On the world order of the Liao Dynasty
Wei Zhijiang Pan Qing
School of Public Administration, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310018
The so-called "world order", also known as "international order", mainly refers to the power structure formed by the power balance between two or more international actors and their changes, and the international order formed by institutional norms, mechanisms and social cultural identities dominated by stronger international actors. The world order of the Liao Dynasty discussed in this article, which mainly includes the Korean Peninsula in East Asia and inland Asia, clearly falls within the category of the regional international order in eastern Eurasia. Although the academic community has different opinions on the concept of world order, we believe that it basically includes two levels: the material construction of national power in the region and the cultural construction of social identity, so this paper intends to focus on the changes in the power relations between the Liao Dynasty and the Song Dynasty, the Western Xia, the Korean Peninsula Goryeo and the Western Regions, as well as the construction of the political and economic institutional norms and social cultural identity of the entire eastern Eurasian region dominated by the Liao Dynasty. This paper discusses the diplomatic relations between the Liao Dynasty and East Asia and Inland Asia, and its process and significance to the construction of world order.
The traditional view is that there was a so-called "Huayi order" and a tributary system in East Asian history, and its main feature was that the neighboring countries with the Han and Tang dynasties in China as the center and Confucianism as the main cultural identity paid tribute to China. However, the Liao Dynasty's construction and form of the Eastern Eurasian world order challenged the traditional so-called "Huayi order" and the tributary system. Since most Chinese scholars follow the basic concepts and connotations of the American scholar Fairbank's "Huayi Order" and tributary system, the research period mainly focuses on the Ming and Qing dynasties or other Han Central Plains dynasties, while from the interdisciplinary perspectives of Eurasian regional history and international relations, the research on the foreign relations and world order of the Northern Chinese dynasties represented by the Liao Dynasty (including the Western Liao) in the 10th and 12th centuries is relatively weak. On the basis of his long-term commitment to the study of the relationship between the Liao Dynasty and the Korean Peninsula, the author intends to comprehensively and systematically explore the relationship between the Liao Dynasty and the world in Eastern Eurasia, deeply study the world order of the Liao Dynasty, the Northern Ethnic Dynasty in Chinese history, and discuss with Fairbank's theories of "Huayi Order" and "Tributary System", so as to reveal the historical position of the Liao Dynasty and the Khitan nation in Eastern Eurasia and the process and influence of shaping the world order.
1. The power structure of the Liao Dynasty and the Eastern Eurasian world
The East Asian world order of the Liao Dynasty was mainly determined by the changes in the power balance between the Liao Dynasty and the Song Dynasty, the Western Xia Dynasty, and the Korean Peninsula Goryeo Dynasty, and the formation of a power structure dominated by the Liao. Due to the changes in the relations between the Liao, Song, Western Xia, and Goryeo states, a world order centered on the Liao dynasty was formed in the East Asian world from the 10th to the 12th centuries.
From the middle of the 10th century to the beginning of the 12th century, the Liao, Song, Goryeo, and Western Xia kingdoms coexisted. In 960, Zhao Kuangyin, Taizu of the Song Dynasty, launched the Chenqiao Mutiny, established the Song Dynasty, and successively eliminated the southern secession regimes by force, ending the national division since the end of the Tang Dynasty, and the Central Plains was restored to unification. However, the Song Dynasty was defeated by the Liao Dynasty twice in the Yongxi Northern Expedition and the Battle of Qigou Pass, so it had to take a defensive position against the Liao Dynasty, so the Song and Liao formed a long-term north-south confrontation situation.
