Ajay Kumar: Created a new article

2023-08-24T16:24:38Z

Created a new article

New page

{{Short description|Rights and obligations of a dominant state}}
{{Redirect|Suzerain|the video game|Suzerain (video game)}}
{{Distinguish|Sovereigntism|Sovereignty}}

'''Suzerainty''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|uː|z|ər|ə|n|t|i|,_|-|r|ɛ|n|t|i}}) includes the rights and obligations of a person, state or other [[polity]] which controls the [[foreign policy|foreign policy and relations]] of a [[tributary state]], but allows the tributary state internal [[autonomy]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suzerain |title=Suzerain |work=Merriam Webster |access-date=2010-04-30 |archive-date=2009-04-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090422182823/http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suzerain |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=":0" /> While the subordinate party is called a [[vassal]], [[vassal state]] or [[tributary state]], the dominant party is called a '''suzerain'''. The rights and obligations of a [[vassal]] are called vassalage, and the rights and obligations of a suzerain are called '''suzerainty'''.

Suzerainty differs from [[sovereignty]] in that the dominant power allows tributary states to be technically independent, but enjoy only limited self-rule. Although the situation has existed in a number of historical empires, it is considered difficult to reconcile with 20th- or 21st-century concepts of [[international law]], in which sovereignty is a binary concept, which either exists or does not. While a sovereign state can agree by treaty to become a [[protectorate]] 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.

==Imperial China==
{{Further|Tributary system of China|List of tributary states of China|Emperor at home, king abroad}}
The tributary system of China or ''Cefeng'' system was a network of loose international relations focused on China which facilitated trade and foreign relations by acknowledging China's predominant role in East Asia. 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 would [[kowtow]] to the [[Emperor of China|Chinese emperor]] as a form of tribute, and acknowledge his superiority and precedence. 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.{{sfn|Chu|1994|p=177}}

The term "tribute system" as applied to China is technically 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 and [[Teng 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.{{sfn|Lee|2017|pp=28-29}}

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 the [[Ming dynasty]].{{sfn|Lee|2017|p=12}} Tributary members were virtually autonomous and carried out their own agendas despite paying tribute; this was the case with Japan, Korea, Ryukyu, and Vietnam.{{sfn|Lee|2017|p=15-16}} 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".{{sfn|Smits|2019|p=35}}{{sfn|de Klundert|2013|p=176}}

The Chinese tributary system was upended in the 19th and 20th centuries as a result of Western and Japanese [[colonialism]]. Japan took [[Korea]]<ref>{{cite book |author=Young Park |title=Korea and the Imperialists: In Search of a National Identity |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2SVO2LI1RnkC&pg=PA49 |year=2009 |publisher=AuthorHouse |pages=49–50|isbn=9781467061407 }}</ref> and the [[Ryukyu Islands]], [[French colonial empire|France]] took Vietnam, and Britain took [[Upper Myanmar|Upper Burma]].<ref>{{cite book |author=George D. E. Philip |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vWOQAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR18 |title=British documents on foreign affairs—reports and papers from the Foreign Office Confidential Print: From the mid-nineteenth century to the First World War. |publisher=Great Britain. Foreign Office |year=1994 |isbn=9780890936061}}</ref>

Since colonial times, Britain had regarded [[Tibet under Qing rule|Tibet]] as being under Chinese suzerainty, but in 2008 the British Foreign Secretary [[David Miliband]] called that word an "anachronism" in a statement, and recognized Tibet as part of China.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/tibet/3385803/UK-recognises-Chinas-direct-rule-over-Tibet.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/tibet/3385803/UK-recognises-Chinas-direct-rule-over-Tibet.html |archive-date=2022-01-12 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title=UK recognises China's direct rule over Tibet|first=Richard|last=Spencer|date=2008-11-05|access-date=2010-07-12|newspaper=[[The Daily Telegraph]]}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

==Ancient Israel and Near East==
Suzerainty treaties and similar covenants and agreements between Middle Eastern states were quite prevalent during the pre-monarchic and [[monarchy]] periods in [[History of ancient Israel and Judah|Ancient Israel]]. The [[Hittites]], [[Egyptians]], and [[Assyrian people|Assyrians]] had been suzerains to the [[Israelites]] and other tribal kingdoms of the [[Levant]] from 1200 to 600 BC. The structure of Jewish covenant law was similar to the Hittite form of suzerain.<ref name="Michael D. Coogan 2009">{{cite book |first=Michael D. |last=Coogan |title=A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament |location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-19-983011-4 |page=100 }}</ref>

