Two research perspectives on the ancient tribute system in China were discussed in the West: one was from the perspective of the Central Plains dynasties, focusing on the order of the world and the relationship between clans and domains, with Fei Zhengqing's theory of "China's World Order" as the center; Secondly, from the perspective of the study of Chinese border history, geography, and ethnic history, represented by the theories of Lattimore and others. The two perspectives have a profound impact, but few people pay attention to their relationship. In recent years, with the "the Belt and Road" initiative, western research on the tribute system has received renewed attention. The author will evaluate the theories of Fei Zhengqing, Buffett, Wang Zhenping, and others, and summarize them into two modes: "virtual" and "real", in order to correct the visual and auditory aspects.

1、 The theory of "concentric circles" in the "Chinese world order"

Fei Zhengqing proposed the theory of "concentric circles" in his book "China's World Order" in ancient East Asia, dividing the ancient East Asian world around China into three levels of concentric circles based on the relationship between neighboring countries and Chinese civilization. The first circle is the Huahua "Chinese Character Circle", which includes countries such as Korea, Vietnam, and Ryukyu. It is based on Chinese characters and Confucianism and interacts with the Central Plains dynasties through tribute relations. The second circle "Inner Asia Circle" is composed of inland Asian nomadic or semi nomadic tribes, bounded by the Great Wall, with complex relations with the Central Plains dynasties, frequent military conflicts, and minimal cultural influence. The third circle, also known as the "outer circle," is composed of countries from South Asia, Southeast Asia, and Europe. It is relatively independent culturally and geographically distant from China, with sparse relations. Fei Zhengqing's theory emphasizes that the Chinese world order of "concentric circles" is a hierarchical social order ruled by the emperor, based on agricultural civilization and guided by Confucianism. The relationship between the Central Plains dynasties and surrounding countries is a fundamental attribute. But some scholars have questioned Fei Zhengqing's viewpoint, believing that the tribute system is not completely unequal, but reflects the concepts of fairness and inclusiveness. Luo Maorui proposed that there existed a stable and equal bilateral relationship between the two Song dynasties and ethnic groups such as Liao, Western Xia, and Jin, rather than an unequal tribute relationship dominated entirely by the Central Plains dynasties. Mark Mankauer pointed out that the term "tribute trade" is inappropriate because "tribute" and "trade" are two different things. Shi Huaci questioned whether China had a permanent view of the world order, believing that it had been fundamentally disrupted in the 20th century. Fei Zhengqing's theory has different manifestations and connotations of tribute system in different circles, and requires specific analysis based on specific situations.

2、 The "Border Centered Theory" and the "Bipolar Model Theory"

This article delves into two theoretical perspectives of Western scholars on China's tribute system: the "borderland centric theory" and the "bipolar model theory". Lattimore's "borderland centric theory" places Chinese history in the grand perspective of inland Asia, emphasizing the equal importance of nomadic civilization and agricultural civilization, and observing Chinese history from the Chinese border with the Great Wall as the center. Based on this, Barfield developed the "nomadic political center theory", which believed that the relationship between nomadic regimes and the Central Plains dynasties was mutually dependent rather than antagonistic and hostile. He proposed the "bipolar model", which means that powerful nomadic tribes rise and fall at the same time as the Central Plains dynasties, and the rise and fall of nomadic regimes and the Central Plains dynasties both prosper and suffer. Barfield also proposed the "outer frontier strategy" and "inner frontier strategy" to explain the relationship between the northern nomadic regimes and the Central Plains dynasties, and summarized it into three cyclical periods. He emphasized the interaction between the military power, political organization, and economic structure of Mongolia, Northeast China, and North China, which determined the historical cycle of the Central Plains dynasties and nomadic regimes. Barfield's viewpoint subverts traditional cognition, believing that the so-called "tribute" between the Central Plains dynasties and the northern nomadic regimes is actually a tribute paid by the Central Plains dynasties to the northern nomadic regimes to meet their material needs. The author criticized Barfield's viewpoint, stating that although it was novel, it was filled with fallacies, creating a binary opposition between the Central Plains dynasties and nomadic tribal regimes, and separating history.

3、 The Theory of Multi polar Center in Asia during the Tang Dynasty and the Theory of Surrounding Countries in the Tribute System

Explored new interpretations of the ancient tribute system in China by the Western academic community, particularly the research of Canadian Chinese scholar Wang Zhenping and Korean American scholar Kang Canxiong. Wang Zhenping believed that the Tang Dynasty was in a multipolar world, and its relations with neighboring countries adjusted according to changes in power. He emphasized the pragmatic principle of "suitability" and criticized the tribute system theory centered on China. Kang Canxiong analyzed the tribute system from a political science perspective and believed that it was the key to peace and stability in East Asia. It was an asymmetric international relations system with multiple manifestations, including politics, economy, culture, and ideology. The research of two scholars provides different perspectives on the tribute system, challenging the traditional Chinese centric view and providing a new perspective for understanding ancient East Asian international relations.

4、 Evaluation of various theories

There are significant differences in the understanding of the ancient tribute system in China among Western scholars. This chapter evaluates the relevant theories from multiple perspectives. Fei Zhengqing and Kang Canxiong emphasized the reality of the tribute system and its significance to the ancient East Asian world, while Bafield and Wang Zhenping discussed its "virtual" side. Based on Chinese historical materials, the academic community in China is more receptive to Fei Zhengqing's theory of "China's World Order". Kang Canxiong further advances this understanding and emphasizes the active participation of neighboring countries. From the perspective of nomadic tribes, Barfield proposed a theory opposite to that of Fei Zhengqing, interpreting the relationship between nomadic regimes and Central Plains dynasties as interdependence and subverting traditional historical cognition. Wang Zhenping believed that the Tang Dynasty was not the center of the East Asian world, but a pole in a multipolar world, emphasizing that power was the key factor determining the tribute system. Regarding the China centered theory, Fei Zhengqing and Kang Canxiong believed that China was the center of the ancient East Asian world, while Bafield and Wang Zhenping put forward different views. Bafield even proposed the "nomadic regime centered theory". In terms of the challenges posed by neighboring countries to China, Fei Zhengqing believed that the main challenge came from the second circle, and Barfield further strengthened the dominant power of the nomadic regime, while Kang Canxiong and Wang Zhenping discussed challenges from different directions. This chapter emphasizes that the multidimensionality of history requires the use of multiple perspectives for research to reveal the different characteristics of the tribute system. As Chinese scholars, we should base ourselves on the essence of China, go beyond limitations, adhere to China's position, and view China from its surroundings, in order to comprehensively understand the historical influence of the tribute system.