1In 1793, that is, the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period of the Qing dynasty of China, the remote British Empire in Europe sent a diplomatic mission, led by Lord George Macartney, to China on the occasion of the Qianlong emperor’s birthday. The visit of the Macartney Embassy (also referred to as the Macartney Mission) can be considered a highlight in the history of diplomacy during the Qing dynasty. Regarding the visit of the mission, both China and Great Britain have left a large number of archives and records, providing first-hand materials for a comprehensive understanding of the historical facts of the mission. Reviewing these materials, especially the Chinese records, we find that the giving of presents constituted quite a significant portion of this diplomatic activity. It can be said that diplomatic presents played a very important role in this Sino-British contact process. Furthermore, there were multi-layered expressions on both sides concerning the different interpretations of these presents. The focus of this article is on the well-known presents given to the Qianlong emperor by the Macartney Embassy. According to views that prevailed in the past, these presents, representing the advancement of British technology and industry, received the full attention of neither the Qianlong emperor nor his court officials. They were instead casually set aside, like toys briefly played with by capricious children. Is this really the case? What kinds of attitudes did the Qianlong emperor have towards the British presents? How were these presents finally disposed of? Do the Palace Museum in Beijing and other institutions still have the “tributes” of the Macartney Embassy in their collections? What effects did the presents of the Macartney Embassy have on succeeding interactions between China and Great Britain? This article will use the Qing archives and existing artefacts to track down these presents and to reconstruct their true historical context in the Qing imperial court.
2In the early and middle Qing dynasty, the missions to China on behalf of the nations and monarchs of Europe—including representatives from a handful of countries, such as Russia, the Netherlands, and Great Britain—although few in number, had extensive and profound impact. Some of the presents that were exchanged between the two parties during these interactions were recorded, providing us with substantial information about the presents given by the missions. Among the presents offered to the Chinese emperors by these Western countries, the ones prompting the most interest and discussion were the presents given by the Macartney Embassy to the Qianlong emperor in 1793.
- 1 1 Staunton 1799.
- 2 2 British Library, India Office Records IOR G/12/91. Many thanks to Professor Henrietta Harrison, E (...)
3In view of the important mission of the Macartney Embassy, the relevant parties spent a great deal of time selecting these presents. In terms of their quantity and quality, the embassy’s presents were foremost among the presents given by the Western missions to Qing-dynasty China. The account by the Secretary of the Macartney Embassy, Sir George Staunton1 and the archives of the English East India Company both document in detail the selection and procurement of the presents for the mission.2
4In his account, Staunton stated that, in order to find interpreters for the mission, the British Ambassador to Naples, Sir William Hamilton, selected two Chinese students who spoke Italian and Latin from the Chinese Academy in Naples and brought them back to Great Britain in May of 1792. These two Chinese students, with their knowledge of Chinese affairs, offered valuable advice on the preparations for the mission, especially on the selection of the presents to the Chinese emperor and his court officials. Not only did they give the types of goods that were most needed and profitable in Guangzhou at the time, but they also clearly outlined the Chinese enthusiasm for sophisticated mechanical products. They stated:
- 3 3 Staunton 1799: 22 (1963: 37).
Extraordinary pieces of ingenious and complicated mechanism, set in frames of precious metal, studded with jewels, and producing, by the means of internal springs and wheels, movements apparently spontaneous, had, often, borne excessive prices. They were, indeed, of no sort of use; but the imagination of the governing mandarines had been struck by them; and an intimation often followed to the native merchants to procure them, no matter at what price. This mandate it was dangerous to disobey; and the machines were afterwards accepted, formally, as gifts; or a sum, small and disproportionate to the cost, was given in return for them, in order that the transaction might have the appearance of a common purchase. Toys of this kind, or sing-songs, according to the corrupt jargon of Canton [present-day Guangzhou], to the enormous value of, at least, a million of pounds sterling, were, in this manner, introduced by private traders into China. Most of these expensive articles found their way, finally, into the palaces of the Emperor, and his ministers. Having been obtained by the mandarines of Canton for little other consideration than the promise of protection to their inferiors, they were, after a short time, transmitted without reluctance, by them, to Pekin [Beijing], in the hope of thereby securing the favour of their superiors.3
5These descriptions were very consistent with the actual situation in China at that time. Indeed, clocks, music boxes, robotic dolls, etc., were among the few Western objects that Chinese emperors and bureaucrats were keenly interested in. The Qing imperial court collected a large number of such so-called “Western rare treasures.”4 Given the goals of opening up the British relationship with China and of winning the goodwill of the Qing court, the selection of these two Chinese students was indeed a good choice.
6The preparation and procurement of the presents for the Macartney Embassy were mainly carried out by the English East India Company, which was responsible for the specific contact and financial support. With years of experience in dealing with Chinese trade and dealing with Chinese people, the company could provide more useful information on the selection of presents. After analyzing the collected data, the organizers of the mission believed that, although the Chinese were keenly interested in sophisticated mechanical products,
- 5 5 Staunton 1799: 22 (1963: 37).
It would have been vain to think of surpassing, in public presents of this kind, either as to workmanship or cost, what had already been conveyed to China through private channels; and it was to be hoped that the momentary gratification, produced by those gaudy trifles, had been satiated by the accumulation of them.5
7In consideration of the tasks of the mission, the organizers finally selected items in the following categories as presents for the Chinese emperor and his court officials:
Products of modern science and technology. These were selected because “it was thought that whatever tended to illustrate science, or promote arts, would give more solid and permanent satisfaction to a prince whose time of life would, naturally, lead him to seek, in every object, the practical uses to which it could be put.”
Astronomical instruments. These were chosen because, “Astronomy being a science peculiarly esteemed in China, and deemed worthy of the attention and occupation of the government, the latest and most improved instruments for assisting its operations, as well as the most perfect imitation that had yet been made of the celestial movements, could scarcely fail of being acceptable.”
- 6 6 Staunton 1799: 22-23 (1963: 37-38).
A variety of new British manufactures. These were selected because “Specimens of the best British manufactures, and all the late inventions for adding to the conveniences and comforts of social life, might answer the double purpose of gratifying those to whom they were to be presented, and of exciting a more general demand for the purchase of similar articles.”6
8Based on these statements, we can determine the basic intended purposes of the presents given by the English at that time, that is, that the presents should show the level of British technological advancement, reflect the aesthetics of English culture, and be potentially important trade commodities between China and Great Britain in the future. From the final presents listed below, we can see that the presents that the English gave to the Qianlong emperor were basically prepared with these purposes or objectives in mind.
- 7 7 Staunton 1799: 242-246 (1963: 248-251).
