琉球使節を通して見る幕末と明治初期の外交政策

从17世纪初开始，琉球就一直保持着中国和日本双重从属的模糊政治地位。在这种安排下，几个世纪后，西方人来到了东亚，包括琉球和日本。在这一新框架下，美、法、荷三国与琉球签订了国际条约，承认了琉球在一定程度上的主权。这些条约是用文言文写成的，按中国历法标注日期，没有提到琉球与日本的关系。明治国家吞并琉球时，关键问题是消除琉球对中国和日本的双重从属。在我担任JSPS博士后研究员期间，通过对多个文件来源的解读，我回答了一个迄今尚未得到应有考虑的问题：这些证明琉球主权的条约怎么可能被明治国家阻止展示琉球的独立？这是琉球、日本和中国历史上的一个重要段落，也是琉球吞并的西方角色中的一个重要段落，这是以前从未解释过的。通过这种方式，我澄清了日本并入琉球以及取代琉球的过程是东亚和世界历史不可分割的一部分。由于我作为JSPS研究员的活动，我在2015年获得了“第一届约瑟夫·克里纳·细成大学国际日本研究奖”，并在2016年获得了“第38届文佳·京凯-东顺潮奖”。

From the beginning of the seventeenth century, Ryukyu maintained an ambiguous political status of dual subordination to China and Japan. After centuries under this arrangement, Westerners arrived in East Asia, including in Ryukyu and Japan. In this new framework, the US, France, and Holland stipulated international treaties with Ryukyu, and in so doing, they recognized a certain degree of Ryukyuan sovereignty. These treaties were written in classical Chinese and were dated according to the Chinese calendar, without any reference to connections between Ryukyu and Japan.When annexing Ryukyu, the Meiji state’s crucial issue was eliminating Ryukyu’s dual subordination to China and Japan. During my research as a JSPS post-doctoral fellow, through the interpretation of multiple documentary sources I answered to a question that so far has not been duly taken into consideration: How was it possible that these treaties, which prove Ryukyuan sovereignty, were prevented by the Meiji state from showing Ryukyu’s independence? This is a significant passage in Ryukyuan, Japanese, Chinese history, as well as in the Western role of Ryukyu’s annexation, which had never been explained before. In this way, I clarified that Japan's incorporation of Ryukyu, as well as the process that superseded it, was as an integral part of both East Asian and world history.Thanks to my activities as a JSPS researcher, in 2015 I received the "1st Professor Josef Kreiner Hosei University Award for International Japanese Studies," and in 2016 I received the "38th Bunka Kyokai-Higa Shuncho Award.