![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
As one of the most controversial historical figures in modern Chinese history, Yuan Shikai has attracted considerable scholarly attention in recent decades. While Yuan’s diplomatic activity during his presidency of the early Republican era has been well studied, his earlier diplomatic activity during the late Qing period has not received much scholarly discussions in the English-language historiography. This article examines how Yuan negotiated with various imperialist powers over the restoration of Tianjin, as well as over the creation of foreign concessions in the city, at the turn of the twentieth century. It reveals Yuan’s distinctive diplomatic strategies while highlighting his way of positioning himself at the intersection of multiple nodes of power. It argues that Yuan Shikai’s diplomatic maneuvering played an indispensable role in the transformation of Tianjin from a city governed by a colonial administration to a Chinese city with multiple foreign concessions.
Acknowledgement
This article is based on a revised version of one of my dissertation chapters. I would like to thank Professor Emily Baum, one of my Ph.D. advisors, for her careful editing of a former iteration of this article and for her helpful comments on how to frame some of the arguments presented here. My thanks also go to Professor Jeffrey Wasserstrom, the other advisor of mine, for his insightful remarks on the continuity and changes between Yuan Shikai and Li Hongzhang. I am also grateful to Professor Antoinette Burton, who inspired me to consider how Yuan's diplomatic maneuvering constituted a “counter-narrative” vis-a-vis old-fashioned colonial history previliging only the colonizer's views. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Hong Zhang, who not only read the entire draft of this article but also encouraged me to submit my manuscript for publication consideration. It goes without saying that I am solely responsible for any errors in interpretation or arguments in this article.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 These seven powers were Britain, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, the United States, and Italy.
2 “Mr. Conger to Mr. Hay. Legation of the United States,” Peking, December 31, 1900, no. 491, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), vol. 60, 40.
3 For a succinct, yet thorough, summarization of the secondary literature on Yuan, see the introduction of Patrick Fuliang Shan, Yuan Shikai: A Reappraisal (UBC Press, 2018), 3–9.
4 These studies include but are not limited to: Jerome Chen, Yuan Shih-k’ai, 1859–1916: Brutus Assumes the Purple (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1961); Peter Lowe, Great Britain and Japan, 1911—1915 (London, Macmillan, 1969); Chan Lau Kit-ching, Anglo-Chinese Diplomacy, 1906 —1920 in the Careers of Sir John Jordan and Yuan Shih-kai (Hong Kong University Press, 1978); Ernest Young, The Presidency of Yuan Shih-kai: Liberalism and Dictatorship in Early Republican China (University of Michigan Press, 1977); Hirata Koji, “Britain’s Men on the Spot in China: John Jordan, Yuan Shikai, and the Reorganization Loan, 1912–1914,” Modern Asian Studies, vol. 47, no. 3 (2013): 895–934; Shan, Yuan Shikai, 194–200.
5 See Shan, Yuan Shikai, 67, 110–15; Zhang Hong, “Yuan Shikai and the Significance of His Troop Training at Xiaozhan, Tianjin, 1895–1899,” The Chinese Historical Review, vol. 26, no.1 (April 2019): 37–54.
6 Ibid., 132–33.
7 Some of the most prominent studies include: Ruth Rogaski, Hygienic Modernity: Meanings of Health and Disease in Treaty-Port China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004); Maurizio Marinelli, “Making Concessions in Tianjin: Heterotopia and Italian Colonialism in Mainland China.” Urban History, vol. 36, no. 3 (2009): 399–425; Elizabeth LaCouture, Dwelling in the World: Family, House, and Home in Tianjin, China, 1860–1960 (Columbia University Press, 2021).
8 Lewis Bernstein, “A History of Tientsin in the Early Modern Times, 1800–1910” (PhD, diss. University of Kansas, 1988), 213–63; and Lewis Bernstein, “Tianjin under Foreign Occupation, 1900–1902,” in The Boxers, China, and the World, eds. Robert Bickers and R. G. Tiedemann (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007), 133–46; Rogaski, Hygienic Modernity, article 6; Robert Nield, “Tientsin,” China’s Foreign Places: The Foreign Presence in China in the Treaty Port Era, 1840–1943, 244–45; and more recently, LaCouture, Dwelling in the World, 37–45.
9 Some scholars have touched on this topic but only mentioned it in passing. See MacKinon, Power and Politics, 39–40; Shan, Yuan Shikai, 106–07.
