Translating Official Documents: An Art of Governance by Translation in the Qing Dynasty

The study examines how the Qing dynasty used translation of official documents as a core technique of governance in a multi-ethnic, multilingual empire. Building on the notion that governance is a discursive practice dependent on text-based documentation, the paper situates China’s long tradition of document politics and the Han-era policy of monolingual standardization (writing the same script) alongside non-Han dynasties’ multilingual strategies. The Qing, while promoting Manchu as the national language, officially recognized Chinese, Mongolian, Tibetan, and Uyghur, making translation integral to administration. The research addresses the gap in comprehensive, regime-level analyses of Qing official document translation within the governance-by-translation framework. Its purpose is to clarify the governance objectives behind translation policies and to reconstruct how translation agencies, officials, and procedures operationalized state rule, centralization, bureaucratic communication, and legitimacy across diverse regions.

Prior scholarship on Qing official document translation clusters into three strands: (1) studies of Manchu–Tibetan translation practices, including translator appointments and training; (2) research on diplomatic document translation; and (3) analyses of official document translation and the offices/officials responsible (e.g., Grand Secretariat translators, bithesi). Existing works highlight importance but are fragmentary and largely historiographical, lacking a comprehensive governance-by-translation perspective and a systematic analysis of the underlying regime. This paper responds by integrating these threads within a unified analytical framework of translation governmentality.

The paper adopts a documentary analysis approach, guided by governance and institutional translation frameworks. Theoretically, it draws on Koskinen’s model of translation in multilingual governance (decisions on governing languages and institutionalization of translation; regimes of maintenance, regulation, implementation, image-building) and Dean’s analytics of governmentality (authorities/agencies, calculative means, knowledge forms, techniques, governed entities, ends). Following Gao and Ren’s operationalization, the study: (1) identifies Qing governing authorities and their language/translation policies; (2) examines the establishment of translation agencies and roles of translators embedded in governing bodies; and (3) reconstructs organized regimes of textual and translation practices. Primary sources include official compilations and archives produced under imperial authority: Veritable Records of Qing Dynasty Rulers, Collected Statutes of the Qing Dynasty, Imperial Regulations and Precedents of the Board of Ministry for the Regulations of the Frontier, History Compiled on Imperial Command, Imperial Comprehensive Treatises, and the Provisional History of the Qing Dynasty. The authors analyze these sources to interpret motivations, institutional arrangements, procedures, and outcomes of official document translation for state administration.

- The Qing established a comprehensive, governance-oriented translation regime that underpinned centralization, bureaucratic operation, and legitimacy across a vast, multi-ethnic empire. - Multiple specialized translation agencies were created or assigned translation mandates: • Grand Secretariat: handled routine memorial translations via Chinese, Manchu, and Mongolian document sections; coordinated imperial edict translations (with evolving division of labor alongside the Council of State and the Sino–Manchu Translation Office). • Council of State: housed the Translation Office of Imperial Proclamations; by 1771 merged into the Sino–Manchu Translation Office, which managed edicts thereafter. • Lifanyuan (Board for Frontier Affairs): supervised ethnic affairs, with a Chinese Archive (translation plus archiving) and a Mongolian Translation Office; translated Mongolian, Western Mongol todo bičig, and Tangut/Tibetan documents; operated language schools (Mongolian, Tibetan/Tanggute, Todo) to train translators. • Interpreters and Translators Institutes (merged in 1748): managed reception and translations for vassal states; organized into Western and Eastern sections for specified languages (Uyghur, Persian, Tibetan, Indian; Siamese, Burmese, Dai, etc.). • Xiyu Guan (founded 1748): served as a translation agency and training center for Western Regions languages and assisted receptions. - Specialized translation officials sustained capacity and workflow: • Dorgi bithesi (Grand Secretariat translators/scribes) expanded significantly during Qianlong’s reign (e.g., assignments of aisilambi assistants; total around 140, later ~170 under Jiaqing/Daoguang). • Bithesi (banner-affiliated clerks) performed translation, transcription, and archival tasks across central and regional bodies; estimates exceed 1,500 per reign, surpassing 2,000 in some periods; the role functioned as a pipeline for civil service. - Institutionalized multilingual translation modes and workflows: • Manchu–Mongolian: Lifanyuan processed Mongolian memorials through defined steps (submission via courier; dual-translator Manchu rendering; senior review; imperial review; archiving of Manchu plus originals). • Manchu–Chinese: Grand Secretariat followed detailed, multi-stage procedures for intake, prioritization, translation (often from Chinese summaries), multilayer proofreading, dual-language registries, imperial endorsement in cinnabar, and inter-ministerial dissemination. • Manchu–Tibetan: no separate office, but standardized channels used Tanggute school-trained interpreters and lamas; Tibetan-to-Manchu and edict workflows ran via Lifanyuan and Grand Secretariat with set review and relay steps, often via Mongolian versions en route to Tibetan. • Manchu–Uyghur (Xinjiang): Manchu designated official language for administration while Uyghur retained official status locally; notices, seals, and letters were bilingual; Grand Secretariat’s Mongolian Documents Section supported Uyghur translation; regional practice mandated dual-script issuance. - Governance outcomes: • Centralization support: translation ensured coherent center–local communication across hierarchies and distances. • Bureaucratic functionality: multilingual document flows enabled information circulation among emperor and officials of diverse ethnic backgrounds. • Ideological construction and legitimacy: translated edicts and documents conveyed doctrines of imperial sanctity and a multi-ethnic unity ideology, bolstering acceptance of Manchu rule.

The findings demonstrate that the Qing implemented translation governmentality: deliberate language and translation policies were institutionalized through agencies, roles, and procedures to direct the conduct of the governed in a multilingual empire. By embedding translators and translation workflows within the Grand Secretariat, Council of State, Lifanyuan, and foreign-affairs institutes, the state ensured routine memorials, edicts, ethnic-affairs documents, and diplomatic texts circulated effectively across languages. This supported three governance aims: (1) maintaining a centralized, hierarchical institutional framework via reliable document transmission; (2) enabling bureaucracy-wide information flow and decision-making among multi-ethnic officials; and (3) constructing ideological legitimacy by disseminating imperial authority and unity narratives in recipients’ languages. The regime’s scale (e.g., hundreds of dorgi bithesi and over a thousand bithesi) and procedural rigor illustrate how translation moved from ad hoc necessity to a core technology of rule, addressing challenges that monolingual policies of earlier Han dynasties could not in a multi-ethnic context.

If Han dynasties can be characterized as governing by documents, the Qing can be described as governing by document translation. The administration built a robust translation regime with diversified agencies, ad hoc translation officials, and multilingual operational modes (Manchu–Mongolian, Manchu–Chinese, Manchu–Tibetan, Manchu–Uyghur). These arrangements handled routine memorials, imperial decrees, border-region and ethnic-affairs documents, and diplomatic communications. The regime ensured effective state administration across center and frontier, facilitated governance of regions like Mongolia, Xizang, and Xinjiang, and helped shape the core concepts, institutions, and mechanisms of Qing state governance. In short, document translation was pivotal to the Qing dynasty’s centralized rule and legitimacy.