Vassal state: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 1:

{{short description|State subordinate to another state}}

{{forms of government}}

A '''vassal state''' is any [[State (polity)|state]] that has a mutual obligation to a superior state or empire, in a status similar to that of a [[vassal]] in the [[Feudalism|feudal system]] in [[Middle Ages|medieval]] Europe. Vassal states were common among the empires of the [[Near East]], dating back to the era of the [[Ancient Egypt|Egypt]]ian, [[Hittites|Hittite]], and [[Mitanni]] conflict, as well as in [[ancient China]]. The use of vassal states continued through the Middle Ages, with the last empire to use such states being the [[Ottoman Empire]].

The relationships between vassal rulers and empires waswere dependent on the policies and agreements of each empire. While the payment of [[tribute]] and military service iswas common amongst vassal states, the degree of independence and benefits given to vassal states varied. Today, more common terms are [[puppet state]], [[protectorate]], [[client state]], [[associated state]], or [[satellite state]].

==Historical examples==

=== Ancient Egypt ===▼

▲=== Ancient Egypt ===

{{main|Ancient Egypt}}

The reign of [[Thutmose III]] (1479 BC- – 1425 BC) laid the foundations for the systems that functioned during the Amarna period of [[Egypt]].<ref name="Jana 2015">{{cite book |last1=Mynárová |first1=Jana |title=Policies of Exchange Political Systems and Modes of Interaction in the Aegean and the Near East in the 2nd Millenium B.C.E: Proceedings of the International Symposium at the University of Freiburg Institute for Archaeological Studies, 30th May -– 2nd June 2012 |date=2015 |publisher=Austrian Academy of Sciences Press |pages=158–161 |chapter=Egypt among the Great Powers and its Relations to the Neighbouring Vassal Kingdoms in the Southern Levant according to the Written Evidence: Thutmose III and Amarna.}}</ref> Vassal states in the [[Levant]] became fully integrated in Egypt’sEgypt's economy with the construction of harbours – allowing for greater communication and collection of tax between Egypt and its vassal states during this period.<ref name="Jana 2015" />

Much of what is known about Egypt’sEgypt's vassal states from the reigns of [[Amenhotep III]] and [[Tutankhamun]] (1390 BC- – 1323 BC) stems from the Amarna letters<ref name="Elayi 2018">{{cite book |last1=Elayi |first1=Josette |title=The History of Phoenicia |date=2018 |publisher=Lockwood Press |pages=66–82 |chapter=The Small Vassal States of the Near East: (1500-12001500–1200)}}</ref> – a collection of 350 cuneiform tablets.<ref name="Morris 2006">{{cite journal |last1=Morris |first1=Ellen |title=Bowing and Scraping in the Ancient Near East: An Investigation into Obsequiousness in the Amarna Letters |journal=Journal of Near Eastern Studies |date=2006 |volume=65 |issue=3 |pages=179–188|doi=10.1086/508575 |s2cid=53452075 }}</ref> The different ways vassal rulers communicated with the [[Pharaoh]] via grovelling and obsequiousness is a key method of extrapolating relationships between Egypt and vassal states.<ref name="Morris 2006" />

Egypt’sEgypt's key vassal states were located on the northern frontier, and included states such as [[NuhasseNuhašše]], [[Qatna]], and [[Ugarit]]. These were located on the fringes of the territory claimed by Egypt and were a potential threat from acting with the Hittites in [[Anatolia]], or the [[Mitanni]] in [[Iraq]] and [[Syria]].<ref name="Morris 2006" /> Due to these vassal states’ distance from the [[Nile]], and their value as a buffer zone from rival kingdoms, these states appeared to have a more high-status relationship with the [[pharaoh]]Pharaoh and Egypt.<ref name="Morris 2006" /> These states could also solicit the Pharaoh for various requests. The fulfilment of these asks by Egypt may have served the purpose of ensuring the loyalty of these distant vassal states.<ref name="Morris 2006" /> However, these vassal states were claimed by the Hittite Empire following the death of [[Akhenaten]] (1353 BC- – 1336 BC) and were never reclaimed.<ref name="Morris 2006" /><ref name="Elayi 2018" />