9A list of all the presents one by one would be quite lengthy. Here, we will simply use the outline descriptions of the presents provided to the Chinese by the Macartney Embassy. These presents comprised a total of more than 590 items in nineteen categories. The most eye-catching item was a large planetarium, which included at least an operational model of the solar system; timing devices indicating eclipses, syzygies, and transits; and a reflective telescope used for verifying the above phenomena. In addition, the presents also included representative achievements of European scientific development at that time: large orreries, celestial globes, globes, moon-phase demonstrators, barometers, vacuum pumps, mechanical instruments, large focusing mirrors, a model of the battleship “Monarch,” muskets, pistols, a steel sword, copper cannons, howitzers, etc. They further included items demonstrating the level of English craftsmanship: newly designed, large-scale, assembled glass lighting fixtures, chariots, saddles, and vases used as interior furnishings or for decoration and made of various materials; and all kinds of wool, cotton, and steel products produced in Great Britain, such as gold blankets, wool felts, and so on. They also included paintings and prints representing the achievements and social conditions of the English culture and its art: portraits of the king, members of the royal family, and famous English figures; paintings and prints of famous cities, churches, parks, castles, bridges, lakes, volcanoes, ports, and monuments; and painting and prints of scenes of warfare on land, naval battles, horse races, and bullfights.7
- 8 8 India Office Records IOR G/12/91, 281-305.
10All of these presents were carefully custom-made by the most reputable manufacturers. They cost a great deal of money, and the total cost for all the presents was as high as £15,610.8
- 9 9 Majia’erni 2008: 141.
11Lord Macartney and his whole suite arrived in Beijing on 23 August 1793, and the presents were separately stored in the city, either at the Hall of Rectitude and Honor (Zhengda Guangming Dian) in the Old Summer Palace (Yuanmingyuan), or taken to Jehol (Rehe), the Imperial Summer Palace of the Mountain Resort (Bishu shanzhuang) at present-day Chengde. On 2 September, Macartney had taken some members of his suite and a portion of the presents to Jehol, arriving there on 8 September. Eight sets of the presents remained in Beijing and were installed by members of Macartney’s Embassy in the Hall of Rectitude and Honor in the Yuanmingyuan. They were assembled immediately out of their crates on the day of their arrival at the Yuanmingyuan, and all the assembly and testing were completed on 16 September. On 27 September, other presents stored in an official hall inside the Forbidden City were transported to the Hall of Rectitude and Honor in the Yuanmingyuan for arrangement. The Qianlong emperor went directly to the Hall of Rectitude and Honor in the Yuanmingyuan to see the English presents upon returning to Beijing from Jehol on 30 September. After that, the Macartney Embassy’s presents faded from sight, and only very brief accounts appeared thereafter in relevant works in the West. For example, in his journal on the day after the Qianlong emperor’s viewing of the presents, Lord Macartney, the Head of the Mission, wrote “the planetarium, lustres, globes, etc., […] seem to strike the Chinese in a most particular manner.”9 However, we learn from the Qing archives that the imperial court of the Qianlong emperor did at the time perform many specific operations on the presents from the Macartney Embassy.
- 10 10 “‘Record’ of the Ninth Month in the Fifty-eighth Year of the Qianlong Reign Period,” in Zhongguo (...)
12On the seventh day of the ninth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period (11 October 1793), the “Council of State [Junjichu] ordered: Let the Imperial Workshops [Zaobanchu] provide twenty-six white deer-leather tags to be used for labelling the items of the tribute from Great Britain, to be noted.”10 This was the Council of State ordering the Imperial Workshops to make white deer-leather tags, which were clearly prepared to be placed on the items of “tribute” presented by Great Britain. Such deer-leather tags were used by the imperial palace of the Qing dynasty to label important items, especially the important items related to frontier and foreign affairs. The relevant information was usually written in four languages, including Manchu, Mongolian, Tibetan, and Chinese, in order to preserve it for a longer time. Up to the present day, many of the artefacts in the collection of the Palace Museum still have such deer-leather tags attached, and the presents of the Macartney Embassy were being sorted for long-term preservation. The seventh day of the ninth month was 11 October by the Western calendar, only 10 days after the Qianlong emperor viewed all the presents of the Macartney Embassy in the Yuanmingyuan.
13On the twenty-eighth day of the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period (2 October 1793), the third day after the Qianlong emperor’s viewing of the presents of the Macartney Embassy, the Imperial Workshops received the work-order instructions described in the following account:
- 11 11 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2005: QL58.8, vol. 53, 697-699.
Storehouse Commissioner [Kuzhang] Shu Xing and Foreman [Cuizhang] Heng Shan came to make a request, which they submitted via the eunuch Eruli: One case for three round Western waist plaques, one case for fourteen Western earrings, one case for ten Western earrings, one case with two drawers for eighteen Western head bands, one case with two drawers for sixteen pairs of Western scissors, one case with two drawers for ten pairs of Western scissors, one case with two drawers for three Western belts, one case with three drawers for twenty-two Western belt plaques, one case with two drawers for twelve Western knives, one case with four drawers for sixty Western buttons. All items were presented by Great Britain. Issue an imperial decree: “Prepare mahogany boxes to store them. So ordered by the emperor himself.”11
14For the above-mentioned items, the Imperial Workshops quickly designed 11 rectangular boxes from the third to twenty-seventh days of the ninth month (7-31 October 1793), and obtained the approval of the Qianlong emperor to construct them as designed. Finally, on the eighth day of the first month in the fifty-ninth year of the Qianlong reign period (7 February 1794), all the mahogany boxes were made and all the items were placed in these custom-made boxes. According to the records of the archives, these mahogany boxes containing English items were stored in the European Palaces (Shuifadian) in the Yuanmingyuan.
15The European Palaces in the Yuanmingyuan was the most common place for storing and displaying Western devices during the reign of the Qianlong emperor. There are a large number of records in the archives about supplying Western items to the European Palaces. Almost every category of Western items handed over to the European Palaces were mostly viewed by the Qianlong emperor. They were stored by the decree of the emperor. The European Palaces can be considered a specialized warehouse focused on the storage, placement, and display of the Qianlong emperor’s Western devices. These Macartney Embassy presents recorded in the archives are small items; for example, the nineteenth item on the present list is the “Red-Haired Kingdom’s domestic products and various hand-made items.” So long as items were uniquely English, the Qianlong emperor would make sure they were properly preserved.
16On the following day, the twenty-ninth day of the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period (3 October 1793), the Imperial Workshops received a further three directives from the Qianlong emperor:
- 12 12 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2005: “Record” (Jishi lu), QL58.8, vol. 53, 656.
Storehouse Commissioner Shu Xing and Foreman Heng Shan came and said, through the eunuch Eruli, who delivered their message: A Western metal tool, presented by Great Britain. Issue an imperial decree: give it to the craftsmen of the Imperial Workshops.12
- 13 13 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2005: “Box Making Workshop” (Xiabiaozuo), QL58.10, vol. 53, 723.
