Asuzerain (/ˈsuːzərən,-reɪn/, fromOld Frenchsus "above" +soverain "supreme, chief") is a person,state orpolity who has supremacy and dominant influence over theforeign policy andeconomic relations of another subordinate party or polity, but allows internalautonomy to that subordinate.[1][2] Where the subordinate polity is called avassal,vassal state ortributary state, the dominant party is called the suzerain. The rights and obligations of avassal are calledvassalage, and the rights and obligations of a suzerain are calledsuzerainty.
Suzerainty differs fromsovereignty in that the dominant power does not exercisecentralizedgovernance over the vassals, allowing tributary states to be technicallyself-ruling but enjoy only limitedindependence. Although the situation has existed in a number of historicalempires, it is considered difficult to reconcile with 20th- or 21st-century concepts ofinternational law, in which sovereignty is a binary concept, which either exists or does not. While a sovereign state can agree by treaty to become aprotectorate of a stronger power, modern international law does not recognise any way of making this relationship compulsory on the weaker power. Suzerainty is a practical, de facto situation, rather than a legal, de jure one.
Current examples includeBhutan andIndia. India is responsible for military training, arms supplies, and the air defense ofBhutan.[3][4][5][6]
In earlyAncient China, the variousself-ruling regionalpolities (some being merelytribalcity-states) often align under thesphere of influence of aconfederacy, of which the largest, most powerful state typically became thede juredynastic leader. During the era of the mythicalThree Sovereigns and Five Emperorsdynastic and the subsequenttheocraticXia andShangdynasties, such a suzerain state would assume the "divine blessings" ofMandate of Heaven and became known as anoverlord (Chinese:共主;pinyin:gòng zhǔ;lit. 'sharedlord'), who claimed superiority over numeroussubmitted butautonomous states known asfangguo (方國 lit. 'regional/local state'). During theZhou dynasty, most of thestates were not indigenously established, but rather werearistocrat polities appointed by the rulingJiroyal family viaenfeoffment (册封cè fēng lit. 'decreedinvestiture') toextended relatives and loyal allies who contributed to theoverthrow of the Shang dynasty. Although China then was largely afederacy where the ruling Zhou kings only had limited sovereignty over the affairs of their vassal states, the term "Son of Heaven" (天子tiān zǐ) has since become the title of allChinese sovereigns of the subsequent dynasties until theXinhai Revolution in 1912, withClassic of Poetry even claiming the king's suzerainty overall lands under Heaven:
普天之下，莫非王土。率土之賓，莫非王臣。
"Under the sky, nothing isn't the king's land; the people who lead the lands, no one isn't the king's subjects."
Theunification of China under theQin dynasty in221 BC started the two millennia-longImperial era of Chinese history, and theEmperor became the supreme leader of aunitary China. Although the Qin dynasty was short-lived and fell to remnant rebels of the states it once conquered soon after the death of theFirst Emperor, the subsequentHan dynasty (whose founding emperorLiu Bang and chancellorsXiao He andCao Shen were all formercivil servants of the Qin bureaucracy) inherited Qin's concept ofChinese uniformity and, through diplomaticpower projections andtrade routes such as theSilk Road andTea Horse Road, became a prosperousempire with international influence far beyond the boundaries ofChinaproper. The prominence of the Han empire, especially after defeating theXiongnu Empire,Dayuan andWimanGojoseon, had led tofealty andtributes from numerous states in the surroundingCentral Asia (then known as theWestern Regions),Northeast Asia (mainlyBuyeo and theJin Koreans) andSoutheast Asia (pre-JiandeNanyue and earlyFunan), to whom the Chinese emperors granted titles ofkingship, as evidenced byKing of Na gold seal ofYayoi periodJapan (then known asWa) and the similar gold seal ofDian. Similarly, the dominance of the earlyTang dynasty, especially after its annihilation of theEastern Turkic Khaganate in630 AD andXueyantuo in646 AD, earnedEmperor Taizong the nickname ofKhan of Heaven (天可汗tiān kěhán) by variousGöktürk nomads ofInner Asia subdued during his reign.
