Introduction to Vietnamese Studies in China

Vietnamese studies, also termed research on Vietnam, could be defined in two ways. Narrowly, it refers to a certain way of thinking and emphasizes Vietnamese characteristics. It involves the existence of a cultural space which distinguishes itself from other countries and nations, especially neighboring ones. This cultural space serves as the basis for understanding and explaining Vietnamese customs, mentality, destiny, and other Vietnam-related problems. Against the background of a tradition of “Sinification” and a certain degree of “Westernization” in academia, Vietnamese studies in this sense focuses on Vietnamese characteristics or what is typical of or unique to Vietnam. By contrast, Vietnamese studies in a broad sense takes the geographic space of Vietnam as its subject and incorporates any studies related to Vietnamese history, culture, politics, economy, law, nations, religions, languages, art, and foreign relations, even the study of ancient Champa and Funan civilizations.

The term Vietnamese studies as used in this article falls into the second, or broad, category. It refers to a comprehensive discipline and a wide range of knowledge. It mainly discusses the evolution and transformation of history and civilization and the substantial contents therein created by the Vietnamese people and other nationalities under the heading of the Vietnamese nation, as well as the similarities, differences, and correlations between Vietnamese and Southeast Asian civilizations and between Eastern and Western civilization.

The term Vietnamese studies was proposed and adopted before the 19th century by Western scholars. After the great geological discovery and with the arrival of Western colonialists in the East, Western scholars became interested in Eastern affairs. They studied Eastern history and culture, and their formulations of Eastern studies became greatly influential. Eastern studies in the West mainly included Indian studies and Han studies (the study of China or Chinese studies), Egyptian studies, Assyrian studies, and also the content of Vietnamese studies. Since Vietnam and Southeast Asia had been historically under the influence of Chinese and Indian civilization, Western scholars for a long time linked and even subordinated Southeast Asian and Vietnamese studies to Indian and Chinese studies. For instance, many French scholars who studied Vietnamese problems in the late 19th and early 20th century were distinguished scholars of Chinese studies.

It could be said that Eastern studies, Chinese studies, and Vietnamese studies in the West were initiated and developed by white people holding Eurocentric values with a colonialist hue. Some problems were studied very thoroughly by Western scholars and remain valuable even today; however, many covered only language, culture, and certain aspects of history, and were of limited breadth. After WWII, Eastern studies in America became quite advanced, yet there the political and academic construction of the East has been called “a discourse of power,” as its political applicability overshadowed its academic value and scholars of Eastern studies became specialists in regional studies. This trend was embodied in the development and flourishing of Vietnamese studies in North America during the Vietnam War period.

In the 20th century in the Soviet Union, too, great attention was paid to Eastern studies, including Vietnamese studies, which was developed anew by Soviet scholars. In the 1950s and 1960s, Chinese scholars accepted the concepts they developed when considering the establishment of Vietnamese studies. However, Vietnamese studies as carried forward by Soviet and Chinese scholars during that time also bore political considerations and was subjected to political purposes. Peasant revolution, anti-colonialist struggle, and friendly bilateral relations were the major topics of Vietnamese studies then. Since the 1980s, with the development of reform and opening up, changing values, and the upgrading of research methodology, Southeast Asian and Vietnamese studies in China have made significant progress. Some scholars have made great efforts to acquire a more comprehensive and thorough comprehension of Vietnam in their areas of specialty; taking advantage of language mastery, they have gone to Vietnam to do field research. Through the concerted effort of many scholars, Vietnamese and Southeast Asian studies in China will probably continue to achieve progress and development.