In 1004, Liao Shengzong and his mother Empress Dowager Chengtian launched a military expedition against the Song Dynasty, and the army was stationed in Lanzhou (now Puyang, Henan). The two armies faced each other, and Song Zhenzong went to Lanzhou to supervise the battle under the persuasion of Prime Minister Kou Zhun. Although the two countries won and lost each other, the Liao Dynasty was a large army deep into the Song realm, and the threat to the Song was self-evident, so the two countries formed an alliance under the city. History is known as the Alliance of the Abyss. The signing of this covenant was of great historical significance, and since then, the Song and Liao have maintained peace for more than 120 years. As Mr. Yao Congwu said, the alliance "naturally helped to promote the exchange and mixing of the Northeast grassland culture and the agricultural culture of the Central Plains in East Asia, and after the mutual cultural assistance and exchange between the two sides, the Khitan people in the Western Liao River Valley outside the 11th century naturally belonged to the mainstream of the Han and Tang dynasties in the Central Plains, and became the Chinese nation in a broad sense, which was actually based on this period of confrontation between the Liao and Song dynasties, which was the real value of the Liao-Song 'Lanyuan Covenant' in the history of East Asia", and "the so-called mutually respectful diplomatic relations between countries began during this period" in Chinese history. The great impact of the alliance on the international order in East Asia can be seen here. Thus, the signing of the alliance was a sign of the shaking of the East Asian international order centered on the Han dynasty in the Central Plains, and the Liao dynasty, which is often regarded as the "Yidi", achieved a status on a par with the orthodox Song dynasty in China.
In 1010, Liao Shengzong took charge of the government and used Kang Zhao's murder of the emperor as an excuse to personally conquer Goryeo to force him to submit. Soon, due to the "Six Cities" issue, he conquered Goryeo for the third time. In the eighth year of Song Zhenzong's Dazhong Xiangfu (the fourth year of Liao Kaitai, the sixth year of Goryeo Xianzong, 1015), because the Song Dynasty could not help the troops, Goryeo had no choice but to return to the Khitan again and pay tribute to it. The tributary system of the Liaogoryeo clan was finally fully established, and the foundation of the international order in East Asia was laid thereby.
From 1071, when Goryeo resumed its tributary to the Song Dynasty, to 1126, when the Liao and Song dynasties were destroyed by the Jin Dynasty, the relationship between the Liao, Song and Li tributaries in East Asia can be said to have formed the so-called "dual" tributary system in which Goryeo paid tribute to the Liao and Song dynasties at the same time. Korean scholar Jeon Hae-jong argued in his "Research on the History of Korean-Chinese Relations" that Goryeo's tribute to Liao, Jinyuan, and Liao was a deterioration of the tributary relationship between Korea and China in ancient times. This history shows that the Goryeo period was a period of transition in tributary relations between China and Korea. Professor Seo Young-so, a Korean scholar, once defined the concept of the so-called "tributary relationship": "Generally speaking, the typical and substantive tributary relationship is premised on political subordination, which can be seen in the use of calendars or era names to symbolize and indicate subordination. This was followed by the establishment of ceremonial relations in internal affairs, followed by the demand of the suzerainty to collect from the subject state. and even become an economic relationship that burdens the latter".
In 1141, the Western Qarakhanid Dynasty and the Seljuk Dynasty formed a coalition army to cross the Amu Darya River, march into the Transoxiana region, and fight against the Khitan, Han and the Turkic forces led by the Western Liao Yelu Dashi in the Kanter Bay steppe in northern Samarkand. Jerodashi waited for his work and took advantage of the location of the valley to defeat the Seljuk coalition forces. The Battle of Canter Bay became one of the most famous battles in the history of Central Asia. Undoubtedly, the foundation of Yelu Dashi's domination in inland Asia was laid, and the world order in eastern Eurasia dominated by the Western Liao Empire was also established.
2. The institutional norms and cultural identity of the world order of the Liao Dynasty
First of all, the Liao Dynasty established a pluralistic and complex institutional norm in the eastern Eurasian region, which was dominated by suzerain-vassal relations. The so-called institutional norms of suzerain-vassal relations are mainly manifested in the fact that the international actors constituting suzerain-vassal relations must have the behavior of political vassals based on canonization and tribute; The state or political power within the structure of the suzerain-feudal system must jointly build and share the security benefits, that is, "the Son of Heaven guards the four empires", and at the same time, the Liao Tianzi guarantees the security of the surrounding four empires, that is, the protection of the security obligations of the vassal states required by the suzerain-feudal system. In addition, the vassal states consciously accepted and identified with the culture and values represented by the Liao Dynasty. The Liao Dynasty established a typical suzerain-vassal system in East Asia, and the suzerain-vassal system established in Inner Asia showed obvious structural characteristics with institutionalized norms in Inner Asia that were significantly different from ordinary tributary behaviors. Because generally in East Asia, the institutional norms of the vassal system must be based on the premise of vassals, the tribute period, tribute and tributary items are stipulated by the Ministry of Rites, and cannot be changed at will, and the vassal state must adopt the era name of the Liao Dynasty, Zhengshuo, etc., and the emperor of the Liao Dynasty canonizes and rewards the king of the vassal state to succeed to the throne, and gives back the tributary items of the vassal state, and the two are typical of the unequal status of political vassal relationship and monarch-vassal relationship.
