Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
To find out what happened to the English objects that Macartney took to China in 1792 proved to be more difficult than finding out what happened to the Chinese objects that he brought back to England in 1794. To begin with there is no single list to use as reference point.
When the Chinese state officials came on board the English warship the Lion in the Gulf of Beizhili (present-day Bohaiwan) in July 1793 the Chinese officials immediately asked for “the English king’s letter, a list of the tribute goods and a list of the persons who would proceed to Beijing with the Chief Envoy”. Macartney was caught unprepared, so the Deputy Ambassador, George Leonard Staunton, had to make a “tribute list” in a hurry. The list was then translated into Chinese by Mr Li (aka Mr Plum), the interpreter Staunton brought along from Naples, with the assistance from two Jesuit missionaries who happened to be on board the Lion. Staunton also very wisely supplied a translation in Latin, because he knew that the missionaries serving in the Qing court did not read English.
However, Staunton did not draw up a simple list. He was of the opinion that “a common catalogue containing the names of the articles would not convey any idea of their qualities or intrinsic worth”. So he decided to write “a general description of the nature of the articles”. Unfortunately that “general description” was nine-pages long. From those nine pages one can see that the presents include a planetarium, a Herschel telescope, an orrery, a celestial globe, a terrestrial globe, several instruments for measuring time, a moondial, a barometer, an air pump, two gout chairs, a number of cannons, Howitzer mortars, muskets, pistols and sword blades, a model of a warship, British-made vases, a burning glass, two magnificent lustres, British-made woollens and prints depicting British people and places.
Macartney himself, in his diary, mentioned "Vulliamy clocks and two chariots made at Long Acre, London".
Aeneas Anderson, Macartney’s valet, gave a detailed list of the things taken to Rehe (old-style romanisation “Jehol”) in September 1793:
Two hundred pieces of narrow coarse cloth,
Two large telescopes,
Two air guns,
Two beautiful fowling pieces; one inlaid with gold and the other with silver,
Two pair of saddle pistols, enriched and ornamented in the same manner,
Two boxes, each containing seven pieces of Irish tabinets,
Two elegant saddles complete with furniture,
Two large boxes containing the finest carpets of British manufactory.
It appears that Macartney’s fellow-countrymen had their own opinions as to what kind of presents the British embassy should take to China. In September 1792, the same month when the embassy set sail from Spithead, the caricaturist James Gillray conjured up an imaginary scene showing members of the embassy offering a variety of English products to the Chinese emperor. The cartoon, entitled The reception of the diplomatique & his suite at the court of Pekin, shows the Chinese emperor being presented with an air balloon; a bird in a wicker cage; model of a coach complete with horses and drivers; a rocking-horse; a weathercock; a volume of “Boydell's Shakespeare” and a rat-trap; a bat, trap, and ball; dice-box and dice; a battledore and shuttlecock; a miniature of King George III, to which is attached a child's coral and bells; a windmill; a magic-lantern with a “slider” which projects at each side showing devils, in the lantern is a figure of Punch; a model of a man-of-war; and an E.O. table.
The reception of the diplomatique & his suite at the court of Pekin, by James Gillray, 1792, © British Museum, Inv. No. 1868,0808.6228
Of the articles featured in the cartoon only the coach and the model of warship came close to the truth. As regards the air balloon, Macartney did write in his diary that “he had taken care to provide one at Pekin with a person to go up in it, but Heshen the First Minister discouraged that experiment”. One can only presume that Macartney felt so utterly cold-shouldered that he did not offer the air balloon as a diplomatic gift.
Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
Part 2: Ambassador or tribute-envoy
Macartney had been Envoy Extraordinary to the court of St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1764. In 1792 he doubtlessly considered himself an ambassador to the Chinese court in Beijing when he and his retinue set sail in September. Earlier that month he had received a long letter from Henry Dundas, the Foreign Secretary, in which Dundas had said unequivocally that “you will then assume the character and public appearance of His Majesty’s Ambassador Extraordinary”.
