Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T22:03:43.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diplomacy of Contempt: The French Consuls and the Mandarins in Nineteenth-Century China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Raphael Israeli
Raphael Israeli
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the process of opening up China, the French representatives, like their other Western counterparts, came into contact with the Chinese mandarins who represented a culture and world view that were almost totally foreign to them. Part of the daunting task of preservin their country's glory and pursuing its interests, was to try and comprehend the world they were attempting to engage. They arrived in China with an intellectual luggage replete with stereotypes and misconceptions about the Chinese, on the one hand, and on the other hand they were committed to their mission civilisatrice in China which was to help the Chinese save themselves from themselves.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , May 1992 , pp. 363 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The twin provinces of Kwangtung and Kwangsi.

2 Until the Chinese allowed the opening of foregin embassies in Peking in the early 1860s, the top diplomatic representatives of the Western Powers were posted in Shanghai.

3 See Israeli, R., ‘China in the Mid-19th Century, Visualized by French Consuls’, Revue Française d'Historie d'Outre-mer LXXV (1988), no. 281, pp. 422–3 and footnote 17 there.Google Scholar

4 Trequalye, to Foreign Minister, 9 05 1858 Correspondance Consulaire, Chine, Consulats Divers Volume 1 (henceforth CCCCD), pp. 7ff.Google Scholar

5 Ibid..

6 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 18 July 1858, Ibid., pp. 20–1.

7 The Chinese text, signed by the Gentry of Kuang-tung and dated the 8th year of the Hsien-feng Emperor (1858), 5th, Moon, 5th Day, appears in an appendix to Trenqualye's report to the Foreign Minister, 6 August 1858, CCCCD.Google Scholar

8 The English text was published in the Friends of China in Hong Kong and is attached to Trenqualye's report.

9 The text read, inter alia, ‘I have now received the Imperial Edict of 27 July, from which I learn that peace has concluded in Tientsin…Having received an express from the Palace that the Great Emperor has accorded peace to your honorable nation, I will refrain from leading any troops against you…The enrolments of the ‘braves’ are high because of the high degree of public resentment. If the soldiers of your honorable country continue to murder, injure, burn and plunder, it will be difficult to secure against a return to trouble and disorder. You must keep your men under restraint…On the receipt of dispatches from the honorable Plenipotentiary on their return to Canton, I, the Great Minister, will dispatch certain officers and gentry for the safe transaction of business…’.The full text and its English translation are in CCCCD, pp. 31–2.Google Scholar

10 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 22 August 1858, CCCCD, p. 33.Google Scholar

11 The Tartar General was the Commander of the Imperial Troops in the province.

12 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 24 November 1858, CCCCD, pp. 43ff.Google Scholar

13 The local superintendent of trade.

14 CCCCD, pp. 43–4.Google Scholar

15 In the beginning of his venture in China, Trenqualye lived on a rented ship, the Tchop, pending his move to the Island of Honam, For details, see Israeli, R. (see fn 4), pp. 422–3.Google Scholar

16 CCCCD, pp. 43–4.Google Scholar

17 Ibid., p. 51.

18 The Imperial Era 1851–1861.Google Scholar

19 CCCCD, p. 54.Google Scholar

20 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 12 January 1860, CCCCD, p. 59.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., pp. 62–3. The text of the letter said, inter alia: ‘I have received your letter, and with a feeling of unworthiness, I blush as the recipient of your condescending regard … Looking towards the sky, I record your kindness and make my prostrations, unable to give expression to the cordial attitude by which I'm animated … The presents you have lavished upon me will remain rooted in my recollection; when I gaze upon them, I still seem to myself to be gazing on your Excellency, the Giver … The fact of your Excellency being charged with transaction of business in Canton affords me lively satisfaction, for every confidence can be regarded in your justness and rectitude, Hereafter, you'll assuredly reach the highes official position and I privately cherish the idea that at some future period it will be your fate to receive congratulations on attaining the First Rank and being armed with Plenipotentiary powers … I now send you two boxes of tea and a pair of embroidered screens … I entreat you that you will not render me unhappy by refusing to accept them…’.

22 Ibid., pp. 63ff. The text of the letter was also transmitted to Bourboulon, the French Minister who was posted in Shanghai until the Powers were allowed to establish their embassies in Peking following the Tientsin settlements. Hang had intimated to Trenqualye that on his way to Peking (Tientsin) he would stop over in Shanghai and greet the French Minister and report to him on his warm relationship with the Consul in Canton.

23 Trenqualye to Paris, 22 March 1863, Ibid., pp. 16–77.

24 Trenqualye to Paris, 22 November 1863, Ibid., pp. 108–9.

25 Ibid., p. 111b.

26 Sometimes Trenqualye refers to him, as the ‘Viceroy’, a term borrowed from the British.

27 Yes, either by design—to emulate the status of the Chinese Governor, or by accident—to express how he had become part of the local scene, Trenqualye used the Chinese term to designate the building of the Consulate, instead of ‘Chancery’ or similar terms.

