This article explores the final movement and transformation of “traditional” diplomatic activities between Vietnam and China in a unique historical period from 1858 to 1885. In particular, this period begins when French colonialists, a third factor, appeared and concludes when the tributary relationship between Vietnam and China ended in accordance with the Tianjin Treaty signed between France and China. Vietnam tried to maintain peaceful and open relations with China. Concurrently, the Qing Dynasty strived to maintain a relationship with its Vietnamese “vassal.” The Qing Dynasty needed both the political and economic interests of its vassal, especially when its own prestige was decreasing. However, despite these efforts, during this period, the traditional diplomacy between the two countries deteriorated and then came to a permanent end. This occurred when China compromised with France and was forced to officially abandon its “suzerain” right in Vietnam (under the Tianjin Treaty signed with France on June 9, 1885). The end of the Vietnam–China tributary relationship at this time contributed to the accelerated collapse of the long-standing Chinese tributary system in East Asia and to the clarification of the mutability of the so-called “center.”
Keywords: Vietnam, China, France, diplomacy, tributary relationshipAnderson, J. A. (2013). Distinguishing between China and Vietnam: Three relational equilibriums in Sino-Vietnamese relations. Journal of East Asian Studies, 13(2), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1598240800003933
Documents diplomatiques. (1885). Affaires de Chine et du Tonkin 1884-1885 [Affairs of China and Tonkin 1884–1885]. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, M DCCC LXXXV.
Dreyer, J. T. (2014). China’s tianxia: Do all under heaven need one arbiter. ? https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/chinas-tianxia-do-all-under-heaven-need-one-arbiter.
Fairbank, J. K. (1968). A preliminary framework. In J. K. Fairbank (Ed.), The Chinese world order: Traditional China’s Fforeign relations (pp. 1–19). Harvard University Press.
Fairbank, J. K., & Têng, S. Y. (1941). On the Ch`ing tributary system. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 6(2), 135–246. https://doi.org/10.2307/2718006
Feng, Z. (2009). Rethinking the ‘tribute system’: Broadening the conceptual horizon of historical East Asian politics. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2(4), 545–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pop010
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2002). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. I. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2004a). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. II. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2004b). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. III. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007a). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. IV. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007b). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. IX. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007c). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. V. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007d). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. VI. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007e). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. VII. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Historiography Institute of Nguyen Dynasty. (2007f). Đại Nam thực lục [Veritable records of Dai Nam], trans. Translation team of iInstitute of hHistory, Vol. VIII. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Hongnian, S. (2006). Research on Sino-Vietnamese suzerain-vassal relationship in Qing dynasty. Heilongjiang Education Press. [孙宏年. (2006). 清代中越宗藩关系研究. 黑龙江教育出版社].
Insun, Y. (2009). Vietnam-China relations in the 19th century: Myth and reality of the tributary system. Journal of Northeast Asian History, 6(1), 81–117. https://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/241641/1/sas_8_1_53.pdf
International Affairs of Nguyen Dynasty. (1993). Khâm định Đại Nam hội điển sự lệ [Imperially commissioned collected statutes and precedents of Đại Nam], volume 8. Hue: Thuan Hoa Publishing House.
John, E. W. J. (1984). Embassies and illusions: Dutch and Portuguese envoys to K`ang-hsi, 1666–1687. (Harvard eEast Asian Monographs, 113.) xii, 303. Harvard University Press and Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University.
Kelley, L. C. (2005). Beyond the bronze pillars. University of Hawaiian Press.
Kim, S. (2008). The evolving Asian system: Three transformations. In D. Shambaugh & M. Yahuda (Eds.), International relations of Asia (pp. 35–56). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Liang, W., & Khilji, F. (2012). China and East Asia’s post- – crisis community: A region in flux. Lexington Books, Chapter 1.
Liễn, T. N. (1995). Mối quan hệ giữa Việt Nam và Trung Quốc thế kỷ XVI – đầu thế kỷ XVI [Relationship between Vietnam and China in the 15th century - early 16th century]. Hanoi: Social Science Publishing House.
Nhu, T. (1991a). Nguồn gốc của chiến tranh Trung – Pháp (1883 - 1885) [The origins of the Sino-French war (1883-1885)]. Journal of Historical Studies, (1), 20–27.
Nhu, T. (1991b). Quan hệ Trung – Pháp về vấn đề Việt Nam cuối thế kỷ XIX [Sino-French relations on Vietnam issues at the end of the nineteenth century] [Unpublished PhD doctoral dissertation]. Hanoi National University.
Ninh, V. D. (2010). Biên giới trên đất liền Việt Nam – Trung Quốc [Vietnam - China land border]. Hanoi: People`s Public Security Publishing House.
Shils, E. A. (1975). Center and Pperiphery: Essays in Macro Sociology. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Thịnh, N. Đ. (2014). Lý thuyết Trung tâm và Ngoại vi trong nghiên cứu không gian văn hóa [Theory of center and periphery in the study of cultural space]. Social Science Information Magazine, 3(375), 13–19. http://nhanhoc.hcmussh.edu.vn/?ArticleId=7a8243e1-ce89-4c6f-84a0-4f2f4fda163f
Tsuboi, Y. (1992). Nước Đại Nam đối diện với Pháp và Trung Hoa 1847 – 1885 [Dai Nam confronted France and China 1847 – 1885]. Vietnam History Group.
Vu, T. (2016). State formation on China’s southern frontier: Vietnam as a shadow empire and hegemon. HumaNetten, 37, 39–65. https://doi.org/10.15626/hn.20163703 https://doi.org/10.15626/hn.20163703
Winthrop, R. H. (1991). ). Dictionary of Concepts in Cultural Anthropology, . Greenwood
Press, New York, USA.
Womack, B. (2004). Asymmetry theory and China`s concept of multipolarity. Journal of Contemporary China, 13(39), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/1067056042000211942
Womack, B. (2012). Asymmetry and China`s tributary system. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 5(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pos003
Woodside, A. B. (1988). Vietnam and the Chinese model: A comparative study of Vietnamese and Chinese government in the first half of the nineteenth century. Harvard University Press.