Second, the Liao Dynasty effectively applied the internal system of "rule by custom" to the Inner Asian continent and achieved peace under Khitan rule. Diplomacy is a continuation of domestic affairs. The pluralistic military and political system and economic structure of the Liao Dynasty's internal affairs endowed it with the characteristics of a pluralistic and complex foreign policy. For a long time, the Liao Dynasty implemented a foreign policy of "rule according to customs", both in its rule of East Asia and in its strategy for Inner Asia during the Western Liao Empire. The Liao Dynasty was not a purely traditional agricultural centralized system in the Central Plains, so the diplomatic system as a continuation of internal affairs and the international order it constructed were inevitably pluralistic and complex, that is, the Liao Dynasty was dominated by the suzerain-vassal relations with the Gaochang Uighurs of Goryeo and Inner Asia, and established a pluralistic and complex Eastern Eurasian world order with other Inner Asian countries. Although the Liao Dynasty was dominated by nomadic people, after taking over the Sixteen Prefectures of Yanyun, a large number of Han people were engaged in settled agriculture, providing a large amount of financial resources for the Liao Dynasty. Therefore, the Liao Dynasty pursued the "rule according to customs", and implemented the "northern and southern official system" in which the farming Han people and the nomadic Khitan people were divided and ruled. Although the fundamental policy was still determined by the Khitan government's northern system, the affairs of the Han people in the south generally followed the old Han system. During the period of the bipolar pattern of the Liao and Song dynasties, neither the Northern Song Dynasty nor the Liao Dynasty in the Central Plains met the conditions of "dominating East Asia", so the relationship between the Liao and Song dynasties was the only choice for equal coexistence and mutual competition. It was precisely on the basis of this geopolitical pattern that the foreign relations of the Liao Dynasty applied the principle of "rule according to customs" in internal affairs to guide foreign affairs, and used flexible and diverse pragmatic diplomacy to bring the countries of the Eastern Eurasian continent into the world order dominated by the Liao as much as possible, and competed with the Song for dominance in the Eastern Eurasian continent.
Finally, the Liao Dynasty's cultural policy of accommodating the pluralism and mutual integration of various ethnic groups was the civilizational foundation for its construction of the world order. During the 10th and 12th centuries, the Liao Dynasty, as a representative of nomadic civilization, succeeded in establishing a vast empire with diverse cultures and continuous interaction with various civilizations on the fault line between Islamic, nomadic and Confucian civilizations. Neither the Liao nor the Western Liao people "defeated, exterminated, or conquered" the Confucian civilization represented by the Song Dynasty or the Islamic civilization of Inner Asia represented by the Qarakhanid.
Undoubtedly, the differences between civilizations and cultures exist objectively. Wars between the Liao and Song dynasties, between the eastern and western Qarakhanids and the Uighurs of Gaochang and Khotan, and between the Khorezm and Western Qarakhanid states against the Western Liao, show that this difference could have turned into hostility and war. The disrespect and even repression of the Liao and the later Western Liao vassal states (the Liao to the Jurchens, the Western Liao to the Eastern and Western Karakhanides, the Gaochang Uighurs, and the Khorezm), especially the "Khitanization" policy of Qu Qu Lu's vain attempt to use violence to force the Western Liao people to convert to Buddhism, eventually provoked a strong backlash, which instead led to the disintegration of the military and the people and the collapse of the state. Therefore, it is clear that military strength alone and the coercive means of military administration cannot sustainably maintain a multi-ethnic and multicultural country. The reason why the Khitan was able to maintain a huge empire on the east side of the civilization fault line and in the hinterland for a long time was because of its strong cultural tolerance. Through the policy of "rule according to customs", the Liao Dynasty succeeded in making all ethnic groups, cultures, and religious beliefs within its borders feel tolerant and respected. Buddhism was originally the upper-class religion of the Western Liao ruling group such as Yelu Dashi, but the Western Liao Empire did not only favor Buddhism and suppressed other religions, it was precisely because "the Western Liao Dynasty implemented the policy of freedom of religious belief, changed the Qarakhanid Dynasty's policy of making Islam the state religion and restricting other religions, so all kinds of religions in the Western Liao Empire became active, including Islam, and there was a great development." The policy of civilization tolerance and integration between Liao and Western Liao gave birth to the pluralistic coexistence of various civilization forms on the fault line of civilization in the Liao Dynasty, realized the reshaping and identification of the social culture of the Eastern Eurasian region centered on the Liao Dynasty, and incorporated countries and nations of different civilizations into the world order centered on the Liao Dynasty, thus realizing peace under the rule of the Khitan.
