Rethinking Hierarchies in East Asian Historical IR

Abstract

International relations (IR) has seen a proliferation of recent research on both international hierarchies as such and on historical IR in (often hierarchical) East Asia. This article takes stock of insights from East Asian hierarchies for the study of international hierarchy as such. I argue for and defend an explanatory approach emphasizing repertoires or toolkits of hierarchical super- and subordination. Historical hierarchies surrounding China took multiple dynastic forms. I emphasize two dimensions of variation. First, hierarchy-building occurs in dialogue between cores and peripheries. Variation in these relationships proliferated multiple arrangements for hierarchical influence and rule. Second, Sinocentric hierarchies varied widely over time, in ways that suggest learning. Successive Chinese dynasties both emulated the successes and avoided the pitfalls of the past, adapting their ideologies and strategies for rule to varying circumstances by recombining past political repertoires to build new ones. Taken together, these phenomena suggest new lines of inquiry for research on hierarchies in IR.

From alien land to inalienable parts of China: how Qing imperial possessions became the Chinese Frontiers

“…In IR, the historiography of China as a singular and continuous entity compounded by the additional layer of essentialised Otherness works to inhabit critical enquires into the historicity of modern China and the contested nature of China as ethnic, racial and modern territorial toponyms (see Krishna, 2017; MacKay, 2015, 2019; Phillips, 2014, 2018 for exceptions). The isomorphism between modern China and the Qing Empire has served as a vantage point for a modern theological understanding of China as a singular national subject moving through history (Duara, 1995).…”

“…Prior to the establishment of the Qing Empire in China ruled by a Tungusic people known as the Manchus in the mid-17th century, the Ming Empire was ruled by Han monarchs and Confucian scholar officials, also known as literati, who presided over an East Asian regional system based on shared Confucian political norms. The conquest of Ming by the Qing Empire, despite the preservation of Ming-era political institutions, fundamentally transformed China into an ethnocultural and geographic component of the Qing imperial hierarchies (MacKay, 2019).…”

War, interaction capacity, and the structures of state systems

“…The model proposed below is sparse (which we see as an advantage) but this sparsity imposes limitations. It doesn't incorporate variations in the structure of P (Gerring et al, 2011) or the possibility that imperial centres structure what constitutes peripheral polities (Phillips, 2017;MacKay, 2018). Polities have 'sovereignty' at the start of the game, which we understand as a 'bundle of rights and obligations' that can be exchanged (Cooley, 2005;Cooley and Spruyt, 2009;Krasner, 1999;Lake, 1996Lake, , 2009Philpott, 2001).…”

“…It does not incorporate variations in the structure of P (Gerring et al . 2011) or the possibility that imperial centers structure what constitutes peripheral polities (Phillips 2017; MacKay 2018). Polities have ‘sovereignty’ at the start of the game, which we understand as a ‘bundle of rights and obligations’ that can be exchanged (Lake 1996, 2009; Krasner 1999; Philpott 2001; Cooley 2005; Cooley and Spruyt 2009).…”

“…How have the structures of state systems varied over time and space, and what drives that variation? A recent turn in international relations scholarship has focused attention on non-Western and pre-modern states (Acharya, 2014;Besley and Reynal-Querol, 2014;Butcher and Griffiths, 2015;Buzan and Little, 2000;Centeno, 2003;Donnelly, 2012;Herbst, 2000;Hui, 2005;Kang, 2010;Phillips, 2011;Phillips and Sharman, 2015;Ringmar, 2012;Mattern and Zarakol, 2016;Dunne and Reus-Smit, 2017;MacKay, 2018). One of the aims of getting beyond the European experience to include previously neglected regions is to show variation in political forms and order (Cooley, 2005;Cooley and Spruyt, 2009;Donnelly, 2015;Lake, 2009;Mattern and Zarakol, 2016).…”