A form of Sinology emerged in Vietnam in the early twentieth century during the period of colonial rule as Western learning came to replace the traditional curriculum of the Confucian classics. At first, scholars sought to preserve traditional learning by translating Confucian and Buddhist texts into the Vietnamese vernacular. Then in the 1930s and 1940s, scholars produced works on Chinese history, philosophy, and literature that engaged with the works of modern scholars from China and the West. The development of this body of Sinological scholarship was then disrupted by periods of revolution and war. This article traces the development of Sinology in Vietnam through these periods up to the present.

Several years ago, Pat Ebrey, founding editor of this journal, solicited the board for ideas for special issues. I have long been interested in the historiography of different national Sinological traditions and suggested a series of essays on this topic from a host of such historiographical backgrounds. Pat agreed and enthusiastically supported the idea. I had spoken about such a topic in a vague, roundabout manner some twenty years earlier with Martin Kern (Princeton University), and so I consulted him and was extremely fortunate to be given by him a handful of names of scholars who might perform such a task for their countries of origin, mostly in Europe. I was able to gradually compile a list that runs now to fifteen essays. Most of the authors are senior scholars in their fields, although some are mid-career or even junior; one is written by a graduate student. It was, of course, also essential that these authors all be able to write in English.

The development of Sinology in Australia was contingent upon, and serves as a lens through which to view, a number of transformations to Australian society in the middle decades of the twentieth century, as the country sought independence from the “Mother Country,” Great Britain, and reoriented itself towards Asia. These include Australia's first forays into independent international diplomacy and the introduction of the Ph.D. degree and postgraduate research in the university system—culminating in the first Australian postgraduate work on China in the 1950s. While government support has always been crucial to the enterprise, from the early years until today scholars have defended the Chinese humanities against the utilitarian “national interest” proclivities of governments. Adopting a broad definition of Sinology, one which encompasses post-war trends in “Chinese Studies,” this article surveys the universities that have been important to Sinology, the scholars who worked in them and the ongoing challenges to the discipline.

This article traces the origins and developments of Chinese studies in Austria. In addition to factors and institutions that were instrumental in the development of these studies, the lives and works of individuals important to this development are revisited, starting with brief remarks on the scholarly interest in China in eighteenth century Austria and on early efforts to obtain Chinese books and Chinese printing types in the nineteenth century. The achievements of individual scholars are examined against the backdrop of their institutional affiliations and their experiences, if any, in China. In addition, the reasons for the delayed institutionalization of Sinological studies at university level are highlighted.

Research into traditional China at German universities began in the early nineteenth century. It took several decades, however—until after the unification of Germany in 1871—positions at the universities of first Leipzig and then Berlin and Hamburg to be established in order to professionalize traditional China studies. The third and fourth decades of the twentieth century saw a rapid expansion, but Nazi rule between 1933–1945 led to massive emigration of German sinologists. This article looks into the details of this development and the disastrous consequences it had for German sinology. It then proceeds to the new beginnings made after World War II when some emigrants returned to Germany from China. East Germany lost many sinologists, who left the GDR when the Berlin wall was built. The article finishes with the challenges that a politically important China presents to traditional sinology.

This paper follows the developments in Chinese studies in Moscow and Leningrad–Saint Petersburg during the Soviet and post-Soviet decades. It provides an overview of institutions and key currents in research conducted in these two cities, while also contextualizing the general political conditions under which Sinology existed. The paper examines the ways researchers responded to the ideological requirements placed upon them in the early Soviet period, then outlines the main trends in Chinese studies after the establishment of the PRC and during the Sino-Soviet split, and, finally, traces the continuities and changes of the late Soviet and post-Soviet years. This article provides some information on existing bibliographical publications, conferences, and journals as an aid for following China-related research conducted in Russia. It also demonstrates that, while many problems continue to hamper the development of Sinology in Russia, this field has sound foundations and many promising tendencies.

Stanisław Kuczera (May 5, 1928–July 28, 2020) was an eminent figure in Polish, Soviet, and Russian Chinese Studies, holding the position of one of leading experts in a vast number of fields (most prominently, archeology, epigraphy, and the translation of classics) over a period decades, until his last days. His life, filled with a thirst for knowledge and harsh vicissitudes, is a story that is worthy of being told and remembered.

Magdalene von Dewall was the only anthropologically oriented specialist in East and Southeast Asian archaeology in Germany in her generation. Her scholarly work on chariots, Dian bronzes, funerary archaeology, and other topics, was often far ahead of its time when published, and it remains worth reading. This article attempts to recount Magdalene von Dewall's biography and intellectual lineage and to characterize her scholarly contributions. It also describes how, largely thanks to Magdalene von Dewall's assiduous efforts, her field of study has gradually gained a certain measure of academic recognition in Germany during recent years.