthis age-long contact with the barbarians roundabout, including both thenomads of the northern steppe and the aborigines of the south, the Chinese 1 This articleis chieflybased upon the data presented in J. K. Fairbankand S. Y. Teng,"On the Ch'ingtributary system," Harvardjournal of Asiatic studies, 6 (1941), 135-246. 2 This topichas been analyzed at lengthby Owen Lattimore,Inner Asian frontiers ofChina (New York,1940). For a bibliographyon tributein generalsee Fairbankand Teng, op. cit.,pp. 238-43. 129 130 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY were impressedwith one fact: thattheir superiority was not one of mere materialpower but of culture.Such thingsas theChinese written language and the Confuciancode of conductwere signsof thisculture and so great was theirvirtue, so overwhelmingthe achievements of theMiddle Kingdom in art and lettersand the art of living,that no barbariancould longresist them.Gradually but invariably the barbarianin contactwith China tended to becomeChinese, by thismost flattering act reinforcingthe Chinese con- victionof superiority.On theirside theinhabitants of theMiddle Kingdom, themselveslargely descendants of barbarians,stood always ready to judgea manby culturalrather than by racialor nationalstandards. After centuries of solitarygrandeur as the centerof EasternAsia, the Chinesedeveloped what may be called, by analogyto ,a spiritof "culturism." Those who did not followthe Chineseway were ipsofacto inferior, and dangerouswhen strong, and thisview was supportedby (or emanatedfrom) an entirecosmology and a well-balancedsystem of ethics. Without venturing too farinto earlier history we maytry to notecertain of theideas which sup- portedthis "culturism." An interpretationof Chinesepolitical theory may well beginwith the dictumthat man is partof nature, not, as in themodern west, in conflictwith nature.Possibly this Chinese view of mankindas subordinateand fittinginto theunseen forces of theuniverse arose fromgeographical environment. On the broadsurface of the NorthChina plain humaninitiative was less im- portantthan the weather,and naturalcalamity, whether drought or flood, could not be avoided as easily as in ancientGreece or WesternEurope, wherethe sea and a woodedterrain usually offered some rewardto human initiativein a timeof trouble.Conceivably this may account for the passive acceptanceof naturalcalamity on thepart of theChinese farmer and it may also have somethingto do withthe lack of anthropomorphismin Chinese religion.At all eventsthe early religion of theChinese appears to havebeen animistic,concerned with the spirits of land,wind, and water.The activity of naturewas observed,and it was but a shortstep to the conclusionthat theactivity of manmust be madeto harmonizewith it. The harmonyof manwith nature in thepresent had its obviouscorollary in thecontinuity between the present and thepast. This senseof continuity, so evidentin thegreat tradition of Chinese historical writing, must probably be associatedwith the highdegree of influenceascribed to the ancestors. Each generation,as it passedfrom the scene, was believedto havejoined the unseenforces of nature which continued to influencehuman life. It was inthis beliefthat the oracle bones were used in the Shang period to ask theancestors' CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 131 guidance.The reverenceand respectpaid to one's forebears("ancestor worship")is one ofthe best known features of Chinese society. With it went a deep respectfor the exampleof the ancestors,with which,as with the forcesof nature,one's presentconduct should accord.

THE ETHICAL BASIS OF THE S POWER Fromthis point of view thefunction of theruler clearly emerges. Being in his persononly human but in his officesomething more, the Son of Heaven mediatedbetween the peopleand theunseen forces of whichwe have been speaking.This is notthe place fora documentedanalysis of theposition of the Chineseemperor and it mustnot be thoughtthat his positioncan be easilydescribed in Westernparlance. But, as a roughinterpretation, it may be saidthat the emperor's position was midwaybetween the mass of mankind and theuniversal power of Heaven. It was his functionto maintainthe all- importantharmony between them. This he did firstof all in a ritualistic manner,by conductingsacrifices like thoseperformed annually until a short timeago at theAltar of Heaven in Peking,and by a multitudeof other cere- monialacts. This activityof theruler is an unbrokentradition from the earli- est timeand is mostspectacularly demonstrated in themodern period in the institutionof ritualresponsibility. According to this doctrineit was felt thatnatural calamity-in other words, disharmony between man and nature -was the resultof the emperor'sinattention to the rites.When calamity occurred,the emperortherefore was quick to issue a penitentialedict-a customwhich has seemedto uncomprehendingEuropeans certainly quaint and perhapssilly. This ritualresponsibility was a doctrinewhich held to accountnot the person but the office. In otherwords the emperor must play his ceremonialpart in the cosmos and in playingthis part he represented all mankind;and since the activitiesof man and naturewere so closely related,any failure in theemperor's ceremonial observances was soon likely to be manifestin an irregularityof naturalprocesses. Ceremonial conduct was thereforeall-important. Intention, being less tangible,mattered little. This Chineseview of responsibility pervaded the entire administrative system and madeits activitiesoften unintelligible to foreigners. To thisancient idea of theruler's ritual function was addedthe idea of his rightconduct as a basis forhis authority.This development,associated with thename of Confucius(b. 551 B.C.), in realityfirst arose at the beginning of theChou dynasty(c. 1122 B.C.) to justifythe establishment of itscontrol in succession to the alleged degenerate last king of the preceding Shang dynasty. A theoryof rightwas sought as a sanction for a new exercise of 132 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY might.Confucius, among others, sought to supplya new rationaland ethical basis for the ruler.Unlike the impersonallegalist doctrine by whichthe WarringStates were finallyregimented into a unifiedempire in 221 B.C., Confucianismsought to makeuse of thepower of moralexample. Right con- ductfor all personsconsisted in theperformance of theproper rites and cere- moniesand the preservationof theproper social relationshipsaccording to status.Thus it was theduty of theminister to be loyal,and of theson to be filial,and of each personin societyto preservethe social orderby actingas demandedby etiquette.It was thereforeparticularly the dutyof the ruler as theone manwho representedhis peoplebefore Heaven to set themodel forthe restof mankind.There was feltto be a certainvirtue or powerin rightconduct such thatit could move others. The virtuousruler-that is, theone who did the rightthing-merely by beingvirtuous gained prestige andinfluence over the people. In thisway Confuciusand his followers defined an ethicalbasis forthe exerciseof politicalauthority.

