Vietnam's history

Some points in understanding the relations between China and Vietnam. First, understand the relationship between the King of Vietnam and the Emperor of China. This will help you understand the relationship between China and Vietnam. It was a feudal relationship between a Lord (the Chinese emperor) and a vassal (a subordinate lord who had sworn loyalty to the higher one). Several of China's 'invasions' of Vietnam were in fact Chinese armies responding to a call for assistance from an Emperor who was either in danger of losing his throne, or had already lost it, but that fact was not recognized by China. Second, Vietnam, or Dai Viet (the name of Vietnam was not used until Gia Long's time, and its choice was approved by the Chinese, who objected to nineteenth century Vietnam assuming the name "Nam Viet") only developed into modern Vietnam after the great move South. This was not a "Vietnamese" initiative in the sense that the King's Court had a vision of an expanded Vietnam. Rather, the Nguyen lords needed more territory to better support their armies against the Trinh. The 'settlers' included military garrisons, prisoners, persons who fallen afoul of the Court (such as Catholics), and those seeking to improve their clan and family fortunes in newly opened lands (settlers). It was a slower process than the American expansion West, but quite similar.  Third, Chinese immigrants played a large part in the development of the South under the Nguyen Lords, and in modern Vietnam's economy. Thus, not all "Chinese influence" was from the China per se, but the result of Chinese Ming refugees, and later Ching immigrants, settling in the South. (such as Mac Cu'u). Thus the official Dai Viet government, i.e., the Court, had nothing to do with the movement south. That was the initiative of the Nguyen Lords, who allowed the Cham to continue inhabiting their territories as subjects of vassal states. It was the arrival of Ming refugees in large numbers, and their interaction with their Vietnamese and Khmer neighbors, that began the process of developing Vietnam as a pre-modern nation. I would recommend anyone interested in that history read both Prof. Li Tana's "Nguyen Cochinchina" and Prof. Choi Byung Wook's "Southern Vietnam under the Reign of Minh Mang." both published by Cornell University's South-East Asia studies program (SEAP). I find interesting parallels between the movement South in the 16th through early 19th Centuries, and the events in Vietnam in 1954, when two Vietnamese governments emerged again, as in the late Nguyen-Trinh period. 


Edited by lirelou - 30-Oct-2010 at 22:03

Joy, obviously there is a real barrier of communication existing between us that prevents us from ever reaching any common ground other than emoticons. So, good luck in your Vietnamese history studies.

Shield, Good point, but in re: "if one uses the original meaning of the term 'nation'."  In my day, that included a common history, and that is where the German nations (i.e., German speaking Switzerland, Austria. Luxumbourg, Flemish Belgium, and the Netherlands differ from modern Germany.) Also regarding the last, note that before the 80 year war, they referred to themselves as 'Nederduits' (Low Germans). (ANd, there are Frisians, also another German group slite up among two nation-states.) But, back to Vietnamese history.

Let's have some brief history lesson.
1. Nan Yue was found by a northern immigration but not local people.
2. Nan Yue was multi-ethnic, oh, please prove that all those ethnic living in old Nan Yue kingdom were all related to vietnamese.
3. Vietnam or northern vietnam is just a tiny part of Nan Yue kingdom and history book said clearly Zhao Tuo conquered the modern time Northern vietnam. Sorry I cannot catch your point. Italy can claim Roman empire's history because it was core part of Roman empire. Your analogy failed, sorry.
Why not take France as analogy?Could france claim Roman empire as their own?

So would u like to claim chinese history as yours because in history northern vietnam was also part of china?

Joy, in re: "So it is very funny to see some viets claim they are vietnamese either by citizen or by ethnic. Remember that kingdom was called Nan Yue but never vietnam."

It is quite plain the the Nan Yue peoples south of the present Viet-China border consciously chose not the be Chinese, while retaining much of Chinese culture. It was the Nguyen dynasty who proposed to reassume the name Nam Viet, but changed it to Vietnam out of consideration for how that would have appeared in Chinese, then still the official written language of the Court. The name Vietnam evokes the earlier Nam Yue origins of the Kinh people, but at the same time underscores that the Vietnamese have now evolved into different nation. Note that the reappearance of the name Vietnam in the 20th Century also coincided with the adoption of Quoc Ngu as the national written language. About as radical a break from Chinese as one can get. The Vietnamese have as much right to claim a Nam Yue origin as the Italians do a Roman origin, and French do the Gauls. Note that both the Austrians and Germans are descended from the same people, but have developed into two different nations over the course of history.

Originally posted by joy Oh, I use the word "viet", which refer to a certain ethnic. And my question is for Zhao Tuo and the other non-viet ethnic ppl living in old Nanyue kingdom, are they all viets?^^ But I donot know what's ur point.

what lirelou is trying to say is that the are all Vietnamese citizens in the same sense that i'm an american citizen.  However, those people may not be ethnically Vietnamese.  Just as i'm not ethnically american, i'm vietnamese. 

My point? To your question, are they all Viets? The answer is that South of the Vietnam-Chinese border, all the ethnic Chinese, as well as the minorities whose territories lie in Vietnam, are all Vietnamese citizens. that doesn't make them Kinh in the cultural sense. But it does make them 'Nguoi Viet" on their passports. Biet?

Joy, any minority group member living in Vietnam today is a Vietnamese citizen(whether they like it or not).

Preah, forced assimilation of the Khmer Krom into Vietnamese society began with Minh Mang. He also invaded Cambodia and made it a protectorate. Likewise, he even got into some of the disputes between various Lao principalities, though he never annexed it. The French move into Cochinchina is what ended Vietnamese control of Cambodia. Likewise, under the French, Khmer Krom went back to using their own names and were even governed by the Cambodian royal government in certain aspects, such as military service.

A worthwhile book that covers the assimilation policies of Minh Mang is: Southern Vietnam under the Reign of Minh Mang (1820-1841) by Choi Byung Wook, It was published by Cornell Universities "SEAP" program, so you might talk your local library into borrowing a copy from someone else on the inter-library loan program. Choi contrasts the assimilation policies of Ming Mang, which sparked several rebellions, to the more liberal policies of the Nguyen Lords, and the later Gia Dinh autonomous governments. It effected the Chinese, Cham, and Mountain ethnic minorities as well as the Khmer Krom. (VIetnam was governing Cambodia as a protectorate, so apparently Khmer in Cambodia were not effected by the assimilation laws, though the Vinh Te canal certainly ripped off some of their traditional lands.

Originally posted by lirelou Preah, interesting post. One minor correction. Minh Mang ruled in the 1830s, which would have made that document a 19th Century one, not 17th. I always have to do the math on that one as well. (first century A.D. ran from the supposed 00 to 99, thus 100 AD was the beginning of the 2nd Century.)

Edited by Shield-of-Dardania - 25-Apr-2010 at 21:21

Preah, interesting post. One minor correction. Minh Mang ruled in the 1830s, which would have made that document a 19th Century one, not 17th. I always have to do the math on that one as well. (first century A.D. ran from the supposed 00 to 99, thus 100 AD was the beginning of the 2nd Century.)