Andrew Chittick

This paper explored the limits of state formation in the Sinitic south through a case study of the Cham state (known in Sinitic texts as Linyi/Lâm Ấp), based in the Thu Bon valley of modern Vietnam. I will first revisit my study of the Jiankang Empire and various models of Sinitic and Buddhist exemplar states in the Sinitic periphery. I will then explore the history of the Cham state, which is unique for its almost wholesale rejection of Sinitic models of statecraft, despite sharing a land border with the major Sinitic empires and maintaining close and continual diplomatic and commercial relations with them. The example of the Cham state can help us to understand the limits of, and the alternatives to, Sinicized political identities on the southern frontier.

This presentation asserted that the most rapid expansion of growth in Sino-Southeast Asian exchange prior to the ninth century was in the fifth and sixth centuries, not the early Tang, which is widely given credit. The Jiankang imperial capital (modern Nanjing) was not only the world’s largest city, but also the first time a Sinitic imperial city was also a major seaport, making it an ideal destination for Southeast Asian merchants and diplomats alike. The Jiankang ruling class was eager for commercial trade and culturally accommodating to Southeast Asians in a manner that northern Sinitic empires were not. The growth of maritime exchange during this period is readily demonstrated by the extent of diplomatic exchange; the increased trade in Southeast Asian commodities, especially aromatics and medicines; and the general influx of information about Southeast Asian states and peoples.

This talk re-assesses the nature and the extent of commercial and diplomatic relations between the states of the South Seas (i.e. maritime Southeast Asia) and the Tang Empire in the 7^th-8^th centuries CE. This period is commonly understood to be the height of Tang “cosmopolitanism,” but the evidence instead suggests a significant decline in the level of diplomatic and commercial exchange, with a concomitant decline in cultural influence, in both directions. The period thus represents a rather stagnant lull between two periods of more vigorous exchange: the Jiankang era (especially the 5^th-6^th centuries), and the late Tang commercial revolution (late 8^th century forwards). The paper explores Tang relations with the Cham state (in modern central Vietnam) and Srivijaya (in southeastern Sumatra), and with the Kunlun, a term used to describe people from maritime Southeast Asia.