Under [[Ramesses II]] (1279 BC- – 1213 BC), Egypt engaged in several military campaigns against the Hittites, eventually capturing the kingdoms of [[Kadesh (Syria)|Kadesh]] and [[Amurru kingdom|Amurru]] by taking advantage of growing problems in the Hittite Empire.<ref name="Elayi 2018" /> In 1258 BC, Ramesses and the Hittite King [[HattusiliḪattušili III]] signed a peace treaty that created a border from north of [[BiblosByblos]] to [[Damascus]] between the two empires.<ref name="Elayi 2018" />

==== Byblos ====

The kingdomKingdom of Byblos was significant in linking the worlds of Egypt, the Near East and the Aegean to one another.<ref name = "Marwan 2019">{{cite book |last1=Kilani |first1=Marwan |title=Byblos in the Late Bronze Age: Interactions between the Levantine and Egyptian Worlds |date=2019 |publisher=BRILL |isbn=9789004416604}}</ref> It is first attested during the reign of Thutmose III. Through Byblos, the Egyptians had access to products from [[Lebanon]] and Syria, while also using the kingdom as a base for military activity.<ref name="Marwan 2019"/> Byblos held religious importance to Egypt, as the local goddess appeared in the form of [[Hathor]], and was associated with [[Isis]].<ref name="Marwan 2019"/> Byblos was also valuable for Egypt as a trade partner, as it allowed the latter to interact with the regional trade connections between Byblos and other small cities.<ref name="Marwan 2019"/> Byblos itself seemed to have a large aboutamount of influence itself. Rib-Hadda’sHadda's letters indicate that Byblos had control over its own territory, until it was taken in conflict with [[Amurru kingdom|Amurru]].<ref name="Marwan 2019"/>

Correspondence with the kingdomKingdom of Byblos is well documented, as the longest interaction between Egypt and a vassal state and spanned a period of 12 years.<ref name="Elayi 2018" /> The subject king in these letters – [[Rib-Hadda]] – is unique among vassal rulers as his letters are more verbose than other small rulers in the Near East. Despite his loyalty to the Pharaoh, Rib-Hadda never received any meaningful reply from Egypt during times of need and was eventually exiled from his own kingdom by his brother.<ref name="Elayi 2018" />

While Rib-Hadda’sHadda's brother was on the throne, Byblos continued to communicate with the Egyptians, although there is some contention over potential alliances between Byblos and Amurru and the Hittite Empire as well.<ref name="Marwan 2019"/>

Interactions between Byblos and Egypt declined in the 12th and 11th centuries BC with the fall of the [[New Kingdom of Egypt|New Kingdom]]. Following Egypt’sEgypt's resurgence, kingdoms such as [[Tyre, Lebanon|Tyre]] and [[Sidon]] were favoured over Byblos.<ref name="Marwan 2019"/> By the Early Iron Age, Byblos no longer had connections to any great powers in the region. While the city still had religious authority until the [[Roman Empire]], it had long lost its economic and political importance.<ref name="Marwan 2019"/>

===Hittite Empire===

[[File:Hittite KingdomEmpire_of_the_Hitties.png|thumb|Map of the Hittite Empirecore underterritory [[Suppiluliumaand I]]its andvassal states around [[Mursili1300 II]]BC]]

{{main|Hittites}}

The Hittite Empire incorporated vassal states that extended over much of [[Anatolia]] and Northern [[Syria]]. The addition of vassal states reached its peak under the reigns of [[SuppiluliumaŠuppiluliuma I]] and [[MursiliMuršili II]] in the 14th Centurycentury BC.<ref name="Bryce 2005">{{cite book |last1=Bryce |first1=Trevor |title=Kingdom of the Hittites |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199279081 |page=49{{ndash}}50 |chapter=Territories and Early Rivals of the Hatti}}</ref> The relationships between the Hittites and their vassal states centered around the Hittite king and the vassal ruler; the terms of their relationship were imposed unilaterally by the former, and accepted by the latter. Whenever a new Hittite king or vassal ruler came into power, a new treaty would be drawn up.<ref name="Bryce 2005" />