28 For the details of that story, see Israeli, R. (see fn 4), pp. 431–5.Google Scholar

29 CCCCD, pp. 113–15.Google Scholar

30 The Commander of the Imperial troops in the province.

31 The Tientsin Treaties allowed missionary activity in China.

32 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 20 December 1863, CCCCD, pp. 117–32 and annexes.Google Scholar

33 See footnote 28 above.

34 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 28 March 1864, CCCCD, p. 145.Google Scholar

35 The photo is on the above file, after p. 145.Google Scholar

36 CCCCD, pp. 145–7.Google Scholar

37 Ibid., p. 148.

38 The French tradition of celebrating National Day on Bastille Day (14 July) did not begin until the first centennial in 1879.Google Scholar

39 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 24 August 1865, CCCCD, pp. 151–4.Google Scholar

40 Ibid., p. 155.

41 Ibid., pp. 156–8.

42 A famous 17th Century Jesuit missionary who had succeeded Matteo Ricci in Peking in the Jesuit service to the Chinese Court during the late Ming and early Ch'ing period.

43 It is remarkable how the French diplomat adopted this mandarin designation of an official office-building to describe not only his own chancery facilities but also missionary buildings such as a Church and an orphanage.

44 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, Marquis de Moustier, 21 September 1865. CCCCD, pp. 159–62.Google Scholar

45 The texts of the Chinese letter and its French translation are found in Ibid., pp. 164 and 163.

46 Both letters are quoted in Ibid., pp. 166–7.

47 The letter is annexed to the report, Ibid., pp. 168ff.

48 Ibid..

49 Trenqualye to Foreign Minister, 31 December 1868, Ibid., pp. 175–7.

50 Correspondance Commerciale Han-keou, vol, I, 1863–1875 (hereafter CCHK), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

51 Ibid., pp. 10–12.

52 Ibid., pp. 13b.

53 Ibid., pp. 17–18.

54 It is the Great Powers who insisted on extra-territorial jurisdiction for their nationals in China. Now they are urged to carry that out, in the face of their spreading impotence.

55 C CHK, p. 19. This passage too was struck off the report but it is still readable. See Dabry to Foreign Minister, 6 March 1863, Ibid..

56 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 4 May and 5 May 1863, Ibid., pp. 37–40.

57 Ibid., p. 43.

58 Ibid., p. 49.

59 Ibid., p. 50.

60 Ibid., pp. 54–5.

61 Wen, Kuan (d. 1871) had participated in the wars against the Taipings and was the Grand Secretary in Peking and attained the highest decorations of the Empire.Google Scholar See Hummel, A., Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Empire (Taipei, 1970), pp. 426–7.Google Scholar

62 CCHK, pp. 62–3.Google Scholar

63 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 29 October 1863, Ibid., p. 83.

64 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 2 December 1863, Ibid., pp. 92–3.

65 Ibid., p. 92.

66 A former senator, a member of the Academie des Sciences Morales et Politiques, foreign minister in 1848–1849, 1851, 1852 and then from 15 October 1862 up until 1 September 1866.Google Scholar

67 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 2 November 1863, Correspondance Diplomatique, Consulats Divers, Hankow (hereafter CDCDH), pp. 184–5.Google Scholar

68 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 5 June 1864, CDCDH, pp. 208–9.Google Scholar

69 For details of these incidents, see Israeli, R. (see fn 4), pp. 442–5.Google Scholar

70 For details, see ibid..

71 Dabry to Foreign Minister, CDCDH, pp. 241–3. In pp. 244–5 there are copies of the letters of protest that Dabry lodged with the Viceroy and the Taotai.Google Scholar

72 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 8 May 1865, ibid., pp. 217–18.

73 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 9 June 1865, ibid., pp. 221–2.

74 Viceroy Lao was reported to have asked Monseigneur Faure, to act as a mediator between him and the Muslim rebels of the province. See Dabry to Foreign Minister, 8 October 1865, Ibid., pp. 225–6.

75 Ibid..

76 This is a refernce to Kuo-fan'sclique, Tseng which was instrumental not only in quelling the Taipings but also in forging the T'ung-chih Restoration (1862–1874).Google Scholar See Wright, M., The Last Stand of Chinese Conservatism (Stanford, Calif., 1957)Google Scholar and Porter, J., Tseng Kuo-fan's Private Bureaucracy (Univ. California, Berkeley, 1972).Google Scholar

77 Dabry to Foreign Minister, 8 October 1865, CDCDH, pp. 228–9. It is noteworthy that this report by Dabry bears, for the first time, the heading: Consulate of France in Hankow and Chiu-Chiang.Google Scholar

78 Annex to Dabry's report of 8 October, Ibid., pp. 230–3.