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".<ref name="Michael D. Coogan 2009" /> Following the historical prologue came the stipulation. This included tributes, obligations and other forms of subordination that would be imposed on the Israelites.<ref name="Michael D. Coogan 2009"/> 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.<ref name="Michael D. Coogan 2009"/> 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.<ref>{{cite book |first=Michael D. |last=Coogan |title=A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament |location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-19-983011-4 |page=103 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor-first=Ed |editor-last=Hindson |editor2-first=Gary |editor2-last=Yates |title=The Essence of the Old Testament: A Survey |location=Nashville |publisher=B & H Publishing Group |year=2012 |page=113 }}</ref>

===Hittite suzerainty treaty form===
Below is a form of a Hittite suzerainty treaty.<ref name="Michael D. Coogan 2009" />
* [[Preamble]]: Identifies the parties involved in the treaty, the author, the title of the sovereign party, and usually his genealogy. It usually emphasises the greatness of the king or dominant party.<ref name="Mendenhall, G. 1954 pp. 49">{{cite journal |last=Mendenhall |first=G. |year=1954 |title=Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition |journal=The Biblical Archaeologist |publisher=The American Schools of Oriental Research |volume=17 |issue=3 |pages=49–76 |doi=10.2307/3209151 |jstor=3209151 |s2cid=166165146 }}</ref>
* [[Prologue]]: Lists the deeds already performed by the Suzerain on behalf of the [[vassal]]. This section would outline the previous relationship the two groups had up until that point with historical detail and facts that are very beneficial to scholars today, such as scholar George Mendenhall who focuses on this type of covenant as it pertained to the Israelite traditions.<ref name="Mendenhall, G. 1954 pp. 49" /> The suzerain would document previous events in which they did a favor that benefitted the vassal. The purpose of this would show that the more powerful group was merciful and giving, therefore, the vassal should obey the stipulations that are presented in the treaty. It discusses the relationship between them as a personal relationship instead of a solely political one. Most importantly in this section, the vassal is agreeing to future obedience for the benefits that he received in the past without deserving them.
* Stipulations: Terms to be upheld by the vassal for the life of the treaty; defines how the vassal is obligated and gives more of the legalities associated with the covenant.
* Provision for annual public reading: A copy of the treaty was to be read aloud annually in the vassal state for the purpose of renewal and to inform the public of the expectations involved and increase respect for the sovereign party, usually the king.<ref name="Mendenhall, G. 1954 pp. 49"/>
* Divine witness to the treaty: These usually include the deities of both the Suzerain and the vassal, but put special emphasis on the deities of the vassal.
* Blessings if the stipulations of the treaty were upheld and curses if the stipulations were not upheld. These blessings and curses were generally seen to come from the gods instead of punishment by the dominant party for example.
* Sacrificial Meal: Both parties would share a meal to show their participation in the treaty.

==India==

===British paramountcy===
{{further|Princely state}}
The [[East India Company|British East India Company]] conquered [[Bengal Subah|Bengal]] in 1757, and gradually extended its [[Company rule in India|control over the whole of India]]. It annexed many of the erstwhile Indian kingdoms (hereafter "states") but entered into alliances with others. Some states were created by the East India Company itself through the grant of [[jagir]]s to influential allies. The states varied enormously in size and influence, with [[Hyderabad State|Hyderabad]] 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.{{sfn|Gupta|1958|pp=145-146}}

The principle was asserted in a letter by [[Marquess of Reading|Lord Reading]] to the [[Nizam of Hyderabad]] 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 the [[Government of the United Kingdom|British Government]] on an equal footing." This meant that the Indian states were [[Crown dependencies]] or [[protectorate]]s 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.{{sfn|Gupta|1958|p=148}}

[[Sugata Bose|Bose]] and [[Ayesha Jalal|Jalal]] say that 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.{{sfn|Bose|Jalal|2004|page=83}}

The [[Government 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.{{sfn|Stein|Arnold|2010|p=306}} The political conditions were oppressive in several princely states giving rise to political movements. Under pressure from [[Mahatma Gandhi]], the [[Indian National Congress]] resolved not to interfere directly but called on the princes to increase civil liberties and reduce their own privileges.{{sfn|Stein|Arnold|2010|pp=336-337}}

