十九世紀中葉以來，東亞各國承受西方列強在政治、經濟、文化等各方面巨大的衝擊與挑戰，潘佩珠所處的時代正是處於越南歷史的轉折點上。在當時法國殖民與亞洲主義的背景下，潘佩珠孕育出其特殊的中華觀，富有時代意義。不論越南的潘佩珠、日本的曾根俊虎及大隈重信與中國的孫中山所主張的亞洲主義內涵皆強調同文同種同洲。潘佩珠認為，越南是亞洲的文明古國，與中國並列為亞洲歷史最悠久的國家，而且在地理、歷史、人種、文化等各方面都跟中國有密切的關係，甚至認為自己是漢人。他不僅認為中越兩國是兄弟之國的關係，並認為中國是全亞洲的兄長，應該擔當起領導亞洲的重任。受到傳統越南的二重朝貢體制所影響，潘佩珠建構未來的世界圖像，希望中國成為亞洲的領導者，中越為兄弟之國，而越南則成為東南亞及南亞諸國的領導者。潘佩珠的思想體現中越同祖觀及中越兄弟觀，同時深具漢文化意識。至於越南的主體意識，猶如兄弟分家之後，各自獨立發展，潘佩珠也與其他越南人一樣具有強烈的國家主體意識。這突顯出潘佩珠的雙元性中華觀，既有人種、文化上的漢人與漢文化認同，又有政治上獨立於中華的主體觀。

Since the mid-19th century, the nations comprising East Asia have been greatly affected politically, economically, and culturally by Western imperialist countries, and as a result, intellectuals throughout East Asian nations attempted to apply Western knowledge to save their countries, among which in Vietnam, Phan Bội Châ 潘佩珠 (1867-1940) was typical. During the time of rising French colonialism and Pan-Asianism, he developed an unusual view of Chinese cultural characteristics and Zhonghua for his time. My research has found that the Pan-Asianism as proposed by Phan Bội Châu, Sone Toshitora 曾根俊虎 (1847-1910), Ōkuma Shigenobu 大隈重信 (1838-1922), and Dr. Sun Yat-sen 孫中山 (1866-1925) all emphasized the commonality of culture and of biological origin among Asian countries. Phan thought Vietnam was one of the countries with a long tradition similar to China and closely resembled China in terms of geography, historical development, biological origin, and culture, even believing he belonged to the Han ethnic group. Not only maintaining Vietnam and China were closely related like brothers, Phan also regarded China as the elder brother and thus should shoulder the responsibility of leading Asia. Influenced by Vietnam’s “double” tributary system, namely Vietnam fell under China’s tribute system whereas neighboring nations paid tribute to Vietnam, Phan expected that while China—as the elder brother of Vietnam—was the leader of Asia, Vietnam—as the younger—should lead both South and Southeast Asia. The thought of Phan embodied the views that Vietnam and China were of the same ancestry and were brothers; Vietnam’s culture was Han culture. As for the subjectivity of the Vietnamese people, Phan, like many others, also regarded Vietnam as an independent country, and China and Vietnam were essentially two brothers following “family division.” To conclude, the present study exposes that Phan’s idea of China-Vietnam relationships were a binary: on one hand biologically and culturally connected, and on the other, politically independent.