We now have some basic understandings in the field of Vietnamese studies: First, Vietnam is not a negligible country. Though relatively small by global standards, it has an important role in Southeast Asia and some influence over the world. Vietnam has a splendid, centuries-old, diverse civilization that includes the Red River civilization in the north and the Champa and Funan civilizations in the south. Ancient Chinese and Indian culture once converged there and to this day, Vietnam preserves some form and content of Eastern culture that can be taken as “specimens” for the study of ancient Chinese culture. In the modern and contemporary periods, Vietnam has been exposed to the West and therefore influenced by Western civilization. Reform in contemporary Vietnam has moved into a vibrant phase. The economy enjoys continued and rapid development, the social and political environments remain stable, the system of socialist market economy has gradually improved, and Vietnam is heading steadily toward industrialization and modernization. Whether in understanding communication and fusion among diverse human civilizations or in summarizing the experiences and lessons of a developing country transforming into a modern one, Vietnamese studies is significant for both academic theory and real-life practice.

Second, Vietnamese studies encompasses a diverse range of knowledge. Compared with the study of large countries, the study of Vietnam is relatively narrow in region but extensive in range. The development of Vietnamese studies requires the study of history, politics, economics, linguistics, ethnology, and various other disciplines. Furthermore, the field can be classified into two categories: studies of a single subject and area based mainly on the knowledge structure of a specific discipline to discuss and solve problems of a relatively narrow and micro knowledge structure; and comprehensive studies involving multiple disciplines and areas using cross-disciplinary methodology to discuss macro problems or problems that require knowledge of various disciplines. For the first category, solid expertise is crucially important, whereas for the second, the ability to analyze in a synthesized manner is indispensable. However, both require a solid foundation of necessary knowledge, scientific research method, and philosophical perspective. Theoretically speaking, the areas are complementary and inseparable. But because the second category is more demanding of researchers’ ability and aptitude, achievements in the first are more common and achievements in the second are extremely rare.

Third, Vietnamese studies is closely related to other disciplines. The diverse nature of Vietnamese history and civilization and its extensive connections with world history and civilization makes relationships to other disciplines inevitable. Vietnamese civilization was a sub-regional civilization that originated and developed in Southeast Asia; it was also a compound civilization with a rich heritage deeply influenced by foreign cultures. Thus Vietnamese studies features characteristics of sub-regional civilization (and plays an important role in Southeast Asian studies), as well as bearing some characteristics of East Asian and South Asian civilizations. Since Indochina was historically under the influence of Chinese and Indian cultures, the study of ancient Vietnamese civilization can hardly be profound without the prior knowledge of both Chinese and Indian civilizations. While acknowledging the correlations, however, we must fully realize that Vietnamese studies is an independent subject of its own, with no available precedence or model to follow. Vietnamese studies belongs neither to Indian studies nor to Chinese studies; rather it has clear target objects and boundaries, its own peculiarities and underlying laws. If we miss this, we may easily come to the narrow misunderstanding that Vietnamese history and civilization are merely a miniature of ancient Chinese and Indian history and civilization.

Fourth, in taking the history and civilization created by various Vietnamese nationalities as its object, Vietnamese studies has a universal nature that transcends national boundaries. The multiple ethnic make-up and achievements of Vietnamese history and civilization determine its universal nature as well as its national features. For a long period of time, the study of Vietnam, like that of China, referred mainly to research by scholars from China, America, Russia, Japan, Australia, Germany, Great Britain, etc. That is, Vietnamese studies was a branch of Western studies in terms of the scholars involved, the research results, and the level of academic work, and it had nothing to do with Vietnamese people. However, further development and deepened understanding of Vietnamese studies necessarily requires the concerted efforts of scholars both inside and outside the country. They should make great endeavors to understand the country and do scholarship relevant to actual conditions in Vietnam today.

Although Vietnamese studies in China has made great progress through the efforts of many scholars, it still has not become a completely independent and integrated discipline. In contrast to Japan, where there is a national association of Vietnamese studies, researchers of Vietnamese studies in China are relatively dispersed and there is no coordinating national research body. The national Southeast Asian Association in China includes a large number of scholars of Vietnamese studies and has played an important role; however, many specialists in the area have not yet joined the association.