THE EMPEROR S RELATIONS WITH THE BARBARIANS By a logicalexpansion of thistheory the emperor'svirtuous action was believedto attractirresistibly the barbarianswho were outsidethe pale of Chinesecivilization proper. "The kingsof formertimes cultivated their own refinementand virtuein orderto subduepersons at a distance,whereupon thebarbarians (of theeast and north)came to Courtto have audience."So readsan officialstatement of theMing periodabout 1530.3 A centuryand a half later the firstManchu editionof the CollectedStatutes records that "When our Dynastyfirst arose, its awe-inspiringvirtue gradually spread andbecame established. Wherever its name and influence reached, there was nonewho did notcome to Court."4 Thus the relationshipbetween the emperorand the barbarianscame to symbolizethe actualhistorical relationship between China as the centerof cultureand the rudetribes roundabout. This relationshipwas clearlyrecog- nized and formedthe theoreticalbasis forthe tributarysystem. The first tenetof thistheory-and this is an interpretation-wasthat the uncultivated alien, howevercrass and stupid,could not but appreciatethe superiority of Chinese civilizationand would naturallyseek to "come and be trans- formed"(lai-hua) and so participatein its benefits.To do thisit was chiefly essentialthat he shouldrecognize the unique position of theSon of Heaven, the One Man who constitutedthe apex of the Chinesescheme of things.

I Fairbank and Teng, op. cit.,p. 141. 4 Ibid.,p. 159. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 133 This conformedwith the fundamental dogma that China was thecenter of the humanscene and thatthe emperor exercised the to rule all mankind,Chinese and barbarianalike. Secondly,the relationship which thus inhered between the outer and the emperorwas by no meansunilateral and indeedcould hardlyexist excepton a reciprocalbasis. It was the functionof theemperor to be com- passionateand generous. His "tendercherishing of menfrom afar" (huai-jou yuan-jen) is one of the clichesin all documentson foreignrelations. The humblesubmission of theforeigner came in directresponse to theimperial benevolence,which was itselfa signof thepotent imperial virtue.

TRIBUTE AS A FORM OF COURT RITUAL Finally,it was unavoidablethat these reciprocal relations of compassionate benevolenceand humblesubmission should be carriedout in ritualform, withoutwhich they could hardly be said to exist.Tribute thus became one of therites of theCourt, a partof theceremonial of .In factthe presentationof tributewas not a ritemonopolized by barbarians.Tribute (kung)was also receivedby theCourt from the of Chinaproper. Its presentationby the barbarians was a signof their admission to theciviliza- tionof the Middle Kingdom-a boon and a privilege,not an ignominious ordeal.The formalitiesof thetributary system constituted a mechanismby whichformerly barbarous regions outside the were given their place in theall-embracing Sinocentric cosmos. This will appearmost plainly from an analysisof therules and regulations of thetributary system as publishedin thevarious editions of theCollected Statutes.5First of all the tributaryruler who tenderedhis submissionwas incorporatedinto the charmed circle of theChinese state by severalforms. An imperialpatent of appointmentwas bestowedupon him-a document whichrecognized his statusas a tributary.A noblerank was also conferred uponhim, sometimes, as withthe Mongol princes, a relativelyhigh rank in comparisonwith those of Chinese subjects.An imperialseal was also grantedhim, to be used in the signingof his tributarymemorials. Such memorialsand othercommunications were to be dated by the Chinese dynasticreign-title-that is, the Chinese calendarwas extendedover the tributarystate. A tributaryenvoy who died withinthe Middle Kingdom receivedunusual Confucian honors: a fimeralessay was recitedand burned at his grave,where sacrificial offerings were made,and latera stonewas placed above it withan imperialinscription. Even forthe burialof an at- ' Cf. regulationstranslated in ibid.,pp. 163-73. 134 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY tendantof themission, if he died at thecapital, a woodencoffin and red satin were supplied.

REGULATIONS GOVERNING TRIBUTE MISSIONS The tributemissions themselves were carefully limited in size but,within thelimit, were well providedfor. The officersand servants of a missionwere notto exceedone hundredmen, of whom only twenty might go to thecapital whilethe rest remained at theborder under the care and on theprovenance of thelocal authorities.A missioncoming by sea shouldnot consist of more thanthree ships, of one hundredmen each. On the way to the capitalthe missionreceived its keepand transportation,the latter being supplied by the men,horses, boats, and cartsof theimperial postal service; this was reallya serviceof transportand communicationmaintained in each provincefor im- perialuse by a systemof postal tallies. At thecapital the mission was lodged at theofficial Residence for Tributary Envoys-a collectionof hostelries- wherestatutory daily amounts of silver,rice, or fodderwere paid fromthe imperialtreasury for the maintenance of menand animals.When an envoy returnedto the frontierhe was escortedby a ceremonialusher. Both going and cominghe was accompaniedby troopswho combinedprotection with surveillance. In thecourt ceremonies there was an exchangeof courtesies.The tribute missionwas entertainedat banquets,not once but severaltimes, and ban- quetedalso in thepresence of theemperor, from whom they might receive tea or even delicaciesof the table.On theirpart the tributaryenvoys per- formedthe kotow. European participants were inclined to feelthat this cere- fnony more than made up for the imperial benevolence which filtereddown to themthrough the sticky hands of theirofficial supervisors. The kotowin principleis a knockingof thehead uponthe ground, in itselfan act of sur- render,but the fullkotow as performedat courtwas a good deal more.It consistedof threeseparate kneelings, each kneelingaccompanied by three separateprostrations, and thewhole performed at thestrident command of a lowly usher-"Kneel!", "Fall prostrate!","Rise to your knees!","Fall prostrate!",and so on. An envoywent through this calisthenic ceremony not once butmany times, since it was thechief means by whichhe repaidthe imperialboard and lodgingand his officialsupervisors were chargedto see thathe did it beforethe emperor with accomplished ease. It was therite above all otherswhich left no doubt,least of all in themind of theperformer, as to whowas thesuperior and who theinferior in status.Yet it shouldnot be for- gottenby egalitarianwesterners (who invariablydid forget)that the kotow CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 135 was merelya part of the universalorder of Confucianceremony which symbolizedall therelationships of life.The emperorperformed the kotow to Heaven and tohis parents,the highest officials of theempire performed it to the emperor,and friendsor dignitariesmight even performit mutuallyto eachother. From a tributeenvoy it was thereforeno morethan good manners. The tributeitself was no gain to the imperialcourt. It was supposedto consistof nativeproduce, a symbolicoffering of the fruitsof the tributary country."Things thatare not locallyproduced are not to be presented."" Rare and strangeitems might be includedin it, like the auspiciousgiraffes which were broughtfrom Africa in the early Ming period as unicorns (ch'i-lin),omens of good fortune,7but there was littlebenefit to theimperial treasuryin anythingthat a tributemission might bring. The value of the tributeobjects was certainlybalanced, if not out-weighed,by the imperial giftsto thevarious members of themission and to thevassal ruler.The ex- penseof a missionwas notinconsiderable, but the court was repaidin kudos. Tributewas ordinarilypresented at the timeof a greataudience at New Years, whenthe bureaucracy of all theempire paid reverenceto theSon of Heaven andwhen the dramatic submission of foreignlands could most effec- tivelyreinforce the imperialprestige within China proper.