Storehouse Commissioner Shu Xing and Foreman Heng Shan came and spoke, in a message delivered by eunuch Eruli: Five velvet-lined leather boxes, presented by the English. Issue an imperial decree: Line them with yellow silk. So ordered by the emperor himself. So on the eighth day of the beginning of the tenth month, the interiors of the five leather boxes were lined with yellow silk, replacing the previously used five rolls of velvet, and the boxes were placed in the Hall of Mental Cultivation (Yangxindian) in the Forbidden City for the emperor to view. By the imperial decree: Take the boxes to the storeroom and use the replaced velvet for use as materials. So ordered by the Empower himself.13
- 14 14 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2005: “Box Making Workshop.”
Storehouse Commissioner Shu Xing and Foreman Heng Shan came and said, delivered by the eunuch Eruli: a silk painting of silver flowers on a pale blue background, a painting of honeysuckle on a white background, a silk painting of gold flowers on a cream background, presented by Great Britain. Issue an imperial decree: take the silver flower on pale-blue silk painting and mount it on a camphor wood screen, once in place find a suitable position for it. The remaining two gold and silver flower paintings are to be stored away, and used to decorate boxes, by order of the emperor himself. Thus, on the twenty-third day of the ninth month [27 October 1793], the painting of a silver flower on pale blue silk was fitted in the camphor wood screen, affixed in place, and displayed in the European Palaces.14
17The metal tool, velvet-lined leather boxes, and the silver and gold flower paintings were all functional tools or things used to package other objects, and the Qianlong emperor explained how each should be handled in turn. Tools were given to the Imperial Workshops for their craftsmen to use; leather boxes were re-lined and given back to the inner storeroom to use again; silk paintings were used as mounting materials, with one moon-white silver-ground flower painting being used as the focal point of a screen and placed in the European Palaces in the Yuanmingyuan. Suffice to say the best use was made of all these items.
18Predominantly, textiles like broadcloth and serge were bestowed on ministers of a certain rank, in and outside of the capital, or senior officials of a particular post, like the governors-general (Zongdu) and governors (Xunfu) of various provinces. The rewards were bestowed shortly after the Qianlong emperor had reviewed all of the mission’s presents, and their primary aim was to promulgate the brilliance of the Qing court to ministers and officials and to make known its cultural prestige to ministers far and wide. Many senior officials receiving these rewards wrote memoranda expressing their gratitude. In each of most of these thank-you letters, the author makes explicit that these prized goods were those given as “tribute” by Great Britain. However, some senior officials overlooked this and did not mention this point in their thank-you memoranda. Upon discovering this, the Qianlong emperor was very unhappy, and he issued a special imperial decree to redress these senior officials’ oversight. It is through this imperial decree that we know the specific circumstances of the presents of the Macartney Embassy. The decree was made by the emperor on the thirtieth day of the ninth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period (3 November 1793), issued through the Grand Secretariat (Neige) with its full text reading as follows:
- 15 15 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2002: vol. 40, 239-240, QL58.9.30 (3 November 1793).
The Grand Secretariat received an imperial edict: Great Britain sent an emissary to the capital to respectfully present gifts. Because these foreign objects are from a faraway land, the emperor made a special order that they be distributed as rewards, so that all senior officials in and outside of the capital might know of [our] flourishing culture and widespread prestige. After the governors-general and governors received their presents, they were to write letters of thanks, detailing that these rewards were the gifts presented by Great Britain. Yesterday, Zhu Gui presented a memorandum to the emperor which made this point clear. However, today Jiang Zhaokui refers to merely receiving a serge jacket, without a word of mention that it was received as “tribute” from Great Britain. It seems as though this reward was given without particular reason, and the fact that it was a present from Great Britain is very unclear. Zhu Gui’s calligraphy is slightly superior, so his wording is fitting. However, because Jiang Zhaokui has risen from the local level, his writing is less polished. Thereupon his mediocre staff made misleading remarks, which is improper. Now the letters to express gratitude from the governors-general and governors are on their way, and there might be some among them that were incomplete, like those of Jiang Zhaokui, but could not be corrected in time. This type of letter is not as important or serious. If a letter were related to handling of local affairs, and there were issues to be reported, yet one were still so careless as to let the lower-level staff write at will, could not this cause big mistakes? Hereafter, when submitting memoranda to the emperor, it is advisable to take more care, to make the writing more suitable. However, I, the emperor, will not determine the virtue of a governor-general or a governor on the trivial matter of language like this, which has nowhere near the importance of politics. Make it known by this decree.15
19The Zhu Gui mentioned in this decree was the teacher of the Jiaqing emperor, and served as the Governor of Anhui at the time. Jiang Zhaokui was the Governor of Shanxi. Jiang Zhaokui received a piece of serge fabric large enough for a jacket, and Zhu Gui likely also received something similar. This shows that the Qianlong emperor had the textiles presented by the Macartney Embassy cut to the sizes of single items of clothing before awarding them to senior officials. As such, large numbers of officials received rewards, and before long these presents were widely distributed. Through this process of conferring rewards, the Macartney Embassy’s presents became a tool used by the Qianlong emperor in portraying his self-image, and an advertisement of the prosperous age founded by him, whence all nations paid “tribute” to China.
20On the twenty-fourth day of the twelfth month in the fifty-ninth year of the Qianlong reign period (14 January 1795), over one year after the Macartney Embassy had departed from Beijing, the Qianlong court made their final arrangements for the Macartney Embassy’s presents and fixed their locations permanently.
- 16 16 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2008: vol. 18, 397-398, QL59.12.24 (14 January 1795).