The problem is: the Chinese Emperor was never informed that the purpose of Macartney’s visit was to negotiate terms of trade. Up to the year 1792 the British government had never corresponded with the court of Beijing. The only channel of communication open to Henry Dundas to let Beijing know that a representative of King George III was on his way, was via the English East India Company (EIC) factory in Guangzhou (old-style romanisation “Canton”). Therefore the Chairman of the EIC headquarters in London, Mr Francis Baring, wrote to the Zhongdu, the most senior state official in Guangdong province, whom the EIC Canton staff customarily called “the Viceroy”. Baring’s letter, written in April 1792, was taken to Guangzhou in one of the EIC ships.
Baring was not a politician. He began his letter by saying that the King of Great Britain wished to send a deputation to Beijing to congratulate the Emperor on his birthday. Although Macartney was described as King George’s ambassador, Baring did not explain what “an ambassador” was. He then went on to say in his letter that
… the Ambassador had several presents for the Emperor of China, which from their size nice mechanism and value could not be conveyed through the interior of the Country from Canton to Pekin without the risk of much damage, he will proceed directly to the port of Tien-sing.
The outcome was a rather unfortunate one. Emperor Qianlong saw Macartney as someone bringing gifts, and in the Chinese vocabulary a gift to the Emperor, whether from a foreigner or from a native Chinese, was always called a “tribute object”, and the bearer of the gifts was called a “tribute envoy”, not an “ambassador”. Worse still, according to Chinese convention once the gifts had been safely delivered the envoy’s job was considered done, and should go home. Macartney, on the other hand, wanted to stay in Beijing as the representative of the British King, at least for a few months if not permanently.
What annoyed Macartney the most was that he never had the opportunity to try his negotiation skills on the court officials. He was on Chinese soil for about six months, namely from August 1794 to January 1795. During that period he saw Emperor Qianlong four times. The first occasion occurred on 14th September, in the imperial resort in Rehe (old-style romanisation “Jehol”), where the Emperor habitually spent the autumn months. That day Macartney delivered King George’s letter, contained in a “large gold box enriched with diamonds”, to the Chinese Emperor. A dinner then followed, and the only conversation that took place was a polite enquiry about King George’s age from the Chinese monarch.
The reception of Lord Macartney by Emperor Qianlong at Jehol, by William Alexander, 1796,
© British Museum, Inv. No. 1872,0210.4
The following day, 15th September, Macartney spoke with the Emperor for about five minutes, when the latter was on his way “to the pagoda to pay his morning devotions”. For the rest of the day Macartney and other members of the embassy were shown various scenic spots in the Garden of Ten Thousand Trees (Wanshu Yuan). Their guide was the First Minister Heshen himself, but Macartney could “perceive that his heart is not with us”. Another high-ranking official present was Fu-kang-an, a former Viceroy of Canton, whose deportment was “formal and repulsive”. Macartney suggested that his guards might perform some military evolutions as an entertainment, but Fu-kang-an “declined the proposal with great coldness and a mixture of unreasonable vanity”. So nothing was achieved that day.
The 17th September was the Emperor’s birthday, and the British people were invited to join the festival. The Emperor “remained concealed behind a screen” the whole day. The First Minister Heshen “parried all my attempts to speak to him on business”.
On 18th September Macartney was invited to a theatre performance. He “endeavoured to lead the Emperor towards the subject of my embassy, but he seemed not disposed to enter into it farther than by delivering me a little box of old japan, which he desired me to present to the King, my master, as a token of his friendship, saying that the old box had been eight hundred years in his family”. So, again, no business was discussed on that occasion.
Macartney saw the Emperor for the last time on 30th September. That day the Emperor returned to Beijing from Rehe, and Macartney had been told previously that “it was the custom for ambassadors, as well as for the great mandarins of the Court, to go and meet him on the road at a place about twelve miles off”. Macartney was suffering from rheumatism, but he exerted himself and went. For that heroic effort he was rewarded with a message from the Emperor “importing that he understood I was not well, and as the cold weather was approaching, it would be better for me to return immediately to Pekin than to make any stay at Yuan-ming-yuan”.
