Explore the vast range of titles available.

This collection brings together themes in East Asian history, diplomacy, culture and politics written by J E Hoare since the early 1970s. His writings derive from his training as a historian, from his time as a Research Analyst in the British Foreign Office from 1969-2003, and from his experiences as a diplomat in the Republic of Korea (South Korea), the People’s Republic of China, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). The writings selected for this volume include academic papers, book reviews and some quasi-journalistic articles which reflect both historical research and analysis of current events and issues. The wide-ranging content speaks to the author’s specialist fields of interest including diplomacy, biography, extraterritoriality and architecture on which he has published extensively.

This book takes an in-depth look at the study of Japan in contemporary Britain, highlighting the many strengths but also pointing out some weaknesses, while at the same time offering a valuable historical record of the origins and development of Japanese Studies in British universities and other institutions. It comprises essays written by scholars from universities all over Britain – from Edinburgh and Newcastle to Cardiff, SOAS and Oxbridge+, as well as contributions from various supporting foundations and organizations – from the British Association of Japanese Studies (BAJS) to the Sainsbury Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts and Cultures (SISJAC). It opens with an historical overview by Peter Kornicki, followed by chapters on the important role of missionaries in advancing Japanese language studies in pre-war Japan by Hamish Ion and the contribution of the British consular and military officers before 1941 by Jim Hoare. Japanese Studies in Britain gives a snapshot of the present state of Japanese Studies in Britain. It also provides an important new benchmark and point of reference regarding the present options for studying Japan at British universities. It offers in addition a wider perspective on the role, relevance and future direction of Japanese Studies for academia, business and government, students planning their future careers and more generally the world of education, as well as readers interested in the developing relationship between Britain and Japan.

THE CONSULAR SERVICEAT THE TIME of the ‘opening’ of Japan in the 1850s, Britain had three consular services. The general service operated in most of the world. Older and better regarded was the Levant Service, covering parts of the near and middle east. Its staff were systematically recruited, properly paid, exercised jurisdiction over their countrymen, and some at least were expected to know the local languages. The China Consular Service that emerged in the 1840s resembled the Levant Service rather than the general service. The 1842 Treaty of Nanking (Nanjing) opened five ports for trade and residence, with a consulate at each. The need for efficient communication led to a professional Chinese-speaking consular service. By 1858, the China Service had developed a structure that would survive until the 1940s. Senior positions in the Service were no longer filled by missionaries and other outsiders with a knowledge of the language but by officers who qualified as interpreters; there were proper salaries and allowances during an officer's employment and a pension at the end; and the rules against trading were strictly enforced. This was the model for the Japan Service.In the early years in China, the availability of missionaries and others filled the gap until a professional cadre could be trained. Japan had remained more isolated, however, and there were few Westerners who had any knowledge of the language. The person with probably the best Japanese was based in the Ryūkyū Islands, but seemed to be unhinged by the mid–1850s. Members of the China Consular Service studied Japanese but the only one who had made real progress died in 1851. Harry Parkes, later minister in Tokyo, had tried but had not advanced far.From the start, therefore, it was assumed that there would be a need to train language staff . In preparation for the opening of Japan to foreign residence, several university colleges were approached in 1854 for nominations. Those selected went to Hong Kong as ‘supernumerary interpreters’. It is not clear if any went to Japan. Instead A J. Gower, private secretary to Sir John Bowring, the Superintendent of the China Trade, was assigned to Japan as it was understand that he had ‘ … directed his attention to Japanese’.

At the time of the 'opening' of Japan in the 1850s, Britain had three consular services. The general service operated in most of the world. Older and better regarded was the Levant Service, covering parts of the near and middle east. Its staff were systematically recruited, properly paid, exercised jurisdiction over their countrymen, and some at least were expected to know the local languages. The China Consular Service that emerged in the 1840s resembled the Levant Service rather than the general service. The 1842 Treaty of Nanking (Nanjing) opened five ports for trade and residence, with a consulate at each. The need for efficient communication led to a professional Chinese-speaking consular service. By 1858, the China Service had developed a structure that would survive until the 1940s. Senior positions in the Service were no longer filled by missionaries and other outsiders with a knowledge of the language but by officers who qualified as interpreters; there were proper salaries and allowances during an officer's employment and a pension at the end; and the rules against trading were strictly enforced. This was the model for the Japan Service. 1

There are a number of books on the subject of the effects of the two great wars of this century on British memory, and other books have dealt with subjects such as propaganda on and deception as they concerned both the enemy and the home front. No such studies exist on the Korean war, though later conflicts involving Britain, especially Suez in 1956 and the Falklands incident of 1982, have attracted a lot of attention. This paper, while by no means the definitive study of British public opinion and the Korean war, can serve as a preliminary look at the

To be invited to publish a selection of one’s writings is a great honour, and I am most grateful to Paul Norbury for suggesting that I should do so. Making a workable selection has not been easy. Preparing the selection, I kept coming across pieces that I had completely forgotten about. Most were short comments or reviews, but one or two were quite substantial. I have a certain diffidence about the project. While I did receive a proper academic training, and, since retiring from the Diplomatic Service in 2003, some short periods teaching at university level, I am not an