With the impending [[Indian independence movement|independence of India]] in 1947, the Governor-General [[Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma|Lord 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, [[Dominion of India|India]] or [[Dominion of Pakistan|Pakistan]]. An [[Instrument of Accession]] was devised for this purpose. The [[Indian National Congress|Congress]] leaders agreed to the plan on 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 State|Junagadh]] and [[Hyderabad State|Hyderabad]]. The two states acceded later, under coercion from India. [[Jammu and Kashmir (princely state)|Jammu and Kashmir]], which shared a border with India as well as Pakistan, [[Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir)|acceded to India]] when a [[Indo-Pakistani war of 1947|Pakistan-backed invasion]] threatened its survival.{{sfn|Stein|Arnold|2010|pp=357-358}}{{sfn|Menon|1956}}

===Sikkim===
Following the [[Indian independence movement|independence of India]] in 1947, a treaty signed between the [[Chogyal|Chogyal of Sikkim]] [[Palden Thondup Namgyal]], and the [[Prime Minister of India]] [[Jawaharlal Nehru]] gave [[India]] suzerainty over [[Kingdom of Sikkim]] in exchange for it retaining its independence. This continued until 1975, when the [[1975 Sikkimese monarchy referendum|Sikkimese monarchy was abolished]] in favour of a merger into India. [[Sikkim]] is now one of the [[states of India]].

===Lakshadweep ([[Laccadives]])===
Located in the [[Arabian Sea]], [[Lakshadweep]] is a [[Union territory]] of India off the coast of the southwestern state of [[Kerala]].
The [[Aminidivi|Aminidivi group of islands]] ([[Amini, India|Amini]], [[Kadmat Island|Kadmat]], [[Kiltan]], [[Chetlat Island|Chetlat]] and [[Bitra]]) came under the rule of [[Tipu Sultan]] in 1787. They passed on to British control after the [[Third Anglo-Mysore War]] and were attached to the [[South Canara]] district. The rest of the islands became a suzerainty of the [[Arakkal Kingdom]] of [[Kannur|Cannanore]] in return for a payment of annual tribute.

After a while, the [[British Raj|British]] took over the administration of those islands for non-payment of arrears. These islands were attached to the [[Malabar district]] of the [[Madras Presidency]]. In 1956, the [[States Reorganisation Act, 1956|States Reorganisation Act]] separated these islands from the mainland administrative units, forming a new union territory by combining all the islands.

==Pakistan==
{{main|Princely states of Pakistan}}
The [[princely state]]s of the [[British India]] which acceded to [[Pakistan]] maintained their sovereignty with the [[Government of Pakistan]] acting as the suzerain until 1956 for [[Bahawalpur (princely state)|Bahawalpur]], [[Khairpur (princely state)|Khairpur]], and the [[Balochistan States Union|Balochistan States]], 1969 for [[Chitral (princely state)|Chitral]] and the [[North-West Frontier States Agency|Frontier States]], and 1974 for [[Hunza (princely state)|Hunza]] and [[Nagar (princely state)|Nagar]]. 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 the [[British Crown]] exercised through the [[Viceroy of India]].

==South African Republic==
After the [[First Boer War]] (1880–81), the [[South African Republic]] was granted its independence, albeit under British suzerainty. During the [[Second Boer War]] (1899–1902), the South African Republic was annexed as the [[Transvaal Colony]], which existed until 1910, when it became the Province of Transvaal in the [[Union of South Africa]].

==German Empire==
Following the [[Treaty of Brest-Litovsk#Territorial cessions in eastern Europe|Treaty of Brest-Litovsk]] (1918), the [[German Empire]] received a very short-lived suzerainty over the [[Baltic states|Baltic countries]] of [[Estonia]], [[Latvia]], and [[Lithuania]]. New monarchies were created in Lithuania and the [[United Baltic Duchy]] (which comprised the modern countries of Latvia and Estonia). The German aristocrats [[Wilhelm Karl, Duke of Urach]] (in Lithuania), and [[Duke Adolf Friedrich of Mecklenburg|Adolf Friedrich, Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin]] (in the United Baltic Duchy), were appointed as rulers. This plan was detailed by German Colonel General [[Erich Ludendorff]], who wrote, "German prestige demands that we should hold a strong protecting hand, not only over German citizens, but over all Germans."<ref>{{cite book|last=Ludendorff|first=Erich von|title=The General Staff and its Problems|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.24787|year=1920|location=London|pages=562}}</ref>