In rare cases, local rulers were given ''kiurwana'' (protectorate status).<ref name="Bryce 2005"/> While they had distinct privileges{{snd}} such as exemption from tribute{{snd}} they did not have any more freedom of activity than other vassal states. All relations among the regions under Hittite control were strictly determined by the king.<ref name="Bryce 2005" /> While this led to the belief that contact between vassal states was limited, it has also been thought that such restrictions were limited to the enemies of the Hatti.<ref name="Devecchi 2012">{{cite book |last1=Devecchi |first1=Elena |title=Policies of exchange political systems and modes of interaction in the Aegean and Near East in the 2nd Millennium BCE: Proceedings of the International Symposium at the University of Freiburg Institute for Archaeological Studies |date=2012 |publisher=Austrian Academy of Sciences Press |pages=117–120 |chapter=The International Relations of Hatti’s Syrian Vassals, or How to make the Best of Things.}}</ref>

Line 35 ⟶ 34:

The treaties imposed on vassal states came with military obligations, though vassals were also promised military assistance in return. Some treaties also contained details of annual tribute. Treaties were often concluded with a marriage between a vassal ruler and a Hatti princess of the royal family. The princess would hold greater power than other wives of the vassal, and succession would pass down her descendants.<ref name="Bryce 2005" />

Vassal states were obliged to support and swear fealty to the king’sking's legitimate successors as well. In the event of a usurper taking the throne, the vassal state was freed from all treaty obligations except to help restore a legitimate king to the throne. In doing so, vassal rulers were guaranteed sovereignty from themselves and their successors in their region.<ref name="Bryce 2005" />

==== Ugarit ====

The relations of Ugarit are the most well-known of the Hittite’sHittite's vassal states. Sources on Ugarit’sUgarit's role and relationship with the Hittites mostly comes from the Ugarit Archives, with only a few from Hittite sources.<ref name="Devecchi 2012" /> From the sources, it is believed that Ugarit held economic and commercial importance to the Hittite Empire, as many letters and documents relate to trade.<ref name="Devecchi 2012" /> Ugarit also maintained a relationship with Egypt, due to contacts with the pharaohsPharaoh's court. Most evidence of this contact comes from the era of the Pax Hethitica, which came after peace between Egypt and the Hittite Empire.<ref name="Devecchi 2012" />

====Amurru====

Amurru’sAmurru's relationship to the Hittite Empire is attested to in documents recovered from Ugarit and [[Hattusa]].<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> Unlike Ugarit, [[Amurru kingdom|Amurru]] does not appear to have been a trading centre. Rather, Hitttite sources place importance on the political and military role this kingdom played in the empire, as it was located on the border of Hatti territory and Egypt.<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> Previously a vassal state of Egypt, the Kingdom defected to the Hittites under the ruler [[Aziru]]. Amurru was loyal to the Hittite Empire from the end of the [[Amarna Period]] until the reign of [[Muwatalli II]], when they switched allegiances back to Egypt.<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> The defection was punished with a temporary replacement of the king with a more loyal ruler.<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> Two marriages occurred between Hittites and Amurru royalty at this time, raising Amurru’sAmurru's importance within the Empireempire.<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> Amurru’sAmurru's relationship with the Hittite Empire was maintained until the collapse of the latter in the 12th Centurycentury BC.<ref name="Rowe 2013">{{cite book |last1=Rowe |first1=Ignacio |title=The Encyclopedia of Ancient History |date=2013 |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |chapter=Amurru}}</ref> A shift from Semitic names used by descendentsdescendants of Aziru suggest a lasting impact of Hittite influence in the region.<ref name="Rowe 2013" />

====Carchemish====

While [[Carchemish]] was a leading power in Syria and delegate for Syrian affairs, not much is known about their interactions with the Great Powers of the region. What is known comes from archives at Hattusa, [[Emar]], and Ugarit.<ref name="Mora 2013" /> When the city was conquered by Suppiluliuma I, he installed his son on the throne<ref name="Mora 2013" /> Due to this, the later kings of Carchemish acted as representatives for the Hittite Empire in Syria.<ref name="Mora 2013" /> In the 13th Centurycentury, Carchemish was trading directly with [[Assyria]], and had relations with [[Babylonia]] as well.<ref name="Devecchi 2012"/> Carchemish also survived the end of the Hittite Empire, and became its own city-state in the [[Iron Age|Early Iron Age]].<ref name="Mora 2013">{{cite book |last1=Mora |first1=Clelia |title=The Encyclopedia of Ancient History |date=2013 |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |chapter=Carchemish}}</ref> In the 8th Centurycentury BC, it was annexed by the Assyrian Empire.<ref name="Mora 2013" />