10 Hosea Ballou Morse, The International Relations of the Chinese Empire (London; New York; Bombay; Calcutta, 1918), vol. 3, 215, 243, 245; Rogaski, Hygienic Modernity, 165–66.
11 David J. Silbey, The Boxer Rebellion and the Great Game in China: A History (New York: Hill and Wang, 2013), 144–58.
12 Morse, The International Relations of the Chinese Empire, 292–93; Decennial Report of Imperial Maritime Customs (Shanghai: Statistical Department of the Inspectorate General of Customs, 1933): 579–82.
13 Nield, China’s Foreign Places, 244.
14 LaCouture, Dwelling in the World, 46.
15 Wang Yan, ed., Qingji Waijiao Shiliao (Historical Materials on Diplomacy during the Qing《清季外交史料》), Beijing: Shumu wenxian chubanshe, vol. 147, p. 21 (127), 1901.7.28; David Silbey, The Boxer Rebellion and the Great Game in China (New York: Hill and Wang, 2012), 227–28.
16 Ibid.
17 “Field Marshal Count von Waldersee to Mr. de Cologan.” April 16, 1901. FRUS, vol. 102, 136.
18 “Mr. Rockhill to Mr. Hay.” April 17, 1901. FRUS, vol. 103, 138.
19 Ibid.
20 “Field Marshal Count von Waldersee to M. de Cologan.” April 29, 1901, FRUS, vol. 111, 163.
21 Ibid. Approximately a month later, Waldersee reiterated these points in another letter delivered to de Cologan. See “Count von Waldersee to M. de Cologan,” May 25, 1901, FRUS, vol. 122, 179–80.
22 Wang Yan, ed., Qingji Waijiao Shiliao, vol. 147, p. 22 (128) (1901.7.28).
23 Mori Estuko (悅子森), “Tenshinto tÔgamon no tsuite” (On the Tianjin Provisional Government), Tôyôshi Kenkyu 67, no. 2 (1988), 325.
24 I have discussed the multi-faceted relationship between the TPG and various foreign consular authorities in the preceding article.
25 Spencer Tucker, ed., The Encyclopedia of the Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars: A Political, Social, and Military History, ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2009, 950.
26 Pierre Singaravélou, Tianjin Cosmopolis: Une autre histoire de la mondialisation, Paris: Seuil (2017), 313; William R. Manning, “China and the Powers Since the Boxer Movement,” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 4, no. 4 (October, 1910): 863.
27 Nihon gaiko bunsho (Japanese Diplomatic Documents『日本外交文書』), XXXV/XV, no. 302, 565–66; Mori, “Tenshinto tÔgamon no tsuite,” 326–27.
28 “A Telegraph to the Grand Council” (Zhi xingzai Jun Ji Chu dian 致行在军机处电), Yuan Shikai quanji (YSKQJ), December 9, 1901, Henan Daxue chubanshe (2013), vol. 10, 50; Manning, “China and the Powers,” 865.
29 Ibid.
30 Nihon gaiko bunsho, XXXV/XV, no. 304, 568.
31 “Mr. Wu to Mr. Hay,” January 20, 1902, FRUS, vol. 149, 184.
32 “Mr. Hay to Mr. Porter,” January 29, 1902, FRUS, vol. 152, 185–86.
33 This includes Britain, France, Italy, and Japan. See, specifically, “Mr. Porter to Mr. Hay,” February 17, 1902, FRUS, vol. 153, 186; “Mr. Choate to Mr. Hay,” February 12, 1902, FRUS, vol. 154, 187; “Mr. Meyer to Mr. Hay,” February 24, 1902, FRUS, vol. 157, 189; “Mr. Buck to Mr. Hay,” March 7, 1902, FRUS, vol. 158, 190.
34 “Baron von Richthofen to Mr. White,” February 25, 1902, FRUS, vol. 156, 190.
35 “Mr. Choate to Mr. Hay,” February 12, 1902, FRUS, vol. 154, 187.
36 “Appointing Tang Shaoyi as the Tianjin Maritime Customs Service Taotai” (yi Tang Shaoyi shu Jin haiguan dao pian 以唐绍仪署津海关道片), YSKQJ, December 6, 1901, vol. 10, 49.
37 Tianjin Social Science Academy, ed., Proces-verbaux des Seances du Gouvernement Provisoire de Tientsin (PVGPT), Tianjin: Tianjin shehui kexue yuan chubanshe (2004), vol. 2, 01/04/1902, 563; 02/03/1902, 566.
