30
STEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.
The English neglect is of special interest and not without significance, for although the document was written by Hung Hsiu-ch'uan, and was translated by Wade, yet it did not occasion even a minimal formal acknowledgment of receipt, either from Elgin, to whom it was addressed, or verbally from Wade during his visit in Nanking.
This document reveals significant information which should not have been so lightly dismissed by the English diplomats. Most importantly it was addressed to Elgin in polite Chinese fashion (though Ch'ing or traditional officialdom could never have been so polite) as 'Imperial Commissioner of a Superior Nation' shang-kuo ch’in-ch'ai ta-ch'en,30 Thus it signified a marked tendency of the Taipings in this period to emphasize the equality of other nations with Taiping China. The tone of writing is throughout conciliatory, and refers to foreigners as brethren in distinctly friendly terms. Taiping ministers, in it, were enjoined to entertain foreigners with ceremony. And while the adjective "younger" was also used with the term "brethren" this need not have implied inequality in an international sense. This is because Hung was giving in this document a religious lecture to foreigners as individuals. His special role as religious leader permitted him, by his reckoning, to use this mode of address in speaking to others. There were no pretensions to universal supremacy, nor was there any mention of foreigners bringing tribute. The document really marked a new and significant stage in Taiping foreign relations. However, as the English neglected even a courteous acknowledgment of the document, so they never bothered distinguishing important and necessary distinctions in it. Instead, subsequent writers have rested content with prejudicial interpretations of its "fanatical" religious content. Wade could not forebear remarking upon its "very small literary pretension and indifferent handwriting."31
At every point of personal contact between the English and Taipings on this trip, the latter never failed to exhibit a spirit of cooperative accommodation and outright friendliness to the English. No place in the record is there a word to contradict this, even from the obviously prejudiced Wade himself. And Elgin was sensitive to such things. Earlier he had written that he always made a point to ask persons who had penetrated the
30
STEPHEN UHALLEY, JR.
The English neglect is of special interest and not without signi- ficance, for although the document was written by Hung Hsiu- ch'uan, and was translated by Wade, yet it did not occasion even a minimal formal acknowledgment of receipt, either from Elgin, to whom it was addressed, or verbally from Wade during his visit in Nanking.
This document reveals significant information which should not have been so lightly dismissed by the English diplomats. Most importantly it was addressed to Elgin in polite Chinese fashion (though Ch'ing or traditional officialdom could never have been so polite) as 'Imperial Commissioner of a Superior Nation' shang-kuo ch’in-ch'ai ta-ch'en,30 Thus it signified a marked tendency of the Taipings in this period to emphasize the equality of other nations with Taiping China. The tone of writing is throughout conciliatory, and refers to foreigners as brethren in distinctly friendly terms. Taiping ministers, in it, were enjoined to entertain foreigners with ceremony. And while the adjective "younger" was also used with the term "brethren" this need not have implied inequality in an international sense. This is because Hung was giving in this document a religious lecture to foreigners as individuals. His special role as religious leader permitted him, by his reckoning, to use this mode of address in speaking to others. There were no pretensions to universal supremacy, nor was there any mention of foreigners bringing tribute. The document really marked a new and significant stage in Taiping foreign relations. However, as the English neglected even a courteous acknowledg- ment of the document, so they never bothered distinguishing important and necessary distinctions in it. Instead, subsequent writers have rested content with prejudicial interpretations of its "fanatical" religious content. Wade could not forebear remarking upon its "very small literary pretention and indifferent hand- writing."31
At every point of personal contact between the English and Taipings on this trip, the latter never failed to exhibit a spirit of cooperative accommodation and outright friendliness to the English. No place in the record is there a word to contradict this, even from the obviously prejudiced Wade himself. And Elgin was sensitive to such things. Earlier he had written that he always made a point to ask persons who had penetrated the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.