In 1998, the First International Symposium on Vietnamese Studies was convened in Hanoi. Scholars from America, Russia, and Japan made separate presentations briefing the participants on the progress of Vietnamese studies in their respective countries. Thirteen Chinese scholars, including myself, were invited, but no one introduced the progress of Vietnamese studies in China. Neither was an article about Chinese achievements in the field included in the published collection of papers, which gave the impression that Vietnamese studies in China was extremely weak. Because of this, my article on the topic submitted to the Second International Symposium on Vietnamese Studies in 2004 in Ho Chi Minh City received enthusiastic comments from many scholars.

To be frank, Chinese scholars should enjoy many advantages in Vietnamese studies due to a long historical tradition and headstart vis-à-vis many other countries. Yet compared with international efforts, contemporary Vietnamese studies in China display both these advantages and many disadvantages.

Vietnamese Studies in Ancient China

Because of close historical, cultural, ethnic, and geographic relations with Vietnam, China was the first in the world to document facts about Vietnam and is also the country with the most abundant historic records about Vietnam. In the pre-Qin dynasties, there were already succinct records about Vietnam (called the Giao Chi or Jiaozhi region) in the historical data, and more and more of those records were found in official and private writings after the Qin, Han, and especially Song dynasty. Although most ancient articles have features that fall into the category of historical data, they already began to take on the form of primary research, for many ancient scholars collected and classified those data based on certain topics and styles, added their own comments and criticisms, and expressed their own views while recording. Thus, despite the fact that the concept of Vietnamese studies did not exist in ancient China, the facts show that the studies were already there. The research activities, tradition, and historical value of these achievements in Vietnamese studies are undeniable. It would be a pity to study ancient Vietnamese history and culture and Sino-Vietnam relations without referring to the historical data in ancient Chinese classics.

Records and studies about Vietnam fall mainly into two categories: official history and private writings. Many private writings were quoted, collected, and conserved in book series. While various other writings and records became scattered or lost through the ravages of time, a significant amount of scattered materials have been conserved in categorical books.

Records about Vietnam, including Lin-yi (in the region of Champa), can be found in the Twenty-Four Dynastic Histories and, in records before the History of the Song Dynasty, mainly in Geographic Records and biographies of emperors and officials. These records reflected a part of history in which Vietnam was under the rule of Chinese feudal dynasties. That period was also termed County Times or Northern Affiliation. In his Domains of Vietnam in Different Dynasties, the distinguished Vietnamese historian Dao Duy Anh used much data from Chinese official history and geographical records. From History of the Song Dynasty on, in addition to autobiographical writing, records about Vietnam are mainly found in History of the Song Dynasty: Records of Giao Chi; History of the Yuan Dynasty: Records of An Nam; History of the Ming Dynasty: Records of Giao Chi; and Scripts of the Qing Dynasty: Memoir of Vietnam. Records about Vietnam were specifically written down after History of the Song Dynasty because in the early years of the Song Dynasty, Dinh Bo Linh established Vietnam’s Ding Dynasty, which was recognized by the Chinese feudal dynasty as a vassal state. Thus Vietnam started a history as an independent feudal dynasty. Since articles specifically about Vietnam were usually written by court officials summarizing the history of the preceding dynasty, they could make use of all kinds of materials, including official archives and statistics hardly accessible to normal researchers. Their records are priceless in that they reflect the level of comprehension and study of Vietnamese history and Sino-Vietnam relations of all dynasties. Besides the Twenty-Four Official Dynastic Histories, official documents and political books of different dynasties, memoirs of the Ming and Qing Dynasty, and archives are also precious in historical value. The Imperial Records of An Nam, finished by the Strategic Planning House of the Qing Dynasty, is an example.

