Ambassadors from the Island of Immortals: China-Japan Relations in the Han-Tang Period

10. The Multipolar Nature of the International System in Asia

10 The Multipolar Nature of the International System in Asia Chinese rulers saw the whole world as coming under their jurisdiction . “Under the wide heaven,” one Chinese saying goes, “all is the King’s land. Within the sea-boundaries of the land, all are the King’s servants .”1 This world was unipolar, with China at the center and the neighboring countries at the peripheries. When they wanted to contact China, they did so by entering the tributary system of the Middle Kingdom. The Tributary System Reassessed Originating during the Western Zhou dynasty (eleventh century–771 b.c.), the tributary system institutionalized relations between the Zhou king and his Chinese and foreign subjects. Geographic distance between a subject and the Zhou king defined the relations between them. A subject was put in one of five classes in a graded system of “five submissions” (wufu),2 in which each classification stipulated the appropriate symbolic actions he had to perform in order to acknowledge his political subordination to the crown and to fulfill economic obligations to the Zhou court. He or his ambassador was required to visit the court on a regular basis at specified time intervals.3 He was to offer local products in a given amount and of certain types as tribute to the Zhou king. Through the bestowal by the Zhou and acceptance on his part of Chinese civil and military titles and royal seals, a sovereign-vassal relationship was established between the involved parties, which required the vassal to respond promptly to instructions from the Zhou court. The court in return would grant the vassal moral and military support at his request.4 Many traditional Chinese scholars regarded foreign countries as negligible to China. They paid attention to these countries only when their rulers or ambassadors glorified China by “paying tribute” to the Son of Heaven. In their works, the centrality of China in the tributary system was axiomatic. A court visit by a foreign ruler or his ambassador was perceived as a token of conformity to the Chinese world order and a public acknowledgment of subordination to the Son of Heaven. The Chinese wishfully and universally described the purpose of many foreign missions as “coming to pay tribute” (laichao),5 “asking to become (China’s) subject” (qingli),6 or “returning to tribute-offering status” (guixian).7 The Chinese primary sources compiled by these scholars are the basis on which a rich body of modern scholarship on the diplomatic history of China has developed.8 Among them, works by Japanese scholars deserve attention. Some examine the relations among China, Japan, Koguryô, Silla, and Paekche in terms of an “oriental history.”9 They treat these “oriental” countries and the relations among them as one entity because they shared similarities in political institutions, culture, and economy. They consider the history of China’s external relations as a process in which Chinese culture spread to the world outside China, and China’s neighbors responded to that cultural expansion. They compare this process to the formation of a concentric circle, with China proper at the center, annexing its neighbors or bringing them to varying degrees into the Chinese political orbit through tributary arrangements. As a theoretical framework, “oriental history” is both credible and helpful in terms of its treatment of the aforementioned guiding principles of China’s diplomacy. This framework is also a welcome departure from the Europe-centered research methods popular with many latenineteenth -century Japanese historians.10 Other Japanese historians use the “investiture system” (sakuhò taisei) to study the diplomatic history of East Asian countries. Similar to the “oriental history” approach, the investiture theory emphasizes the homogeneity of East Asian countries. This homogeneity is evident in that they shared a culture based on the Chinese written language, they patronized Buddhism and Confucianism, they built economic ties with each other through tributary arrangements, and they all had a Chinese-style statute and code system. They thus formed a “historical civilization zone” or an “East Asian world.”11 Countries in the “East Asian world” used the “investiture system” as a general medium for conducting diplomacy. Through the bestowal and acceptance of Chinese titles, this system created a political hierarchy between China and its neighbors12 that was an extension of the Chinese domestic social order, known as the “status system.”13 Focusing on the bestowal and acceptance of Chinese titles, the THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM IN ASIA : 217 investiture theory is more...