Age of Emperors: Divisible Imperial Authority and the Formation of a "Liao World Order" in Continental East Asia, 900–1250

Introduction

This article investigates the formation of a "Liao world order," which brought about crucial changes in East Asian political elites' understanding of the nature of rulership at various imperial courts, and defined the basic pattern of interstate relationships in continental East Asia between the tenth and thirteenth centuries. I argue that the interstate system in question was distinct from those of other periods and characterized by an unprecedented mutual acknowledgement of imperial authority amongst contending states, which did not come to an end until the Mongol conquest. I contend that it was Liao 遼 (907–1125), ¹ a regime founded in the steppe, rather than its north China-based counterparts, which played a determinant role in shaping this new form of interstate interaction. This article examines this Liao-defined interstate order through a case study of the relationship between Liao and the Later Jin 後 晉 (936–946) regime in north China between 936 and 942. This will provide a new basis for understanding the dynamic nature of the multistate system and imperial sovereignty in East Asia, as well as their interactive relationship.

The period between the fall of the Tang Empire in 907 and the Mongol conquest of continental Eastern Eurasia in the thirteenth century witnessed an enduring multistate system. Scholars normally see this historical period as exceptional, in that "diplomatic parity defined the relations between China and other states," and China as they defined it ² could not impose its sinocentric system on foreign regimes. ³ Among these regimes, the Song has indubitably received much more scholarly attention than the others. Scholars tend to believe that its acknowledgement of northern neighbors such as Liao as equals was a clear indication of China's capability to conduct realistic and flexible diplomacy with geopolitical rivals. ⁴

However, the scholarship concerning interstate relationships from the tenth to the thirteenth century remains problematic. Although scholars have recognized that interstate interactions in this period were exceptional, what made them exceptional has normally been misunderstood. In fact, conceptions of hierarchy—between an overlord and his vassal monarchs, which was sometimes accompanied by fictive familial relationships—existed alongside diplomatic parity in interstate interactions between the tenth and thirteenth centuries, as in any other period. Therefore "equality" cannot be taken as one of the defining factors of the period's interstate relationships. ⁵ Instead, I contend that what defined interstate interactions between the tenth and thirteenth centuries was an entirely new understanding of East Asian imperial authority. Multiple claimants to the imperial position came to perceive their imperial sovereignty as well as related imperial designations, which in previous times had been conceived as absolutely indivisible in nature and exclusive to one monarch, as being divisible and shareable among contenders. A new type of diplomatic interaction emerged, characterized by the mutual acknowledgement of imperial authority amongst multiple claimants to the throne.

Furthermore, I argue that Liao was critical to the formation of this new perception of imperial sovereignty and the emergence of related new diplomatic patterns. In recent decades, the importance of Liao in the interstate network from the tenth to the eleventh century has received more attention. For instance, Naomi Standen's works demonstrate that Liao was actively involved in political struggles between its southern neighbors that emerged from the Tang Empire's carcass in the tenth century. They underscore the central place of Liao in Northeast Asian interstate interactions and in transforming the post-Tang world, including perceptions of borders and loyalty. ⁶ Mori Eisuke 毛利英介 has pointed out the key role of Liao as the mediator behind negotiations between Northern Song and Xi Xia 西夏 (1038–1227), ⁷ and emphasizes the overlordship of Liao, rather than Northern Song, over Goryeo 高麗 (918–1392), ⁸ underscoring Liao as the dominant force in a multistate system. Nicolas Tackett has recently analyzed the new diplomatic practices developed in the East Asian interstate system after 1005, and shows the impact of Song-Liao diplomatic interactions and Liao internal ethnic divisions on the emergence of a sense of Chinese identity among Song literati...