The tributary orChaogong (朝貢) system under the Chinesesphere of influence (particularly within theSinosphere) was a loose network of international and trade relations focused on China's prestige as the undisputedregional power inEast Asia, and other states in the surrounding Central, Northeast, Southeast andSouth Asian regions also facilitated their trade and foreign relations by acknowledging China's primacy role in theFar East. It involved multiple relationships of trade, military force, diplomacy and ritual. The other states had to send a tributary envoy to China on schedule, who wouldkowtow to the Chinese emperors as a form of submission and acknowledgement of Chinese supremacy and precedence, and the Chinese emperors often granted gifts, wealth, blessings and favorable policy promises in return. The other countries followed China's formal ritual in order to keep the peace with the more powerful neighbor and be eligible for diplomatic or military help under certain conditions. Political actors within the tributary system were largely autonomous and in almost all cases virtually independent.[7]
The term "tribute system" as applied to China is a Western invention. There was no equivalent term in the Chinese lexicon to describe what would be considered the "tribute system" today, nor was it envisioned as an institution or system. John King Fairbank andTeng Ssu-yu created the "tribute system" theory in a series of articles in the early 1940s to describe "a set of ideas and practices developed and perpetuated by the rulers of China over many centuries." The Fairbank model presents the tribute system as an extension of the hierarchic and nonegalitarian Confucian social order. The more Confucian the actors, the more likely they were to participate in the tributary system.[8]
In practice the behaviours which were collectively seen as a tributary system, involving tribute and gift exchange in return for symbolic subordination, were only formalized during the early years of theMing dynasty due toZheng He'streasure voyages.[9] Tributary members were virtually autonomous and carried out their own agendas despite paying tribute; this was the case with Japan, Korea, Ryukyu, and Vietnam.[10] Chinese influence on tributary states was almost always non-interventionist in nature and tributary states "normally could expect no military assistance from Chinese armies should they be invaded".[11][12]
The Chinese tributary system was upended in the 19th and 20th centuries as a result of spreadingWestern colonialism and the rise ofImperial Japan after theMeiji Restoration. Previously, thePortugueseconquest of Malacca andsettlement of Macau, theSpanishcolonization of the Philippines and theDutchincursions to the Malay Archipelago had already eroded the Chinese prestige in theNanyang region (roughly present-day Southeast Asia as well asNew Guinea). During the lateQing dynasty, the Chinese tributary system was gradually destroyed withBritain annexingHong Kong,Lower andUpper Burma following theOpium Wars andAnglo-Burmese Wars;[13] theFrance conqueringCambodia,Laos andVietnam intoIndochina, and Japan annexingRyukyu Islands,Taiwan andKorea[14] after theRyukyu Disposition andFirst Sino-Japanese War. The downward spiral of the Qing dynasty over the second half of the 19th century also causedMainland China to become semi-colonized, with many of its coastal regions turning intoforeign concessions that lasted through theFirst andSecond World Wars. Most of the foreign colonies were returned back to Chinese control before thefounding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, with the last three concession territories being returned inby the Soviets in 1952,by the British in 1997 andby the Portuguese in 1999.
Since colonial times, Britain had regardedTibet as being under Chinese suzerainty, but in 2008 the British Foreign SecretaryDavid Miliband called that word an "anachronism" in a statement, and recognized Tibet as sovereign part of China.[15]
Suzerainty treaties and similar covenants and agreements between Middle Eastern states were quite prevalent during the pre-monarchic andmonarchy periods inAncient Israel. TheHittites,Egyptians, andAssyrians had been suzerains to theIsraelites and other tribal kingdoms of theLevant from 1200 to 600 BC. The structure of Jewish covenant law was similar to the Hittite form of suzerain.[16]
Each treaty would typically begin with an "Identification" of the Suzerain, followed by an historical prologue cataloguing the relationship between the two groups "with emphasis on the benevolent actions of the suzerain towards the vassal".[16] Following the historical prologue came the stipulation. This included tributes, obligations and other forms of subordination that would be imposed on the Israelites.[16] According to the Hittite form, after the stipulations were offered to the vassal, it was necessary to include a request to have copies of the treaty that would be read throughout the kingdom periodically.[16] The treaty would have divine and earthly witnesses purporting the treaty's validity, trustworthiness, and efficacy. This also tied into the blessings that would come from following the treaty and the curses from breaching it. For disobedience, curses would be given to those who had not remained steadfast in carrying out the stipulations of the treaty.[17][18]
Below is a form of a Hittite suzerainty treaty.[16]
TheBritish East India Company conqueredBengal in 1757, and gradually extended itscontrol over the whole of India. It annexed many of the erstwhile Indian kingdoms ("states", in British terminology) but entered into alliances with others. Some states were created by the East India Company itself through the grant ofjagirs to influential allies. The states varied enormously in size and influence, withHyderabad at the upper end with 16.5 million people and an annual revenue of 100 million rupees and states like Babri at the lower end with a population of 27 people and annual revenue of 80 rupees.[20]
The principle of paramountcy was explicitly stated in a letter byLord Reading to theNizam of Hyderabad,Mir Osman Ali Khan, in 1926, "The sovereignty of the British Crown is supreme in India and therefore no ruler of an Indian State can justifiably claim to negotiate with theBritish Government on an equal footing." This meant that the Indian states werecrown dependencies orprotectorates of the British Indian government. They could not make war or have any direct dealings with foreign states. Neither did they enjoy full internal autonomy. The British government could and did interfere in their internal affairs if the imperial interests were involved or if it proved necessary in the interest of so-stated "good governance". In some cases, the British government also deposed these Indian princes.[21]