WHAT MADE THE TRIBUTE SYSTEM WORK This bringsus to theinteresting question, what made the tributary system work?Why did missionsfrom neighboring states come to theChinese court year afteryear, century after century? Something more tangible than the imperialvirtue must lie behindthis impressiveand persistentinstitution. The questionis essentiallyone of motive.Without a constantincentive on bothsides, the system could never have functionedas it did. The motivationof the courtis not difficultto see. The rulerof China claimedthe mandate of Heaven to ruleall mankind.If the restof mankind did not acknowledgehis rule,how long could he expectChina to do -so? Tributehad prestigevalue in thegovernment of China,where prestige was an all-importanttool of government. More thanthis, the tributary system was a diplomaticmedium, the vehicle forChinese foreign relations. Whenever a new rulerascended the throne of a tributarystate, he was requiredby the regulationsto send an envoyto obtainan imperialmandate from the Chinese court. By imperialcommand he

Ibid., p. 171. I J.J. L. Duyvendak,"The truedates of theChinese maritime expeditions in theearly fifteenth century,"rTog pao,34 (1939), 341-412. 136 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY was thenappointed ruler of his country,and theimperial patent of appoint- mentwas givento his envoy; afterreceiving this document, the new ruler senta tributemission to ofer thanksfor the imperialfavor. In otherwords, his regimewas recognized.In the Far Easternscene thisrecognition, or perhapswe mightsay "investiture,"by theMiddle Kingdom was probably at timesquite comparable to recognitionin Europeby theconcert of powers. It mighthelp to establisha claimantupon his throne.A recognizedvassal mightappeal in timeof need forChinese help, as did the kingof Malacca afterhis oustingby the Portuguesein 1511. Chineseinfluence abroad was also exertedthrough personal contact with tributary rulers, wavho sometimes cameto court.In theancient period this had beena chiefform of submission; when the chieftainof the Hsiung-nuvisited the Han or when the kingof the Uigursor of Korea came to the Mongol court,they placed themselves literallyunder the imperial control. In laterperiods such activity grew rare, althoughseveral visits of kingsof Malacca and suchplaces are recordedin the Ming period,perhaps for the junket. Sometimes the heir-apparent of a tributarystate might appcar in a mission,an almostequally useful custom.

THE FUNCTIONS OF CHINESE ENVOYS Evenmore important was thetradition of sendingChinese envoys abroad. ChangCh'ienv, who was sentto the"XWestern Regions" in theyears 138-126 B.C. to gainfor the Han an allianceagainst the Hsiung-nu (Huns), is onlythe most famousof theseenvoys. Even beforethe timeof Chang Ch'ien, the firstemperor of the Han had sentLu Chia on an officialmission to Nan Yieh, the regionof C anton,and numerousenvoys were latersent to deal with theHsiung-nu of the northern steppe. Under the T'ang suchan emissary was called "an cnvoyto foreigncountries" (ju-fan shih); underthe Sung, "

TRIBUTE AS A DEFENSE MEASURE At differenttimes tribute served different purposes, and thesystem could be usedby Chinafor defense quite as muchas foraggression. Broadly speak- ing underthe Sung it appearsto have been used mainlyon the defensive, while underthe Mongols it servedfor expansion and underthe Ch'ing it promotedstability in foreignaffairs. In the firstof theseperiods, one of weakness,it has beensuggested that the suzerain-vassal relationship was an isolationistdevice, a meansof avoidingthe dangers inherent in foreignrela- tionson termsof equality.9In a sensethis is thesecret of thewhole system, thatoutsiders could have contactwith China onlyon China'sterms. These termswere in effectthat the outsider should acknowledge and enter into the Chinesescheme of thingsand just to thatextent become innocuous. So China triedto gainpolitical security from her accepted cultural superiority. Tribute was a firststep towardsinicizing the barbarianand so absorbinghim and apparentlythe dogmaof superioritywaxed whenChina grew weak. This interpretation,if supported by furtherresearch, may indicatethe perennial valueof theinstitution to theSon of Heaven. If tributehad thisobvious political value forthe Chinese court, what was its value to thebarbarian? Did thetributaries subscribe to theChinese view of theirposition, or is the whole greattradition partly an officialChinese myth,foisted with great consistency upon the emperor'ssubjects and later historians?When we findthat Lord Macartney,sent by GeorgeIII in 1793 to demandtrade concessions, is faithfullyenshrined in theChinese records as a tributaryenvoy, what are we to thinkof the precedingmillennia of so- called tributemissions? Why should an upstandingbarbarian come and kotow?The answeris partly,of course, that he hadlittle choice in thematter, being obliged eitherto accept the conditionsof the gargantuanMiddle Kingdomor stay away. But the unbrokencontinuity of tributaryrelations withChina arguesfor a strongand consistentmotivation on theforeigner's partas well as on thatof thecourt, and thismotivation seems clearly to lie in trade,so muchso thatthe whole institution,viewed fromabroad, appears to have been an ingeniousvehicle for commerce.