The English state reverently submitted [tribute that was distributed as follows]. A set of astrological clocks and charts was placed in the Immense Ocean Observatory (Yuanyingguan). An equatorium was set up in the Lodge of Sincerity Cultivation (Chunhuaxuan). A celestial globe was set up in the Hall of Tranquil Minds (Danhuaitang). A globe was placed in the Hall of Tranquil Minds. An equatorium was placed in the Palace of Tranquil Longevity (Ningshougong). An instrument predicting a sunny or overcast day [a barometer] was placed in the Palace of Tranquil Longevity. A pair of glass lamps was placed in the European Palaces. A weathervane was placed in the European Palaces. An automaton was placed in the European Palaces. Small objects of appreciation were stored in both the Inner Palace (Neidian) and the European Palaces. Ceramics were separately stored in the Inner Palace, the Hall of Military Prowess (Wuyingdian), and the European Palaces. Whole sets of paintings were stored in the European Palaces and the Imperial Workshop. A Western ship model was put in the European Palaces. A pair of bicycles was placed in the European Palaces. A summer carriage was placed in the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence (Jingyiyuan). A winter carriage was placed in the Garden of Limpid Ripples (Qingyiyuan). A large fire mirror was stored in the Object Warehouse (Qiminku) of the Yuanmingyuan. The two watermelon-shaped cannons (xigua pao) with complete bullets were stored in the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence and in the Garden of Limpid Ripples, one in each location. Four bronze cannons with complete bullets were stored in the Court of Imperial Armaments (Wubeiyuan). Two more bronze cannons with complete bullets were also stored in the Court of Imperial Armaments, along with thirteen barrels of gunpowder received and stored by the Gunpowder Bureau. A case full of copperplate art prints was received by the Imperial Workshops, including portraits of the royal family of the “red-haired” foreign king, city buildings, towers, mountains and rivers, scenes of churches, historic land and sea battles, ancient temples, and galloping horses. A small case of copperplate prints of battle ordnance was received by the Imperial Workshops. Felt carpets, or “English Oriental Rugs,” received together in one large case, were stored, some in each location, at the Yuanmingyuan, the Inner Palace, the Garden of Limpid Ripples, and the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol. Two horse’s saddles, received together in one case, were stored separately in the Hall of Military Officers (Wuchengdian) and the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines (Wanhesongfengyuan) in Jehol. Among seven cases of small-bore and large-bore guns and “red-haired” foreigners’ swords, the distribution was as follows. Sixteen “red-haired” foreigners’ swords without handles, each three feet long, were distributed to the Hall of Military Officers, the Court of Imperial Armaments, the Imperial Workshops, and the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines in Jehol, some to each location. A silver-inlaid flintlock musket was stored at the Hall of Military Officers. Four small flintlock rifles, one foot long each, were stored, some in the Hall of Military Officers and some in the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines. Two five-foot-long double-barreled muskets were stored by the Court of Imperial Armaments. Four five-foot-long small-bore rifles were stored, some in the Hall of Military Officers and some in the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines. The contents of thirty cases of fabrics including broadcloth, camlet, and wool were distributed as follows. The broadcloth and serge fabrics remaining after rewards of them had been conferred were distributed among the following locations for storage: the Hall of Mental Cultivation, the Palace of Tranquil Longevity, the Hall of Military Officers, the Storage Office (Guangchusi), the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol, the Fragrant Garden (Fangyuanju), the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines, the City of Mukden, and Mount Pan. Fabrics sent to these locations included twelve bolts of broadcloth in mixed colors; twelve bolts of broadcloth in green, blue, and light and dark red colors; two bolts of fine broadcloth; and two cases of fine serge and plain bombazine fabrics. Two telescopes with the ability to see far into the distance clearly, day and night, were stored, one at the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence and one at the Wind in the Pines of a Myriad Ravines.16
21Through this description of the placement of these objects, we can see that the most important of the Macartney Embassy’s presents were eventually spread among several of the imperial palaces: the Forbidden City, the Yuanmingyuan, the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence, the Garden of Limpid Ripples, the Hall of Military Officers in the Xiyuan, the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol, the Imperial Summer Villa on Mount Pan, the Imperial Palace in the city of Mukden, and almost all the important spots frequently visited by the Qianlong emperor. Many of these sites were places used by the court for storing foreign objects; for example, the European Palaces of the Yuanmingyuan was dedicated to storing Western curios, and the Court of Imperial Armaments and the Hall of Military Officers housed large quantities of foreign weapons. In particular, the Court of Imperial Armaments and the Hall of Military Officers were used to display objects commemorating important historical events significant to the history of the Qing dynasty. The displays in these buildings served to showcase the great success of the Manchu Qing powers in expanding national territory, and they had a practical significance in publicizing military success. Thus, the Macartney Embassy’s presents that found their final assigned location in the Court of Imperial Armaments were four bronze cannons, a further two bronze cannons, four “red-haired” foreigners’ knives without handles, two double-barreled muskets, and two large-bore rifles. In the Hall of Military Officers were placed a saddle, four “red-haired” foreigners’ knives without handles, a gilt-silver flintlock musket, two small-bore flintlock rifles, and two pistols. It can be said that the decision of where to place these objects was not made simply at random, but was based on a strong sense of symbolism.
22The Qing imperial record’s accounts of a more than year-long process of sorting, marking, packing up, using, giving out as rewards, and finally displaying the Macartney Embassy’s presents illustrates the importance that the Qing court attached to these presents, and to their appropriate handling and preservation. It was certainly not the case, as the Western accounts implied, that these presents were thrown aside by their recipients as toys are discarded by an uninterested child. The Chinese and English perceptions of each other’s attitudes towards these presents were completely different from the actual circumstances, and the reasons behind this are worth exploring.
23Taking into account the final destinations of the Macartney presents cited above, combined with the many vicissitudes of recent Chinese history, reasoned conclusions can be drawn as to the possibility that some of the objects still survive to this day.
24Presents that went to the Yuanmingyuan, the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence, the Garden of Limpid Ripples, and the Hall of Military Officers at the Xiyuan were the largest and, therefore, would not easily have been moved. As well, due to their particular locations, they would seldom have been moved. Without an extraordinary event taking place, then, presents stored in these places should have remained unmoved. However, in recent history, as everyone knows, unfortunate fates have befallen these sites, and they have suffered repeated calamities. The Yuanmingyuan, the Garden of Compatibility with Quiescence, and the Garden of Limpid Ripples were first plundered in 1860 and then burned to the ground by Franco-British troops. The Hall of Military Officers at the Xiyuan was occupied by the Eight Nation Alliance during the 1900 Boxer Rebellion and was looted. Therefore, the probability that presents from the Macartney Embassy remain in these original locations is not very high.
25Presents which may have survived include the armillary sphere and the barometer in the Hall of Tranquil Longevity in the Forbidden City; the box full of copperplate art prints, the small box of copperplate prints of battle ordnance, and the “red-haired” foreigners’ knives in the Imperial Workshops; the ceramics in the Hall of Military Prowess; the cannons, the “red-haired” foreigners’ knives, the double-barreled muskets, the large-bore rifle in the storerooms of the Court of Imperial Armaments; the horse saddle, the “red-haired” foreigners’ knives, the gold-inlaid flintlock musket, the flintlock, the small gun, the telescope, and the broadcloth and fine serge fabrics from the Imperial Palaces in the City of Mukden and Mount Pan; as well as other small objects distributed to each location at the time. Essentially, these presents would have circulated among the palaces, where there were few disturbances, and so it is probable that, among these collections, there will be some items that can be identified as the Macartney Embassy’s presents.
26From the Qing imperial records and the inventory of presents provided by the English East India Company mentioned above, combined with existing objects, it can be inferred that, at the very least, the following objects might be presents that survived from the Macartney Embassy:
- 17 17 Anderson 1795: 44 (1963: 127).
