ive, it was the Qing Dynasty s gradual cognisance of the shift in balance of power between China and the West (albeit it sluggishly and with only a clouded perception of its full significance) that caused the change in its diplomatic behaviour. This essay does not regard such a change as ideational. Even from the point of view of the most materially motivated actor, owing to the information factor, non-cognition of information was not instrumental in the change in Qing diplomatic behaviour.raises the question of how can one evaluate the effectiveness of ideational and material explanations. To this end, we offer a rough guideline: In effective material analyses, there must be a plausible explanation for behavioural adjustments without resorting to changes in concepts of legitimacy. From the ideational standpoint, the change in behaviour resulted from a specific change in ideas, and can be traced to it.made these distinctions, it must be borne in mind that they are operational guidelines only, and not intended to constitute full, appropriate conditions for a firm ideational or material explanation.dynasty foreign policy was chosen as the subject for this analysis for several reasons. First, the dynasty s reign encompassed a prolonged period of stability that culminated in significant change. The length of the Qing reign, however, does not compromise the effectiveness of variables that occurred within it. This would be the case if the essay were to choose a period in whose extent the actor underwent a fundamental change in identity. In, for example, an analysis of China throughout the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing periods, the differing value systems of these successive dynasties would undoubtedly have significant impact on the foreign policy behaviour of the actor in question. Specific selection of the Qing dynasty allows for the study of cultural and normative differences between China and the West in a number of different contexts. Initially, cross-cultural contact was extremely rare, but by the end of the dynasty it had become quite commonplace. An analysis of this period of history may determine whether changes in Qing foreign policy were brought about by transformation of the Qing value system, changes in material factors or cognition of material factors. This case examines a period of history long enough to cover the related concept of essential change in identity.to the mid 19th century, China s diplomatic practice was almost exclusively confined to the tribute system. Imperial China s vast, independent territory also had considerable influence on its dealings with the West. The Chinese people regarded the Emperor as the ruler of all under heaven; no other monarch in their perceived view of the world shared his near god-like status. Diplomatic exchanges were not regarded as a necessary aspect of the Emperor s activities. China's smaller, neighbouring states, however, believed that they had much to gain by establishing ties with their large, powerful neighbour. They pursued relationships with this dominant power within their midst with political, economic, and cultural interests in mind. The tribute system, therefore, existed on the basis of disparity of power and interests.substance of the tribute system was initially nebulous; it took hundreds of years for this institution to develop into its full formality. It originated in the archaic system of tributes paid to the Emperor by vassal states during the chaotic pre-Qin period and reached its zenith during the Ming Dynasty. Institutionalization of this system increased its complexity. The Ming and Qing dynasties imposed rigorous regulations regarding the appointed time, personnel, and itinerary of foreign countries wishing to pay tribute. Abiding by the host of conditions stipulated by the court regarding tribute protocol was crucial. Visiting foreign dignitaries were expected to spend the time necessary on versing themselves in the relevant ceremonials before they were allowed to go about their business.tribute system in force during Ming and Qing dynasties was imbued with pre-Qin ceremonial and symbolic significance. A certain number of tributary states, however, played only a symbolically subordinate role in the tribute giving ritual. Chinese rule was nominal rather than actual. The governance of old imperial China adhered to the principle of national unity, in which feudal rulers formed relationships with foreign officials within the framework of the tribute system. The parties concerned enacted the roles of the highly respected, high ranking Chinese superior and lowly, deferential foreign subordinate, a relationship reflected in tribute documents as well as ceremony. The system actually worked to maintain relations with, rather than subjugate, neighbouring countries. It was also one of material benefit to tributary states, as they were often rewarded with gifts more valuable than those they had originally offered...
