Content area
Full Text
In this article I remedy the popular misconception that the East Asian international system was hierarchical and non-egalitarian in history. I argue that the tribute system is mainly a function of power. Backed by power, Confucian norms and rules became the rules of the game in the system. Power asymmetry gave rise to hierarchy in foreign relations while power symmetry led to diplomatic equality between great powers. East Asia during the tenth to the thirteenth centuries was a multistate system without a regional hegemon. In the Song-Liao international system (960-1125), due to power symmetry, the two great powers conducted their foreign policy on the basis of formal equality. In the Song-Jin international system (1127-1234), the weaker Song China became a Jin vassal state and acknowledged its inferior status in the Jin-derived hierarchy. In studying historical East Asia, Confucian rhetoric needs to be examined against power reality. Only by taking power seriously can we get a better understanding of the East Asian international system. KEYWORDS: tribute system, hierarchy, Confucianism, power asymmetry, historical China
THERE IS A WIDESPREAD BELIEF THAT, COMPARED TO AN EGALITARIAN but war-prone West, the East Asian international system was historically hierarchic and relatively peaceful. China, by virtue of its superior power and size, maintained order and kept the peace through the tribute system. During those times, China stood at the center of "all under Heaven"; neighboring polities sent tributary missions to China to symbolize their submission to the Chinese emperor. Unlike the Westphalian system of sovereign equality and autonomy, the tribute system was based on inequality and deference. This popular idea of a hierarchical East Asia derives from the region's history from the fourteenth to the nineteenth century, when the polity that we know today as China was the regional hegemon. But China was not always dominant in history and the East Asian system was not always hierarchical. To remedy this misconception in the literature, I examine the medieval period in East Asian history when formal equality, not hierarchy, characterized great power relations.
East Asia from the tenth to the thirteenth centuries was a multistate system without a regional hegemon. Several centralized, independent states interacted with each other through economic, cultural, and military means. Song China (960-1279) coexisted with a succession of...