III. The World Order of the Liao Dynasty and the Fairbank East Asian "Tributary System"
During the Liao Dynasty, there was a multi-faceted and complex world order based on suzerain-vassal relations in East Asia centered on the Liao-Song-Yuanyuan Alliance, East Asia centered on the Liao Dynasty, and inland Asia. It is quite different from the so-called "tributary system" of East Asia proposed by Mr. Fairbank in terms of institutional connotation and value orientation. The theory of the "Huayi Order" began with Professor Fairbank, an American sinologist. Due to the weakness of the academic research on the relationship between Chinese history and neighboring countries and the theoretical forms such as the "Huayi Order", especially in the specific theoretical research, Fei Shi's theory is very weak. In 1941, Professor Fairbank and Professor Deng Siyu, a Chinese-American scholar, published an article entitled "On the Tributary System of the Qing Dynasty", which made pioneering contributions to the theoretical study of the tributary system. Fairbank believed that China's tributary system was an extension of the centralized agricultural system to the international order, and maintaining the coherence and universality of the tributary system was actually related to the continuity and political stability of the Confucian cultural order within this "China". Therefore, the purpose of the tributary system was to ensure that the Confucian principle of "unity and centralized management of the true Son of Heaven" was followed throughout the world, thus demonstrating the legitimacy of the Son of Heaven in the country. Therefore, after establishing a tributary relationship based on the principles of Confucianism with another smaller country, a country will inevitably do its best to replicate this tributary relationship and impose it on all other small states with which it has dealings, so as to form a tributary system that demonstrates the "supremacy of the Son of Heaven". However, the world order constructed by the Liao Dynasty posed a challenge to Professor Fairbank's theory of "Huayi Order", because the complexity of the interlocking of suzerain-vassal relations and the equality relationship in the world order of the Liao Dynasty and the diversity of forms of suzerain-vassal relations were obviously inexplicable by Fairbank's tributary theory.
The Liao Dynasty established a composite world order: the relationship between the clan and the vassals was predominant, with equal interaction and various forms, and the relationship between the Liao Dynasty and the Song Dynasty and most of the Inner Asian countries was not in essence a suzerain-vassal relationship, but an equal diplomatic relationship. During the Liao Dynasty, although all the countries that carried out tributary trade in the "History of Liao" were called "Lai Gong", because Liao and many of these countries were not suzerain-vassal relations, they could not be called "Lai Gong", and could only be called "gifts" as Xiang Lewei Han Sen, such as Khotan and the Eastern and Western Karakhanid States, although the national strength was greatly weaker than that of Liao, but except for the so-called "Lai Gong" and diplomatic exchanges such as the conclusion of marriages, there was no diplomatic norm that could clearly reflect the relationship between the suzerains and vassals, and its relationship with Liao should be regarded as an equal relationship. Although the tributary order of the clan based on Confucian etiquette norms was established in the Liao and Goryeo regions of East Asia, a world order centered on Confucian cultural values was never established in the international order of Inner Asia.
