The purpose of this paper is to trace the process that led to the establishment of the 400 million franc Russo-French loan to China, the first of the three indemnity loans after the Sino-Japanese War, with respect to the new diplomatic offensive of the Western powers and the structural change of Ch'ing foreign policy ; and to attempt to evaluate its position in the diplomatic history of the late Ch'ing period. Foreign loans to China, which before the Sino-Japanese War had been obtained chiefly from British banks and merchants in China by local authorities, had by the end of the war been reduced to a route that led from Robert Hart, the Inspector General of the Chinese Maritime Customs, to the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation and thence to the London money market. However, after the Three Power Intervention, while high officials of the Peking government bypassed Hart to assume direct responsibility for conducting loan negotiations, Gemany, France and Russia proposed to make a loan to China with the intention of undermining the monopoly of Great Britain in regard to foreign loans to China. At that time, the goverments and bank groups of both Germany and France had plans of organizing an international consortium and the international supervision of China's Customs, but the Russian government from the beginning had proceeded to negotiate with China independently. The Russian government sought the loan for China from French capital, and in order to make the conditions of the loan's issue beneficial to China the Russian government also gave a guarantee in the contract concluded by China as well as securing the approval of the French government for this scheme. Though Great Britain and Germany in response tried to frustrate the Russian scheme by warning the Tsungli-Yamen of the risk involved in accepting a loan guaranteed by Russia, China finally accepted the Russian offer. The Russo-French loan to China, which was concluded on July 6,1895, marked the beginning of the rivalry between the Russo-French bloc and the Anglo-German bloc in late Ch'inginternational ralations. In that year, France succeeded in obtaining the first railway concession in China with the aid of Russia, while Russia established the Russo-Chinese Bank which was to become an important weapon in her policy to penetrate into Manchuria after obtaining finance from the French bank group that participated in the Russo-French loan. On the other hand, bank groups of Great Britain and Germany entered into an agreement for the joint financing of Chinese loans, and this Anglo-German financial entente in China was to continue till the breakout of the First World War. For China, the Russo-French loan was the first diplomatic problem that the Peking government which up till that time had had very little to do with direct diplomatic negotiations coped with after the 1894-95 war under a drastically changed internal political structure and international environment without relying on local authorities. Though the Peking government did not possess the ability to deal with diplomatic problems sufficiently, it was able to get a loan on relatively favorable conditions because of the external factor of rivalry amongst the Western powers.

抄録全体を表示

The purpose of this paper is to study the various historical materials which have been handed down in the Kitsuregawa Family, the last descendant of Kamakura-Kubo Family : Kanto-Ashikaga-shi. (鎌倉公方家 : 関東足利氏) Chapter II pays particular attention to the connection between the manuscript "Kitsuregawa-monjo" (「喜連川文書」) which is now in the possession of the National Library and the materials owned by Otomaru Ashikaga (足利於兎丸) (which are the manuscripts concerning the Kitsuregawa Family kept in the Editorial Office of Historical Materials at Tokyo University.) It is proved that the latter was 'Gosho-an' (御書案) which was edited during the period of Yoriuji Kitsuregawa (頼氏) in the early seventeenth century ; and that the former was the manuscript made referring to the latter in the period of Shigeuji Kitsuregawa (茂氏) in the first half, of the eighteenth century. The arrangement of the old documents of the Kitsuregawa Family was made twice. The aim of the latter was to show the succession from the Kubo Family to the Ko Family (公方家, 高家) ; while on the other hand that of the former was to edit the historical materials of the period their lord studied. It is clear that these two documents are quite different. Being different from Shimazu-shi (島津氏), the Kitsuregawa was seemed to take no special measures with the original document, but they rather made efforts to make manuscripts. We think that this was one of the ways of arranging old documents in those days. In Chapter III, the historical materials owned by Otomaru Ashikaga were studied and the contents of each were analyzed. Chapter IV deals with "Kitsuregawa-monjo" written in the "Tochigiken-shi" (『栃木県史』) and it is pointed out that even within the "Kitsuregawa-monjo" each one differs in content and form. In Chapter V, the original historical documents of the Kitsuregawa Family which have been recently confirmed are examined as well as verifying the process of acquiring and certifying the documents. Further analysis has also been made upon the contents of each material.

抄録全体を表示

La revuelta de las ciudades castellanas, que comenzo en Toledo en abril de 1520, y termino en la batalla de Villalar en abril de 1521, es conocida con el nombre de las "Cmunidades". Suponemos que la tarea aclaratoria de esta revuelta constituye la premisa fundamental para la comprension de las caracteristicas estructurales de la sociedad moderna castellana. Porque despues del fracaso de esta, Castilla se subordino a la politica exterior de la monarquia absoluta de los Austrias que sacrificaba el pais considerandolo como mero arsenal de hombres y materiales, y no acontecio ningun alzamiento grave durante el Antiguo Regimen. En el capitulo primero estudiamos, para conocer las aportaciones historiograficas anteriores sobre el tema, las interpretaciones de las Comunidades segun las diferentes etapas hasta nuestfos dias. En la primera mitad del siglo XIX, predomino la interpretacion liberal, la cual valoraba la revuelta como un movimiento precursor de la libertad y al mismo tiempo, nacional contra el absolutismo "foraneo". Sin embargo, desde mediados de ese siglo, aparecen criticas contra esta interpretacion, cuyas corrientes se cristalizaron en la tesis de G.Maranon caracterizada como el "culto al Imperio". El considero la revuelta como medieval y feudal contra el poder absoluto moderno y unificador del pais. La revaloracion de la revuelta de las Comunidades comenzo a finales de la decada de 1950 por J.Vicens Vives, E.Tierno Galvan, etc. Y en la del '60, J.A.Maravall presento una valoracion completamente opuesta a la de Maranon. Segun el, las Comunidades fue la primera "revolucion moderna". Los aspectos economicos de la revuelta fueron analizados por J.Perez, historiador frances, que vio en el fondo de la revuelta, los conflictos economicos existentes entre los productores de panos y los exportadores de lanas. J.I.Gutierrez Nieto presto atencion al movimiento antisenorial acaecido en el mismo periodo y lo considero como el factor determinante, tanto en el desarrollo de la revuelta como en la formacion del bando realista. Ademas, el insistio en que el enfrentamiento basico se dio entre la nobleza territorial y las ciudades en torno al regimen senorial. En el capitulo segundo, examinamos las interpretaciones recientes y presentamos varias dudas sobre estas. Estamos de acuerdo con J.Perez en considerar la revuelta como la crisis economica y social de la epoca, pero no podemos aceptar los intereses opuestos en el conflicto de las lanas como la causa fundamental del movimiento. Tampoco aceptamos la interpretacion de Gutierrez Nieto, porque no suponemos que las ciudades eran tan marcadamente antisenoriales, aunque reconocemos que hay que profundizar bien el aspecto antisenorial en los senorios y su influencia en el movimiento. Pensamos que las causas sociales de la revuelta habria que encontrarlas, ante todo, en la transformacion sufrida por las ciudades castellanas situadas entre el Duero y el Tajo, despues de la Baja Edad Media, y por eso, se presento como un movimiento de "le caractere communautaire" (P.Chaunu). En cuanto al caracter ideologico de la revuelta, aceptamos que fue un movimiento progresivo, constitucional y democratico, pero no admitimos que fuera esa "revolucion moderna" de que hablan algunos historiadores, puesto que la idea politica de los sublevados no sobrepaso las restricciones de la sociedad estamental. Creo que se impone, ante todo, una aclaracion detallada y concreta de lo acontecido en las ciudades, desde antes de la revuelta.

抄録全体を表示