Print Page | Close Window

Vietnam's history

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: History of Oceania, South-East Asia and Pacific
Forum Discription: Discuss the history of SE Asia: Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore etc.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24700
Printed Date: 02-Jul-2022 at 05:04
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Vietnam's history
Posted By: Guests
Subject: Vietnam's history
Date Posted: 21-Jun-2008 at 22:41
Hello, I'm Vietnamese, as so far I haven't seen any topic (In this forum) discussed on Vietnam's history, so I create this new one. Anyone who want to talk about Vietnam or ask question, or everything they could think of about Vietnam may post some stuff here.Welcome! Cheers



Replies:
Posted By: jiankeyps
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2008 at 05:09
The Vietnamese's cooking art is named


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2008 at 05:33
There are many threads on Vietnamese history on this forum. You didn't search well enough. Smile

-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2008 at 08:49
Here's a tip though; when starting a thread, instead of just going "let's talk about this" and mentioning some general topic (Vietnam, WW2, Roman Empire, whatever) it's better to start with a specific problem. F.ex. how Vietnam has been influenced by Chinese culture, reasons why the Mongol invasion failed or what political leader meant the most for the creation of modern Vietnam. This way you can spark a debate, while "open" threads tend to die out unless someone raises an issue.

-------------


Posted By: evilbu
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2008 at 21:45
Well, yeah, I have a questionEmbarrassed...

it is my perception that the south of vietnam used to be predominantly khmer, and that vietnamese settled there in the last thousand years and eventually gained an overwhelming majority, while they themselves come from the guangxi and guangdong province, which is now taken over by ethnic han chinese (so in essence : both groups moved south)

How much of this is correct?Confused


Posted By: pebbles
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2008 at 05:53
 
Vietnam is a SE Asian country,why is this thread in East Asia history section ????


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 10-Nov-2008 at 15:30
The thread is moved to SE Asian history subforum.

-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 10-Nov-2008 at 15:48
Originally posted by evilbu

Well, yeah, I have a questionEmbarrassed...

it is my perception that the south of vietnam used to be predominantly khmer, and that vietnamese settled there in the last thousand years and eventually gained an overwhelming majority, while they themselves come from the guangxi and guangdong province, which is now taken over by ethnic han chinese (so in essence : both groups moved south)

How much of this is correct?Confused
 
It's partly correct.
 
Not only South Vietnam but also central Vietnam and a large chunk of Northern Vietnam was inhabitted by Chams - Austonesian people close to Malays who later created a powerful maritime kingdom of Champa.
 
The craddle of the modern Vietnamese people was indeed the areas of Guanxi and Guangdong provinces. Slowly they moved to the South until they proclaimed independence from China in what is not Northern Vietnam around Hanoi in the 10th century AD.
 
For the last 1000 years they have been again moving to the South slowly. They defeated and assimilated Chams, the remnants of whom converted in Islam still can be found in Southern Vietnam.
 
Chams culture as a representative of Indianized cultures of SE Asia was close to Khmer.


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 28-Apr-2009 at 23:12
The "advance South" started in the 1600s, and culminated in the late 1700s and early 1800s. China recognized (Nguyen) South Vietnam as independent of the (Trinh) North in 1744. Saigon (Prei nokor) wasn't even Vietnamese until 1698, Can Tho was founded in the 1730s when the Southern Mekong Delta's ruler, Mac Cu'u, switched his allegience to the Nguyen. So the actual Vietnamese move south is as recent as much American history.

By the way, Vietnam is culturally East Asian, just as China, Korea, and Japan are. Geographically, SEA makes sense, but Historically and Culturally, it is East Asian. 

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: evilbu
Date Posted: 01-May-2009 at 08:35
Thanks for the interesting replies.
Are there many remnants (demographically, culturally, linguistically, architecturally..) to be found in Guangdong and Guangxi of the Vietnamese presence in the past?
 
I once read that although Khmer/Cambodians and Vietnamese are linguistically related, the former are way more "indianized" culturally, and the latter more "sinicized" (although ironically China was on "Cambodia's side" in the third indochina war)


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 01-May-2009 at 16:38
Originally posted by evilbu

Thanks for the interesting replies.
Are there many remnants (demographically, culturally, linguistically, architecturally..) to be found in Guangdong and Guangxi of the Vietnamese presence in the past?
 