S Cf. Ta Ming chi-li,ch. 32, pp. 1-3, partiallytranslated in Fairbank and Teng, op. cit.,p. 146. 9 Cf. T. F. Tsiang, "China and European expansion," Politica,2 (Mar., 1936), 3-4. 138 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY

TRIBUTE AS A CLOAK FOR TRADE That tributewas a cloak fortrade has beenaxiomatic ever since merchants fromthe Roman orient reached Cattigara in 166A.D. claimingto be envoysof Marcus Aurelius.Testimony on thesubject abounds, particularly regarding the shamembassies of merchantson theCentral Asian caravanroutes. The Kansu governorreported in 1502 thatthere were morethan 150 self-styled rulers(wang) tradingwith China fromthe westernregions and theJesuit Benedictde Goez who crossedCentral Asia a centurylater in 1604 de- scribedhow thecaravan merchants "forge public letters in thenames of the kingswhom they profess to represent"and "underpretense of beingam- bassadorsgo and offertribute to the Emperor."10 So fundamentalwas thiscommerce that the regulations for tribute devote a whole sectionto it.1"Tribute missions arriving at the frontiernormally includedmerchants, either as privateindividuals or as agentsof thetributary ruler,who often monopolized the trade. They broughtwith them commercial goods whichthey were allowed to sell to the Chinese merchantsat the frontieremporium, or alternatively,they might at theirown expensebring thesegoods dutyfree in the trainof theenvoy to thecapital and sell them thereat a specialmarket set up at theResidence for Tributary Envoys. This marketlasted for three or fivedays, accordingto the regulationsof 1690, and was carefullysuperintended by officersof theBoard of Revenue.Trade outsideof theofficial market and tradein certaintypes of goods wereboth strictlyprohibited. The contrabandlist includedworks of history,imple- mentsof , saltpetre, and copper and iron-things which might weaken the defenseof therealm. Meanwhile for independent foreign merchants who did not come in the trainof an embassythere were emporiaon the frontier- suchas thosefor Korea on theManchurian frontier, and forthe western area nearChengtu and Lanchowwhere there were one or two marketsa year, each lastingtwenty days. These appearto havebeen similar to themarket set up inthe eighteenth century at Maimaichenfor the caravan trade with Russia. For themaritime nations the market was at Canton.Foreign merchant vessels were forbiddento carryaway contrabandgoods,- or Chinesepassengers, or riceand grain beyond the needs of theships. Exports in a tributevessel, how- ever,were exemptfrom customs duty. In theseterms the tributary system was madeto coverforeign trade, as well as diplomacy. This sketchis of courseonly a faintreflection of theplethora of rulesand regulationson thesubject of tributary trade. Considering their extent, and the 10 See Fairbankand Teng, op. cit.,p. 139. 11Ibid., pp. 167-70. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 139 extentof the trade, it seemsanomalous that foreign trade could be considered in Chinesetheory to be subordinateto tribute,but so it was. It was officially regardedas a boon grantedto the barbarian,the necessarymeans to his sharingin the bountyof China,and nothingmore. No doubtthis quixotic doctrinereflected the anticommercial nature of theChinese state, where the merchantwas low in the social scale and beneathboth the farmerand the bureaucratwho lived off the produce of the land. It was strengthenedperhaps by theself-sufficiency of the empire which made suppliesunnecessary from abroad.At all events,it was thetradition that foreign trade was an unworthy object for highpolicy, and this dogma was steadilyreiterated in official documentsdown intothe nineteenthcentury. Meanwhile foreign trade de- velopedand grewever largerwithin its ancienttributary framework.

TRIBUTE VERSUS CHINESE MARITIME TRADE This bringsus to a paradoxin thehistory of modernChina and one of the fundamentalreasons for the collapse of the Confucianstate. Trade and tributein the Confucianview were cognateaspects of a singlesystem of foreignrelations. The importantthing to therulers -of China was themoral value of tribute.The importantthing for the barbarianswas the material valueof trade.The rubcame when the foreign trade expanded and finallyin some cases eclipsedtribute entirely, without changing the officialmyth. Tributecontinued to dominateChinese official thought after trade had begun to predominatein the practiceof Chineseforeign relations. In the modem periodthe Confucianbureaucracy tried to treatthe new tradingnations of thewest as meretributaries. Naturally they failed, being incapable of chang- ing theirimmemorial theory to fita new situation.The paradoxin this tragedylies in thefact that the new situationto whichthe Chinese govern- mentcould not adjustitself had been createdlargely by themaritime trade of Chinesemerchants. Chira had been fortoo long a continentalempire, accustomedto relationsacross a land frontier.Her new maritimerelations caughther unpreparedand destroyedher ancientdefense, the tributary system. This thesisis franklyan interpretation,in some respects perhaps a truism, and yet one whichrequires careful examination. Having presented above a briefinterpretation and summaryof the tributarysystem and its working withoutany effortto explorethe bewildering minutiae of theregulations at variousperiods and the inevitableinconsistencies among them, let us now turnto thetrend of foreignrelations under the Ming and Ch'ing dynasties (1368-1911). 140 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY

THE CHENG HO EXPEDITIONS The highpoint of tributaryactivity in China came early in the Ming period.Between the years 1403 and 1433 sevenimperial expeditions were dispatchedinto the waters of southeastern Asia andthe Indian Ocean.12 They wereunder the general superintendence ofthe Cheng Ho andare said to haveincluded as manyas 60 vesselsand 27,000men at a tixre.Some forty states were includedin theirpoints of call and most of themsent back envoyswith the Chinese fleetsand becameenrolled as tributaries.These includedPahang, Kelantan, and Malacca on theMalay peninsula;Palembang (ancientSrivijaya), Samudra, Lambri (modern Achin), and Aru in Sumatra; Ceylon, Cochin,Chola, Calicut,and severalother places on the southern coastsof India; Barawaand Mogadishoon theSomali coast of Africa;Aden and Djofarin Arabia,and the ancientport of Hormuzon the PersianGulf. These distantplaces of Africaand Arabiawere visited but a fewtimes and by fewvessels, yet the fact remains that representatives of theChinese court touchedthere in the earlyfifteenth century, a generationbefore the Portu- guesecame into the Indian Ocean aroundthe Cape. A partyfrom one Chinese expeditioneven saw thesights of Mecca. To call theseChinese voyages spectacular is an understatement,but it is noteasy to comprehendtheir object or to understandthe reason for their completecessation after 143 3. ProfessorDuyvendak,'3 the closest student of theproblem,has pointedoutthatthey were the work of palace eunuchs, a group whose considerablepower dependedupon the imperialfavor, and thatthe flowof vassal envoysand rareobjects, "unicorns" (giraffes) and blackmen amongthem, was well calculatedto pleasethe imperial fancy. The cessation of the voyageswas dictated,he suggests,partly by theirexpense, which plainlymust have been considerable when one includesthe largesse bestowed uponprospective tributary rulers to win themover. No scholarhas as yet ventureda completeexplanation; the Chinese historian's tradition that they wentto seek out a vanishedclaimant to the thronedoes not give us much satisfaction.The suggestionnow seemsin order,that these official voyages cannothave been entirely unconnected with the private Chinese trade which we knowhad beenexpanding for some time into the waters of southeastern Asia. This commercialbackground deserves attention. We know,first of all, thattribute from this area did notbegin at thetime of ChengHo. "Java" (perhapsthen Sumatra) sent tribute as earlyas 132

12 Thesehave been studied particularly by Professors Pelliot and Duyvendak in a seriesof mono- graphsin P'oungpao, espec. vols. 30 and 34. 13 See J.J. L. Duyvendak,"The truedates ... ", op. cit.,395-99. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 141

A.D.14 A regularand extensivemaritime trade with China fromthe regions ofthe Indian Ocean hadbegun at leastas earlyas theT'ang period(618-906) underthe aegis of theArabs, and underthe Sung it had attainedvery con- siderableproportions. Mongol fleets had sweptthe seas of Javaand Malaya in the timeof Kubilai'5and by theend of thefourteenth century a number of statesin Malaya had becomeregular tributaries of the Ming. They in- cludedJava, (in Borneo),Pahang on theMalay peninsula,Palembang andSamudra on theisland of Sumatra,and evenChola fromthe Coromandel coast of Indiain 1372. It is patentthat Cheng Ho after1403 was following well knowncommercial paths. He was "exploring,"for the mostpart, the establishedsources of tradeand tributerather than terra incognita.

DECLINE OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN TRIBUTE The strikingfact is, however,that tribute from declined afterthe time of ChengHo, althoughtrade did not.This is mostsignificant. In theearly fifteenth century the official Ming listof tributariesfrom which tributemissions were received included Japan, the (Li-sung, i.e. Manila), Cambodia,Java, Pahang on the Malay peninsula,and Achinand Samudraon the islandof Sumatra.Later, underthe Ch'ing,none of these placeswas listedas tributary."6But in the 1818edition of theCh'ing Statutes thesevarious places, Japan, the Philippines,and the othersjust mentioned, were listedin a specialsection as "tradingcountries" (hu-shih chu-kuo), i.e. countriesthat traded with China butdid not sendtribute. Of coursethis is understandablein the cases of Japan,the Philippines,and Java (Batavia), wherethe Tokugawa sh6gunate, , and Holland respectivelycould not easilybe consideredtributary (although the Dutch had actuallysent tribute as recentlyas 1794). But this classificationis less logical in the case of the small places of Malaya. The full list of "tradingcountries" in 1818 was as follows: Chiang-k'ou(i.e. Siam), Cambodia,Yin-tai-ma (perhaps Chantebun?),Ligor, Jaya (Chiaya), Sungora, Patani, Trengganu, Tan-tan(?), Pahang,Johore, Achin (defined as thesame as Samudra,by error),Lu-sung (the Philippines),Mindanao, and Java (Batavia). Most of thesewere small

"-C. S. Gardnerin W. L. Langer,ed., An encyclopediaofworld history (Boston, 1940) p. 134. 1i W. W. Rockhill,"Notes on the relations and trade of China . . . ", T'oungpao15 (1914), 419- 47. "I The officialCh'ing lists published in thefive editions of theCollected Statutes between 1690 and 1899 includedonly Korea, Turfan,Liu-ch'iu, Holland, Annam, Siam, the countriesof the WesternOcean, Burma, Laos, andSulu, and not even all of theseat one time;these tributaries of theManchus were fewer in number,although it mustbe admittedthat they were more substantial politicalentities than were some of thesmall islands and out-of-the-way induced by ChengHo to becomevassals of theMing. 142 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY kingdomsunder petty sultans, similar to the statesof Pahang and Achin whichCheng Ho had enrolledas Ming tributaries.Whywere theynot now listedas vassalsof theCh'ing?

GROWTH OF CHINESE TRADE The answerplainly lies in thefact that it was no longerthey who came to Chinabut the Chinese who wentto them.Chinese trade with southeast Asia haddeveloped since the days of Cheng Ho to thepoint where the barbarians, or the Arab tradersof the region,no longercame to Cantonto obtainthe productsof theMiddle Kingdom. Instead, the great junk fleets of Amoyand Cantonnow carriedChinese produce into all partsof thearchipelago. The listof "tradingcountries" made out in 1818 reallyconstitutes a catalogueof theports of call on thetwo greatcoastal trading routes down the Malay pen- insulaand throughthe Philippines,respectively. Indeed it showsan almost one-to-onecorrespondence with a listof thetrading countries of theregion made by theBritish founder of Penangabout 1788: Siam,Chantebon, Chia, Sangora,Pattany, Ligore, Tringano, Pahang, Jahore, and othersincluding Acheen.'7 That Chinesejunks had long been the local carriersof Malayan trade hardlyseems to requiredocumentation, although it is a muchneglected sub- ject.The Portugueseat Malacca after1511 , theSpanish at Manilaafter 15 71, and the Dutch at Bataviaafter 1619 had all foundChinese traders much in evidence,and it is nottoo much to say thatthe early European trade in eastern Asia was actuallygrafted onto the junk trade which already flourished there inChinese hands. The Britishand French East Indiacompanies appear to have been well aware of thedesirability of tappingthis local commerce.Manila, indeed,lived upon it, the cargoesof the Acapulco galleonscoming not so muchfrom the Philippinesas fromthe vast storehouseof China, whither theSpanish themselves were not allowed to go.'8In shortit seemsincontest- able thatthe migration of theChinese into southeastern Asia whichhas been one of the significantphenomena of theninteenth and twentiethcenturies is merelythe laterphase of the Chinesecommercial expansion which began muchearlier. To this early maritimetrade it would seem thatthe tributarysystem had been on the whole successfullyapplied. The systemhad developedon the land for operationacross easily controllableland frontiers,and every