If Macartney still hoped to have other opportunities to talk business with the Qing court he was soon disappointed. Three days later, when he was still being ill, he received news that the date of the embassy’s departure from Beijing had been fixed on 7th October.
Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
Part 3: Success or failure
If one puts aside, momentarily, the opinions of 20th-century writers, it would seem that British society initially showed no discontent with the Macartney embassy upon their return to England in 1794.
There is no evidence to say that King George III took offence with the Chinese emperor, and indeed there was no reason why he should have. All that the Chinese emperor had said in his edict was that:
1) the British request to send someone to reside in the Celestial Empire to look after trade did not conform to the Celestial Empire’s system, thus could not be done;
2) China had never valued rare and precious things, and had not the slightest need of British manufactures.
Those remarks might have sounded blunt, but they could in no way be called “offensive”. During his reign King George III must have made other requests to other nations, and it is hard to imagine that he would feel hurt when his requests were not granted.
Equally, one must not presume that the English East India Company, who paid for all the expenses of the embassy, had considered the entire undertaking a complete waste of time and money. In 1797 George Leonard Staunton’s An Authentic Account of an Embassy from the King of Great Britain to the Emperor of China, in three volumes, was published. In the book Staunton assured the British public that the Chinese emperor had shown great interest in the English products:
He seemed much gratified with the sight of most of the English presents … Several of the instruments and machines were tried in his presence. Distant objects were observed through the telescope; and metals melted in the focus of Parker’s great lens … A model of the Royal Sovereign, a ship of war of a hundred and ten guns, attracted much of his notice …
Those soothing words might have convinced the English East India Company that the £11,500+ used to buy the presents were well worth spending.
The Herschel telescope on the left above is now in the Science Museum, London. It is similar to the one taken to China in 1792. The telescope presented to Emperor Qianlong has not survived, except the wooden stand, which is shown above, on the right. The image is taken from a 1998 Palace Museum publication, Qinggong Xiyang Yiqi. The telescope resting on the wooden stand is not a Herschel product.
Left: Reflecting telescope made by William Herschel, circa 1783-85, © Science Museum, London, Inv. No. 1876-1000
Right: Wooden stand originally for a Herschel telescope, circa 1790, © Palace Museum, Beijing, Inv. No. 141750
Staunton took three years to write his Authentic Account, thus his book was only the second eye-witness account to appear on the market. The first prize went to Aeneas Anderson, Macartney’s valet, whose A Narrative of the British Embassy to China in the years 1792, 1793 and 1794, came out in 1795. Upon its publication Macartney was keen to distance himself from the book, telling his friends that: “I have never seen it, but have been told it was a mere bookseller’s job to gratify the public curiosity”. One does not know whether the lack of endorsement from Macartney had depressed the sales figure of Anderson’s book, but it would seem unlikely, since the intended audience were the common folks, not people who moved in exalted places or learned societies.
The third eye-witness account, The Journal of Mr Samuel Holmes, came out in 1798. Samuel Holmes was a soldier of the 11th Regiment of Dragoons, who joined the embassy as one of Macartney’s guards. He kept a diary, but not with publication in mind. When asked about “the particulars of his journal”, he replied that
… on leaving England I took a small book for the purpose of making memorandums, not thinking to enlarge so much; but which I had completely filled by the time we landed in China. I then bought the Chinese paper, and copied from the above book; after which I inserted all observations daily, and never wrote a line in the book about China after leaving Macao …
It was exactly for the unadulterated nature of the journal that William Bulmer decided to publish it. The publisher stated that it was “for patronage of humble merit”. But if one reads the Preface carefully one can detect, between the lines, a certain distrust of the “politicians and philosophers” on the part of the publisher. It was due to that distrust that a long declaration was added to the title page of the book, namely “printed without addition, abridgment, or amendment, from the original diary, kept during that expedition”.