27This artefact is in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing (fig. F1, fig. F2). It is 159.5 centimeters long, with an inner diameter of 1.6 cm; the barrel is iron, and it rests on a lacquered wooden forestock which is inlaid with gold and silver patterns of flowers, armor, and other weapons. The back of the barrel is engraved “H. W. Mortimer London, Maker to His Majesty,” tallying with the “Two very elegant guns from H. W. Mortimer” in the East India Company inventory. The entire body of the gun is splendidly decorated, the same as the “gold-inlaid flintlock musket” mentioned in the imperial records as being kept at the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol. This is also in accordance with Macartney Embassy member Aeneas Anderson, who wrote of the “two beautiful fowling pieces; one inlaid with gold, and the other with silver”17 that were taken to the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol. This musket has a white deerskin label, with the following inscription written in Manchu, Mongolian, Tibetan, and Chinese scripts: “A flintlock musket reverently presented on behalf of King George of Great Britain on the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period.” This proves that this musket is one of the firearms presented to the Qianlong emperor in that year by the Macartney Embassy.
Fig. F1. Flintlock musket
L. 159.5 cm, inner diameter: 1.6 cm. © The Palace Museum of Beijing (gu 171636), China.
Fig. F2. Flintlock musket (detail of the butt)
© The Palace Museum of Beijing, China.
- 18 18 Anderson 1795: 144 (1963: 127).
28This artefact is in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing (fig. F3). It is 95.5 cm long, with an inner diameter of 0.8 cm. The barrel is gold-plated bronze, and it is divided into two parts. When in use, it can be used simply as a musket or, together with the second section of a bronze barrel fixed on top, as an air gun. It has a wooden stock with a trigger and plate; the underside of the mid-section of the stock has a gold-plated bronze compressed-air ball-shaped tank, which is fixed to the rifle butt with a screw socket. The back of the barrel of the gun is engraved “H. W. Mortimer London, Gun Maker to His Majesty,” the same as the gun described above, and is likely to be one of the presents brought by the Macartney Embassy. Aeneas Anderson’s writings mention “Two air guns” among the presents being taken to the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol.18 This kind of air gun did not use gunpowder to fire; instead, one would fill the tank with air, then, when one pressed the trigger, a small amount of the air would escape from the tank, firing the rifle using air pressure.
Fig. F3. Two-part air gun
L. 95.5 cm, inner diameter: 0.8 cm. © The Palace Museum of Beijing (gu 171673), China.
- 19 19 Majia’erni 2008: 97-98.
- 20 20 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 563.
- 21 21 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 204-205.
29This artefact is in the collection of the National Museum of China in Beijing (fig. F4). It is 97.7 cm long. It has a blade made of steel, a green jade hilt inlaid with gold, and a leather scabbard. This knife has a white deerskin label, with the following inscription written in Manchu, Mongolian, Tibetan, and Chinese scripts: “On the ninth day of the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period, King George of Great Britain respectfully presented […] one knife.” This date equivalent to 13 September 1793, and it was the day before the Qianlong emperor held a “longevity” ceremony welcoming Macartney to the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol. That day the Qianlong emperor received and viewed all the presents brought by the Macartney Embassy to Jehol. On this, Macartney wrote in the entry for that day: “Friday, 13 September. Wang and Chou [Zhou] called on us to say that the presents were much approved, but they wished that somebody might be sent to show how the telescopes were to be put up and used […]. Tomorrow being the grand festival at Court, and the day appointed for our first presentation, we are busily employed in getting ready for the occasion.”19 There are similar descriptions in the records of the Imperial Household Department (Neiwufu) of the Qing Court regarding the Macartney Embassy’s presents taken to the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol, including reference to “sixteen ‘red-haired’ foreigners’ knives,”20 illustrating that the objects presented by Macartney in Jehol did include metal knives. The two corroborate one another and essentially confirm that this knife worn at the waist was one of the sixteen steel knives taken to Jehol by the Macartney Embassy. However, the knife’s rhombus-shaped silver spacer and “Hindustan jade style” hilt inlaid with gold do not tally with the Council of State’s records’ description of “sixteen three-foot-long handle-less ‘red-haired’ foreigners’ knives without handles.”21 As for when the scabbard and the jade hilt were fitted to the blade, this requires further investigation.
Fig. F4. Knife with a green jade hilt inlaid with gold, and leather scabbard (L. 97.7 cm)
© The National Museum (Y536 C06.0674), Beijing, China.
- 22 22 Zheng Xinmiao 2017: 348.
- 23 23 India Office Records IOR G/12/91, 293.
- 24 24 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 123.
- 25 25 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 563.
30These artefacts are in the collection of the First Historical Archives of China. Stored separately in two boxes, they total sixteen volumes of various sizes, the largest of which has 359 pages, the smallest of which has only sixty-five pages. In total there are 2,108 plates or pages, weighing 136 kilograms. Roughly half of these plates or pages contain images and half contain texts. Volumes are bound in lambskin covers, and are large-scale, with gilt designs. All the inner pages have been printed using copper plates, using ink with skill, and creating exquisite realism.22 The copperplate art prints in this set were procured from different publishers at a cost of around £257,23 and the set was the tenth item on Macartney’s inventory list of presents (fig. F5): “Various printed pictures, including portraits of the royal family of the ‘red-haired’ foreign king of Great Britain, as well as pictures of cities, fortresses, long bridges, chapels, gardens, villages, scenes of battle and unusual foreign ships.”24 These two groups of copperplate prints, listed under the name of “two cases of pictures depicting people and cities of Great Britain,”25 were taken by Macartney to the Bishu shanzhuang in Jehol and presented to the Qianlong emperor. After this they were transported back to Beijing and, in the fifty-ninth year of the Qianlong reign period (1794), “a case of copperplate art prints” and “a small case of copperplate prints of battle ordonnance” were given to the Imperial Workshops for storage. These copperplate prints were discovered in the First Historical Archives of China in 2005, and a limited numbers of replicas were made by the Xiamen Foreign Language Publishers and were put on sale to the public, under the title Qin cang ying huang quanjing dadian (Classical Illustrations of the King of Great Britain Collected by the Emperor) shortly thereafter.
Fig. F5. Set of copperplate prints
© China First Historical Archives.
- 26 26 Anderson 1795: 172 (1963:149).
31These artefacts are in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing. One belt is made of purple silk, with a yellow silk damask lining. Inside, between the outer and inner surfaces of the belt, are sewn five slender elastic “springs,” giving the belt elasticity. The two ends of the belt have a steel buckle and tip protector. The tip protector is olive-shaped, with openwork on every side, fitted with beadwork. The center is inlaid with a piece of Wedgwood blue-ground porcelain decorated with a white-colored porcelain figure (fig. F6). The second belt is made from black suede, also with a yellow silk damask lining. The front is decorated with a beadwork pattern, and the two ends of the belt also have a steel buckle and tip protector. The tip protector is elliptical, with its outer edge decorated with a decorative border of beadwork. In the center there is a piece of Wedgwood blue-ground porcelain decorated with a white-colored shepherd maiden (fig. F7). In the register of artefacts of the Palace Museum, it was noted that when these objects were received they bore a paper label with text that read “Received on the twenty-eighth day of the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period, the soft belts with embedded metal springs and decorated with porcelain, ‘tribute’ from Great Britain,” but that label has not survived to the present. Use of such paper labels to record the original provenance of objects entering the Qing imperial collections was fairly common. The twenty-eighth day of the eighth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period is 2 October 1793. Anderson recounted the following for that day: “Another package of presents was opened and examined preparatory to their being sent to his Imperial Majesty.”26 At this time, the Qianlong emperor had already returned to Beijing after viewing the display of presents in the Hall of Rectitude and Honor. The unpacking of objects on that day would have been entirely of small objects, not objects for the inspection of the Qianlong emperor; all of these objects would have been handed over directly to the relevant personnel for safe storage. The next day these presents were given to the Imperial Workshops for packing up, and the two belts might have been included among them. The note on the paper label corroborates Anderson’s account and also concurs with the work records of the Imperial Workshops.