=== Neo-Assyrian Empire ===

{{main|Neo-Assyrian Empire}}

[[File:Neo-Assyrian map 824-671 BC.png|thumb|Map of [[Neo-Assyrian Empire|Neo-Assyrian]] territories in 824 BC and 671 BC]]

The vassal states of the [[Neo-Assyrian Empire]] (911 BC- – 609 BC) had a unique relationship with the Empireempire they became a part of. While vassal states were necessary to the politics of the empire and connected by administrative and economic means, they are not considered to be ‘properly Assyrian’.<ref name="Hunt 2015">{{cite book |last1=Hunt |first1=Alice M.W. |title=Palace Ware across the Neo-Assyrian Imperial Landscape: Social Value and Semiotic Meaning. |date=2015 |publisher=BRILL |pages=22–29 |chapter=Power and Prestige: The Neo-Assyrian Imperial Landscape.}}</ref> Neo-Assyrian imperial ideology placed importance on unified diversity, and as such vassal states maintained a degree of cultural independence.<ref name="Hunt 2015" /> While territorial expansion slowed in the 7th century BCEBC, the amount of vassal states increased in number, suggesting a change in foreign policy.<ref name="Hunt 2015" />

Assyrian kings expressed their hold over vassal states through the collection of flora and fauna from these regions.<ref name="DeGrado 2019">{{cite journal |last1=DeGrado |first1=Jessie |title=King of the Four Quarters: Diversity as a rhetorical strategy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire |journal=Iraq |date=2019 |volume=81 |pages=107–175|doi=10.1017/irq.2019.8 |s2cid=211654399 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The earliest records of this practice date back to [[Tiglath-pileserPileser I]] (1114 BC- – 1076 BC) in the Middle Assyrian Period. It was revived by [[Ashurnasirpal II|Ashurnasirpal]] in the Neo-Assyrian Period by creating a garden with specimens from across the empire.<ref name="DeGrado 2019" /> Later Neo-Assyrian rulers would expand on this practice; [[Sargon II]] created a garden that imitated the forests of Northern Syria, while [[Sennacherib]] created a swamp that reflected the landscape of Southern Babylonia.<ref name="DeGrado 2019" /> In artistic representations, subjects of vassal states are depicted bringing tribute to Assyria.<ref name="DeGrado 2019" /> These representatives are shown bowing or crouching before the king.<ref name="DeGrado 2019" /> The gifts offered range from horses and monkeys to wineskins.<ref name="DeGrado 2019" /> These scenes of tribute and audience with the king express how vassal states participated in the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

By the 8th Centurycentury BC, the southern vassal states of the empire saw an increase in settlement. In comparison to the northern regions of the empire -– which were previously devastated -– these kingdoms become denser and the more prosperous parts of the empire.<ref name="Faust 2021">{{cite book |last1=Faust |first1=Avraham |title=The Neo-Assyrian Empire in the Southwest: imperial domination and its consequences |date=2021 |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=Under the Empire}}</ref> The kingdoms west of the [[Euphrates]] river were considered vassal states until the 7th century BC, when they were incorporated into the proper provincial system of the empire, though they still had various degrees of political control depending on location.<ref name="Faust 2021" /> In [[Kingdom of Judah|Judah]], there was a further increase in settlement in the 7th century that was greater than the 8th.<ref name="Faust 2021" /> It was the same in [[Jordan]], showing that Neo-Assyrian control over the region was a successful period for these kingdoms.<ref name="Faust 2021" />

