Saturday, April 5, 2008

Tibet and China: The early period

Yesterday, armed with two books, I began my journey through Tibetan history in earnest. As I said in my previous post I began with Mr. Li's book to learn about the ancient history of Tibet. I must say that the very earliest period was a bit difficult to read about as the names of people and places were in Tibetan and Chinese. In spite of this, I managed to glean what I feel is important information from the text. Not surprisingly, the history of China goes back a long way and I found that the earliest mention of contact between the two countries is about 2200 BC. In my opinion, it is important that the author treats Tibet and China as two separate and distinct countries. He mentions Chinese Emperors and Tibetan Kings, and in doing so he confirms that the two countries were at one time free and independent of each other.

For his purpose of defining status Mr. Li mentions that "Definite relations, however, were not established until the T'ang dynasty (618-907). It was during the period of this dynasty that no fewer than one hundred missions went from one country to the other" (6). What went on between the two countries is pretty much what can be expected. News was passed back and forth between Tibet and China, treaties were signed, matrimonial alliances formed, gifts exchanged and Mr. Li mentions Tibet paying tribute to the Chinese Emperor. There were border disputes and wars, "The two countries were often at war-one side being victorious at one time and the other at another-and frontier conflicts were common" (6). What I feel is important here is that Mr. Li consistently refers to Tibet and China as separate countries.

In addition to what I mentioned above other means of communication were in effect as well. Religious ideas were passed back and forth. Due to marriage alliances, cultural influences were passed back and forth. Knowledge and learning was also shared. Military assistance was provided by either country to the other at various different times. In discussing the relations between the two countries from the seventh through the ninth centuries Mr. Li also mentions Tibet's military standing, "During that period, Tibet as a military power was by no means inferior to China..." (18). Throughout all of this I get the impression that China was slightly more dominant in this early period with most of the influence on the mentioned issues flowing from China to Tibet. In spite of this, it is of the utmost importance, again in my opinion, that we remember that Tibet was an independent country.

Relations betwen the two countries went on in this manner for hundreds of years until both were shaken by a newcomer on the scene, the Mongols. As the Mongols went on their campaigns of military expansion, they inevitably came into contact with both Tibet and China, and both countries suffered. And, for the first time in their history, the Tibetans fell under the domination of a foreign power. Although they suffered the loss of their independence, the Tibetans suffered less than other peoples the Mongols conquered. The Buddhist religion flourished and spread, sometimes with Mongol help.

In summary, from the earliest times there was contact between the independent countries of Tibet and China. Tibet would not succumb to a foreign power until the 13th century when the Mongols invaded. Although they lost their independence, the Tibetans would survive this clash with the Mongols and keep their culture and religion intact. In later entries we will see how Tibetan culture and religion are faring under Chinese Communist domination.

References:

Li, Tieh-Tseng. The Historical Status of Tibet. New York: King's Crown Press, 1956.

2 comments:

Julie P.Q. said...

This is a good historical overview. I think it's important to show the separation of the countries, too. But aren't borders sore spots with many countries, even hundreds of years after new demarcations? Have you seen in the news recently that Mexico got an apology from a vodka company because in one of the Absolut (I think it was Absolut) ads showed old borders with the U.S., when Mexico had much more territory in the now U.S.-Southwest.
Strange...that 150 odd years later and Mexico is still smarting from an alcohol ad mentioning it!

Spectre of Dissonance said...

Hmm... history. History is always fun. My own sarcastic and smartass remarks aside, it's truly awesome to see someone approaching such a serious and global topic.

And not trying to be a pain, because I fully support the B.C. and A.D., but just so we all know how stupid and liberal our history-keepers have become, B.C. and A.D. are no longer appropriate citations. I mean, God-forbid (pun intended) that we have a time notations that came to be known as "Before Christ" and "After Death". True, it's not what they really meant, but that's the way they were associated, and it worked, because once upon a time, America, and the world in general, had religious roots (you know, like the fact that America was founded on religious freedom).

So, in my own sidetracked thoughts, the proper notation is now B.C.E. and C.E., or "Before Current Era" and, wouldn't you know it, "Current Era". Or maybe it's "Common". ... But I'm pretty sure it's "Current". Anyways, I know that the notations are B.C.E. and C.E.

Now, all my random ranting aside, I really like your blog and look forward to seeing your continued research.