The Song Dynasty can also be used to delimit private writings. Writings before the Song Dynasty include Changes of Giao Chi by Yang Fuy (late Han Dynasty), Records of South Vietnam by Shen Huaiyuan, Records of Giao Chi by Liu Xinqi (Jin Dynasty), Anecdotes Recorded in the South of the Five Ridges by Liu Xu (Tang Dynasty), etc. The volume of these records are sparse, their contents quite succinct and often scattered and embedded in other books or lost; we can therefore only get a glimpse of their content as afforded by compiled secondary versions. Here we especially need to mention Records of the Outer Domains of Giao Chi quoted in Commentary to the River Classic, in which there are valuable records of the land, people, nobility, and sovereign lords of the Luo Kingdom. These records are used by historians as references. Since the Song Dynasty, there were more writings about Vietnam and the subject matters gradually became more diverse: Representative Answers to Matters Beyond the Five Ridges by Zhou Qufei and Gui Hai Yu Heng Zhi by Fan Chengda of the Song Dynasty; An Nam Zhi Lue by Li Wei, a Vietnamese scholar residing in China during the Yuan Dynasty; Writings on Jiao Zhou by Chen Gangzhong and A Journey to An Nam by Xu Mingshan of the Yuan Dynasty; Books of Yue Qiao by Li Wenfeng, Yu Jiao Ji by Zhang Jingxin, and An Nam Lai Wei Ji Lue by Jiang Meizhong of the Ming Dynasty; Annals of An Nam by Gao Xiongzheng of the early Qing Dynasty; Geography of Vietnam with Illustrations by Sheng Qingba and Vietnam Ji Lue by Xu Tingxu of the late Qing Dynasty, etc. Many of these could be seen as classics of Vietnamese studies, especially An Nam Zhi Lue, Yu Jiao Ji, and Books of Yue Qiao, which are important references for the study of ancient Vietnamese history and culture and Sino-Vietnam relations.

The tradition of ancient Vietnamese studies in China continued to the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic period. For the purpose of saving the country and pursuing its existence, Liang Qichao paid great attention to foreign history and helped Phan Boi Chao, a great Vietnamese patriot, to publish History of Vietnamese Downfall; he also wrote books like Short Stories of Vietnam, A Summary of the Tragedy of Vietnamese Downfall, etc. Around the 1940s, through the efforts of a group of distinguished scholars from the Southeast Asian Studies Institute and the teaching and research activities of the Oriental Language School, studies of Chinese foreign relations and the history of the Chinese people was proposed and new progress achieved in Southeast Asian and Vietnamese studies. The Yugong Society, specializing in historical and geographical research, and scholars such as Zhang Xiumin, Meng Wentong, Fang Guoyu, and Chen Xujing carried on the tradition of austere learning of the Qing Dynasty’s Qianjia School. They also achieved great success in textual research on Vietnamese history. Zhang Xiumin published some quite impressive books in the 1930s and 1940s; An Nam during the County Times by Li Zhengfu is a great book even today.

Despite the fact that historical documentation of ancient Vietnamese history started quite late and a large part of what had been written was either scattered or lost, the writing on Vietnamese studies by ancient China scholars have preserved some priceless historical data about ancient Vietnam and the history of Sino-Vietnam relations. In addition, scholars continued to study generation after generation, forming a centuries-old tradition of Vietnamese studies in China. Considering that written records of Vietnam came late in history and that Vietnam was long under the direct rule of Chinese feudal society, data found in Chinese historical records constitute the first written evidence and have played a highly important role in the study of ancient Vietnamese history and civilization. However, to fully benefit from the value of written evidences in China, we should combine them with and verify them against various kinds of Vietnamese historical records, such as mythology, legends , pedigree of gods, family pedigrees, inscriptions, etc.

We have therefore come to some basic understandings of Vietnamese studies in ancient China:

First, the conceptualization and historical outlook held by scholars of Vietnamese studies in ancient China was obviously limited by contemporary conditions of feudal society. On the one hand, they considered Vietnam to be a part of China or a territory or vassal that was not independent, and they studied Vietnamese culture as if it were an extension of Chinese culture. Books by Li Zhengfu, a scholar of the first half of the 20th century, revealed the same outlook. On the other hand, ancient Chinese scholars saw themselves as the Hua (Chinese) majority and Vietnam, its neighboring countries, and its peoples as Yi (alien) minorities. They considered Vietnam and its relation with China from a perspective of subordination. A telling example: the editor of Complete Collection of Four Treasures slashed the word “great” from the title A Summary of History of Great Vietnam, reflecting a suzerain-vassal concept of ancient China and a Chinese-alien concept. In essence, ancient scholars reflected a narrow nationalism or ethnic chauvinism nurtured by feudal literati and officialdom on the basis of China’s self-sufficient agro-economy. Officials of feudal Vietnam continuously disproved and challenged that concept: the protests of Le Quy Don, a late Le Dynasty envoy to China in the Qing; An Argument of the Concept of Alien by Li Wenfu, a Ruan Dynasty envoy to China in the Qing; and the book of the same title rewritten by Ruan Sijian. The distinguished American scholar John K. Fairbank once wrote on “The Chinese World Order,” in which he explored ancient Chinese foreign relations. In fact, the ancient rulers of feudal Vietnam accepted this orthodox viewpoint and developed a similar but smaller version which may be termed the Vietnamese world order, or sub-regional order. They used this concept to handle their relations with neighboring countries and nations and established their own system of subordination, which is also termed a sub-system of subordination or hypo-system of subordination.

It should be noted that while the Chinese and Vietnamese literati and officials argued ceaselessly about “Chinese” and “alien,” Japan, having got rid of traditional Confucius ideology, broke away from Asia to embrace Europe and was heading toward modern development. In a sense, the historical views and traditional ways of thinking concerning subordination and the order of Chinese and alien might be one of the important cultural reasons why the development of both ancient China and Vietnam were relatively slower and lagging behind that of contemporary countries in the world. Although the implementation of feudal rituals, which was related to the concept of subordination and the order of Chinese and alien, could engender the effects of a hierarchy of power, these concept and traditional ways of thinking were also the mental root sources resulting in many mistakes of ancient feudal Chinese rulers in dealing with Vietnamese issues and in neglecting the independent nature and regenerative ability of the Vietnamese people.

Secondly, Vietnamese studies in ancient China demonstrates the attention paid to neighboring countries and peoples by generations of scholars, who wrote countless volumes of priceless books. However, in today’s view, the contents of those books are neither abundant nor comprehensive enough. The immortal The History by Sima Qian documented the activities of many of China’s neighboring countries and peoples in a rather broad sweep, but when discussing Vietnamese history before and during the Qin and Han Dynasty, we still get the feeling that the corresponding historical records are insufficient. The interests of many scholars in recording and studying Vietnam were different and even far from those we have today. Sometimes, to meet the needs of feudal court politics, scholars falsely prettified feudal rule and did not fully reveal the truth of history. For instance, A Record of An Nam, published by Strategic Planning House of the Qing Dynasty, treated the war of An Nam as one of the Ten Most Noted Martial Arts of the Emperor Qianlong period and treated it prominently, together with the event of Ruan Guangping paying homage in person on the occasion of the Emperor’s 80th birthday. Some scholars noted experiences and things of interest either because they lived in the Southwest border areas on official mission or because there were battles in Vietnam. To give an example, Representative Answers to Matters Beyond the Five Ridges by Zhou Qufei, who was tired of answering questions and used the book as a substitute, included all the things the author thought would satisfy the curious questions of other people. But things that we are interested in were recorded very sketchily or not at all.

On the other hand, there are cases in which ancient scholars shared our interests. For example, studies of the history of numismatics and Sino-Vietnam relations have always been favorite topics. Spring in the Country by Hong Zun of the Song Dynasty included records of different coins of the Ding and the early Le Dynasty. In Miscellaneous Scripts of Kezhai, by Li Bozeng, written evidence is presented of trilateral relations among Southern Song Dynasty in south China, the Yuan Dynasty in the north, and the Vietnamese Chen Dynasty. All of these records are extremely important in historical value.