==Second World War==
Despite being occupied by the [[Axis powers]], several Western and Asian countries were allowed to exercise self-rule. Several states were created in order to facilitate their occupation, including [[Vichy France]], [[Manchukuo]], the [[Empire of Vietnam]], the [[Independent State of Croatia]] in Croatia and the [[Lokot Autonomy]] in [[Central Russia]].{{Clarify|reason=Can anyone provide any evidence that the term "suzerainty" was actually used to refer to these territories? In other words, even if they fulfilled all of the conditions of the definition of the term, were they actually referred to by the term? |date=September 2017}}

==Historical suzerainties==
[[Ottoman Empire]]:
* [[Principality of Serbia]]
* [[Principality of Samos]]
* [[Cretan State]]
* [[Crimean Khanate]]
* [[Septinsular Republic]]
* [[Principality of Bulgaria]]
* [[Principality of Moldavia]]
* [[Republic of Ragusa]]
* [[Principality of Romania]]
* [[Serbian Despotate]]
* [[Principality of Transylvania (1570–1711)|Principality of Transylvania]]
* [[Principality of Upper Hungary]]
* [[Principality of Wallachia]]
* [[Khedivate of Egypt]]
* [[Vilayet of Tripolitania]]
* [[Eyalet of Tunis]]
* [[Regency of Algiers]]

[[Duchy of Prussia]]/[[Kingdom of Prussia]]/[[North German Confederation]]/[[German Empire]]
* [[Margraviate of Brandenburg|Electorate of Brandenburg]] ([[Brandenburg-Prussia]])
* [[Canton of Neuchâtel#History|Principality of Neuchâtel]]
* [[Stolberg-Wernigerode|County of Stolberg-Wernigerode]]
** County of Stolberg-Schwarza (after 1748)
** [[Lordship of Gedern#Stolberg-Gedern|County of Stolberg-Gedern]] (after 1804)
* [[Grand Duchy of Posen]]
* [[Saxe-Lauenburg|Duchy of Saxe-Lauenburg]]
* [[Grand Duchy of Baden]] ([[Franco-Prussian War]])
* [[Kingdom of Bavaria]] (Franco-Prussian War)
* [[Kingdom of Württemberg]] (Franco-Prussian War)
* [[Grand Duchy of Hesse|Grand Duchy of Hesse and by Rhine]] (Franco-Prussian War)
* [[Kingdom of Finland (1918)|Kingdom of Finland]]
* [[Duchy of Courland and Semigallia (1918)|Duchy of Courland and Semigallia]]
* [[United Baltic Duchy]]
** Duchy of Courland and Semigallia
** Duchy of Estonia and Livonia
* [[Kingdom of Lithuania (1918)|Kingdom of Lithuania]]
* [[Kingdom of Poland (1917–1918)|Kingdom of Poland]]
* [[Belarusian Democratic Republic]]
* [[Ukrainian People's Republic]] ([[Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (Ukraine–Central Powers)|Treaty of Brest-Litovsk]])
* [[Ukrainian State]]
* [[Crimean Regional Government]]
* [[Don Republic]]
* [[Kuban People's Republic]]
* [[Mountainous Republic of the Northern Caucasus]]
* [[Transcaucasian Democratic Federative Republic]] ([[Otto von Lossow]] mission)
* [[Democratic Republic of Georgia]] ([[Treaty of Poti]])

[[Qing Dynasty]]:
* [[Mongolia]]<ref>Dickinson, Edwin De Witt, [https://books.google.com/books?id=CYXBSnQVmGkC ''The Equality of States in International Law''], p239</ref>
* [[Tibet]]
* [[Korea]]
* [[Vietnam]]
* [[Myanmar]]
* [[Thailand]]

[[Empire of Japan]]:
* [[Ryukyu Kingdom]]
* [[Korea]]

In [[Europe]]:
*[[House of Habsburg|Habsburg]] control, as [[Holy Roman Empire|Holy Roman Emperor]], over [[Liechtenstein]] (1719–1918), previously [[Schellenberg]] (1499–1719) and [[Vaduz|County of Vaduz]] (1322–1719)
* Ireland, under the control of the [[High King of Ireland]].
* [[Principality of Piombino|Piombino]] ([[Kingdom of the Two Sicilies]])<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Zhu|first=Yuan Yi|date=2020|title=Suzerainty, Semi-Sovereignty, and International Legal Hierarchies on China's Borderlands|journal=[[Asian Journal of International Law]]|volume=10|issue=2|pages=293–320|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/S204425132000020X|s2cid=225302411}}</ref>