32In addition, there are also some clues that can further the search, such as the following.
Fig. F6. Purple silk Western belt with embedded metal springs and decorated with porcelain (L. 93 cm, l. 8.5 cm)
© The Palace Museum of Beijing (gu 221229), Chine.
Fig. F7. Black suede Western belt with embedded metal springs and decorated with porcelain (L. 72 cm, l. 6.5 cm)
© The Palace Museum of Beijing (gu 221228), Chine.
33This artefact is in the collection of the Palace Museum, Beijing. It is 34 cm wide, 77 cm long, and 147.5 cm tall. In an appendix to the “astronomical mapping instruments” listing in the inventory of the Macartney Embassy’s presents, the Herschel reflector telescope was given this short summary:
- 27 27 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 122.
With this list is also included another rare apparatus called a “reflector,” which can observe stars and constellations near and far, their rotations extremely clear. It can also be used with an apparatus called a “planetarium.” This lens does not view straight on, but perceives sideways a reflection, in a new method created by astronomer Herschel, whose surname gives this its name.27
34This reflector-style telescope, made by Sir William Herschel, the famed astronomer, can be used together with other astronomical instruments, or on its own. There are very few surviving Herschel reflector telescopes, including a replica of one in the Herschel Museum of Astronomy in Bath, England. The body is wooden and hexagonal in section, placed on a wooden frame. The collection of the Palace Museum does include a few similar hexagonal wooden telescopes; however, they do not feature a reflector. There is only one telescope stand. It has a low front and a high back, and the telescope would be fixed to the front of the stand using a brass fixture. A pulley on the stand would allow the height to be adjusted and the angle of the telescope to be changed. The stand’s structure and size, and the way the telescope attached to it would be used, are exactly the same as they would be if this stand had been made for use with the reflector telescope in the Herschel Museum in Bath. This gives us valuable clues in searching for the telescope among the Macartney Embassy’s presents (fig. F8).
Fig. F8. The stand for the Herschel reflecting telescope (147.5 cm x 34 cm x 77 cm)
©The Palace Museum of Beijing (gu 141750), Chine.
35The notes above are the results of the author’s searching for clues over the past few years to trace the whereabouts of the Macartney Embassy’s presents. Though including a small number of artefacts compared to the extensive inventory of items present at the time, investigation of this list has been somewhat fruitful. Regrettably, the largest and most valuable of the presents are still missing and may well be lost forever.
36The objects discussed above are the presents from the Macartney Embassy that can be identified and have survived into the present. It is seldom seen in the history of Chinese foreign diplomacy that so many presents from a single foreign mission have been preserved. The Macartney Embassy was a significant event in the history of the foreign affairs of the Qing dynasty. As the Macartney Embassy came into contact with a China deeply embedded in its traditional culture and a particular tributary system, the mission was given special significance by both sides, and, with interpretations added by each side’s language systems, each created a different understanding. The Macartney Embassy’s presents became an important component of this diplomatic affair, with both sides concerned with them in varying degrees. These presents, in fact, resembled a mirror, acting as a tool for observation and understanding for both the Chinese and the English, reflecting the completely different attitudes of both sides. Subsequent diplomacy was also similarly influenced by these presents, as discussed later in this section.
37The Chinese, for their part, consistently discussed the Macartney Embassy within the context of the “Celestial Empire” and the framework of vassal states paying tribute to China, as amply reflected by the Qianlong emperor’s imperial edict to the Ministers of the Council of State on the thirtieth day of the sixth month in the fifty-eighth year of the Qianlong reign period (6 August 1793). When the Qianlong emperor received the inventory list of the Macartney Embassy’s presents from his official Zheng Rui, who was sent to welcome the Macartney Embassy, he found wordings such as “imperially commissioned legate of the sovereign” in the texts of the inventory list. The Qianlong emperor thought this did not conform to the system of the Celestial Empire, and he issued a special edict:
- 28 28 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 40.
Review the texts in the list to find wordings such as “imperially commissioned legate of the sovereign to pay tribute to [. . .]” and the like. This vassal state sending a legate to pay tribute, how could it dare to be referred to as an imperially commissioned legate of the sovereign? It must have been merely that the translator was imitating the appellations of the Celestial Empire [i.e., “sovereign”], and was using words to inflate the importance of its special envoy. Initially, I intended not to bother about this. However, I am concerned that those taking care of the diplomatic envoy might have a lowly intellect, not knowing trivial from grave, and also referring this envoy as an “imperially commissioned legate of the sovereign.” That would absolutely not be allowed. I instruct Zheng Rui to notify all in advance, whether it be the head or the deputy head of a diplomatic mission from that vassal state, that they should all be referred to as “tributary envoys” in accordance with our system.28
38This was the view ultimately taken by China’s highest officials regarding the Macartney Embassy at the time. Consequently, the objects brought by tributary envoys would have been merely “tributary items.” This understanding of the nature of the presents brought by the Macartney Embassy was crucial, and it determined the Chinese side’s fundamental attitudes towards them.
39On the one hand, the “notion of taming foreigners from afar” and the Celestial Empire system had restricted the way in which Chinese officials spoke about the Macartney Embassy’s presents all along. Upon reading the inventory list of presents and its introductory description, the Qianlong emperor first expressed his own opinion on this:
- 29 29 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 39-40. Yi-barbarians designates all non-Han Chinese people (...)
Reviewing the items recorded in this inventory list, [I find that] they are undoubtedly all overstated. This is because of the narrow minds of the Yi-barbarians, who believe that they alone have secret understanding, and so exaggerate the brilliance of their manufacture. Now I have ordered the best clock-makers to come, and to wait for when the craftsmen of that vassal state are at work, then to study beside them and learn well [their ways]. I order Zheng Rui to mention to them in passing conversation that it is because of China’s grand emperor’s consideration that they came by boat to pay tribute, travelling a long distance of 10,000 li, a journey more than a year long, showing themselves truly dedicated and sincere, trusting that the grand emperor would extend to them extra grace and kind consideration. As for the tributary objects from their state, the Celestial Empire, in the first place, already has such objects too. Given this, I clearly announce these facts by edict, so that this envoy does not have too high a sense of self-importance: This is the notion of taming foreigners from afar.29
40Upon Macartney’s departure, the Qianlong emperor, on the occasion of this so-called “tributary mission,” elected to write a poem entitled “A Poem Recording the Reception of the Reports from the Macartney Embassy Tributary Mission sent by the King of the ‘Red-Haired’ Great Britain.” Once again commenting on presents given by the Macartney Embassy, he wrote:
- 30 30 Aisin Gioro 2003: juan 84.