Third, in order to engage in Vietnamese studies, one needs to acquire specialized knowledge and to have some first-hand understanding of the Vietnamese situation. Only so equipped can we make records and studies of Vietnam more relevant and avoid making mistakes. During the Ming and Qing period, when Vietnamese intellectuals and officials used Chinese characters for writing, communications between many Chinese and Vietnamese people were realized through writing because of the oral language barrier. Zhu Shunshui, a scholar in the Ming Dynasty who once resided in the southern regions ruled by the Ruan Dynasty, later wrote A Memoir of Service in An Nam. Liang Qichao later conducted a thorough study of Zhu Shunshui, but he overlooked the process of verification, which resulted in a confusion between the Ruan Regime in the South with the Zheng Regime in the north.

The books of scholars did field research in Vietnam are more valuable as references. For instance, a monk named Shi Dashan, who lived in Guangzhou during the Qing Dynasty, was invited to reside in the southern regions ruled by the Ruan for a year or more. When he returned he published My Experiences Overseas to help people understand the history of the Ruan Regime and Sino-Vietnamese relations. During the Emperor Daoguang period, Cai Tinglan, a low-ranking official from Penghu, drifted to the Quang Ngai region of Vietnam while sailing. Emperor Mingming sent people to escort him back. They headed north on land and returned to China after a few months. Because of his contacts with the Chinese in Vietnam, he then wrote Notes on Hainan, which was of great help to the study of Chinese residing in Vietnam during the early Ruan Dynasty period. Gao Xiongzheng, a scholar of Confucianism living in Guangxi during the early Qing Dynasty, wrote books including Records of An Nam and Cheng Xuezhai’s Scripts. The former was frequently referred to in private writings of Vietnamese in the Ruan Dynasty, for instance, in Imperial Catalogue of Vietnamese History. This was probably because Gao Xiongzheng was an official in Guangxi, paid great attention to Vietnam, and collected related historical data; it was also likely that he made use of materials introducing the Giao Chi region edited by Ming officials.

Finally, there is some connection between ancient Chinese scholars and Vietnamese scholars in Vietnamese studies and some achievements were the results of joint efforts by scholars from both countries. For instance, many Yuan scholars wrote preludes for Li Ze’s Introduction to An Nam, which greatly influential. Precursor of Vietnamese History by Xi Shanchao was quite popular in China because it was edited by Xihai Liu, a Qing bibliophile and epigraphy specialist. Ambassadorial writing was more typical. Ambassadorial visits were the most important type of friendly communication and a crucially important channel to enhance mutual understanding between China and its neighboring countries. The grand foreign visits and abundant literary achievements were carried out and created by visiting ambassadors and scholars of China, Vietnam, South Korea, and other countries. In a sense, foreign visits boosted Vietnamese studies in China. The travel notes of the Qing ambassador to Vietnam and North Korea was created through cooperation with Chinese officials and scholars. These have both literary and historical value. Books like Diary of Escorting A Vietnamese Envoy provided precious historical data to the study of Sino-Vietnam relations during the late Qing period. To successfully fulfill the mission of escorting Vietnamese envoys or ambassadors, and to make their language more natural, the author urged diplomatic officials and scholars to visit and conduct research on Vietnam. Guangxi governor Lao Chongguang during the Qing Dynasty visited Vietnam on diplomatic missions and wrote Poetic Grass, which was quite influential in Vietnam. The volume Poems of Vietnamese Envoys and Ambassadors, stored in the National Library of China, collected many writings in the form of responses by Ruan Shu, an ambassador to China during the Ruan Dynasty, and the matching Qing officials who worked with him.

Vietnamese Studies in China Since 1949

During the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, Vietnamese studies in China carried on the ancient tradition and further developed under the guidance of a new historical outlook. On the one hand, Vietnamese studies continued to promote goodwill communication and friendly relations between the two countries. For example, Chen Xiuhe’s article “Friendly Communication and Cultural Exchange between China and Vietnam in History” was translated and introduced to Vietnam. On the other hand, great efforts were made to teach Vietnamese language, translate Vietnamese writings, and introduce the achievements of Vietnam to the young generation who would become future specialists in the field. Books by distinguished Vietnamese scholars such as Daop Duy Anh, Tran Huy Lieu, and Ming Zheng were translated and introduced to China during that period.

