A critique of Chinese diplomatic modernization narratives: reinterpreting shifts in Qing foreign affairs institutions in the early 1860s from the Qing perspective

IF 1.7 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Kazumasa Hayamaru
{"title":"A critique of Chinese diplomatic modernization narratives: reinterpreting shifts in Qing foreign affairs institutions in the early 1860s from the Qing perspective","authors":"Kazumasa Hayamaru","doi":"10.1093/irap/lcab022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Scholars have long read the shifts in late Qing China’s institutional framework for diplomatic interactions through a lens derived from the Western European diplomatic paradigm. However, such a methodology fails to accommodate the autochthonous perspective of the Qing bureaucrats who initiated these shifts in the first place. Drawing upon two case studies from the 1860s, the Zongli Yamen and the proposed Superintendent of Trade for the Yangzi, this article attempts to understand the motivations and priorities of the Qing in establishing new frameworks for diplomatic interactions in this period. The article argues that, for the Qing, it was not the establishment and the efficacy of these new institutions that was important. What mattered to them in this period was how these new institutions could eventually be abolished and an older, idealized form of practice reinstated in their place.","PeriodicalId":51799,"journal":{"name":"International Relations of the Asia-Pacific","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations of the Asia-Pacific","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcab022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Scholars have long read the shifts in late Qing China’s institutional framework for diplomatic interactions through a lens derived from the Western European diplomatic paradigm. However, such a methodology fails to accommodate the autochthonous perspective of the Qing bureaucrats who initiated these shifts in the first place. Drawing upon two case studies from the 1860s, the Zongli Yamen and the proposed Superintendent of Trade for the Yangzi, this article attempts to understand the motivations and priorities of the Qing in establishing new frameworks for diplomatic interactions in this period. The article argues that, for the Qing, it was not the establishment and the efficacy of these new institutions that was important. What mattered to them in this period was how these new institutions could eventually be abolished and an older, idealized form of practice reinstated in their place.
中国外交现代化叙事批判——从清代视角解读19世纪60年代初清外交体制的变迁
长期以来,学者们一直通过西欧外交范式的视角来解读晚清中国外交互动制度框架的变化。然而,这种方法论未能适应最初发起这些转变的清朝官僚的本土视角。通过19世纪60年代的两个案例研究,即宗理衙门和拟议中的长江通商督抚,本文试图了解清朝在这一时期建立外交互动新框架的动机和优先事项。文章认为,对清朝来说,重要的不是这些新机构的建立和效力。在这一时期,对他们来说重要的是,这些新制度最终如何被废除,一种更古老、更理想化的实践形式如何在它们的位置上恢复。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific is an exciting journal that addresses the major issues and developments taking place in the Asia-Pacific. It provides frontier knowledge of and fresh insights into the Asia-Pacific. The journal is a meeting place where various issues are debated from refreshingly diverging angles, backed up by rigorous scholarship. The journal is open to all methodological approaches and schools of thought, and to ideas that are expressed in plain and clear language.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信