RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1964
https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/qz20zx09r
106

CRANMER-BYNG AND SHEPHERD

had the opportunity of travelling to Peking and observing life at the Court. It was realized that even if the main objects of the embassy were not achieved it was a splendid opportunity for obtaining first-hand information about various aspects of China. In fact, the embassy was something of a reconnaissance behind the Manchu curtain of exclusiveness, since Macartney took with him an army officer, Lieutenant Henry William Parish, who was trained to make plans and sketches and to take measurements. As one of his tasks Parish made a detailed survey of a section of the Great Wall which Macartney passed by on his journey from Peking to the Manchu Emperors' summer hunting-palace at Jehol?. Also included in the ambassador's suite was William Alexander, a promising young artist who was given the title of draughtsman,

Macartney arrived at Peking in August 1793, and then proceeded to Jehol where he had an audience with the Emperor on 14 September. After being shown round the parks and pleasure gardens at Jehol he returned to Peking where on 7 October he received the Imperial reply refusing all the requests made in the state letter from King George III to the Emperor Ch'ien-lung. A few days later Macartney set out from Peking on his way to Canton escorted by Chinese officials. After a long journey by inland waterways he reached Canton in December, and finally in January 1794 he moved to Macao where he stayed until all the East Indiamen were ready to sail in convoy with H.M.S. Lion (64 guns), the warship which had brought the ambassador out to China.

While waiting for the Indiamen to complete their loading Lord Macartney used his staff for various tasks. Thus Lieutenant Parish was instructed to draw up answers to question on the defences of Macao3, and also in February 1794 he was sent, together with William Alexander, to explore the coast of Lantao island and the small island of Ma Wan (called in his report Cowhee) in case it might be considered necessary to form a settlement somewhere in that area. The idea of obtaining an island was not a new one. It had been put forward unofficially in the past and it received official recognition in the instructions to Lord Macartney dated 8 September, 1792 where it was stated:

ᅡ
================================================================================
RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1969
https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d
KING MONGKUT AND THE KINGDOM OF SIAM

85

Crawfurd obtained neither better relations nor easier trading conditions. What is more he was received by King Rama II's officials in a most ungenerous manner. Dr. George Finlayson, the Scots medical officer and naturalist on board their ship the John Adam records this impression of the dwelling given to the mission by the Siamese: "A habitation was provided for the British envoy, a miserable place, an out-house with four small, ill-ventilated rooms, approached through a trap-door from below..." An official of low rank was sent to them. All he wanted was presents for the King. Finlayson goes on: "In the urgency to obtain and the frequency of the demands of the Court for the gifts there was a degree of meanness and avidity at once disgusting and disgraceful". The King seems to have been petty as well as rude. On one occasion the Foreign Minister called on Crawfurd to help retrieve two pairs of "ordinary glass lamps" on which the King had set his heart. The lamps had been promised, said the Foreign Minister, to His Majesty and sold by a member of the John Adam's crew to somebody else!

Fortunately the Crawfurd mission was not treated in such a mean manner throughout all its four months' stay at Bangkok. Dignity was restored by a Royal audience and there was much friendly talk. But he got no improvement in either trade or diplomacy. Crawfurd also tried to get the Siamese to accept a Consul and to obtain exemption for British merchants and crews from the harsh justice of Siam's law, but in these matters he had no success. He comments in his account of the Mission: "If the subjects of a free and civilised Government resort to a barbarous and despotic country, there is no remedy but submission to its laws, however absurd or arbitrary".

Four years later, in 1826, the East India Company sent another mission to Bangkok. By this time the first campaign against the Burmese had been fought and won and there was a new king on the throne of Siam, Mongkut's half brother, Rama III. The mission was led by Captain Henry Burney, a nephew of Fanny Burney and military secretary to the Governor of Penang. He was much more successful than Crawfurd and came away with a treaty which somewhat improved matters. The Burney Treaty did not, however, go very far. It obtained a certain amount of goodwill regarding the frontier and the Malay States but Kedah was still accepted as Siam's vassal. Trade was to be free and
================================================================================
RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊 | RAS-1990
https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/d79206299
336

Jonathan D. Spence, The Search for Modern China, W.W Norton and Company: $29.95; cloth; 876 pages.

Jonathan D. Spence in "The Search for Modern China” endeavours to facilitate an understanding of China. He says, quite rightly, that "in trying to understand China today we need to know about China in the past" (pp. xix-xx). That is why Spence begins his narrative in the late 16th century, when China was ruled by its last native dynasty on the eve of the Manchu conquest.

Interestingly, the Yale historian explains that his book is not about modern China. Rather, it is about a centuries-long effort to create such a country, one which is both integrated and receptive, fairly sure of its own identity yet able to join others on equal terms in the quest for new markets, new technologies, new ideas" (p.xx).

By this definition, Spence says, China is not today and never has been a modern country.

Certainly, China in the Qing dynasty was far from being **fairly sure of its own identity yet able to join others on equal terms**. As Spence points out, China did not even have a national flag in its 4,000 years of existence, until one was created in the nineteenth century, when it consciously began to acquire what it thought were the attributes of a modern nation.

As is to be expected, Spence finds numerous parallels in Chinese history. Thus, he likens General Claire Chennault's World War II "Flying Tigers" to the foreign mercenary Ever-Victorious Army formed to fight the Taiping rebels; he sees similarities between Great Leap Forward rhetoric and the vision of Hong Xiuquan, the Taiping Heavenly King, and he compares the Shanghai Communique of 1972 with the Treaty of Nerchinsk of 1689.

This does not mean, of course, that China is unchanging. During the Qing dynasty, for example, China spurned British requests for developing trade. Spence quotes the Qianlong emperor's message to George III of England:

"We have never valued ingenious articles, nor do we have the slightest need of your country's manufactures. Therefore, O king,
================================================================================