In the late 1970s and 1980s, many articles about Vietnam and Sino-Vietnam relations were published, but because relations between the two countries were not normal, many of these articles were not sufficiently academic and thus limited in value. However, two works of great academic value and influence were important achievements of Vietnamese studies in this period. These were Dao Duy Anh’s Domains of Vietnam in Different Dynasties, which was translated by Professor Dai Kelai (and published by the Commercial Press), and A Collection of Materials about Ancient Sino-Vietnam Relations, edited by Chen Zhichao. In addition, the textual research by Zhang Xiumin on An Nam Zhi Yuan made use of a great deal of historical data compiled during the Ming Dynasty on local issues and raised the point that the main part of that book should be from A General Introduction to Yong Le and Giao Chi, a local annals edited by officials during the County Re-Division Period of Vietnam, and that the current title of the book was mistaken by scholars from the École Française d’Extrême Orient. Mr. Zhang’s articles have already been translated and introduced by The Study of History, an academic journal in Vietnam. But since Gao Xiongzhi and his An Introduction to An Nam were also involved in textual research, the problem remains unsolved.

Since the 90s, Vietnamese studies in China have registered rapid development, which is reflected in the following:

First, the domain of Vietnamese studies in contemporary China has been greatly expanded. The traditional domain included history, language, and literature, which today remain the basis of Vietnamese studies and have exerted great influence. To them have been added studies in culture, nationality, religion, law, and especially current affairs. Issues related to politics, economy, diplomacy, and society have been investigated more thoroughly, have become more more influential, and are becoming the keystones of Vietnamese studies. The extension of the domain of research has met the needs of both friendly neighboring relations and comprehensive cooperation, and the construction and development of the discipline of Vietnamese studies itself.

Second, the team of interested scholars in Vietnamese studies has became larger and larger. Scholars of Vietnamese studies in China are found mainly in research institutions and universities in Beijing, Henan, Yunnan, Guangxi, Guangdong, Fujian, and other cities and provinces. The total number is over 200, and many of them, we have to admit, are doing Vietnamese studies concurrently with their studies of Southeast Asia and other areas. Furthermore, some interested foreign affairs officials including retired diplomats and journalists are doing research and have made contributions to Vietnamese studies. For instance, Li Jiazhong, a former Chinese ambassador to Vietnam, is quite accomplished in his achievements and research. There are also some scholars of Chinese history and literature who are joining and furthering Vietnamese studies.

Third, scholars of Vietnamese studies in China have grown into an academic contingent made up of the senior, the middle aged and the young. Scholars in the past built a very sound foundation for the development of Vietnamese studies and made great efforts for the cultivation of the younger generations. Middle-aged scholars have achieved great success and are the backbones of the contingent. Now there are some post-graduate programs in research institutes and universities where master’s and doctoral degrees can be earned in fields such as Vietnamese language, culture, and history. Some researchers have already graduated from these programs, earned their degrees, and are ready to launch big projects. With the development of cultural exchange between China and Vietnam, some scholars of Vietnamese studies have received master’s degrees and Ph.D.s from Vietnam and other countries.

