[
    {
        "id": 207372,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1975",
        "page_number": 140,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "132\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\nbecame American citizens,93 Meiji Japan held similar views and pursued similar policies. In short, China's response to the basic problems of employing foreign military men, although tinged with specific characteristics of Chinese political culture such as a special emphasis on personalistic relations, was reasonably enlightened, and not fundamentally different from that of other countries, Asian or Western.95\n\nChina's attempt to build a modern, Western-trained officer corps in the T'ung-chih period did not fail because the foreigners she employed refused to become Chinese subjects or to accept Chinese culture. It failed primarily because the Chinese did not use foreign military assistance in a systematic and sustained way, as did, for example, Meiji Japan. Plagued by continual foreign meddling, and unwilling to fundamentally restructure the existing military establishment with its carefully devised system of checks and balances, the weak Ch'ing government neglected to sponsor meaningful, centralized military reform, dooming itself to defeat at the hands of the Japanese in 1894-95.97\n\nNOTES\n\n1 See, for example, Edward Schafer, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1963), esp. p. 49, 291 note 75; Henry Serruys, \"Were the Ming against the Mongols settling in North China?,\" Oriens Extremus, 6 (1959), 136ff; etc.\n\n2 For the employment of foreigners under these circumstances, consult Wolfram Eberhard, Conquerors and Rulers (Leiden, 1965); Lei Hai-tsung, Chung-kuo wen-hua yû Chung-kuo ti ping [Chinese Culture and the Chinese Military] (Ch'ang-sha, 1940); Michael Loewe, Imperial China (New York, 1969), 182.\n\n3 Kuwabara Jitsuzo, “On P'u Shou-keng,” Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, 7 (1935), 44-45; also Su Ch'ing-pin, (Liang Han ch'i Wu-tai ju-chi Chung-kuo chih fan shih-tsu yen-chiu) [Research on barbarian families residing in China during the period from the Han to the Five Dynasties] (Hong Kong, 1967), 2; Wai-ming George Yuan, \"Ko Son-ji (Kao Hsien-chih): A Korean in the Chinese Military Service,” Asea Yongu, 13.3 (1970), 160.\n\n4 See the forward to this work in Li Te-yü's collected writings, Li Wei-kung hui-ch'ang i-pin chih [The collected works of Li Te-yu] (Shanghai, 1937), chüan 2, 10-11 (consecutive pagination). The book is listed in the sections on literature in the T'ang-shu (2:20) and the Sung-shih (2:19a). All references to the dynastic histories are to the po-na edition.\n\n5 I have discussed these challenges and their implications in a forthcoming study entitled . (University of California Press).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207374,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1975",
        "page_number": 142,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "134\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\n15 Cited in Mary Ferenczy, \"Chinese Historiographers' Views on Barbarian-Chinese Relations (14-16th C.), Acta Orientalia, 21.3 (1968), 356-357.\n\n16 See Su Ch'ing-pin, 1-2, 596-597. As might be expected, the vocabulary of submission was highly refined, and often connected with the idea of return (kuei): Some common terms included: \"[to come to] adhere to China' (nei-fu); “return and submit” (kuei-fu or kuei-chiang); “return to loyalty\" (kuei-chung); “turn toward [Chinese] civilization” (hsiang-hua), etc. Related terms referring to specific values included \"return to sincerity\" (kuei-ch'eng), \"return to right behavior\" (kuei-i) and “return to virtue\" (kuei-te). For the use of these various expressions in the context of employing foreigners in military affairs, consult Li Te-yü, chüan 2, 8, 10-11; chüan 5, 31, 34; chüan 7, 56-57; chüan 8, 59, 60-61; chüan 13, 101-103, 104, 108-109; chüan 14, 117; chüan 19, 159-160. See also Michael Loewe, \"Chinese Relations with Central Asian, 260-90,\" in the Bulletin of the London School of Oriental and African Studies, 32 (1969), 100.\n\n17 For a discussion of the circumstances under which a foreigner might gravitate to China, see Su Ch'ing-pin, 1-3 and especially 596-597; also Ch'u Tung-tsu, Han Social Structure (Seattle and London, 1972), 138-139; L. S. Yang, \"Hostages in Chinese History,\" Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 15 (1952), 512; Wang Yi-t'ung, \"Slaves and Other Comparable Social Groups during the Northern Dynasties (386-618),\" HJAS, 16 (1953), 295; Yu Ying-shih, Trade and Expansion in Han China (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967); Colin Mackerras, trans., The Uighur Empire (Columbia, S.C., 1972) and the numerous works by Henry Serruys in HJAS 17 (1954) and 22 (December, 1957), Oriens Extremus 6 (1959) and 8 (1961), Monumenta Serica 25 (1966), etc.\n\n18 See the informative discussion of Chinese stereotypes regarding barbarians in Earl Swisher, China's Management of the American Barbarians (New Haven, 1951), 43-53.