Speaking to History: The Story of King Goujian in Twentieth-Century China

Speaking to History: The Story of King Goujian in Twentieth-Century China

Paul A. Cohen is Professor of History Emeritus at Wellesley College and Associate of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, Harvard University. In his book, Speaking to History: The Story of King

Ohnesorge: A Hurstian View on Chinese Econonomic Development

John K.M. Ohnesorge, University of Wisconsin Law School, has posted Development is Not a Dinner Party: A Hurstian Perspective on Law and Growth in China, which is forthcoming in the Wisconsin Law Review Forward:

Much has been written, and remains to be written, about the many roles law has played in China’s economic development since 1978. Without minimizing the value of what has been written so far, this essay seeks to broaden the discussion by applying to China’s recent history certain ideas of the great historian of 19th Century American law and economic development, James Willard Hurst. The essay proceeds by providing a brief introduction to Hurst and his work on law and economic growth in the United States, then explores how those ideas might be applied to assist our understanding of what has happened in China.

--Dan Ernst

Zhu on China Suzerainty over Tibet and Mongolia

Yuan Yi Zhu, Stipendiary Lecturer in Politics at Pembroke College, Oxford, has published Suzerainty, Semi-Sovereignty, and International Legal Hierarchies on China's Borderlands, in the Asian Journal of International Law:

The concept of semi-sovereignty, a now obsolete category of international entities possessing limited sovereignty, remains hazily understood. However, the historical examination of how semi-sovereignty was defined and practised during the long nineteenth century can provide insights on the interplay between authority and control within the hierarchies of international relations. This paper examines one specific type of semi-sovereignty—namely, suzerainty—which is often used to describe China's traditional authority in Tibet and Mongolia. By examining the events that led to the acceptance of suzerainty as the legal framing for the China-Tibet and China-Mongolia relationships, I argue that suzerainty was a deliberately vague concept that could be used to create liminal international legal spaces to the advantage of Western states, and to mediate between competing claims of political authority. Finally, I point to the importance of semi-sovereignty as an arena of legal contestation between the Western and non-Western members of the “Family of Nations”.

Update: With the new link above, the article is ungated.

–Dan Ernst

Du on filiality and falsity in Qing China

Last year, Yue Du (Cornell University) published "Policies and Counterstrategies: State-Sponsored Filiality and False Accusation in Qing China" in the International Journal of Asian Studies 16 (2019), 79-97. Here's the abstract: 

Using court cases culled from various national and local archives in China, this article examines two strategies widely employed by Qing litigants to manipulate state-sponsored filiality to advance their perceived interests in court: “instrumental filicide to lodge a false accusation” and “false accusation of unfiliality.” While Qing subjects were willing and able to exploit the legalized inequality between parent and child for profit-seeking purposes, the Qing imperial state tolerated such maneuvering so as to co-opt local negotiations to reinforce orthodox notions of the parent–child hierarchy in its subjects’ everyday lives. Local actors, who appealed to the Qing legal promotion of parental dominance and filial obedience to empower themselves, were recruited into the Qing state's project of moral penetration and social control, with law functioning as a conduit and instrument that gave the design of “ruling the empire through the principle of filial piety” a concrete legal form in imperial governance.

Further information is available here. 

--Mitra Sharafi

Ho on Administrative Law in Tang Dynasty China

 [We have the following announcement from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.  DRE]

Greater China Legal History Seminar Series: Feeding the Emperor – Administrative Law in Tang Dynasty China by Prof. Norman P. Ho (Online)

The Tang Liu Dian (hereafter, “TLD”), compiled in 738–739 A.D. during the Tang dynasty, is an important administrative law code which lists out in great detail every Tang dynasty government office, as well as various official positions and their functions and obligations. The TLD is of great historical significance—it is regarded as the earliest fully extant administrative law code from China, and it served as a model administrative law code for subsequent dynasties, including the Ming and Qing dynasties. This seminar will examine Tang dynasty administrative law, as set forth in the TLD, through the specific lens of how the emperor was fed and will analyze Tang administrative regulations on feeding the emperor. This seminar will describe the specific agencies and officials who were responsible for feeding the emperor, as well as their specific functions and structures as provided by the TLD. Relevant rules in the Tang Code ?? (i.e., the Tang dynasty penal code) will also be discussed to provide a complete picture of the regulatory apparatus behind the task of feeding the emperor. Ultimately, from this examination of Tang administrative law through the emperor’s food service agencies and offices as set forth in the TLD, this seminar will also set forth some general observations regarding Tang dynasty administrative law and will argue that one of the key roles of administrative law in the Tang was to further enhance and protect the prestige, image, and power of the emperor.

Prof. Norman P. Ho is a Professor of Law at the Peking University School of Transnational Law (STL) in Shenzhen, PRC. His research interests broadly are in legal theory and legal history, and he writes specifically in the areas of premodern Chinese legal history and legal theory, comparative jurisprudence, property theory, and Asian-American jurisprudence. He has served as a visiting professor at the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law and a visiting fellow in the Center for Chinese Law (HKU Faculty of Law). Prior to joining the STL faculty, Norman practiced in the Hong Kong offices of Morrison & Foerster and Slaughter and May, where his practice focused on capital markets and private equity transactions. He received his J.D. degree from NYU School of Law and his undergraduate and graduate degrees in Chinese history from Harvard University.

CPD credits are available upon application and subject to accreditation by the Law Society of Hong Kong (currently pending).

Register here by 5pm, 17 September 2020 to attend the seminar.

Boxer uprising

It is a nationalist uprising in China. The so-called Boxer uprising was initiated by the secret organization known as the Righteous and Harmonious Society Movement or Boxers.

With much social unrest in China, the Boxers, as the movement’s adherents came to be known, found ready acceptance. A division within China’s royal dynasty further aided the growth of the movement.

Its objective was the removal of foreign influence over Chinese trade, politics, religion and technology. Brief but intense it stands as a significant episode of anti-imperialist fervor at a time when the United States was just beginning to involve itself to a greater degree in international affairs an create its own empire.

In response to spreading Boxer predations, Western nations began to build up their forces on the Chinese coast in April 1900.

In May 1900, Boxers move across the countryside, destroying railroads, dismantling telegraph lines, and murdering Christian missionary including some Americans, as well as their Chinese converts, whom the Boxers detested as much as the “foreign devils.”

In June, after the Japanese legation’s chancellor and the German minister were murdered by an angry mob, Boxers laid siege to the foreign embassies in the city of Peking. On 4 August a second, heavily reinforce column reinforced Tianjin in relief of the embassies, defeating Chinese forces in two battles on 4 an 5 August.
Boxer uprising

Vintage China

Greatest of China's statesmen - Li Hung Chang in the 

court of his yamen, Tientsin, China, 1901

  

Natives at breakfast, movable chow shop, Canton, 1919

 

Newly married couple dining together for the first time, Canton, China, 1919

 

Rich merchants dining with the singing girls, Peking, China, 1901

 

Some of China's solemn daughters at recreation--

recess at So. Gate Presbyterian Mission School, Shanghai, 1901