This special envoy states that his country has proficient understanding of astronomy, and that over many years they have invented different instruments for astronomical observation. The largest, called a planetarium, follows the movements of Heaven and Earth and records the sun, moon, and stars. In the West this is regarded as a superior thing, but this is merely exaggerated overstatement. All of these kinds of tall and large instruments with exquisite ingenuity could be found among instruments made by the Imperial Household Department nowadays. This vassal state’s envoy has travelled so far to come and pay tribute respectfully, because of our extensive prosperity built on the virtue and success of our forefathers. These matters must be treated properly, carefully, and sincerely. As far those objects that they considered extraordinary, they seemed to be only commonplace to me.30
41These comments were the official commentary of the Chinese authorities on the Macartney Embassy’s presents. The aim of such open disdain towards the presents was to quash the arrogance and self-importance of these Yi-barbarians, and it perceptibly affected the foreigners’ judgement of the true opinions of the Chinese authorities.
- 31 31 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 95.
- 32 32 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 1996: 112.
42On the other hand, the Macartney Embassy’s presents really were vastly different from those tributes brought previously by other countries. “The first ever tributary mission from Great Britain brought so many tributary items, unlike those routine tributaries of local products presented by Burma over the years.”31 This was the first impression that the Macartney Embassy’s presents made on the Chinese. Afterwards, following the continued interactions of the Chinese with the members of the embassy on the transportation, installation, and proper operations of these presents, the notion that these “tributary items were not only very large but also extremely sophisticated”32 was increasingly strengthened. At any rate, the Macartney Embassy’s presents left very deep impressions on the Chinese monarch and his ministers, and they became synonymous with the most valuable tributary items ever received under the Chinese tributary system, which posterity took delight in discussing. The Macartney Embassy’s presents became the yardstick against which all “tributes” were measured afterwards in all the Sino-European diplomacy. The classic example came two years after the Macartney Embassy had left China, in the fifty-ninth year of the Qianlong reign period (1794–95), when a Dutch “tributary” mission was sent to China and the Qing court consciously compared the tributary presents with those brought by the Macartney Embassy:
- 33 33 Zhongguo diyi lishi dang’anguan 2008: vol. 18, QL59.12.23 (13 January 1795).
Taking the inventory of tributary items submitted by this Dutch mission and comparing in detail each item on the list of the “tributary” items presented by Great Britain [yields the following]. Great Britain brought six large apparatuses, and the Dutch have only brought a pair of bells, four gold clocks, and camlet (sateen) and wool in quantities less than a tenth of those brought by Great Britain. As for the camphor oil and clove oil on the Dutch tribute items list, these are not items of value, and they serve only as a stopgap. Comparing this with the tributary objects brought by Great Britain, there is certainly great disparity. This memorial is sincerely presented.33
43At this point, we realize that deep in the minds of the Chinese was a completely different attitude from the overt disdain towards the Macartney Embassy “tribute,” which was presented as official. The Chinese thought that these were all objects of value, and in fact this was the true opinion of the Qianlong emperor and his ministers. The opinions above attach a strong symbolism to the Macartney Embassy’s presents, which influenced the reception of so-called “tribute items” from other Western countries for years to come. Regrettably, the English people at the time had no way of knowing this truth.
- 34 34 Staunton 1799: 324 (1963: 405-406).
44When preparing and selecting their presents, the English expected that they would elicit looks of unparalleled admiration and expressions of wonder when seen by the Chinese. This expectation was definitely disappointed. From the writings of members of the mission to China, we find that many of them felt that the Chinese were nowhere near as interested in the presents as they had hoped. Among them was only one exception, Staunton, the Secretary to the Macartney Embassy, who spoke of the Qianlong emperor’s deep appreciation of the presents, and of how he gave a number of silver taels to each individual involved in their assembly. He even ordered a demonstration of some of the instruments on the spot, tried out the telescope, used the Parker lens to melt metal, and asked about British naval ships. Staunton concluded that the emperor’s lack of conversation with mission members about these presents was due to the sub-standard abilities of the interpreters.34
45However, the records of others are completely different. As the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Lord Macartney wrote:
Some of those who were patronized by the Emperor K’ang-hsi [Kangxi], about fourscore years ago, were men of considerable knowledge, and of indefatigable industry. They attempted to introduce experimental philosophy into China, and from the accounts given by them of the taste of the Court, and of the avidity with which their lessons and exhibitions were received, we were induced to provide and carry with us expensive apparatuses of different kinds and of the latest inventions; but we had very little occasion to make use of them, for almost everything of this nature, that had been taught by the Jesuits, seemed to be either entirely forgotten or considered of no value. Neither Ch’ien-lung [Qianlong] himself nor those about him appeared to have any curiosity in these matters.
46Not only was the Qianlong emperor of this opinion, but so were his court officials. Lord Macartney continued:
- 35 35 Maji’a erni 2013: 63.
But the Mandarins in Pekin manifested very little disposition of this kind; none of them discovered the slightest notion of the pressure of fluids, the principles of optics, perspective, electricity, etc., although several of them had seen the air-pumps, electrical machines, spy glasses, prisms, magic lanterns, and show-boxes. Nevertheless, it was observed that most of the great men who came to see the globes, the planetarium, the barometers, and the pendulums put up at Yuan-ming Yuan affected to view them with careless indifference, as if such things were quite common and familiar to them, and the use of them well understood.35
47Anderson mentioned the opinions of James Dinwiddie and John Barrow, who were responsible for the instruments among the mission’s presents:
- 36 36 John Barrow 1795: 177 (1963:153).
The gentlemen and mechanics were dismissed from their attendance at the palace of Yeumen-manyeumen [Yuanmingyuan]; for, as all the optical, mechanical, and mathematical instruments were removed from thence, their presence were no longer necessary. Besides, several of these presents, when a trial of them was made before the mandarins, were found to fail in the operations and powers attributed to them; and others of them did not excite that surprise and admiration in the breasts of the Chinese philosophers, which Dr. Dinwiddie and Mr. Barrow expected, who immediately determined upon the ignorance that prevailed in China, and the gross obstinacy of the people.36
48All of these accounts indicated that it was a clear fact that the Chinese people at the time had a common disregard for and ignorance of science. Barrow went even further, giving specific suggestions for future envoys to China regarding their presents:
- 37 37 John Barrow 1804: 343 (2013: 324).
