Vietnam’s Chinese-style ‘tributary system’ in South East Asia in the nineteenth century

ABSTRACT

This article uses the historical sources of the Historiography Institute of the Nguyễn Dynasty (Vietnam) along with the theoretical model of centres and peripheries to demonstrate a nineteenth-century ‘tribute system’ that paralleled the more widely known Chinese system. This second tributary system was in South East Asia and had Vietnam at its centre. Surrounding countries in the region were ‘peripherals’ or ‘vassals’ to Vietnam, and they maintained diplomatic relations through requesting investiture, tributes and offerings. This article identifies the similarities and differences between the Vietnamese and Chinese centre–periphery political systems based on their characteristics, activities and operational principles. Although Vietnam emulated China’s tributary model in many aspects, it wisely chose a diplomatic policy that promoted ‘harmony to distant countries’ to soften the relationship with its vassals. This policy was important in maintaining peace and mutual benefit, especially when Vietnam was not in a position of strength in the region.

KEYWORDS:

• Vietnam
• China
• international order
• Nguyễn dynasty
• tributary system
• centre–periphery

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 ‘Cambodia’ is commonly used to refer to the post-Chenla dynasty Cambodia. Because the Vietnamese word for Cambodia (Cao Miên) coincided partly with the name Miên Tông of King Thiệu Trị (r. 1841–1847), the Nguyễn Dynasty reverted to the old name Chenla (Chân Lạp) when he ascended the throne in 1841. From 1847. Cao Miên was again used for Cambodia.

2 Fairbank used the Wade-Giles romanization system for Chinese, in which this character is rendered kung. This article uses Pinyin romanization throughout.