Fourth, research results keep coming forth and studies are conducted more and more thoroughly. Specialized writings on Vietnamese history and current affairs since the 1990s include the translation of History of Vietnam, by Dai Kelai; Socialism in Vietnam and Cuba, edited by Fan Honggui; Notes on Three Kinds of Historical Data about Ling Nan Shu Guai, revised by Yang Baojun; Vietnamese Economic Reform and Modernization, by Liang Zhiming; Vietnam, compiled by Yu Xiangdong; Vietnamese Socialism, From Complaints and Hatred to Equality and Mutual Benefit and Fifty Years of Sino-Vietnam Relations, by Gu Xiaosong; Reform of Vietnamese State Owned Enterprises, edited by Gu Yuanxiang; History of Vietnam, by Guo Zhenduo; Comparative Studies of Reform of the Economic Structure of China and Vietnam, by Pi Jun; Review of Distinguished Eastern Philosophers: Vietnam Volume, by Yu Xiangdong; From Dunhuang Studies to Overseas Chinese Studies, by Wang Xiaodun; and Vietnam, by Zhang Jiaxiang. In addition, a number of quality Ph.D. dissertations have been produced by Huang Yunjing, Sun Hongnian, You Mingqian, Niu Junkai, etc. The yearly Report on Vietnamese National Conditions, released in recent years by Guangxi Southeast Asian Studies Institute, is very convenient for Vietnamese studies and therefore very popular. In addition, a significant number of writings, translations, and textbooks on Vietnamese language and literature, ethnology, law, and other areas have been published, not to mention papers and monographs related to politics, economy, culture, religion, diplomacy, etc. What should be specially mentioned is the recently published A Catalog of Writings in Hannan Vietnam, compiled jointly by Prof. Wanf Xiaodun from Qinghua University, Prof. Liu Chunyin from Taiwan, and Prof. Chen Yi from the Vietnamese Hannan Institute; this is an important and indispensable reference book for the study of Vietnamese history and civilization and is one of the latest achievement in bibliographical studies.

Currently, Vietnamese studies in China are in a period of rapid and vigorous development with the attainment of more and more research achievements, an increasing number of which are of good quality. In terms of the trend of development of Vietnamese studies, two final things merit our attention:

First, under the influence of both domestic and overseas academic trends and thinking, Vietnamese studies in China will pay more attention to introducing new ideas, new methodologies, and multi-disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, and integrated studies. The Annales School in the West proposed that the study of human history should be approached using the methods of various disciplines and with a holistic historical perspective. Since the 1990s, The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia, edited by N. Tarling; ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age, by A. G. Frank; and the latest edition of The World Since 1500: A Global History by L. S. Stavrianos represent the application of new ideas, concepts, and methods in their exploration of Southeast Asian and world history. The renewed interpretations of history and China by Western post-modern studies and different schools of Chinese studies, especially the California School in the US, have exerted great influence in the Chinese academic world. Influenced by innovative thoughts and pioneering schools, Vietnamese studies in China promises further broadening and deepening.

With these renewed ideas, concepts, and research methods, and from a historical and cultural perspective, many problems of Vietnamese studies need to be understood and reviewed again. For example, how should we now evaluate the authenticity of legends of pre-historical Vietnam or the existence of King Xiong, for many scholars have denied the existence of King Xiong and ignored the existence of pre-historical civilization in Vietnam? Further, how should we understand the nature and characteristics of Vietnamese national culture and civilization, especially ancient culture, which is deeply influenced by yet different from Chinese and Indian culture? National identity (possessed exclusively by the Vietnam people, reflective of their national mentality and characteristic of their thinking, based on the fountainhead of the Vietnamese people), uniqueness (closely related to and integrative with the cultures of other nationalities, having an independent system, inherited and developed by its people), and innovativeness (created on the basis of accepting and transforming foreign cultures into national culture) might be important characteristics.

Secondly, the number of people engaged in Vietnamese studies might further increase and infrastructure for research in all areas might be further strengthened. The fact that scholars formerly interested in Chinese studies gradually become interested in Vietnam and joined the contingent of Vietnamese studies might boost new breakthroughs and in turn exert an impact on the study of Chinese history and civilization. In a sense, Chinese studies are the basis of Vietnamese studies; conversely, Vietnamese studies could also facilitate and promote Chinese studies. As Professor Wang Xiaodun once pointed out, ancient books of Vietnam, like classic writings of Dunhuang, might exert tremendous influence on studies of numerous ancient Chinese academic subjects.

After a period of development and incorporation, more emphasis will be paid to consolidating the research foundations of Vietnamese studies: first, collecting, sorting, and compiling primary materials; second, training in language skills, not only Vietnamese, but also English, French, or Japanese; third, strengthening communication, exchange, and cooperation with the academic world of Vietnam and other countries, maintaining contact with Vietnam, and doing more field research there to make research more authentic and realistic. These might be considered the weak points of Vietnamese studies in China today that call for improvement.

Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia Issue 10 (August 2008)