¹ Giau, Tran Van, Su phat trien cua tu tuong o Viet Nam tu the ky XIX den cach mang thang Tam, 2 vols. (Ha-noi: Nha Xuat Ban Xa Hoi, 1973–1975), 1: 412–38Google Scholar; Van, Dang Huy, “Ve cuoc dau tranh cua nhung nguoi si phu yeu nuoc chu chien chong trieu dinh dau hang xam luoc o cuoi the ky XIX”jt Nghien cuu lich su, no. 112 (1968): 33–34.Google Scholar

² Marr, David G., Vietnamese Anti-Colonialism, 1885–1925 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1971).Google Scholar

³ Due to incomplete and sometimes contradictory documentation, some uncertainty remains regarding the precise date of Nguyen Truong To's birth. Scholarly estimates range from 1827 to 1830. Can, Truong Ba, Nguyen Truong To: con nguoi va di thao (Thanh Pho Ho Chi Minh: Nha Xuat Ban Thanh Pho Ho Chi Minh, 1988), pp. 19–20.Google Scholar

⁴ Ham, Duong Quang, Viet Nam van hoc su yeu (Ha-noi: Bo Quoc Gia Giao Duc Xuat Ban, 1951), p. 330.Google Scholar

⁵ Dai Nam thuc luc, 38 vols. (Ha-noi: Nha Xuat Ban Xa Hoi, Nha Xuat Ban Su Hoc, Nha Xuat Ban Khoa Hoc, 1962–1978), 24: 35–36, 74, 193, 255.Google Scholar

⁶ Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, pp. 21–23.

⁷ Anh, Dao Duy, “Nguyen Truong To hoc o dau?” Tri tan tap chi, no. 7 (1941): 3–4.Google Scholar

⁸ Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, pp. 21–22. These considerations notwithstanding, the story about Gauthier taking Nguyen Truong To to Europe during 1859–60 continues to be uncritically repeated in Western-language secondary works, most recently in Hanh, Vo Duc, La place du cathoticisme dans les relations entre la France et le Viet-Nam de 1870 à 1886, 4 vols. (Bern: Peter Lang, 1992), 1: vi–vii.Google Scholar

⁹ By signing the Treaty of Sai-gon in 1862 (which the European aggressors cynically termed a “treaty of peace and friendship”), the Hue court granted France three provinces in coastal southern Vietnam (Giadinh, Dinh-tuong, and Bien-hoa), agreed to pay a sizable indemnity, and promised that the Catholic religion could henceforth be freely followed throughout Vietnam. Although a limited number of Spanish troops had fought alongside French forces during the campaigns of 1858–62, France effectively denied Spain any territorial aggrandizement at Vietnam's expense. See Thomson, R. Stanley, “The Diplomacy of Imperialism: France and Spain in Cochin China, 1858.63”, Journal of Modern History, no. 12 (1940): 334–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ Cf. Tran Van Giau, Su phat trien 1: 382; Hanh, Vo Duc, La Place du Catholicisme dans les relations entre la France et le Vietnam, 1851–1870, 2 vols. (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969), 2Google Scholar: 250; Son, Pham Van, Viet su tan bien, 6 vols. (Sai-gon: Khai Tri, 1962), 5Google Scholar: 265. Nguyen Truong To himself regretted his brief collaboration with the French authorities. He later wrote: “This is truly a mistake that one regrets all of one's life.” Quoted in Tran Van Giau, Su phat trien 1: 383.

¹¹ Tran Van Giau, Su phat trien 1: 383. Indeed, France seized three additional southern provinces in 1867, forcing Vietnam to acknowledge French sovereignty over them by treaty in 1874 (Treaty of Ha-noi).

¹² Nguyen Truong To, Thien ha dai the luan, in Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, p. 111.

¹³ For convenient lists of Nguyen Truong To's proposals, see Duong Quang Ham, Viet Nam van hoc su yeu, pp. 331–35; Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, pp. 497–99.

¹⁴ Pham Van Son, Viet su tan bien 5: 265.

¹⁵ Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, pp. 44–47, 99–100.

¹⁶ Ibid., pp. 54–63.

¹⁷ Tran Van Giau, Su phat trien 1: 431.

¹⁸ Anh, Nguyen The, Viet Nam thoi Phap do-ho (Sai-gon: Lua Thieng, 1970), pp. 69–73.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Tung, Nguyen, “Champ idéologique, vision confucéen du monde et comportement des lettrés devant l'invasion française”, Cahiers d'études vietnamiens, no. 1 (1975): 29–30Google Scholar; Giau, Tran Van, “Lich su quan cua trieu dinh va nho gia trong thoi Nguyen”, Nghien cuu lich su, no. 125 (1969): 27Google Scholar; Yoshiharu, Tsuboi, L'Empire vietnamien face à la France et à la Chine (Paris: L'Harmattan, 1987), pp. 241–42.Google Scholar

²⁰ Khoang, Phan, “Chung quanh van de cai-cach cua Viet Nam khi moi tiep-xuc voi van-minh Tayphuong: Vi sao cac de-nghi duy-tan khong duoc thuc-hien?” Bach khoa, no. 72 (1960): 16; Duong Quang Ham, Viet Nam van hoc su yeu, p. 335.Google Scholar

²¹ Dai Nam thuc luc 34: 165–66.