 
Historically speaking one can say that current inhabitants of Guandong and Guanxi are Sincized descendants of "Prto-Vietnamese." There are of course several ethnic minorities there now that speak languages related to Mon-Khmer group, but not many. The biggest ethnic minority group there is Zhuang and they speak a Tai-Kadai language.
There are of course some local customs which resemble Vietnamese customs. However, the overwhelming bulk of culture and not only the Southern Chinese provinces but in Vietnam itself are genetically Chinese.
 
 
Originally posted by evilbu

I once read that although Khmer/Cambodians and Vietnamese are linguistically related, the former are way more "indianized" culturally, and the latter more "sinicized" (although ironically China was on "Cambodia's side" in the third indochina war)
 
Khmer and Vietnamese cultures like you noted are different and while Vietnamese belong to Sinitic world, Khmer culture relates to the "Indianized cultures of SE Asia."  This is very visible in linguistics as well. Khmer has a huge Sanscrit and Pali influence, while Vietnamese is very Sincicized to the extent that some "advanced" linguists even put it into Sino-Tibetian group. Most of Vietnamese vocabularly is of Chinese origin  it also has tones like Chinese which is absent in Khmer. And also Khmer and Vietnamese are complitely mutually non intelligible. A Vietnamese would be able to understand some of Chinese speech (especially if it is in one of the Southern dialects) but not Khmer speech.


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 01-May-2009 at 17:18
I've always understood the Vietnamese to be a Malayo-Polynesian group that became sinicized through intermarriage, and adopting Chinese culture. The only tribal people left who are related to modern Vietnamese are the Muong, whose territory was in the Black River Highlands, capital Hoa Binh. But I noticed years ago that, generally speaking, that the general physical appearence of Vietnamese (Kinh) undergoes subtle changes as you travel from North to South. I have no doubt that many old families in the Mekong Delta have some Khmer blood, but I tend to doubt that the Vietnamese base genetic stock of two thousand years ago was Mon-Khmer. To me, generally, the Khmer body style and hair differs from both the Vietnamese, and Malayo-Polynesians (Cham, Rhade, Jarai, and Raglai). I know one family from the Delta where the son has some Khmer characteristics (a great-grandmother was Khmer) and the daughter Chinese features, except for large, almond eyes (a great-grandfather was Chinese).




-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 01-May-2009 at 18:36
Racial group often do not correspond at all with linguistic groups. It's natural that Vietnamese have a lot of from Malayo-polinesian phenotype ( just thing about mixing with Chams) but Vietnamese language is not Malayo-Polinesian by any means.

-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 02:43
Sarmat, my point exactly. There are many examples in history where a people adopted the language of a dominant culture, but remained a people apart, though often an amalgym of two cultures. Vikings moved into Normandy and became Norman French. The Norman French took over a Saxon kingdom, and became English. The English took over India, were thrown out, and left in their wake the English language as a unifying factor, an English vision of laws, and many other insitutitions which make modern India indian.The Nguyen Lords made Vietnam what it is today, but Minh Mang, apparently feeling some sense of inferiority, adopted the Le Dynasty's view of Vietnam and the Vietnamese.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: pebbles
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 07:58
Originally posted by Sarmat

 
 
 
Historically speaking one can say that current inhabitants of Guandong and Guanxi are Sincized descendants of "Proto-Vietnamese."
 
 
 
 
 
 
There was no " Proto-Vietnamese ' in southern China !
 
The indigenous Bai Yue bloodline is an undisputed genetic component of modern day Han-Chinese in Guandong & Guangxi,however,there have been recorded massive migrations from northern China so today's population is a mixture of northern Han ( of Sinitic origin ) and various indigenous Bai Yue groups ( Austronesian & Austro-Asiatic origins ).
 
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=21714 - http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=21714
 
Quote: " genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo Sapiens in China ".The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia." from the abstract, and "Now that we have established that populations in East Asia were subjected to genetic contributions from multiple sources: Southeast Asia, Altaic from northeast Asia, and mid-Asia or Europe. It would be interesting to estimate relative contributions from each source.Unfortunately,the current study involved only mostly minority populations.A study involving populations across the country is necessary to reveal such a picture"
At the conclusion,what I see is that the study is more of Chinese minority groups than the larger Han Chinese majority.It seems to suggest and enforce Li Hui theory of at least one of the 3 streams of transmigratory routes taken by Chinese peoples,the stream of genetic marker M119 ( where the Viets belong ) whose path was through northern SE asia into China and they contain Bai Yue and other minorities like Dai but not Han Chinese.So it sort of confirm " the current study involved only mostly minority populations " in the article on PNAS and they " entered from Southeast Asia " ( not the Han Chinese, mind you).
 
Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets do not share the M122 genetic marker with the Han-Chinese. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.

I read the other article on PNAS, and quote

"Usually, most Chinese immigrants to the U.S. ( and to other countries, like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc. ) come from southern China, and this is certainly true of the cell lines from California residents from China born in the mainland, collected by Louise Chen and Alice Lin at Stanford and used in our surveys (2, 7, 8). Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the North, but they did so at very different times, and thus had different times for gene flow from the earlier settlers,that is the minorities"

The statement sort of confirm Han Chinese from south China " mostly came originally from the north ", which substantiate Li Hui theory of one of his 3 streams where in one stream the peoples passed through tibetan plateau to arrive in North China were ancestors of the Han-Chinese and Tibetans, carrying the genetic marker M117.PNAS site states that "Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the north, but they did so at very different times".

Virtually all Han Chinese share the same paternal and maternal lineage except for few southern groups that had Austronesian maternal ancestors.The many migrations ( referenced Tang & Song history chronicles ) into southern China have diluted the bloodlines.
 
The fact is that the Han Chinese majority and ethnic Vietnamese didn't share a common root.Any culture similarity,language similarity and genetic similarity in the south are due to chinese expansion to the south,and cultural diffusion, and mixing with the local people but not by common root. its simple as that.It is a fact that Vietnamese culture shares similarities with Chinese culture is due to Chinese influence like how Chinese influenced Korean and Japanese,not by common root.Another fact that the northern Han-Chinese migrated southward in large numbers and some have mixed with the locals and that's the reason they are genetic related ( same scenario with both Chinese & Japanese or Chinese & Koreans because their ancestors originally from Asia continent which is today's China excluding Russian Far East Territory & outer Mongolia ).

Series of civil warfare, rebellions, famines and barbarian invasions in Northern China led to mass migrations of Chinese people from devastated Northern China to the fertile and peaceful Southern China. An estimated 20 million people migrated from Northern China to Southern China from 800AD – 1250AD, to flee from prosecution and escape from the destitute and war-ridden Northern China.Through these waves of migrations to the south,Middle Chinese language was brought into Southern China.Eventually evolved into several dialects,a major one of these dialects is Cantonese.

Vietnamese is an Austro-Asiatic language,not Austronesian.Thus the language is related to that of the Khmers and Mons.The negrito people of Malaya (Asli people) also speak this language.In this latter case,it is likely they were a mixed race adopting the language of the dominant group). We should also note that the original speakers of Austro-asiatic (and for that matter, Austronesian) are also Mongoloids.The differences in features only indicate the amount of negrito blood in them due to intermarriage. Paleolithic Negrito people (who look like the Australian Aborigines) lived in most of Southeast Asia and South China prior to the big migration of Mongoloids southwards, which displaced these peoples. Other contribution of course also include climate and diet.

 
It is a fact that Vietnamese language has at least 60% of Chinese loanwords due to Chinese cultural influence and dominance,50% of Chinese loanwords in Korean and Japanese languages,again not by common roots.
 
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 15:07
First you said this:
 
Originally posted by pebbles

 
 
There was no " Proto-Vietnamese ' in southern China !
 
 
And then you refuted yourself.
 
Originally posted by pebbles

The indigenous Bai Yue bloodline is an undisputed genetic component of modern day Han-Chinese in Guandong & Guangxi    
 
 
Nice


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: pebbles
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 16:11
 
 
Nope ...  proto Vietnamese only existed in Vietnam not southern China,mind you !
 
 
 
 


Posted By: pebbles
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 16:19
Originally posted by lirelou

 


By the way, Vietnam is culturally East Asian, just as China, Korea, and Japan are. Geographically, SEA makes sense, but Historically and Culturally, it is East Asian. 
 
 
 
 
Vietnam is also SE Asian culturally & linguistically,native cuisine is similiar to Thai and their language sounds like Thai.
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 16:47
Originally posted by pebbles

 
 
Nope ...  proto Vietnamese only existed in Vietnam not southern China,mind you !
 
 
Proto Vietnamese (if one can use such a term) originate primarily from Souther China from the historical kingdom of Nan Yue
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanyue - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanyue
 
Historically speaking the largest Northern part of Nan Yue remained under Chinese dominance and was complitely assimilated into China.
 
