Conflicting Loyalties
Fugitives and “Traitors” in the Russo-Manchurian Frontier, 1651-1689
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 12622778 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Andrey Ivanov (0000-0001-6410-6347, 1Yale University, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2009 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Fascículo | 5 |
| Páginas | 333-358 |
| Data de publicação | 2009-01-01 |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Journal of Early Modern History (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 1385-3783 • E-ISSN: 1570-0658 |
| Editora | Brill (PUBLISHER • NL) |
| DOI | 10.1163/138537809x12528970165145 |
| OpenAlex | W2092262816 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 2 |
For many contemporary historians, the 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk was not only the first diplomatic treaty between China and a European power, but also an example of a peaceful boundary settlement, which ended the protracted conflict between the two expanding empires. Yet despite modern emphasis on territorial demarcation, clarity of border signs hardly dominated this seventeenth century conflict in the Far East. In fact, careful examination of the published Russian archival record of Muscovite-Qing diplomatic correspondence reveals that competition for tributary allegiances of indigenous and settler populations proved to be a much greater source of tension between the two empires. Ultimately, the mercurial loyalties of local Tungus and Mongol tribes as well the cross-nation desertions of Cossacks, military commanders and Ming loyalists drove both Qing and Muscovite officials to stabilize their shared frontiers through negotiation
Ancient history · Frontier · Indigenous · Negotiation · Political science · Power (physics · Settlement (finance · Treaty · Chinese history and philosophy · Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis · Historical Studies of British Isles · History · Law
| Citações por ano | 0,15 |
|---|---|
| Intervalo de citações | 2013 - 2017 (5) |
| Altamente citado | Não |