17Letter of Capt. Francis Light in jou rnal of Malayan branch of the R.A.S., 16,part I (July,1938), 123-26. 18 See W. L. Schurz,The Manilagalleon (New York,1939). CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 143 approachto Chinafrom the continental side had offered convenient points of controllike theJade Gate on thewest or Shanhaikuanon thenorth. Under theCh'ing the missions from Korea were requiredto entervia Fenghuang- ch'engand Shanhaikuan,those from Annam via P'ingyangor T'aip'ingfuin Kwangsi,and thosefrom Burma via Yungch'angor T'engyuehin Yunnan.19 Over maritimetributaries a similar control had beenestablished by requiring missionsfrom Liu-ch'iu to enteronly at Foochow,those from Sulu onlyat Amoy,and thosefrom Siam only at Canton; the Dutch were reprimanded forcoming to Fukieninstead of Kwangtung. The greatervolume of maritime tradehad led to thegrowth of foreigncommunities in theseaports like those of the Arabs at Zaytonand Canton,but thesecommunities had been kept undercontrol through their own headmenin theirown restrictedquarter, and tradingoperations had been supervisedby Chineseofficials. So long as theforeign traders came to thefrontier of China,whether by landor by sea, tributaryforms could be preservedand tributemissions could be sentto the capitaleither on the initiativeof acquisitivemerchants or rulersor at the instigationof theface-seeking Chinese bureaucracy.

CHINESE TRADE AND THE DECLINE OF TRIBUTE These observationsoffer some supportfor the hypothesisthat the first blow at theChinese tributary system was strucknot by theEuropeans who refusedto accepttributary status after 1500 butby theexpansion of Chinese tradeeven before that time. We knowin a generalway thatthe Arabs who had once dominatedtrade betweenChina and southeastAsia were sup- plantedby Chinesemerchants, that traders from the southeastby degrees no longercame to China,that the Chinesewent to them.As thisforeign- carriedtrade dried up, tribute probably dried up withit. If we lookat thegreat fifteenth-century voyages of Cheng Ho in thislight, perhapswe can regardthem as an effortto bringthe sourcesof Chinese maritimetrade back intothe formal structure of the tributarysystem so as to make the factsof foreigntrade square with the theorythat all places in contactwith China weretributary to her.Foreign places communicating by land, like Samarkand,Isfahan, Arabia, or the Kingdomof Rum in Asia Minor,were enrolled as tributariesof theMing althoughcontact must have been extremelytenuous (particularly after the Kingdomof Rum, for ex- ample,had ceased to exist). Was it notlogical to enrollsimilarly the places communicatingby sea? Mixed motivesnaturally must be assumed,but this desireto preservethe traditionalsystem may well have been one of them.

19 See Fairbankand Teng, op. cit.,pp. 174-76. 144 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY In anycase thetributary system gradually ceased to operateby sea although it continuedto do so by land. Fromthe firstit had been a passivesystem, theMiddle Kingdom waiting for the barbarians to approach,and it couldnot be maintainedwhen the Chinese were themselves active. By thebeginning of thenineteenth century its demisewas officiallyacknowledged in thecase of the "tradingcountries" of southeastAsia which tradedwithout sending tribute,and whichwere so recordedin theCollected Statutes of 1818.

THE TRIUMPH OF TRADE OVER TRIBUTE The predominanceof tradeover tributein the earlynineteenth century mayalso be evidentin thefact that the number of recordedtribute missions showed a decided increase.20 From 1662 to 1761 the total of recorded embassieswas about216. In thefollowing century from 1762 to 1861it was about 255. This increasemust be examinedas a possibleindex of greater commercialactivity taking the form of tributemissions. The statutoryfre- quencyof thesemissions was as follows:from Korea annually,Liu-ch'iu everytwo years,Annam every three, six, or fouryears (the regulations changed),Siam everythree years, Sulu everyfive years, Laos and Burma everyten years, Holland every eight and laterevery five years, the Western Ocean (Portugal,etc.) indefinite.How did thissquare with practice? With perhapsa coupleof exceptions,Korea senttribute every year steadily until 1874and so maybe leftout of account.Tribute from Liu-ch'iu was recorded in some 70 yearsout of the 144 yearsfrom 1662 through1805, that is, on theaverage almost exactly as requiredby statute.But in thenext 54 years from1806 to 1859,tribute from Liu-ch'iu instead of beingbiennial was re- corded45 times,on theaverage in fiveout of everysix years!This is doubly significantwhen we rememberthat the Liu-ch'iu islands, in themselvesun- important,served as an entrepotfor trade between Japan and Korea on the one handand Chinaon theother, in thisperiod before either Japan or Korea were open to foreigntrade. Tribute from Annam was recorded45 timesin the 200 yearsfrom 1662 to 1861,somewhat less thanan averageof one in fouryears, which agrees fairly well withthe shifting regulations for Annam. There was no significantincrease. Siam was recordedas sendingtribute only 11 timesin the 115 yearsfrom 1662 to 1776,an averageof aboutone year in teninstead of one in threeas requiredby statute.But in thenext 77 years from1777 through1853, Siamese missions were recorded38 times,on the averageevery other year, and halfagain as frequentlyas the regulations prescribed!Here againsignificance is addedby thefact that Siamese tribute 21 See ibid.,pp. 193-98,table 5. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 145 cameby sea alongthe main coastal route connecting Canton with southeast Asia and theStraits. Tribute from Burma came only 3 timesbefore 1788; fromthen until 1853 it came 13 times,an averageof once in fiveyears in- steadof once in tenyears as prescribed.Tribute from Laos came 17 times between 1730 and 1853, averagingsomewhat better than the statutory decade.Sulu is recordedonly 7 times,between 1726 and 1754 and may be leftout of account. Fromthese data the factstands out thattribute missions coming by sea, fromLiu-ch'iu and fromSiam, increased remarkably in the half century beginningabout 1800. They becamedecidedly more frequent than required by statuteand pendingfurther investigation we must suppose that their motivationwas commercial.I am not aware of politicalor othercircum- stanceslikely to have producedthe recorded increase of activity. As faras it goes, thisevidence lends strong support to the theorythat tributemissions functioned chiefly as a vehiclefor trade. Whether the com- mercialprofits were gained by thetributary rulers and theirmerchants or by Chinesemerchants and officialsremains to be investigated.At least in the case of Siam themissions came over a routedominated by theChinese junk trade.The arrivalof thistribute at the Chinesecourt was thereforean ill omen,a sign of the risingtide of maritimetrade conducted by Chinese merchants,with the help of whichthe merchants of thewest were aboutto burstthe dike of thetributary system and invade the Middle Kingdom. It is a fascinatingquestion whether the court was not,on thecontrary, lulled into a falsesense of securityby thisincreased barbarian submissiveness. Possibly thisprostitution of thetributary system for commercial ends served to con- firmthe Chinese idea ofsuperiority just when it was mosturgently necessary to get rid of it.