²² Tu-duc Thanh che van tam tap, 2 vols., ed. Mien, Bui Tan and Khai, Tran Tuan (Sai-gon: Phu Quoc Vu Khanh Dac Trach Van Hoa Xuat Ban, 1971), 2: 236.Google Scholar

²³ Ibid., p. 239.

²⁴ Ibid., p. 240.

²⁵ Nguyen Tung, “Champ idéologique”, p. 31.

²⁶ Phung, Phan Dinh, quoted in Van, Dang Huy and Thau, Chuong, Nhung de nghi cai cach cua Nguyen Truong To cuoi the ky XIX (Ha-noi: Nha Xuat Ban Giao Duc, 1961), p. 18.Google Scholar

²⁷ Tu-duc Thanh che van tam tap 2: 209–215.

²⁸ Dai Nam thuc luc 35: 56–57.

²⁹ Marxist historians working in the Democratic/Socialist Republic of Vietnam have also debated among themselves the relative weight of tradition and change in Nguyen Truong To's thought, although they prefer to frame the question in terms of the respective influence of “feudal” and “capitalist” ideologies. See Van-Tan, , “Nguyen Truong To va nhung de-nghi cai-cach cua ong”, Nghien cuu lich su, no. 23 (February 1961): 19–33Google Scholar; Van, Dang Huy, “Vai y kien nho ban gop them ve nhung de-nghi cai-cach cua Nguyen Truong To”, Nghien cuu lich su, no. 25 (March 1961): 57–70.Google Scholar

³⁰ Lam, Truong Buu, Patterns of Vietnamese Response to Foreign Intervention, 1858–1900 (New Haven: Yale University, 1967), p. 18.Google Scholar

³¹ Boudarel, Georges, Phan Boi Chau et la société vietnamienne de son temps (Paris: France-Asie/Asia, 1972), pp. 362–63Google Scholar. Boudarel's view has since become more nuanced. In a paper originally presented in 1986 and published in 1988 as part of a collection of scholarly writings on Catholicism in Asian societies, he stated that, while not directly challenging the Nguyen political system, Nguyen Truong To's administrative reforms, if implemented, would have eliminated the scholar class from its predominant role in government and “transform[ed] the celestial bureaucracy into a modern-style techno-structure”. Boudarel, Georges, “Un lettré catholique qui fait problème: Nguyen Truong To”, in forest, Alain and Tsuboi, Yoshihara ed., Catholicisme et sociétés asiatiques (Paris and Tokyo: L'Harmattan/Sophia University, 1988), pp. 175–76.Google Scholar

³² DeFrancis, John, Colonialism and Language Policy in Vietnam (The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1977), pp. 100–105.Google Scholar

³³ Among Western and Western-trained scholars, Alexander Woodside and Nguyen The Anh have pointed out the radical nature of Nguyen Truong To's reforms. However, neither scholar has developed the argument at sufficient length to dispel the older notion of Nguyen Truong To as an essentially “moderate” or “conservative” reformer. Woodside, Alexander, writing in Steinberg, David Joel ed., In Search of Southeast Asia: A Modern History (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1987), pp. 136–37Google Scholar; Anh, Nguyen The, “Traditionalisme et réformisme à la cour de Hue dans la seconde moitié du XIXè siècle”, in Brocheux, Pierre ed., Histoire de l'asie du sud-est: révoltes, réformes, révolutions (Lille: Presses universitaires de Lille, 1981), pp. 111–23.Google Scholar

³⁴ Nguyen Truong To, Te cap bat dieu, in Nguyen-Lan, Tu-Ngoc, Nguyen Truong To, nguoi Viet Nam sang-suot nhat o thoi-ky roi-ren nhat trong lich-su Viet Nam (Hue: Nha In Vien-De, 1941), p. 30.Google Scholar

³⁵ Nguyen Truong To, Te cap bat dieu, in Dang Huy Van and Chuong Thau, Nhung de nghi, p. 186. Mencius conceived the subject's obligation of fidelity in the context of the ruler's responsibility to establish the appropriate moral content for the relationship; should the ruler fail to maintain this, the subject was released from the obligation of loyalty. Mencius thus allowed a restricted justification for rebellion against an unjust ruler based on the concept of “rectification of names” (in Sino-Vietnamese, chinh danh dinh phan). Since an unjust ruler did not deserve to be called a king, he could be slain without transgressing the cardinal Confucian virtue of loyalty to one's sovereign. The essence of Mencius' variant of Confucian political theory was thus the ruler's obligation to protect and care for the people; in this view, the people were primary, the kingdom was secondary, and the king was third in importance. See Kim, Tran Trong, Nho giao, 2 vols. (Sai-gon: Trung-tam Hoc-lieu Bo Giao Duc, 1971), 1Google Scholar: 128–29, 209–219; Manh-tu, , Manh-tu Chu Hy tap chi, 2 vols. (Sai-gon: Trung-tam Hoc-lieu Bo Giao Duc, 1972), 1: 97–99.Google Scholar

³⁶ Nguyen Truong To, Ngoi vua la quy, chuc quan la trong, in Truong Ba Can, Nguyen Truong To, p. 174.

