[KS] Qing–Chosŏn royal exchanges or marriages?

[Frank Hoffmann]

Adam, your reference to Ming -- instead of Qing -- is well taken. 

However, in the specific context I described, I tend to view it more as 
a sociological approach rather than one rooted in pseudo-religious or 
moral/ethical schools. I mean that, although, as you stated, Chiang 
modeled himself on Ming period Confucian norms and value systems, he 
was born during the late Qing period and was far from being a scholar. 
He was essentially a military man with a military education who thought 
in military terms and sought military solutions to political problems. 

Perhaps it becomes easier to understand when we momentarily shift from 
history to another field, such as art history. If a Western artist or 
architect from the late 19th or early 20th century were to incorporate 
references and borrowings from Classical Greece or Rome into their 
work, it wouldn't necessarily indicate that they were truly informed by 
classical approaches. In fact, they would likely be influenced more by 
their immediate teachers, predecessors, and contemporary clients and 
sponsors, who may or may not share the same appreciation for classical 
art and architecture. Chiang wouldn't have actually done things the 
same way they were done during the Ming era, just as the Luxor Las 
Vegas isn't utilized and wasn't constructed in the same manner as the 
Great Pyramid of Giza.

Unlike many contemporaries who worked with him, Chiang was somewhat 
slow to adapt to the 20th century. For instance, Chiang worked closely 
with Westerners for most of his life but never bothered to learn 
English on a conversational level; instead, he let his wife handle the 
communication. It's evident that he was a product of the late 19th and 
very early 20th century, steeped in the late Qing and warlord period of 
Chinese history―and that was the mental framework within which he 
operated. We can observe this in many details. This is why I was more 
interested in whether such family politics existed during Qing times, 
rather than Ming times.

In any case, aside from the specific context that piqued my interest, 
it's fascinating to note that there were essentially no intermarriages 
among royal families in East Asia. Perhaps this can be attributed to 
the significant disparities between these countries, as they weren't 
direct competitors. Alternatively, it could be due to the nature of 
their relationships, which were characterized by Confucian tributary 
dynamics rather than horizontal alliances. The intermarriages then 
happened a level lower, within Chinese warlord families, for example 
(Chiang himself is an example for exactly that).

Best,
Frank


On Sat, 23 Sep 2023 00:51:34 +0000, Adam Bohnet wrote:
> So, I cannot think of anything like this for the Ming - which is the 
> regime that Chiang modeled himself on, at least outwardly. For the 
> Qing, among the Manchu banners, sending  your sons and daughters to 
> receive tutelage in this manner was very common, domestically. As I 
> remember,  (was I reading this in Evelyn Rawski, Mark Elliott or 
> Pamela Kyle Crossley? Not sure!) Manchu girls were sent to serve in 
> the palace, and in contrast to the Ming, could serve in the palace 
> for a few years and then come out of it. The service of Mongol 
> princes in the palace is also perhaps similar. So if you are looking 
> for earlier models for Chiang Kai-shek's policy of sending sons 
> abroad for tutelage, I suggest that the approach not of the Aisin 
> Gioro house, but of the Mongol princes and leading Manchu generals, 
> might be a better point of departure. 
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Adam
> 

_______________________________
Frank Hoffmann
https://koreanstudies.com