In [[Indonesia]]:
* [[Kingdom of Larantuka]]

==Suzerainties in Fiction==
In J.R.R. Tolkien's ''The 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.”<ref>Return of the King, pages 173-74</ref>

In the ''Walking Dead'' comic book series and its television spinoff, Negan and the Saviors are a militant group who establish suzerainty over the various survivor communities in Northern Virginia. Under the pretense of protecting them against zombies and hostile humans, the Saviors threaten subservient communities with extreme violence unless those communities provide regular shipments of food, skilled personnel, and other supplies. The Saviors also disarm these communities but otherwise allow them to remain internally self-governing.

In Season 7 of ''Supernatural'', Castiel briefly attains god-like powers and takes direct control of Heaven.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skR5VsP5SHI|title=Supernatural - 7x01 - Castiel makes Crowley a deal|via=www.youtube.com|access-date=2023-02-08|archive-date=2023-05-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230504212914/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skR5VsP5SHI|url-status=live}}</ref> 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.

In the grand strategy video game Stellaris, one of the preset playable empires is named the Xanid Suzerainty. In the lore, the “suzerainty” is the Xani race having power over the Vheln race, a distinct, slightly less intelligent species that evolved on the same planet as the Xani.

''Suzerainty'' is a fictional, semi-playable board game within the video game [[Disco Elysium]]. Playable only via text interactions, ''Suzerainty'' satirizes the sanitized amorality present in many grand strategy games.

==See also==
{{Div col|colwidth=20em}}
*[[Associated state]]
*[[Client state]]
*[[Finlandization]]
*[[Hegemony]]
*[[Imperialism]]
*[[Mandala (Southeast Asian history)]]
*[[Overking]]
*[[Puppet state]]
*[[Satellite state]]
*[[Satrap]]
*''[[Sadae]]''
*[[Special Administrative Region]]
*[[Tributary state]]
*[[Tributary system of China]]
*[[Vassal state]]
*[[Westphalian sovereignty]]
{{Div col end}}

==References==
===Inline citations===
{{Reflist}}

=== Sources cited ===
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite book |last1=Bose |first1=Sugata |author1-link = Sugata Bose |last2=Jalal |first2=Ayesha |author2-link = Ayesha Jalal |title=Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=PaKdsF8WzbcC |year=2004 |edition=2nd |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-30787-1 }}
* {{citation|last=Chu|first=Samuel C.|year=1994|title=Liu Hung-Chang and China's Early Modernization|publisher=Routledge}}
* {{cite book |last=Garver |first=John W. |title=Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Twentieth Century |location=Seattle |publisher=U of Washington P |year=2001 }}
* {{cite book |last=Gupta |first=Manik Lal |title=Constitutional Development of India |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=N1nGL4qH1ccC&pg=PA146 |year=1958 |publisher=Atlantic Publishers & Distri |pages=146– |id = GGKEY:FYQFERQJW2U }}
* {{citation|last=de Klundert|first=Theo van|year=2013|title=Capitalism and Democracy: A Fragile Alliance|publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing Limited}}
* {{citation |last=Lee |first = Ji-Young |year=2017 |title = China's Hegemony: Four Hundred Years of East Asian Domination |publisher=Columbia University Press }}
* {{cite book | last=Menon | first=V.P. | title=The Story of the Integration of the Indian States | publisher=Macmillan | place=New York | year=1956}}
* {{Citation |last = Smits |first = Gregory |title = Visions of Ryukyu: identity and ideology in early-modern thought and politics |publisher = University of Hawaii Press |location = Honolulu, HI |year = 1999 |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=37LxVhgIbJkC&q=chinese+tributary+system&pg=PA35 |isbn = 0-8248-2037-1 |access-date=June 20, 2011 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Stein |first1=Burton |author-link1=Burton Stein |last2=Arnold |first2=David |title=A History of India |edition = 2nd |url = https://books.google.com/books?id=QY4zdTDwMAQC |access-date=27 July 2012 |year=2010 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-4051-9509-6 }}
{{refend}}

{{Terms for types of country subdivisions}}
{{Autonomous types of first-tier administration}}
{{International relations}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Types of administrative division]]
[[Category:International law]]
[[Category:Independence]]
[[Category:Sovereignty]]

Suzerainty - Revision history

Ajay Kumar: Created a new article