As regards Macartney himself, although he did not bring home a piece of paper from the Chinese emperor granting trading privileges to Britain, he was able to deliver plenty of intelligence to Henry Dundas, the Foreign Secretary. In particular he could boast that
We are now masters of the geography of the north-east coast of China, and have acquired a knowledge of the Yellow Sea, which was never before navigated by European ships.
Thus, at the end of the 1790s, it would seem everybody was happy. Did anyone speak of “failure” at that time? The answer is rather surprising, because the person who mentioned “failure” was one member of the embassy - John Barrow.
Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
Part 4: The Dutch had done better
John Barrow went to China with Macartney in 1792, in the capacity of “comptroller”. His book Travels in China came out in 1804.
A great many things had happened during the ten years between 1794 and 1804. George Leonard Staunton had died in 1801. His son George Thomas, who had been given a silk purse by Emperor Qianlong in Rehe (old-style romanisation “Jehol”) while he was only a boy of twelve, had found employment with the English East India Company and had gone to Guangzhou (old-style romanisation “Canton”). Emperor Qianlong had died in 1799. The powerful First Minister Heshen, whom Macartney had met several times, had no one to protect him from the wrath of the new emperor Jiaqing. He was ordered to commit suicide within a month of the death of his old master.
In 1804, for a number of reasons John Barrow wanted to promote himself as someone knowledgeable about China, but the moment was inopportune for him. In the opening years of the 19th century the British people had heard about the Dutch embassy having been given a most favourable reception by Emperor Qianlong in 1795. Isaac Titsingh, of the Grand Council of the Dutch Indies, and Andreas Everardus van Braam Houckgeest, of the Dutch East India Company factory in Guangzhou, arrived in Beijing on January 10th, 1795, and remained there as guests of the Emperor until February 15th, during which time they visited places that
the foot of an alien had never before trod … nor had any European eye ever perceived what we had been permitted to examine … and that we might thence judge how far the Monarch had carried his preference and predilection.
This showed the Macartney embassy in a bad light. Back in 1793 the British deputation spent seven days in Rehe which could be described as "constructive", and were practically ordered to leave Beijing in such a hurry that Macartney’s suite had only a few days to pack everything up for the homeward journey. Aeneas Anderson, Macartney’s valet, summed up the situation as: “the hurry and confusion of this day is beyond description”.
The Ambassador's residence in Pekin, drawing by William Alexander, circa 1793, © British Library
Understandably, when the British people heard of the Dutch success they asked questions. One of the questions asked was: if Macartney had been less rigid about the kowtow ceremony perhaps he would have secured more favourable results.
Barrow could not admit that the Dutch had done better than the British. Therefore he put forth the argument that the British embassy had to leave Beijing hurriedly not because Macartney had refused to perform the kowtow, but because the British embassy were costing the Chinese treasury 1,500 taels (or £500) per day. He invented a “court of ceremonies” in Beijing, and it was that court of ceremonies that
prescribed forty days for the residence of foreign embassadors, either in the capital, or wherever the court may happen to be; though on particular occasions, or by accident, the term may sometimes be extended to double that time.
He went on to assert that the British embassy had stayed in Beijing and Rehe for a total of 47 days, which was a longer period than the standard 40 days prescribed by the Chinese court, whereas the Dutch had stayed only 36 days. And since Aeneas Anderson was the person who indiscreetly told the whole Europe the unflattering condition under which the Macartney embassy made their far-from-glorious exit in 1793, Barrow did not forget to bad-mouth Anderson’s book, calling it “no better authority than a livery servant … vamped up by a London bookseller as a speculation …”.
Barrow would never have dreamt that one century later imperial China would be replaced by Republic China, and that the Chinese people could read English books. The account of the Macartney embassy was read with keen interest by a scholar named Liu Bannong, because the said account mentioned the behaviour of Emperor Qianlong and the palace officials in a way that would not be mentioned in any Chinese history book. A Chinese translation of Macartney’s diary was published by Zhonghua Bookstore, Shanghai, in 1916.
Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
Part 5: In search of the English presents in the Forbidden City
On the last day of August, 2017, I flew to Beijing. Thanks to a grant awarded to me by the J.S. Lee Fellowship Programme I began my search in the Palace Museum, formerly the Forbidden City, for any possible survivals of the presents taken to China by Lord George Macartney in 1792.
Spending months in the Forbidden City was like a dream. Every building, every room is steeped in history. The Library is located in the Shou-An Palace, where Ming and Qing empresses dowager and imperial consorts resided. Near the North Gate is the Yangxing Studio, where Reginald Johnston gave English lessons to the abdicated Emperor Puyi between 1919 and 1922. Near the East Gate is the office of the Palace Department, the department who hosted me during my placement. The suite of rooms occupied by the Department used to be a book depository of the Guoshi Guan (Office of the Compilation of National History), when the Forbidden City came under the jurisdiction of the Republic government after 1912.
The important thing to note is that the history is not confined to the past. While I was there I witnessed the historical meeting of the President of the United States, Mr Donald Trump, and the President of China, Mr Xi Jinping, on November 8th.
It was on October 3rd, 1793, that Macartney and Staunton came to the Forbidden City. Macartney met the First Minister Heshen at the Taihe Gate, but he was so ill that he had to leave. Staunton and a few gentlemen of the embassy were shown a “number of edifices” in the Outer Palace, but Staunton’s mind was probably elsewhere, because he was unable to give even a minimal narrative of the palaces and halls in his book.
The “tribute list” that Staunton gave to the Chinese officials mentioned nineteen items. Of these nineteen items seven were installed in the Zhengda Guangming Hall in Yuanming Yuan, because of their large size. Six items were taken to Rehe (old-style romanisation “Jehol”), and the remaining items were delivered to the officials in Yuanming Yuan after Macartney had returned from Rehe. But neither Macartney nor Staunton were in the Yuanming Yuan when Emperor Qianlong viewed the presents. When Staunton reported in his An Authentic Account that the Emperor was pleased with the English presents he was citing second-hand information.
The following is a summary of what have been said about the English presents. The remarks came not only from members of Macartney’s team, but also from eye-witnesses who had seen the English products.
The planetarium
Remarks by James Dinwiddie, the “machinist” in Macartney’s team: Mr Alexander came to take a perspective representation of it to accompany Lord Macartney into Tartary; eighteen days, however, elapsed before the machine was thoroughly cleaned, fixed in its place, and adjusted to its proper motion. The planetarium will by this mode of erecting lose much of its effect, because an ignorant people should always be taken by surprise.
.png)
The Planetarium, drawing by William Alexander, circa 1793, © British Library
The orrery, the celestial globe, the terrestrial globe and two magnificent lustres
Joint memorial from three officials of the Imperial Household Department: The celestial globe and the terrestrial globe are similar to the two globes now installed in the Leshou Hall. The orrery is similar to the one now in the Jingfu Palace, but the decorative pattern on its stand is not as good. The two glass lamps are similar to the goose-neck lamp now hung in the Shuifa Hall.
Remarks by Dinwiddie: The oldest eunuch made his appearance and asked us to go and take down the lustres - that it was the Emperor’s command. This we positively refused to do.
The air pump
Remarks by Dinwiddie: When viewing the air-pump, &c., the Emperor said “These things are good enough to amuse children”.
Parker’s great lens
Remarks by Dinwiddie: The Emperor looked at the lenses not more than two minutes … Wood set on fire, even the Chinese cash melted by the power of this apparatus, seemed to excite no other feelings in the prime minister than lighting his pipe at the focus in derision of its usefulness.
There is an entry in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 7th edition, 1842, under “burning glass”: The most powerful burning glass that has yet been constructed was made by Mr Parker of Fleet Street. After a great number of experiments, and an expense of above L.700, this able artist succeeded in completing a burning lens of flint-glass three feet in diameter … That ingenious artist was naturally desirous to indemnify himself for the expense. A subscription was therefore opened for purchasing the lens as a national instrument; but this subscription failing, Mr Parker was induced to sell it to Captain Mackintosh, who accompanied Lord Macartney to China. This valuable instrument was left at Pekin, where it still remains.