\n\n19 Cited in Yang, \"Historical Notes,\" 28.\n\n20 Ibid., 28-29.\n\n21 Ibid., 31.\n\n22 Ch'ien and Goodrich, 8. \"Before the Yuan, people of the Western Regions who served as officials in China were mostly military men; very few distinguished themselves in cultural affairs.\"\n\n23 See Henry Serruys, \"Mongols Ennobled during the Early Ming,” HJAS, 22 (December, 1957). For the use of the term \"turning toward Chinese civilization” (hsiang-hua) with reference to the submission of Chinese rebels, see IWSM, TC 12:26.\n\n24 See, for example, Serruys, \"Were the Ming against the Mongols,\" 136ff.; also note 43.\n\n25 Cited in Derk Bodde, China's First Unifier: A Study of the Ch'in Dynasty as Seen in the Life of Li Ssu, 280 (?)-208 B.C. (Leiden, 1938), 14-15. For background on Yu Yü, consult Edouard Chavannes (trans.), Les mémoires historiques de Se-ma Ts'ien (Paris, 1895-1905), II: 40-45; also Shih chi, 5: 15b-17b; 68: 7b-8; 83: 13a-b; 87: 3a-b; 110: 4b.\n\n26 IWSM, TC 79; 11; Ch'ing-chi wai-chiao shih-liao [Historical materials on late Ch'ing foreign relations], (Peiping, 1932; hereafter WCSL) 129: 17.\n\n27 See Yu cited in note 17.\n\n28 See Michael Loewe, \"The Campaigns of Han Wu-ti,” in Frank A. Kierman, Jr. and John K. Fairbank, eds., Chinese Ways in Warfare (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), 79 and 89; Chun-chu Chang, \"Military Aspects of Han",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207376,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1975",
        "page_number": 144,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "136\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\n46 See K. A. Wittfogel and Feng Chia-sheng, History of Chinese Society, Liao (907-1125) (Philadelphia, 1949), 8-10; also Igor de Rachewiltz, “Yeh-lü Ch'u-ts'ai (1189-1243); Buddhist Idealist and Confucian Statesman\" in Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett, Confucian Personalities (Stanford, 1962).\n\n47 Wittfogel and Feng, 9.\n\n48 See Herbert Franke, \"Sino-Western Contacts under the Mongol Empire,” Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 6 (1966), 52.\n\n49 Kuwabara, 96-99.\n\n50 See Henry Serruys, \"Mongols Ennobled during the Early Ming,” HIAS, 22 (1959); also Serruys, \"Landgrants to the Mongols in China: 1400-1460,” Monumenta Serica, 25 (1966), especially 394. As had been the case with other barbarians in China's past, the use of Mongol and Jurched troops in the Ming could be a liability as well as an asset. See Serruys, \"Sino-Jürched Relations During the Yung-Lo Period (1403-1424),” Göttinger Asiatische Forschungen (Weisbaden, 1955); 67-68, 71.\n\n51 See the summary discussion in Immanuel C. Y. Hsü, The Rise of Modern China (London and Toronto, 1975), 138-139; also George L. Harris, \"The Mission of Matteo Ricci, S.J.: A Case Study of an Effort at Guided Culture Change in China in the Sixteenth Century,” Monumenta Serica, 25 (1966).\n\n52 James B. Parsons, Peasant Rebellions of the Late Ming Dynasty (Tucson, 1970), 129.\n\n53 C. R. Boxer, \"Portuguese Military Expeditions in Aid of the Mings Against the Manchus, 1621-1647,\" T'ien-Hsia Monthly, VII (1938); S. Y. Teng and John K. Fairbank, China's Response to the West: A Documentary Survey, 1839-1923 (New York, 1970), 13; North-China Herald, January 10, 1852. Boxer, 32, offers the explanation that the expedition was undermined by Cantonese who feared that the Portuguese, if successful, would be granted extended trading rights, while the North-China Herald suggests that when the men reached Nan-ch'ang they were ordered to return because \"the contemptible figure they presented completely disappointed expectation.\" It is probable that each of these interpretations has a measure of validity.\n\n54 Serruys, \"Were the Ming,” 136.\n\n55 Boxer, 35.\n\n56 Wills, Guns, Pepper and Parleys, especially chapter 2; Fu Lo-shu, A Documentary Chronicle of Sino-Western Relations (1644-1820) (Tucson, 1966), I: 32-33, 58; Teng and Fairbank, 34.\n\n57 The Ch'ing did, however, ally with the Russians against the Dzungars during the K'ang-hsi period and the Ch'ien-lung emperor did make good use of Western cannon (Hsi-yang p'ao) in his famous campaigns. See, for example, IWSM, TC 9: 30a-b; also Teng and Fairbank, 34; Swisher, 697.\n\n58 See Immanuel C. Y. Hsü, \"Russia's Special Position in China during the Early Ch'ing Period,\" Slavic Review, 13.4 (December, 1964).\n\n59 Chinese Repository 11: 64; Swisher, 98-99.\n\n60 See Masataka Banno, China and the West, 1858-1861 (Cambridge, Mass., 1964), especially 45-53, 207-209; Swisher, 683-697.\n\n61 See, for example, IWSM TC 22: 11b-13b; also Richard J. Smith, \"Foreign-Training and China's Self-Strengthening: The Case of Feng-huang-shan, 1864-1873,” Modern Asian Studies, 10.12 (1976).\n\n62 For the use of this expression (or a variant) as late as the 1890's see WCSL 101: 9 and 129; 16.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    }
]