Korea (Joseon) and Tibet both paid tribute to the Qing Empire, while maintaining internal autonomy. However, Chinese Nationalists were happy to support the independence of Korea, but not that of Tibet. Was there any difference between the relationship between Korea-China and Tibet-China before 1897?

Edited in response to a few comments: As someone in the comments has mentioned, Wikipedia has separate discussions on each of the two relationships (Tibet under Qing Rule and Manchu Invasion of Korea). Another response on Stackexchange on Tibet says that it was always administered separately. The only thing that came out of these links is that while Tibet actually had around 2000 or so Qing soldiers stationed, Korea did not. The key question here is: did the Qing soldiers actively enforce the Emperor's direct administrative orders in Tibet? And if they indeed do so, how often was this done?

  • 2
    Have you looked at "Tibet under Wing rule" and Qing invasion of Joseon on Wikipedia for starters? Different timing, different organization, different local regimes, etc.
    – Brian Z
    Jul 12 '20 at 23:01
  • @BrianZ Very much so. The Qing Invasion of Joseon decisively forced Joseon to accept Qing suzerainty. Joseon's kings had to seek legitimacy by getting permission to accede to the throne from the Qing Emperor. This is similar to the case of Tibet under Qing's rule, where the Dalai Llama could only be considered legitimate on the emperor's approval.
    – Arani
    Jul 13 '20 at 8:37
  • 2
    @Arani (1) History.SE expects questions to demonstrate priori research; if the links Brian provided has not answered your question, please edit your post to explain why. (2) What you're describing is not similar at all beyond the most superficial sense. Tibet was (until the Qing decline, at least) administered directly by the Qing Court, which maintained a military presence. Korea meanwhile was completely autonomous and in fact secretly defiant. This is laid out in the Wikipedia articles Brian linked.
    – Semaphore
    Jul 13 '20 at 8:59
  • @Semaphore I disagree that the link says Tibet was administered directly by the Qing court. Also, another response on Stackexchange also says Tibet was always administered separately (history.stackexchange.com/a/23238/1074). Yes, there was Qing military presence of 2000 soldiers according to Wikipedia (which also can be untrustworthy in controversial cases), but that by no means suggests Tibet was directly administered by the Qing court at all. As for Joseon, the very fact that Samjeondo monument was erect till 1895 (when it was broken) shows that Korea was China's tributary.
    – Arani
    Jul 13 '20 at 9:25
  • 2
    @Arani (1) That question is asking about the Yuan dynasty, not Qing. (2) If you dispute what Wikipedia says, then that could be a valid reason asking this question, but again, you need to edit your post to make your case rather than argue with me in the comments.
    – Semaphore
    Jul 13 '20 at 9:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.