Mmm Im inclined to argue that I have done my duty by providing the original French text exactly and that in an English translation I am entitled to follow the normal modern rules for spelling Vietnamese names  Had it been a British treaty of  which used spellings such as Tongking and LangSon I would of course have reproduced the text exactly  But I can see your point     In answer to one of your rhetorical questions Tourane has indeed become Danang with neat Vietnamese accents in my series of articles on the Cochinchina campaign  I would much prefer it to be Tourane as that was what it was called then but cest la vie  I have reverently removed my yellowing copy of the Histoire militaire from my shelves and blown the dust off the title page  You are right that Aubert and Pasquier are mentioned on this page but not as its authors  Pasquier is merely mentioned as the governor of Cochinchina at the time and even Aubert modestly assigns the authorship to his staff officers  During the past seven years I have made a close study of both Histoire militaire and Conqute de lIndochine and there are so many verbal similarities that I am convinced that Thomazi doubtless on Auberts tatmajor was the main author of Histoire militaire even though he is not formally credited with it  However I have perhaps gone too far in formally attributing authorship to him  Is it normally attributed to Aubert and Pasquier  If so I suppose I had better follow convention