Indeed, in selecting the many valuable presents relating to science, their knowledge and learning had been greatly overrated. They had little esteem for what they could not comprehend; and specimens of art served only to excite their jealousy, and to wound their pride. Whenever a future embassy shall be sent to Pekin, I should recommend articles of gold, silver, and steel, children’s toys and trinkets, and perhaps a few specimens of Derbyshire spar, with the finest broad-cloth, and kerseymeres, in preference to all others for in their present state, they are totally incapable of appreciating anything great or excellent in the arts and sciences.37
49These personal accounts of those who served as members of the embassy, who had experienced the entire process of the mission, undoubtedly left a huge impression on the British government, and quietly changed the future diplomatic style and mind-set of Great Britain. This was especially the case in terms of choosing diplomatic presents, where the impact was substantial. Twenty-three years later, Great Britain sent another diplomatic mission to China under the Earl of Amherst, Ambassador Extraordinary, accompanied by second commissioner Sir George Thomas Staunton, who was the son of George Staunton, Secretary of the Macartney Embassy, and who became the key figure of the mission. The Qing imperial archives include an inventory list of the presents that were presented to the Jiaqing emperor by the Amherst Embassy. This list reveals the significant change among state presents in diplomatic activities between Great Britain and China after twenty years. Thirty-nine presents were presented to the Jiaqing emperor, and they were recorded below:
The king of Great Britain sent Lord Amherst to pay special tribute to the Emperor of the Celestial Empire with these tributary items:
- 38 38 Case No. 050585062 of the Memorialized Cases of Imperial Household Department: “The list of the (...)
A large gold box with the portrait of King George on the lid, surrounded with inlaid sapphires and rubies around the outside. This box submits documents from the King to the Emperor, and was delivered in person as a tribute. A gold tripod and lid, the body of the tripod with classical details; a gold dish for use with the tripod, with lobed openwork edges; a separate ingenious box made of English willow, for use with the gold tripod; two large silver glass mirrors that are 10 chi [one chi equivalent to 32 cm] long and 6 chi wide; two finely crafted stands, for use with a large mirror; a round mirror, about 30 chi wide, for use with the two finely decorated stands; four large silver platters, for banquet use; four round silver baskets for holding fruit; four round silver tripods with fine openwork lids for sweet foods; a large silver platter, the upper part of which is a silver basket, based on English scale, was for use as tableware. A round silver platter with feet, for use as tableware; four silver teapots with spouts; silver candle stick holders, each one for three candles; thirty-nine pieces of English-made porcelain; six fine porcelain tripods; two English sedan chairs; two pairs of glass candlestick holders, each pair for seven candles; large glass hanging candelabras, holding thirty-six candles; twelve English-made glass dishes; twelve glass jars with the most fragrant and invigorating of spices; twelve glass jars of the finest perfume; twelve glass boxes of rose petals; ten glass bottles of rose frankincense; variety of exquisite objects decorated with gold; fifty-seven zun-vessels for fine wine and sweet treats; English marble of all colors; two water wheels; four topographical maps of England, Ireland, Scotland—making up Great Britain, the fourth was Wales; multiple paintings of race horses; forty-four bolts of woolen fabrics in yellows, reds, and blues, on giant portrait of the British King and his Consort dressed in their robes of state, and the crowns used on top of the portrait frame; ninety five copperplate prints of English landscapes and figures; cut velvet silver-white pelts.38
- 39 39 Ellis 1817: 40 (2013: 31-32).
50If the inventory list of the Amherst Embassy presents is compared with that of the Macartney Embassy, we find that the valuable astronomical instruments, scientific apparatuses, and military objects are missing, and instead are replaced by vast quantities of gold, silver, ceramics, and glassware. Science and technology were already no longer what Great Britain was striving to present, and were replaced by things for everyday usage. The selection of these presents was clearly influenced by the writings from the members of the Macartney Embassy, and it could even be said that presents had been prepared on the basis of John Barrow’s suggestions at the time. This was precisely the case. In the process of preparing for the Amherst Embassy, they gathered together any information they could regarding every aspect of China—an important source of which was the writings of various members of the Macartney Embassy. “The more modern works of our countrymen Sir George Staunton and Mr. Barrow, of De Guignes and Van Braam, have satisfied curiosity up to the date of the respective embassies to which they belonged, and as centuries have produced less change in China than a generation in Europe, variety is not now to be expected.”39 The organizers of the new diplomatic missions based their preparations entirely on the information in these writings, including selection of presents.
51Thus, the Macartney Embassy’s presents perhaps made the English people at the time perceive inaccurately the attitudes of the Chinese towards the presents, causing them to surmise that Chinese did not appreciate or understand science and technology. This conclusion influenced the selection of presents in Sino-British diplomacy to follow and resulted in the completely different inventory list of presents for the Amherst Embassy. This is worth our careful consideration when comparing, interpreting, and judging the significance of these two inventory lists of diplomatic presents.
52In terms of state presents in Sino-foreign relations, because the circumstances behind each state invited to China were different, the approach taken by the Qing regime also varied. The Qing imperial archives explicitly record the periodic processing of tributary presents from its tributaries such as Burma, Vietnam (Annan), and the Ryūkyū Islands (Liuqiu) during the Qianlong reign, and surviving specimens could be used in future comparisons. However, despite regular tribute paid by these tributaries, the actual tributary presents that have survived until the present time are extremely limited. The Macartney Embassy was completely different, however, and from the outset these presents were given great significance by the Qing imperial court and placed in suitable locations. Because of this, we are fortunate enough that, even today, in imperial collections we can find objects like the flintlock musket, the double-barrelled air gun, an inlaid jade-handled knife, copperplate prints, a silk belt decorated with ceramic pieces, and a telescope, all preserved until the present, allowing us to see their true features.
53By searching through the Qing imperial histories for traces of the Macartney Embassy’s presents, it can be inferred that, were it not for the vicissitudes of China’s recent history, these presents would have most likely survived until the present day. According to archival records, the Macartney Embassy’s presents were certainly not uninteresting to the Qianlong emperor and his officials, as alleged by both the Macartney and later Dutch missions; neither were they put aside without a second glance. In fact, great pains were taken to ensure these presents were conserved appropriately. However, because China’s foreign interaction had always been limited to the system of tributaries paying homage to a China entrenched in an ideology according to which the emperor ruled the Celestial Empire with the Mandate of Heaven, when receiving presents from foreign parties there was discrepancy between their official reception and the actual attitudes towards such presents. Contradiction emerged. This kind of contradiction prevailed in many aspects of the Qing dynasty’s foreign relations, and also was present in the reception of the Macartney Embassy’s presents. The result was that the British Mission only saw the public response of the Chinese side, based upon which they drew conclusions that were not entirely true. Not only that, the selection of presents for subsequent diplomatic visits to China was also influenced as a result.