Universalism and Equal Sovereignty as Contested Myths of International Law in the Sino-Western Encounter

in Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

Contrary to the relevant traditional historiography, this article argues that early modern Sino-Western conflicts are to a great extent attributable to the sustained contestation between China and the Western empires (particularly Britain) over their competing claims to sovereignty in China. The article shows that the Western empires' demand for extraterritoriality and natural rights to freely trade, travel, and proselytize in China originated in their assumption of universal sovereignty in the non-Christian world. The early Sino-Western encounter illustrates how the discourses of sovereign equality and universal justice, as two origin myths of modern international law and diplomacy, were constructed, deployed, challenged, and adapted in the course of Western expansion in the age of empire.

Universalism and Equal Sovereignty as Contested Myths of International Law in the Sino-Western Encounter

in Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international

Sections

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 46 46 40
Full Text Views 11 11 11
PDF Downloads 6 6 6
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0