.png)
Drawing of Parker's great lens, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 7th edition, 1842, plate 142
Did Emperor Qianlong like the English presents?
Part 6: English carriages, guns and woollens
In addition to the scientific instruments Macartney also presented to the Emperor two carriages made by John Hatchett of Long Acre, London.
Macartney considered the English carriage a more comfortable means of transport than the Chinese one. On September 30th, while waiting for the Emperor to return to Beijing from Rehe, he said to himself: "The Emperor was carried in a kind of sedan chair, and followed by a clumsy state chariot upon two wheels without springs, which must be so rough and disagreeable a machine that I think he will be delighted with a transition to the elegant easy carriages we have brought for him".
Staunton knew the truth to be otherwise, so he told a different story in his book, which was for public consumption: "When a splendid chariot intended as a present for the Emperor was unpacked and put together, nothing could be more admired; but it was necessary to give directions for taking off the box; for when the mandarins found out that so elevated a seat was destined for the coachman who was to drive the horses, they expressed the utmost astonishment that it should be proposed to place any man in a situation above the Emperor. So easily is the delicacy of this people shocked in whatever relates to the person of their exalted sovereign".
Andreas van Braam, of the Dutch embassy, saw one of the carriages in Yuanming Yuan in January 1795: "Our conductor pointed out to us the coach of which Lord Macartney made a present to the Emperor last year, standing against the wall on the left side of the throne. It is exquisitely painted, perfectly well varnished, and the whole of the carriage is covered with gilding. The harness and the rest of the equipage are in the body of the coach, which is covered with a linen cloth".
One can only presume that the carriages remained in the Yuanming Yuan for the next sixty-five years, since Robert Swinhoe, of the British Consular Service, saw them during the Second Opium War. He wrote in his book Narrative of the North China Campaign of 1860 : "In an outhouse in Yuen-ming-yuen two carriages, presented by Lord Macartney to the Emperor Taou-kwang [sic], were found intact and in good order. The Emperor appears to never have used them, preferring instead the springless native cart or the sedan".
It is also presumed that the two Hatchett carriages were destroyed when the Yuanming Yuan was set on fire in 1860. By a fortunate coincidence there exists today a carriage made by John Hatchett at roughly the same time, which enables 21st-century readers to form an idea of what the Qing court officials would have seen in 1793. The carriage formerly belonged to James, 3rd Duke of Montrose, who was King George III's Master of the Horse. It is incomplete, and the "box" (meaning the place where the driver sat) that horrified the Chinese officials, is missing. However, readers can still see that the driver would have been seated at a level above the traveller, i.e. the emperor.
Travelling carriage, made by John Hatchett, 1760-1790, © V&A, Inv. No. 353-1882
At the Yuanming Yuan Robert Swinhoe also saw other things in addition to the Hatchett carriages. He wrote in his book: "two Howitzer guns, with equipments complete, the gift also of Lord Macartney, were likewise found; and among astronomical and various other scientific instruments, a double-barrel English made gun in case occurred, with tins of powder and boxes of Eley’s caps".
Cannons and guns were taken to China because Macartney and Staunton were under the wrong impression that the Chinese emperor would be interested in the latest inventions in artillery. Samuel Holmes, a soldier in Macartney’s team, said they delivered "4 one-pounders, 2 three-pounders, 2 twelve-inch howitzers, with a large supply of ammunition, &c. &c. &c". Then he added a comment: "the Chinese are naturally such timid cowardly fellows, and it is a question if they ever make any use of them".
After the English had gone home Emperor Qianlong gave the British-made woollens to his ministers as gifts. He explained his act of generosity in an edict: "The Kingdom of England has sent a deputation bringing tribute goods. They are foreigners from afar. Therefore I order that their local products be distributed among the state officials in the Capital and in the provinces, so that they know their country’s reputation has travelled far and wide".
..... Part 7 to follow soon
