@article{oai:rekihaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:02000123,
 author = {福岡, 万里子 and FUKUOKA, Mariko},
 journal = {国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Japanese History},
 month = {Sep},
 note = {本稿は，初代米国駐日総領事タウンゼント・ハリスが来日前にシャムで行った条約交渉を取り上げ，それが行われた歴史的背景と交渉経過を，前年に展開された英使バウリングの交渉経過と対比させつつ考察し，ハリスにとって初めての「外交」経験が持った意味と，それが彼の日本外交に与えた影響を検討することを目的とする。本論は三章から成り，第1章では，19世紀半ばまでのシャムの対外貿易の諸前提と，英米が対シャム条約締結を求めた事情を整理する。第2章では，バウリングの対シャム条約交渉（1855年）の経緯を，彼の刊行日誌及び随員パークスの未公刊日誌に基づき再構成する。第3章では，ハリスの対シャム条約交渉（1856年）の課題と企図，交渉経緯と結果を，刊行・未刊行のハリス関係文書を総合的に参照しつつ再構成し，その特徴を，バウリングの経験と比較しながら考える。
比較考察から明らかになるのは，シャム側が，米使ハリスを英使バウリングよりも格下の外国使節として扱い，両者の待遇を細かに差別化していた様相である。本稿ではその背景に，世界の国々の君主や代表たちをランキング化して捉え，欧州の帝室・王室の高貴な交友関係に自らも一員として連なることを重視する一方，そうしたロイヤル・コネクションの圏外にある米国大統領とその代表の扱いを劣等視する，モンクット王の世界観を読み取った。一方でシャム側は，英国の脅威に対する危機意識を背景に，対外的難事の際の米国の仲裁を条約で規定することを求めたが，仲裁条項の代わりとして米国に有利な条件が最終的に確保できず，また序列認識に基づく差別待遇を敏感に感じ取っていたハリスは，これに応じなかった。その後ハリスは，対欧米関係の蓄積が比較的薄い日本において，欧州諸列強に対する米国の優位的地位の確保と，日米修好通商条約第2条の米国仲裁条項に象徴される特別な日米友好関係の構築に腐心することとなるが，その外交活動は，シャムにおける否定的経験から得られた次のような教訓を，念頭に置いて展開されていた面があると考えられる。すなわち，ヨーロッパ列強に対して劣位に置かれる形での外交交渉は望ましくない，と同時にアジアの国々は侵略的な西洋列強に対処するため仲介国の存在を強く求めている，という観測である。, This article focuses on the treaty negotiations which the first American Consul General to Japan Townsend Harris conducted in Siam in 1856 before he was accredited to Shimoda, Japan. By comparing the American-Siamese negotiations with those conducted by the British Plenipotentiary Sir John Bowring with Siam in the previous year, this article aims to assess the meaning of Harris' first diplomatic experiences in Asia and their influences upon his ensuing diplomacy in Japan. The article consists of three sections: Section one overviews the historical backgrounds of the Siamese foreign trade under the Chakri dynasty by the middle of the nineteenth century and the reasons why Britain and the United States needed to conclude or revise commercial treaties with Siam. Section two reconstructs the British-Siamese negotiations in 1855 based on the published journal of Bowring and the unpublished journal of his secretary, Harry Parkes. Section three reconstitutes the American-Siamese negotiations in the following year based on published and unpublished sources relating to Harris, analyzing the mission entrusted to him by the U.S. government, his own plan for the Siamese treaty, and the detailed process of the negotiations and their results.
Comparing the two negotiations reveals that the Siamese royalty and nobles treated the American representative Harris as an inferior envoy to his British counterpart Bowring, and discriminated against him in layered ways. The worldview of the King Mongkut was presumably behind these discriminative receptions, and he seemed to view international relations as hierarchy of superior and inferior sovereigns and their representatives. He put a high value on integrating himself into honorable social connections with the European royal and imperial sovereigns, while regarding the American President and his representative as alien to those royal connections, and estranged himself from them. On the other hand, the Siamese side, perceiving the British military threat, hoped to stipulate in the Siamese-American treaty that the U.S.A. would act as a friendly mediator in difficulties arising between the Siamese government and any European power. However, Harris kept declining this request, being offended by those discriminative treatments, and also because he saw that there were no quid pro quo benefits to be had. After that, in Japan, where the accumulation of relations with Europe and the United States was relatively thin, Harris focused on securing the superior position of the United States over the European powers and establishing a special Japan-US friendship symbolized by the US mediation clause in Article 2 of the American-Japanese Treaty of Amity and Commerce, which was to be concluded by him in 1858. The author argues that this kind of diplomatic course Harris pursued in Japan may have partially been influenced by his negative experiences in Siam, from which he should have learned the following things: that negotiating from a lesser status was not desirable; and that the Asian countries were very eager for a mediator to help them cope with the competing Europeans, who were acting as predators and sometimes as colonizers.},
 pages = {95--173},
 title = {[論文] バウリングとの比較からみるハリスの対シャム条約交渉 : 19世紀前半アジアの貿易構造変化と外交},
 volume = {239},
 year = {2022},
 yomi = {フクオカ, マリコ}
}