=== Achaemenid Persia ===

{{main|Satrap}}

While the Persians made use of Satraps[[Satrap|satraps]] (appointed Persian governors)<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lendering |first1=Jona |title=Satraps and Satrapies |url=https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/satraps-and-satrapies/ |website=Livius |access-date=2021-05-17 |archive-date=2021-04-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210428192628/https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/satraps-and-satrapies/ |url-status=live }}</ref> rather than vassal rulers in subject regions, there were rare cases of vassal states being utilizedutilised. [[Herodotus]] writes that negotiations took place between kingKing [[Amyntas I of Macedon|Amyntas I]] of [[Macedonia (ancient kingdom)|Macedonia]] and the Persians after the former’sformer's subjugation by the [[Achaemenid dynasty|Achaemenids]] by 513 BC. The Macedonians became further connected to the Persians as Amyntas married his daughter to a Persian nobleman (Hdt. 5.21.). Under [[Darius the Great|Darius I]], Macedonia was organizedorganised into a regular tax district of the Empire (Hdt. 6.44.). Their control over Macedonia is attested in the DNa[[DNA]] inscription at Naqsh-I-Rustam. Amyntas’ son [[Alexander I of Macedon|Alexander I]] supported [[Xerxes I]] during the Persian invasion of Greece. In 479 BC, the Achaemenid forces were defeated by the Greeks, and Macedonia was no longer considered Greek by other city-states.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lendering |first1=Jona |title=Macedonia |url=https://www.livius.org/articles/place/macedonia/ |website=Livius |access-date=2021-05-17 |archive-date=2021-05-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210509082213/https://www.livius.org/articles/place/macedonia/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Another region considered a vassal state rather than a satrap was [[Arabian Peninsula|Arabia]]. According to Herodotus, they aided [[Cambyses II]] in his invasion of Egypt (525 BC).<ref name="Dandamayev 1986">{{cite web |last1=Dandamayev |first1=Muhammad |title=Arabia i. The Achaemenid Province Arabāya |url=https://iranicaonline.org/articles/arabaya-arabia-a-province-of-the-achaemenid-empire |website=Encyclopedia Iranica |access-date=28 May 2021 |archive-date=2 June 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210602215251/https://iranicaonline.org/articles/arabaya-arabia-a-province-of-the-achaemenid-empire |url-status=live }}</ref> As such, Arabia did not become a satrap and was exempt from paying annual tribute.<ref name="Dandamayev 1986" /> Instead, they are attested to in the [[Behistun Inscription|Behistun]] inscription and in the [[Persepolis]] [[Persepolis Administrative Archives|Fortification Tablets]] as providing 1000 talents per year.<ref name="Dandamayev 1986" /> In Xerxes’ invasion of [[Greece]], Herodotus mentions the Arabians among the different sections of the Persian armyArmy as being led by [[Arsamenes]] -– the son of Darius I.<ref name="Dandamayev 1986" />

Despite the size of the Achaemenid Empire, there was efficient communication and connectivity between different regions. The [[Royal Road]] which ran through most of the Empireempire allowed for the movement and sharing of goods, culture, and ideas between the Achaemenid satraps and vassal states.<ref name="Henry 2013">{{cite journal |last1=Colburn |first1=Henry |title=Connectivity and Communication in the Achaemenid Empire |journal=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient |date=2013 |volume=56 |issue=1|pages=29–52 |doi=10.1163/15685209-12341278 }}</ref>

===Ancient China===

{{Main|Ancient Chinese states}}

From the time of the [[Zhou Dynastydynasty]] (1046&ndash;7701046–770 BC) until the [[Han Dynastydynasty]] (206 BC&ndash;220BC–220 AD), a varying number of vassal states existed in ancientAncient [[China]].

These ranged in size from small city states to vassals which controlled large swathes of territory such as the Statesstates of [[Chu (state)|Chu]] and [[Qi (state)|Qi]]. One of these vassal states would go on to conquer China and unite the country under the first emperor [[Qin Shi Huang]].

==== Controversy on Status of Joseon====

The [[Qing dynasty]] of China viewed the [[Joseon|Joseon dynasty]] of Korea as an [[Autonomy|autonomous]] vassal state.{{sfn|Rockhill|1889|p=1}}{{sfn|Battistini|1952|p=50}} The Joseon dynasty was autonomous in its internal and external affairs.{{sfn|Lin|1991|p=71}}{{sfn|Oh|2019|pp=352–355}} It was not a colony or dependency of China.{{sfn|Lin|1991|p=71}} However, China abandoned its conventional laissez-faire policy of noninterference toward Korea and adopted a radical interventionist policy of interference in the late 19th century.{{sfn|Lin|1991|pp=69–70}} [[Yuan Shikai]] argued that Korea was a dependent "vassal state"; Owen N. Denny argued that Korea was an independent "tributary state".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fuchs |first1=Eckhardt |last2=Kasahara |first2=Tokushi |last3=Saaler |first3=Sven |title=A New Modern History of East Asia |date=4 December 2017 |publisher=V&R unipress |isbn=978-3-7370-0708-5 |page=96 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pZlBDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA96 |access-date=17 March 2022 |archive-date=20 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220220152954/https://books.google.com/books?id=pZlBDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA96 |url-status=live }}</ref> [[William Woodville Rockhill|William W. Rockhill]] said that calling Korea a vassal state iswas "misleading".{{sfn|Rockhill|1889|p=2}} According to Rockhill: "The tribute sent to Peking by all the 'vassal states,' and also by the Tibetans, and the Aboriginal tribes of Western China, is solely a ''[[quid pro quo]]'' for the privilege of trading with the Chinese under extraordinarily favorable conditions."{{sfn|Rockhill|1889|p=2}} Rockhill argued that Korea viewed China not as a suzerain but as a family head: Korea likened the [[Ming dynasty]] to a father and the Qing dynasty to an older brother.{{sfn|Rockhill|1889|p=18}} According to Rockhill: "As to the custom of submitting to the Emperor the choice made by the king of an heir to the throne, or of a consort, or informing him of the death of his mother, of his wife, etc., we can look at them as only strictly ceremonial relations, bearing with them no idea of subordination."{{sfn|Rockhill|1889|p=18}}

