Ch'ien-lung's Letter to King George III of Great Britain

(Ref.: F. Schurmann et al., (eds.), Imperial China, pp. 105-13)

(Language adjusted for reading level by James Couture – 2006)

Background:

Excerpted from The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition.  2001-05.

Ch'ien-lung, 1711–99, reign title of the fourth emperor (1735–96) of the Ch’ing dynasty, whose given name was Hung-li. Under his vigorous military policy, China attained its maximum territorial expanse; Xinjiang in the west was conquered, and Myanmar and Annam in the south were forced to recognize Chinese political control. He restricted Western merchants to Guangzhou (Canton) in 1759, and he rejected British overtures for expanded trade and diplomatic ties in 1793. Ch’ien-lung was a patron of scholarship and the arts; some of China’s finest porcelain and cloisonné were produced for his collections... Despite the surface splendor of cultural achievement and imperial expansion, his reign in later years was characterized by growing official corruption, loss of military efficiency, and fiscal imbalance.

Introduction:

In the summer of 1793, after a nine-month sea voyage from England, the British expedition led by Lord Macartney dropped anchor to begin the overland journey to the Imperial court at Peking. King George III's ambassador had been instructed to deliver a personal letter from the king to the emperor requesting permission to post a representative to the imperial court and allow the expansion of trade with China which, for all foreign countries, could only be conducted under strict regulation at the southern port of Canton. The request was unprecedented and, as far as the emperor was concerned, impossible to grant. The monumental arrogance and indifference to diplomatic niceties of the Son of Heaven conveyed in the emperor’s refusal played its part in hardening the British attitude toward China, though it was to take another 50 years before China's weakness in the face of real military power was revealed in the Opium war.

The Letter:

…I have looked over your (King George’s) request: the sincere terms in which it is phrased reveal a respectful humility on your part, which is highly praiseworthy. In consideration of the fact that your Ambassador and his deputy have come a long way with your request and tribute, I have shown them high favor and have allowed them to be introduced into my presence. To show my indulgence, I have entertained them at a banquet and made them numerous gifts. I have also caused presents to be forwarded to the Naval Commander and six hundred of his officers and men, although they did not come to Peking, so that they too may share in my all- embracing kindness.

As to your request to send one of your citizens [namely, Lord Macartney] to be admitted as an official to my Celestial Court and to be in control of your country's trade with China, this request is against the traditions of my dynasty and cannot possibly be allowed. It is true that Europeans, in the service of the dynasty, have been permitted to live at Beijing. But they are compelled to adopt Chinese dress. They are strictly confined to their own neighborhoods and are never permitted to return home. You are presumably familiar with our dynastic regulations. Your proposed Envoy to my Court could not be placed in a position similar to that of European officials in Peking who are forbidden to leave China, nor could he, on the other hand, be allowed liberty of movement and the privilege of writing freely to his own country. So, you would gain nothing by his residence in Beijing.

…Supposing that your Envoy should come to our Court… His language and national dress differ from that of our people. There would be no place where we could let him live. It may be suggested that he might imitate the Europeans permanently resident in Peking and adopt the dress and customs of China. However, it has never been our dynasty's wish to force people to do things unseemly and inconvenient. Besides, supposing I sent an Ambassador to reside in your country, how could you possibly make for him similar arrangements? Europe consists of many other nations besides your own: if each and all demanded to be represented at our Court, how could we possibly consent? The thing is utterly impracticable. How can our dynasty alter its whole procedure and system of etiquette, established for more than a century, in order to meet your individual views?

If it be said that your object is to exercise control over your country's trade, your nationals have had full liberty to trade at Canton for many a year, and have received the greatest consideration at our hands. … Why then should foreign nations advance this utterly unreasonable request to be represented at my Court? Peking is nearly two thousand miles from Canton, and at such a distance what possible control could any British representative exercise?

If you claim that your reverence for Our Celestial dynasty fills you with a desire to acquire our civilization, our ceremonies and code of laws differ so completely from your own that, even if your Envoy were able to learn the basics of our civilization, you could not possibly transplant our manners and customs to your alien soil. Therefore, however adept the Envoy might become, nothing would be gained.

…I have but one aim in view, namely, to maintain a perfect government and to fulfill the duties of the state. Strange and costly objects do not interest me. If I have commanded that the tribute offerings sent by you, O King, are to be accepted. This was solely in consideration for the spirit which prompted you to send them from afar. Our dynasty's majestic virtue has penetrated into every country under heaven. Kings of all nations have offered their costly tribute by land and sea. As your Ambassador can see for himself, we possess all things. I set no value on objects strange or ingenious, and have no use for your country's manufactures. This then is my answer to your request to appoint a representative at my Court, a request contrary to our dynastic tradition, which would only result in inconvenience to yourself. I have explained my wishes in detail and have commanded your tribute Envoys to leave in peace on their homeward journey. It is in your best interests, O King, to respect my feelings and to display even greater devotion and loyalty in future. That way, by everlasting submission to our Throne, you may secure peace and prosperity for your country hereafter…

-----------------------------------------------------

Questions for the reading:

Answer in complete sentences and provide explanation and/or evidence to back up your points.

1. What has King George III asked for that has led Ch'ien-lung to write this response?

2. What is the tone of this article? Provide two quotes that prove your point.

3. How do you imagine King George III, king of the England, the superpower of that era, would have felt upon reading this letter.

4. What reasons does Ch'ien-lung give for refusing King George’s request.

5. In thirty words or less, summarize what Ch'ien-lung was saying to George III.