EUROPEANS AND THE TRIBUTARY SYSTEM The problemof the Europeansin the tributarysystem must be viewed againstthis larger background. Perhaps the mostamazing thing about the Europeanmenace is the factthat it was not at firstclearly recognized. In thelatter days of theMing, Matteo Ricci andhis Jesuit colleagues had inter- estedthe Confucian literati with maps of the world showing strange countries to thewest, and manyof Ricci's transliterationsof theseplace nameshave survivedin modernChinese usage. But thisnew knowledgepresented to Chinesescholarly circles in theperiod about 1600 did notsurvive long, or at least did not retainits significance,after the establishmentof the Manchu dynastyand it was generallydisregarded during the eighteenth century. This 146 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY is one of thepuzzles of Chineseintellectual history, and withoutventuring uponan explanationit maybe strikinglyillustrated.

CHINESE IGNORANCE OF EUROPEAN GEOGRAPHY The countriesof theWestern Ocean wereirretrievably confused with one anothereven in theofficial publications of theimperial government. From medievalEurope via theArabs had comethe term Fo-lang-chi, a translitera- tionfor Franks, the Europeans in theNear East at thetime of theCrusades. Whenthe Portuguese appeared by sea after1500 they were therefore identi- ficdas Fo-lang-chi,and thisterm was also appliedto theSpanish after their arrivalin thePhilippines; since Portugal was underSpanish rule from 1580 to 1640,this confusion was no doubtinescapable. The arrivalof theFrench createda furtherterminological enigma by the similarityof France and Franks.Time and again Fa-lan-hsi,Fo-lang-hsi, Fu-lang-hsi and similar transliterationsfor France were perspicaciously identified by Chineseschol- arswith Fo-lang-chi, the Portuguese-Spanish. Meanwhile the term Kan-ssu-la forCastilla, the Spanish, had also beenapplied to thePortuguese; and two tributemissions sent by the kingof Portugalin 1670 and 1727 had been recordedin officialworks as fromthe two separatecountries of Po-erh-tu- chia-li-yaand Po-erh-tu-ka-erh,respectively. But in themeantime the Jesuit missionariesin China had identifiedthemselves as comingfrom Italy, I-ta-li-ya,and yet by theiruse of thePortuguese settlement at Macao as a portof entrythey had becomeassociated with Portugal. Consequently as lateas 1844the name I-ta-li-ya was beingapplied to thePortuguese at Macao, andwhen a genuineItalian turned up in 1848his countryhad to be identified as I-ta-li,an entirelynew and separatecountry from I-ta-li-ya. There were also otherways of referringto Portugalin additionto the fivejust men- tioned.It wouldhave taken a strongmind to identifyFo-lang-chi, Kan-ssu-Ia, Po-erh-tu-chia-li-ya,Po-erh-tu-ka-erh, and I-ta-li-yaas all referringto the same smallwestern country. Confusionwas not confinedto thebooks. Just as Chinese,Japanese, and Koreanslook muchthe same to thewestern man in thestreet, so thewest- ernersin Chinaas in Japanwere indistinguishable in their common outland- ishness.The colloquialterm Hung-mao-fan, "Red-haired barbarians (or for- eigners),"was appliedto boththe Dutch and theEnglish, whose blue eyes, redcomplexions, beak noses,and tawnyhair made them all indiscriminately exotic. Since Ricci's map of the world had not gainedacceptance, the native 21 See sourcescited in ibid.,232-33. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 147 habitatof theseEuropeans remained shadowy. They all arrivedby sea from thesouthwest and theCollected Statutes of 1818 thereforeopined that their locationwas "in the southwesternsea," thesame as Siam,Sungora, Ligor, Patani,Johore and way stationson the routeto the Straits.One of the Portugals(Kan-ssu-la, Castilla), however,was in the northwesternsea, as werealso Swedenand Denmark.The exactlocation of theWestern Ocean (Hsi-yang)was a bithazy, since the term had originallybeen applied to the waterswest of Borneoand into the IndianOcean on the ancientwestern traderoute. This wentdown the Indo-Chinese-Malayancoast and was dis- tinguishedfrom the easternroute throughthe Philippinesand Moluccas. When the earlyEuropeans used the termWestern Ocean to referto the Atlanticit was not illogicallyobjected that the WesternOcean, as known to theChinese, had beensailed through from end to end by theexpeditions underCheng Ho withoutanyone noting a traceof Europe.A compromise was finallyworked out by referringto theIndian Ocean as theLittle West- ern Ocean, Hsiao-hsi-yang,while the Atlanticbecame the Great Western Ocean, Ta-hsi-yang.Ta-hsi-yang, incidentally, was anotherof thenames of Portugal22 The relationsbetween these miniscule kingdoms in thewestern sea were naturallydifficult to keep straight,particularly when they were not too permanentin actual factand were differentlydescribed by the patriotic membersof each nationalitywhen theyvisited Chinese ports. An official workcompiled in the1750's under the direction of thehighest officials of the empire,for example, in describingthe variousbarbarians illustrated in its pages made thesestatements: that Sweden and Englandwere dependencies of Holland; thatSweden Gui) and England(Ying-chi-li) were shortened namesfor Holland (Ho-lan); thatFrance was the same as Portugal;that I-ta-li-ya(instead of Holland) had presentedtribute in 1667, and thatthe himselfcame to do so in 1725. These deviationsfrom truth seem to representthe average degree of errorin theminds of Chineseofficials of the period. How long this confusionpersisted was strikinglyshown by the ImperialCommissioner Ch'i-ying in Novemberif 1844 just afterhe had negotiatedthe treaties,with Britain, the UnitedStates, and France which openedChina to the west. No one in China shouldhave been betterin- formedthen he aboutthe barbarians. He explainedto theemperor that France (Fo-lan-hsi)was thesame as theFo-lang-chi (Portugal) of theMing period;