===Ottoman Empire===

{{Main|Vassal and tributary states of the Ottoman Empire}}

[[File:OttomanEmpire1590.png|thumb|Vassal and [[tributary state]]s of the [[Ottoman Empire]] in [[1590 AD|1590]].]]

The [[Ottoman Empire]] (1299&ndash;19231299–1923) controlled a number of tributary or vassal states in the peripheral areas of its territory. Vassalage took a number of different forms with some states permitted to elect their own leaders. Other states paid tribute for their lands.

During the 18th century, the [[Ottoman Empire]] controlled many vassal and tributary states such as the principalities of [[Wallachia]] and [[Moldavia]], orand the [[Crimean Khanate]].

==See also==

* {{Annotated link |Autonomous administrative division}}

*[[Mandala (Southeast Asian political model)]]▼

*[[ {{Annotated link |Autonomous republic]]}}▼

*[[Puppet state]]

* {{Annotated link |Dependent territory}}

*[[Roman-Persian wars]], during which vassal kingdoms played a key role▼

* {{anli|Imperialism}}

▲*[[Autonomous republic]]

* {{Annotated link |Indirect rule}}

▲*[[ {{Annotated link |Mandala (Southeast Asian political model)]]}}

* {{Annotated link |Periphery countries}}

* {{Annotated link |Protectorate (imperial China)}}

* {{Annotated link |Puppet state}}

▲*[[ {{Annotated link |Roman-Persian wars]],}} (during which vassal kingdoms played a keysignificant role)

==References==

{{Reflist}}

===Sources===

{{refbegin |indent=yes}}

* {{citation |last1=Battistini |first1=Lawrence H. |title=The Korean Problem in the Nineteenth Century |journal=[[Monumenta Nipponica]] |date=1952 |volume=8 |issue=1/2 |pages=47–66 |doi=10.2307/2383005 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2383005 |issn=0027-0741 |jstor=2383005 |access-date=2022-03-17 |archive-date=2022-02-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220204035212/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2383005 |url-status=live }}

* {{citation |last1=Lin |first1=Ming-te |title=Li Hung-chang's Suzerain Policy toward Korea, 1882-18941882–1894 |journal=Chinese Studies in History |date=July 1991 |volume=24 |issue=4 |pages=69–96 |doi=10.2753/CSH0009-4633240469 |publisher=[[Taylor & Francis]]}}

* {{citation |last1=Oh |first1=Si Jin |title=Resolving the Misunderstood Historical Order: A Korean Perspective on the Historical Tributary Order in East Asia |journal=[[Journal of the History of International Law]] |date=28 October 2019 |volume=21 |issue=3 |pages=341–377 |doi=10.1163/15718050-12340115 |publisher=Brill Nijhoff|s2cid=213718118 }}

* {{citation |last1=Rockhill |first1=William W. |title=Korea in Its Relations with China |journal=[[Journal of the American Oriental Society]] |date=1889 |volume=13 |pages=1–33 |doi=10.2307/592442 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/592442 |issn=0003-0279 |jstor=592442 |access-date=2022-03-17 |archive-date=2022-02-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220203074621/https://www.jstor.org/stable/592442 |url-status=live }}

{{refend}}

==External links==

* {{Commons category-inline|Vassal states}}

{{Autonomous types of first-tier administration}}