38 PVGPT, vol. 2, 03/17/1902, 602.
39 PVGPT, vol. 2, 03/26/1902, 612; for these tentative conditions, see 05/23/1902, 671–72.
40 “Mr. Conger to Mr. Hay,” June 11, 1902, FRUS, vol. 159, 190.
41 “Mr. Conger to Mr. Hay,” July 2, 1902, FRUS, vol. 161, 195–96; “Russia Helps out China,” New York Times, Jun 23, 1902; “Russia Gains a Point: Again Poses Conspicuously as The Friend Of China,” The Sun, Jun 24, 1902.
42 “A Letter in Consultation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs” (zi Waiwubu wen 咨外务部文), 06/30/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 315.
43 “A Telegraph to Hu Weide, the Ambassador in Russia (zhi zhu E gongshi Hu Weide dian 致驻俄公使胡惟德电), 06/30/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 315.
44 Yuan expressed his mistrust in one of his replies to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. See “A Telegraph to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (zhi Waiwubu dian 致外务部电), 07/06/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 334.
45 “A Letter in Consultation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs” (zi Waiwubu wen 咨外务部文), 06/30/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 315.
46 “A Telegraph to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs” (zhi Waiwubu dian 致外务部电), 07/03/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 325.
47 “Mr. Conger to Mr. Hay,” July 15, 1902, FRUS, vol. 163, 198; “A Telegraph to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs” (zhi Waiwubu dian 致外务部电), 07/09/1902, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 335.
48 Wang Yan, ed., “A Note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Foreign Ambassadors—on the Retrocession of Tianjin to be handled by the Imperial Minister” (Waibu fu geguo gongshi Tianjin qing jiao Beiyang dachen jieshou zhaohui 外部覆各國公使天津請交北洋大臣接受照會), 07/18/1901, Qingji Waijiao Shiliao, vol. 147, 7–8 (279–280).
49 PVGPT, vol. 2, 08/15/1902, 792.
50 The establishment of the Russian Concession in 1900 sparked immense controversies over this issue.
51 Toby Lincoln, An Urban History of China (Cambridge: Cambridge University of Press, 2021), 144.
52 This is beyond the scope of this essay, but the detailed negotiations have been discussed in my previous article.
53 “A Letter to the Imperial Minister regarding Britain’s Agreement on Taking over the Tianjin American Concession (Ying tongyi jiang Tianjin Mei zujie you Ying guanxia shi zhi han Beiyang dachen 英同意将天津美租界由英管辖事致函北洋大臣),” 08/06/1902, TJZJDAXB, 16–17.
54 “Yuan Shikai’s Reply to the British Ambassador in China (Yuan Shikai zhi Ying zhuhua gongshi fu han 袁世凯致英驻华公使复函),” 08/07/1902, TJZJDAXB, 18.
55 Specifically, the French was concerned with how to handle the properties that had been owned by a Chinese company before the Boxer War and that were then included into the newly extended French Concession. As for the German authorities, the German consul raised a series of questions with regard to the land prices. See TJZJDAXB, 105, 177–80.
56 “Submitting the Agreement and Map following the Resolution of the Belgian Concession for Documentation (Banli Bilishi zujie shi jun jiang ditu hetong zi cheng beian 辦理比利時租界事竣將地圖合同咨呈備案),” 1902.10.22, MHIAS, 02-11-019-18-001.
57 “Submitting the Agreement regarding the Expansion of the Tianjin Japanese Concession for Documentation (Riben kuochong Tianjin zujie jin jiang shangding hetong chengsong beian 日本擴充天津租界謹將商訂合同呈送備案),” 1903.7.13, MHIAS, 01-18-075-02-002.
58 “The Agreement on the Expansion of the Japanese Concession (Riben tuiguang zujie hetong 日本推广租界合同),” 1903. 4. 24, TJZJDAXB, 199–201.
59 “Correspondence from Yuan Shikai to Qian Rong with Respect to the Handling of Salt Stacks and Residential Houses in the Italian Concession (Yuan Shikai wei tuoban Yi jie yantuo, min fang shi zha chi Qian Rong 袁世凯为妥办意界盐坨、民房事札饬钱鑅),” 1901.12.19, TJZJDAXB, 393–94.