³⁷ Ibid.

³⁸ Ibid.

³⁹ Ibid., p. 175. It is doubtful that Nguyen Truong To really believed that Westerners were so forgiving of their rulers' foibles. He was probably taking liberties with historical reality in order to reassure the Tu-duc Emperor that adoption of European political theories would increase the security of the throne rather than jeopardize it, as was generally believed by the Vietnamese elite.

⁴⁰ Ibid.

⁴¹ Ibid., p. 174.

⁴² Ibid., p. 175.

⁴³ Cao Huy Thuan has exposed the missionaries' campaign, led by Fathers Huc, Pellerin, and Legrand, to convince French Emperor Napoleon III of the necessity, relative ease, and ultimate profitability of French military action against the Nguyen dynasty. The missionaries did not hesitate to advocate the overthrow of the Tu-duc Emperor and his replacement by a Catholic Vietnamese pretender claiming descent from the defunct Le dynasty. Cao Huy Thuan, Les Missionnaires et la politique coloniale française au Vietnam (1857–1914) (New Haven, Connecticut: Center on Southeast Asia Studies, Yale Center for International and Area Studies, 1990), pp. 20–27. And Vo Duc Hanh has shown that Father Puginier persuaded one of the Le pretenders, Pierre Le Duy Phung, to organize an anti-Nguyen rebellion to coincide with the Franco-Spanish invasion of 1858–62, creating a two-front conflict that prevented the Tu-duc Emperor from concentrating his forces against the European invaders and contributed to the Hue court's capitulation and the signing of the Treaty of Sai-gon. Vo Duc Hanh, La Place du catholicisme dans le relations entre la France et le Viet-nam, 1851–1870, 1: 192, 226–39.

⁴⁴ Rhodes, Alexandre de, Cathechismus/Phep giang tam ngay (Sai-gon: Group Litteraire Tinh Viet, 1961), pp. 206–207. The Cathechismus was originally published in Rome in 1651.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ For examples of collaboration between Vietnamese Catholics and French colonial forces during the nineteenth century, see McLeod, Mark W., The Vietnamese Response to French Intervention, 1862–1874 (New York: Praeger, 1991), pp. 45–46, 90–91, 106–107, 114–20.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Nguyen Truong To, Giao mon luan, in Tran Van Giau, Su phat trien, 1: 349.

⁴⁷ To, Nguyen Truong, Te cap bat dieu, in Lien, Vu Dinh et al., Van hoc Viet Nam, 1858–1930 (Ha-noi: Nha Xuat Ban Van Hoa, 1963), p. 175.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Ibid., p. 176.

⁵⁰ Nguyen Thruong To, Ke hoach gay nen nhan tai, in Vo Duc Hanh, La Place du Catholicisme dans les relations entre la France et le Viet-Nam, 1851–1870, 2: 256.

⁵¹ Ibid., p. 257.

⁵² Nguyen Truong To, Te cap bat dieu, in Dang Huy Van and Chuong Thau, Nhung de nghi, p. 179.

⁵³ Ibid., p. 101.

⁵⁴ Ibid., p. 179.

⁵⁵ Ibid., pp. 200–206.

⁵⁶ Ibid.

⁵⁷ Ibid.

⁵⁸ Nguyen Truong To, Te cap bat dieu, in Tu-Ngoc Nguyen-Lan, Nguyen Truong To, p. 33. The tu-tai (“flowering talent”) and cu-nhan (“selected man”) were lower-level academic degrees awarded by competitive examination in the civil-service examination system.

⁵⁹ Ibid., pp. 33–34.

⁶⁰ Nguyen Truong To, Te cap bat dieu, in Dang Huy Van and Chuong Thau, Nhung de nghi, p. 206. Imperial Vietnam, of course, already had a Ministry of Justice known as the Hinh Bo (literally, the “Ministry of Punishment”); but the Ministry of Laws proposed by Nguyen Truong To was to have a much wider scope and, significantly, was to be independent from monarchical authority, which was not the case in the existing structure. Vietnam's Six Ministries (Luc Bo) included the Lai Bo, Ministry of Public Office; Ho Bo, Ministry of Finance; Le Bo, Ministry of Rites; Binh Bo, Ministry of War; Hinh Bo, Ministry of Justice; Cong Bo, Ministry of Public Works. See Philippe Langlet, “Essai sur les institutions du pouvoir central au Viet Nam au milieu du XIXè siècle”, Cahiers d'études vietnamiennes, no. 6 (1963/64): 18–19.

⁶¹ Tu-Ngoc Nguyen-Lan, Nguyen Truong To, p. 117.

⁶² Anh, Nguyen The, Kinh te va xa hoi duoi cac vua trieu Nguyen (Sai-gon: Lua Thieng, 1970), pp. 74–75.Google Scholar