According to historiansSugata Bose andAyesha Jalal the system of paramountcy was a system of limited sovereignty only in appearance. In reality, it was a system of recruitment of a reliable base of support for the imperial state. The support of the Imperial State obviated the need for the rulers to seek legitimacy through patronage and dialogue with their populations. Through their direct as well as indirect rule through the princes, the colonial state turned the population of India into 'subjects' rather than citizens.[22]
TheGovernment of India Act 1935 envisaged that India would be a federation of autonomous provinces balanced by Indian princely states. This plan never came to fruition.[23] The political conditions were oppressive in several princely states giving rise to political movements. Under pressure fromMahatma Gandhi, theIndian National Congress resolved not to interfere directly but called on the princes to increase civil liberties and reduce their own privileges.[24]
With the impendingindependence of India in 1947, the Governor-GeneralLord Mountbatten announced that the British paramountcy over Indian states would come to an end. The states were advised to accede to one of the new dominions,India orPakistan. AnInstrument of Accession was devised for this purpose. TheCongress leaders agreed to the plan on the condition that Mountbatten ensure that the majority of the states within the Indian territory accede to India. Under pressure from the governor-general, all the Indian states acceded to India save two,Junagadh andHyderabad.[25][26]
Following theindependence of India in 1947, a treaty signed between theChogyal of Sikkim,Palden Thondup Namgyal, and thePrime Minister of India,Jawaharlal Nehru gaveIndia suzerainty overKingdom of Sikkim in exchange for it retaining its independence. This continued until 1975, when theSikkimese monarchy was abolished in favour of a merger into India.Sikkim is now one of thestates of India.[citation needed]
Located in theArabian Sea,Lakshadweep is aUnion territory of India off the coast of the southwestern state ofKerala.TheAminidivi group of islands (Amini,Kadmat,Kiltan,Chetlat andBitra) came under the rule ofTipu Sultan in 1787. They passed on to British control after theThird Anglo-Mysore War and were attached to theSouth Canara district. The rest of the islands became a suzerainty of theArakkal Kingdom ofCannanore in return for a payment of annual tribute.[citation needed]
After a while, theBritish took over the administration of those islands for non-payment of arrears. These islands were attached to theMalabar district of theMadras Presidency. In 1956, theStates Reorganisation Act separated these islands from the mainland administrative units, forming a new union territory by combining all the islands.[citation needed]
Theprincely states of theBritish Raj which acceded toPakistan maintained their sovereignty with theGovernment of Pakistan acting as the suzerain until 1956 forBahawalpur,Khairpur, and theBalochistan States, 1969 forChitral and theFrontier States, and 1974 forHunza andNagar. All these territories have since been merged into Pakistan. These states were subject to the 'paramountcy' of the British Crown. The term was never precisely defined but it meant that the Indian states were subject to the suzerainty of theBritish Crown exercised through theViceroy of India.[citation needed]
After theFirst Boer War (1880–81), theSouth African Republic was granted its independence, albeit under British suzerainty. During theSecond Boer War (1899–1902), the South African Republic was annexed as theTransvaal Colony, which existed until 1910, when it became the Province of Transvaal in theUnion of South Africa.[citation needed]
Following theTreaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918), theGerman Empire received a very short-lived suzerainty over theBaltic countries ofEstonia,Latvia, andLithuania. New monarchies were created in Lithuania and theUnited Baltic Duchy (which comprised the modern countries of Latvia and Estonia). The German aristocratsWilhelm Karl, Duke of Urach (in Lithuania), andAdolf Friedrich, Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin (in the United Baltic Duchy), were appointed as rulers. This plan was detailed by German Colonel GeneralErich Ludendorff, who wrote, "German prestige demands that we should hold a strong protecting hand, not only over German citizens, but over all Germans."[27]
Despite being occupied by theAxis powers, several Western and Asian countries were allowed to exercise self-rule. Several states were created in order to facilitate their occupation, includingVichy France,Manchukuo, theEmpire of Vietnam, theIndependent State of Croatia in Croatia and theLokot Autonomy inCentral Russia.[clarification needed]
 | This sectionneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(May 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
InAfrica
In J.R.R. Tolkien'sThe Return of the King, the Mouth of Sauron proposes terms of surrender that would effectively give Mordor suzerainty over Gondor and Rohan: "The rabble of Gondor and its deluded allies shall withdraw at once beyond the Anduin, first taking oaths never again to assail Sauron the Great in arms, open or secret. ... West of the Anduin as far as the Misty Mountains and the Gap of Rohan shall be tributary to Mordor, and men there shall bear no weapons, but shall have leave to govern their own affairs."[29]
In Season 7 ofSupernatural, Castiel briefly attains god-like powers and takes direct control of Heaven.[30] He then meets with the King of Hell, Crowley, to propose an arrangement in which Crowley maintains control over Hell's internal affairs but pledges allegiance to Castiel. He also requires Crowley to give him control over the distribution of souls between Heaven and Hell, as souls are a source of supernatural power that Castiel needs to maintain his dominance. Reasoning that he has no choice, Crowley promptly agrees to this arrangement.[citation needed]
Authority control databases: National |
|---|
