帝国主义的工具还是国际法的来源?近代早期和东南亚殖民地的条约和外交关系

IF 0.5 Q1 HISTORY
History Compass Pub Date : 2023-11-27 DOI:10.1111/hic3.12793
Stefan Eklöf Amirell
{"title":"帝国主义的工具还是国际法的来源?近代早期和东南亚殖民地的条约和外交关系","authors":"Stefan Eklöf Amirell","doi":"10.1111/hic3.12793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The history of treaty-making, diplomacy, and international law has traditionally been written from Eurocentric perspectives, but since the middle of the 20th century, Southeast Asia has attracted relatively much attention because of the region's importance for the 17th-century Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius. More recently, however, the interest in Southeast Asia's role in the history of international law and diplomacy in the early modern period has become more oriented toward understanding the dynamics of international relations and cross-cultural diplomacy in Southeast Asia itself, rather than focusing on the region's role in European legal and intellectual history. The prolific treaty-making and other diplomatic activities of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) during the 17th and 18th centuries have been the object of several studies, highlighting how the company adopted Asian practices of statecraft and at times functioned as a traditional ruler, tributary or stranger-king, rather than as an omnipotent colonial power. Moreover, several recent studies have expanded the study of diplomacy and treaty-making in Southeast Asia to imperial powers other than the VOC and into the 19th century. With regard to the practice of treaty-making during the colonial era, three main themes in the current state-of-the-art are identified: 1) Southeast Asian and inter-cultural perspectives on treaties and treaty-making; 2) the question of mutual consent or coercion and violence in treaty-making; and 3) discrepancies between Asian and European treaty texts and biases in printed and digitised compilations of treaties.</p>","PeriodicalId":46376,"journal":{"name":"History Compass","volume":"21 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12793","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tools of imperialism or sources of international law? Treaties and diplomatic relations in early modern and colonial Southeast Asia\",\"authors\":\"Stefan Eklöf Amirell\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hic3.12793\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The history of treaty-making, diplomacy, and international law has traditionally been written from Eurocentric perspectives, but since the middle of the 20th century, Southeast Asia has attracted relatively much attention because of the region's importance for the 17th-century Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius. More recently, however, the interest in Southeast Asia's role in the history of international law and diplomacy in the early modern period has become more oriented toward understanding the dynamics of international relations and cross-cultural diplomacy in Southeast Asia itself, rather than focusing on the region's role in European legal and intellectual history. The prolific treaty-making and other diplomatic activities of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) during the 17th and 18th centuries have been the object of several studies, highlighting how the company adopted Asian practices of statecraft and at times functioned as a traditional ruler, tributary or stranger-king, rather than as an omnipotent colonial power. Moreover, several recent studies have expanded the study of diplomacy and treaty-making in Southeast Asia to imperial powers other than the VOC and into the 19th century. With regard to the practice of treaty-making during the colonial era, three main themes in the current state-of-the-art are identified: 1) Southeast Asian and inter-cultural perspectives on treaties and treaty-making; 2) the question of mutual consent or coercion and violence in treaty-making; and 3) discrepancies between Asian and European treaty texts and biases in printed and digitised compilations of treaties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History Compass\",\"volume\":\"21 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12793\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History Compass\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12793\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12793","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统上,条约制定、外交和国际法的历史都是从欧洲中心的角度来写的,但自20世纪中叶以来,东南亚吸引了相对较多的关注,因为该地区对17世纪荷兰法学家雨果·格劳修斯(Hugo Grotius)来说很重要。然而,最近,对东南亚在近代早期国际法和外交史上的作用的兴趣已经变得更加倾向于理解东南亚本身的国际关系和跨文化外交的动态,而不是专注于该地区在欧洲法律和思想史上的作用。荷兰东印度公司(VOC)在17世纪和18世纪多产的条约制定和其他外交活动一直是一些研究的对象,突出了该公司如何采用亚洲的治国之道,有时作为传统的统治者,朝贡或陌生的国王,而不是作为一个无所不能的殖民大国。此外,最近的几项研究将东南亚的外交和条约制定的研究扩展到了19世纪,而不是VOC。关于殖民时期条约制定的实践,确定了当前最先进的三个主题:1)条约和条约制定的东南亚和跨文化视角;(二)订立条约时的相互同意或强制和暴力问题;3)亚洲和欧洲条约文本之间的差异以及条约印刷和数字化汇编中的偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tools of imperialism or sources of international law? Treaties and diplomatic relations in early modern and colonial Southeast Asia

The history of treaty-making, diplomacy, and international law has traditionally been written from Eurocentric perspectives, but since the middle of the 20th century, Southeast Asia has attracted relatively much attention because of the region's importance for the 17th-century Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius. More recently, however, the interest in Southeast Asia's role in the history of international law and diplomacy in the early modern period has become more oriented toward understanding the dynamics of international relations and cross-cultural diplomacy in Southeast Asia itself, rather than focusing on the region's role in European legal and intellectual history. The prolific treaty-making and other diplomatic activities of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) during the 17th and 18th centuries have been the object of several studies, highlighting how the company adopted Asian practices of statecraft and at times functioned as a traditional ruler, tributary or stranger-king, rather than as an omnipotent colonial power. Moreover, several recent studies have expanded the study of diplomacy and treaty-making in Southeast Asia to imperial powers other than the VOC and into the 19th century. With regard to the practice of treaty-making during the colonial era, three main themes in the current state-of-the-art are identified: 1) Southeast Asian and inter-cultural perspectives on treaties and treaty-making; 2) the question of mutual consent or coercion and violence in treaty-making; and 3) discrepancies between Asian and European treaty texts and biases in printed and digitised compilations of treaties.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
History Compass
History Compass HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
×
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