60 “In Hope of a Speedy Response regarding the Italian Ambassador’s Claim that Construction within the Italian Concession had been Ordered to Begin (zhun Yi Luo shi zhao cheng zai Jin zujie yi chi kaigong deng yin ying ruhe shang ban xi fu su you 準意羅使照稱在津租界已飭開工等因應如何商辦希復速由),” 1902. 1. 19, MHIAS, 02-11-007-03-002.
61 “Decisions to be Considered until Taotai Tang had Adequate Negotiations with regard to the Tianjin Italian Concession (Tianjin Yi guo zujie yishi yi chi Tang Dao tuo wei shang kan si bing fu zai zhuo duo you 天津意國租界一事已飭唐道妥為商勘俟稟復再酌奪由),” 1902.1.20, MHIAS, 02-11-007-03-003.
62 “A Detailed Response to the Imperial Minister Yuan Shikai with an Attachment of the Agreement about the Italian Concession (Zhanchao Yi zujie zhangcheng xiang fu Beiyang dachen Yuan Shikai 粘抄意租界章程详复北洋大臣袁世凯),” 1902.6.8, TJZJDAXB, 396–99.
63 “The Generally Acceptable Agreement between the Tianjin Taotai and Italy with regard to the Concession (Jin Haiguan Dao suo ding Yi guo zujie zhangcheng shang shu tuoxie you 津關道所訂意國租界章程尚屬妥協由),” 1902.7.2, MHIAS, 02-11-007-03-006.
64 “A Proclamation to the Tianjin Residents (Xiao yu Jin jun minren gaoshi 曉諭津郡民人告示),” 1902. 10. 7, SYKQJ, vol. 10, 473.
65 “A Proclamation on the Newly Created Italian Concession (Xiao yu xin ding Yi guo zujie gaoshi 曉諭新定意國租界告示), 1902. 12. 14, YSKQJ, vol. 10, 530; Shan, Yuan Shikai, 107–08.
66 “Yuan Shikai’s Correspondence with Zhang Lianfen and Qian Rong with regard to the Establishment of the Austrian Concession (Yuan Shikai wei Ao guo sheli zujie shi zha chi Zhang Lianfen, Qian Rong 袁世凱為奧國設立租界事札飭張蓮芬、錢鑅),” 1902. 3. 28, TJZJDAXB, 433.
67 “The Agreements about the Tianjin Austrian Concession being Acceptable Notwithstanding, the Various Issues Reported by Liu should be Verified (Tianjin Ao guo zujie zhangcheng sui shang tuoxie wei Liu Xiangrong deng suo bing ge jie shifou shu shi ying zhuo he sheng fu 天津奧國租界章程雖尚妥協惟劉向榮等所稟各節是否屬實應酌核聲復),” 1902. 7.13, MHIAS, 02-11-006-02-001.
68 “A Report from Zhang Enrui to the Concessionary Authorities about the Philanthropist Organization in the Eastern Side of the Austrian Concession not being an Official Land (Zhang Enrui wei qing zhaohui Ao guo dong yan shengshe shi mo chang shi fei guandi shi bing zujie ju 张恩瑞为请照会奥国东延生社施馍厂实非官地事禀租界局),” 1902.9.29, TJZJDAXB, 434–35; “A Report from Yang Chengmo to the Concessionary Authorities about Protecting the Philanthropist Organization (Yang Chengmo wei shefa baohu mo chang qingxing shi bing zujie ju 杨承谟为报设法保护馍厂情形事禀租界局),” 1902.10.4, TJZJDAXB, 435–36.
69 “The Agreements about the Tianjin Austrian Concession being Acceptable Notwithstanding, the Various Issues Reported by Liu should be Verified (Tianjin Ao guo zujie zhangcheng sui shang tuoxie wei Liu Xiangrong deng suo bing ge jie shifou shu shi ying zhuo he sheng fu 天津奧國租界章程雖尚妥協惟劉向榮等所稟各節是否屬實應酌核聲復),” 1902. 7.13, MHIAS, 02-11-006-02-001.
70 “Austria’s Intent to Establishing its Concession and the Difficulty of Changing Location as Suggested by Liu Xiangrong (zi fu Ao guo zujie xi zixing zhanju Liu Xiangrong suo qing ze di dihuan zhi chu ainan zhun ban qing cha you 咨復奧國租界希自行佔據劉向榮所請擇地抵換之處礙難准辦請查由),” 1903.1.1, MHIAS, 02-11-006-02-002.