In contrast to Fairbank's so-called "tributary system," the Liao dynasty did not rule out the establishment of substantial or even nominal equal relations with other small Inner Asian states. For countries that were essentially equal, even small ones, the Liao Dynasty never refused to associate with them. It is true that the Liao Dynasty also took a series of diplomatic measures to seek to construct a world order that covered the entire eastern Eurasian continent and was regulated by suzerain-vassal relations, and on the basis of the tributary relations of the Liaoli suzerain-vassal relations that existed in East Asia, the Liao Dynasty did use the vocabulary of the suzerain-vassal system in its discourse with the Inner Asian states, which to some extent seemed to be similar to the diffusion characteristics of the so-called tributary system of Fairbank. However, unlike Fairbank's so-called tributary system, the guidance of Confucian principles, whether in the Liao or Western Liao, was never the necessary values to maintain the establishment of a world order in Eastern Eurasia centered on the Liao dynasty. Thus, although the Liao and Goryeo in East Asia concluded a tributary system based on Confucian values and Buddhist civilization, they did not establish the ritual relationship regulated by such Confucian values with the Uighurs of Gaochang, a vassal state in Inner Asia. Although the Western Liao practiced the Han system in the central proper, it did not seek to make it a mandatory institutional norm for the Islamic vassals of Inner Asia. The reasons for this are, first of all, that the Liao Dynasty, as a foreign conqueror, pragmatically chose the policy of "rule by custom" in which multiple cultures and religions tolerated each other, in the context of the comparative strength and geographical environment in which the cultural soft power of the Liao Dynasty was not superior to that of Islamic civilization. Therefore, in constructing a Liao-centered world order externally, the Liao dynasty did not seek to transplant Confucian principles and Buddhist ideas into its foreign relations, nor did it need to rely on Confucianism or Buddhist values to establish the legitimacy of its regime. At the same time, in the eastern Eurasian continent, the East Asian international order of the Liao and Song dynasties ran through the Liao Dynasty's century-old state from beginning to end, and neither the Northern Song Dynasty nor the Liao Dynasty in the Central Plains had the conditions to "dominate East Asia." Therefore, the Liao and Song dynasties launched equal and fierce competition with their vassal states in the eastern Eurasian continent.
The foreign relations of the Liao Dynasty were also based on the changes in its domestic political ecology and external geopolitical pattern, and the internal policy principle of "rule by custom" was used to guide foreign affairs, and the countries of the Eastern Eurasian continent were included in the world order dominated by the Liao as much as possible with flexible and diverse pragmatic diplomacy, and diplomatic competition with the Song Dynasty in East Asia. In inland Asia, in different ways, it established a pluralistic and complex tributary relationship with the Qocho Uighurs and the eastern and western Karakhanid kingdoms and the Khorezm kingdoms, and from the perspective of the fact that China is still called "Khitan" among the Slavic and Turkic languages today, the foreign relations and civilization of the Liao Dynasty are of great significance for reshaping the world order of Eastern Eurasia centered on the Liao Dynasty.
Although the Liao Dynasty established suzerain-vassal relations with Goryeo in East Asia and the Gaochang Uighurs in Inner Asia, and established suzerain-vassal relations or good-neighborly and equal diplomatic relations with the Inner Asian countries in the Western Liao's strategy for Inner Asia, the world order centered on the Liao Dynasty basically presented a pluralistic and composite world order based on the suzerain-vassal relationship. The so-called Northern Dynasty represented by the Liao Dynasty achieved the central position of the international order in Eastern Eurasia from the 10th to the 12th centuries and forced neighboring countries such as Goryeo and Inner Asia to pay tribute. Moreover, the world order of the Liao Dynasty is also a further revision and challenge to Fairbank's so-called "Huayi order" and "tributary system", and it also further reflects the ability and influence of the Chinese nation, including the Liao Dynasty, with a pattern of pluralism and integration, to shape the historical civilization form of the eastern Eurasian region and promote the process of world order.
▲ "Academic Monthly" 2023 No. 12, the original text is about 18,000 words, and "Academic Digest of Liberal Arts in Colleges and Universities" is reproduced in No. 3 of 2024
New issue express
Table of Contents of Academic Abstracts of Liberal Arts in Colleges and Universities, Issue 4, 2024
Table of Contents of Academic Digest of Liberal Arts in Colleges and Universities, No. 3, 2024
Table of Contents of Academic Digest of Liberal Arts in Colleges and Universities, Issue 2, 2024
Table of Contents of Academic Digest of Liberal Arts in Colleges and Universities, Issue 1, 2024
Editor and proofreader: Li Jiajun
Review: Shen Lifei