晚清中外条约关系与朝贡关系的主要区别  

The Main Difference between Late Qing Sino-Foreign Treaty Relationships and Tributary Relationships

作　　者：李育民[1] Li Yumin

机构地区：[1]湖南师范大学历史文化学院,教授。长沙410081

出　　处：《历史研究》2018年第5期53-70,190,共19页Historical Research

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目"近代中外条约关系通史"(14ZDB045)的阶段成果

摘　　要：晚清中外条约关系与朝贡关系是两种不同性质的国际秩序。后者形成了以中国为中心的"天下共主"观念,却在某种意义上是名实难副的虚幻构想,前者以国家主权概念和国际法原理为基石,却是作了调整的失衡的国际规范;后者旨在建立"守在四夷"的自卫架构,前者孜孜以求的是实际权益,尤其是经济利益;后者的不平等主要反映在交往形式上,将中外关系纳入到唯我独尊的天朝礼制之中,前者对中国实施"准统治权",体现了主权损害的实质内涵;后者践履"不治""字小"的王道德行,前者充斥"武力""凌弱"的霸道暴举。这两种不同性质的国际秩序模式,其所秉具的内涵和特征,包含着种种复杂的成份和因子。In the late Qing,Sino-foreign treaty and tributary relationships between China and foreign countries reflected international orders that were different in kind.The tributary relationship had shaped the idea of“common rule of all under heaven”(tianxia gongzhu)centered on China,but in a sense it was an illusory construct whose name did not reflect reality,whereas the treaty relationship,based on the idea of national sovereignty and the principles of international law,was a modified and unbalanced international norm.The former aimed at establishing a self-defense framework that used tributary relationships to“make the barbarians form a defensive wall”(shouzai siyi);the latter was keen to secure actual rights and interests,especially economic interests.The inequality of the former was mainly reflected in forms of intercourse that absorbed Sino-foreign relations into the ritual of the sole authority,the Celestial Empire(tianchao);the latter exercised“quasi-rule”over China,which in actuality meant undermining its sovereignty.The former practiced the morality of the kingly way,of“non-rule”and“recognizing the weak”;the latter exhibited to the full the hegemonic way of“military force”and“oppressing the weak”.The connotations and characteristics of the two different types of international order have their own complex elements and factors.

关 键 词：朝贡关系 条约关系 国际秩序 晚清 

分 类 号：D829[政治法律—政治学]