71 “Yuan’s Correspondence with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Submission of the Sino-Austrian Agreements and Map for Documentation (Yuan Shikai wei jiansong Ao zujie hua yang hetong ditu qing cunan bei cha shi zi cheng Waiwu bu 袁世凯为检送奥租界华洋合同地图请存案备查事咨呈外务部),” 1903. 3.29, TJZJDAXB, 439–40.
72 See, for instance, “A Letter from Qian Rong to the Russian Consul in Determining the Boundary of Railway (Qian Rong wei heading tielu jiezhi shi zhi E lingshi han 钱鑅为划定铁路界址事致俄领事函),” 1901.7.25, TJZJDAXB, 334–35.
73 “A Report from Zhang Lianfen, Tang Shaoyi, and Qian Rong to Yuan Shikai with regard to the Difficulty in Dealing with the Russian Concession and Considerations of Solutions (Zhang Lianfen, Tang Shaoyi, Qian Rong wei banli E guo zujie kunnan qingxing yiji zhuo ni banfa deng qing bing Yuan Shikai 张莲芬、唐绍仪、钱鑅为办理俄国租界困难情形以及酌拟办法等情禀袁世凯),” 1902.4.3, TJZJDAXB, 338–40.
74 This was eventually resolved as a result of the intervention of Gustav Detrilin, the President of the Tianjin Municipal Council.
75 “Yuan Shikai’s Instruction (Yuan Shikai pi 袁世凯批),” 1902.5.6, TJZJDAXB, 340–41.
76 Singaravelou, Tianjin Cosmopollis, 239–59.
77 “A Report from Zhang Lianfen, Qian Rong, and Tang Shaoyi to Yuan Shikai with regard to the Inspections of the East Side of Hai River as a New Location for Storing Salt Piles (Zhang Lianfen, Qian Rong, Tang Shaoyi wei kancha Haihe dong an bo zuo tuo di shi bing Yuan Shikai 张莲芬、钱鑅、唐绍仪为勘察海河东岸拨作坨地事禀袁世凯),” 1902. 5.19, TJZJDAXB, 341–43.
78 “Yuan Shikai’s Instruction (Yuan Shikai pi 袁世凯批),” 1902.6.16, TJZJDAXB, 343.
79 “A Report from Zhang Lianfen, Tang Shaoyi, and Qian Rong with regard to the Inclusion of the Land of Salt Piles into the Russian Concession (Zhang Lianfen, Tang Shaoyi, Qian Rong wei E zujie yan tuo di gei jia guizuo zujie shi 张莲芬、唐绍仪、钱鑅为俄租界盐坨地给价归作租界事),” 1902.11.24, TJZJDAXB, 344–45.
80 “Copies of the Memorials on the Newly Created Tianjin Italian, Austrian, and Japanese Concessions (Tianjin xin ding Yi Ao Riben zujie yi zhe chao gao zi cheng you 天津新訂意奧日本租界一折抄稿咨呈由),” 1903.7.23, MHIAS, 02-11-007-03-009.
81 LaCouture, Dwelling in the World, 46.
82 “Austria’s Intent to Establishing its Concession and the Difficulty of Changing Location as Suggested by Liu Xiangrong (zi fu Ao guo zujie xi zixing zhanju Liu Xiangrong suo qing ze di dihuan zhi chu ainan zhun ban qing cha you 咨復奧國租界希自行佔據劉向榮所請擇地抵換之處礙難准辦請查由),” 1903.1.1, MHIAS, 02-11-006-02-002.
83 Guo Weidong (郭卫东), “The Change of Duties of Li Hongzhang and the Imperial Minister” (Jianzhi da guo benchai: Li Hongzhang yu Beiyang dachen de zhiwu zhuanhuan 兼职大过本差：李鸿章与北洋大臣的职务转换) Xuzhou gongcheng xueyuan xuebao, 28, no. 6 (2013), 31–37.
84 Rogaski, Hygienic Modernity; Singaravelou, Tianjin Cosmopollis.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Taoyu Yang
Having graduated from the University of California in 2022, Taoyu Yang is currently a Global Perspectives on Society Postdoctoral Fellow at NYU Shanghai. His research interests revolve around the multi-imperial dimensions of Chinese treaty port cities during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Correspondence to: Taoyu Yang. Email:[email protected]