22 Ibid., pp. 187, 232. For a pertinentdiscussion of the reasons for the failureof Ricci's map to gain acceptance see Kenneth Ch'en, "Matteo Ricci's contributionto and influenceon geographical knowledge in China," JAOS, 59 (Sept., 1939), 325-59,especially pp. 347 et seq. 148 THE FAR EASTERN QUARTERLY thatunder the influence of MatteoRicci, the great Jesuit the French had been inducedto give up Macao to the Portuguese,even thoughFrance was ten timesas strong.23France, of course, had never held Macao. This wholecock- and-bullstory probably illustrates the Paul Bunyanquality taken on by the legendof MatteoRicci, who had alreadybecome the tutelary deity of clocks (li-ma-tou p'u-sa).

UNPREPAREDNESS FOR THE WESTERN The vaguenessof theConfucian mind regarding the West was no doubta productof lack of interestand lack of contactcombined with distaste. Out- land merchantson the fringeof the empirewere heardof morethan seen, printedsources of informationregarding them were fewand out of date; as merchantsthey were beneathattention, and as barbarianswith powerful armsthey were pleasant to forgetabout entirely. The Westernersin China had neverbeen manyand in the eighteenthcentury they were effectively quarantined.The decadentpart-half-caste community of Macao remained walledoff on itspeninsula, the "Thirteen Factories" at Cantonwere outside the citywalls, from which foreigners were excluded.After the early eight- eenthcentury foreign trade was not allowed at otherports. Moreover the tradingcommunity at Cantonwas not only quarantinedbut insulated.All foreignintercourse with the Chineseauthorities was mediatedthrough the officialtrading monopolists, the hong merchants, and theswarm of linguists, compradores,and shroffswho specializedwith them in theconduct of bar- barianrelations. This specialclass of functionarieswas not a literateclass, and it intervenedbetween the foreigners and thescholar-bureaucrats of the imperialadministration. There was thereforeno one in a positionto write intelligiblyabout the west. In fact,the use of pidginEnglish as the chief mediumfor exchange of ideas madeit ratherdifficult, so to speak,to makee any China-mansavvy. The Europeantribute embassies which penetrated the veil of Chinese exclusivenesswere relativelyfew and farbetween. After the firstabortive Portugueseembassy of 1520-21 therewere onlyabout seventeen Western missions,so faras we now know,which got as faras an audiencewith the emperor.24They all occurredin theyears between 1655 and 1795,and six of themwere fromRussia, an Asiaticpower in a somewhatdifferent cate- gory fromthe maritimeWest. There were fourfrom Portugal, after the firstone; three(or perhapsfour) from Holland; threefrom the Papacy; and

23Ibid., pp. 189-90. 24 Ibid., pp. 188-89, table. CHINA'S RELATIONS WITH THE WEST 149 one fromBritain under Macartney in 1793. All butthe last appearto have performedthe kotow. (The secondBritish ambassador, Lord Amherst,in 1816 failedto obtainaudience.) Of thesevarious embassies only fouroc- curredafter 1727 and the last one, thatof the Dutch in 1795, fitperfectly intothe traditional tributary system.25 The establishedorder was not chal- lengedby thiscontact. The only otherwestern contact aside fromtrade was thatof theJesuit missionaries,but after1725 theirdefeat in the ritescontroversy and the imperialdenial of papalclaims had madethem impotent at court,long before theirdissolution in Europein 1773. The Lazaristswho succeededthem at Pekingin the late eighteenth century were not influential and the few Catholic priestswho perseveredin theprovinces reached only a smallgroup.

SUMMARY In thisway theChinese state of theearly nineteenth century was leftin- tellectuallyunprepared against the commercialinvasion from the West. First,Chinese nativetrade had expandedinto southeasternAsia and the tributarysystem had notmanaged to keepup withit. Thereuponcommerce fromthe West had begunto flowinto these channels of nativetrade; the re- sultingincrease of commercialactivity in theFar East had led to an increase after1750 in thesending of tributarymissions to China.Thus thenew west- erntrade with Asia indirectlystimulated the old-style tributary activity of countrieslike Liu-ch'iuand Siam, and this strengtheningof the ancient tributaryforms, through which foreign contact continued to be mediated, leftthe scholar-officialsof China intellectuallyblind to theirdanger. This interpretationdeserves active testingamong the voluminoussources now available.26

25 This Dutch embassy has been carefully studied by Prof. Duyvendak, "The last Dutch em- bassy . . . ", T'oung pao, 34 (1938), 1-137, 223-27; 35 (1940), 329-53. 26 See Fairbank and Teng, op. cit., pp. 206-19 for a list of some 35 Ch'ing works on maritime relationswhich await furtherstudy.