While the Southern part was able to get independence and only later, very slowly expanded to the South and now it's known as Vietnam.
 
The fact that the ancestors of Vietnamese people lived in the Southern China you proved yourself by giving the links that prove "Bai-yue" genetic element in Southern China.


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 16:49
Originally posted by pebbles

 
Vietnam is also SE Asian culturally & linguistically,native cuisine is similiar to Thai and their language sounds like Thai.
 
 
 
Vietnamese cuisine is also very similar to Southern Chinese cuisines. And "sounds like" is not an argument at all. For many people Chinese, Thai, Vietnamese, Burmese etc. would all "sound the same."


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: Sarmat
Date Posted: 02-May-2009 at 16:59
He is the map of Ancient Nanyue. One can see that it mostly consisted of the territories of the modern Guangxi and Guangdong provinces of China.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nanyue001.png - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nanyue001.png


-------------
Σαυρομάτης


Posted By: souther
Date Posted: 05-Sep-2009 at 14:49
Originally posted by evilbu

Well, yeah, I have a questionEmbarrassed...

it is my perception that the south of vietnam used to be predominantly khmer, and that vietnamese settled there in the last thousand years and eventually gained an overwhelming majority, while they themselves come from the guangxi and guangdong province, which is now taken over by ethnic han chinese (so in essence : both groups moved south)

How much of this is correct?Confused

Partially correct. As far as Vietnamese migrating from Guangdong and Guangxi this is not true. Guangdong and Guangxi is the native land to all Tai speaking people. The Tai speaking people are the largest minority group in China concetrated in Guangxi and Guangdong.


Posted By: souther
Date Posted: 05-Sep-2009 at 15:05
 
 
Originally posted by Pebbles

]
There was no " Proto-Vietnamese ' in southern China !
 
The indigenous Bai Yue bloodline is an undisputed genetic component of modern day Han-Chinese in Guandong & Guangxi,however,there have been recorded massive migrations from northern China so today's population is a mixture of northern Han ( of Sinitic origin ) and various indigenous Bai Yue groups ( Austronesian & Austro-Asiatic origins ).
 
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=21714 - http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=21714
 
Quote: " genetic evidence does not support an independent origin of Homo Sapiens in China ".The phylogeny also suggested that it is more likely that ancestors of the populations currently residing in East Asia entered from Southeast Asia." from the abstract, and "Now that we have established that populations in East Asia were subjected to genetic contributions from multiple sources: Southeast Asia, Altaic from northeast Asia, and mid-Asia or Europe. It would be interesting to estimate relative contributions from each source.Unfortunately,the current study involved only mostly minority populations.A study involving populations across the country is necessary to reveal such a picture"
At the conclusion,what I see is that the study is more of Chinese minority groups than the larger Han Chinese majority.It seems to suggest and enforce Li Hui theory of at least one of the 3 streams of transmigratory routes taken by Chinese peoples,the stream of genetic marker M119 ( where the Viets belong ) whose path was through northern SE asia into China and they contain Bai Yue and other minorities like Dai but not Han Chinese.So it sort of confirm " the current study involved only mostly minority populations " in the article on PNAS and they " entered from Southeast Asia " ( not the Han Chinese, mind you).
 
Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets do not share the M122 genetic marker with the Han-Chinese. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.

I read the other article on PNAS, and quote

"Usually, most Chinese immigrants to the U.S. ( and to other countries, like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc. ) come from southern China, and this is certainly true of the cell lines from California residents from China born in the mainland, collected by Louise Chen and Alice Lin at Stanford and used in our surveys (2, 7, 8). Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the North, but they did so at very different times, and thus had different times for gene flow from the earlier settlers,that is the minorities"

The statement sort of confirm Han Chinese from south China " mostly came originally from the north ", which substantiate Li Hui theory of one of his 3 streams where in one stream the peoples passed through tibetan plateau to arrive in North China were ancestors of the Han-Chinese and Tibetans, carrying the genetic marker M117.PNAS site states that "Han-Chinese living in the south of China mostly came originally from the north, but they did so at very different times".

Virtually all Han Chinese share the same paternal and maternal lineage except for few southern groups that had Austronesian maternal ancestors.The many migrations ( referenced Tang & Song history chronicles ) into southern China have diluted the bloodlines.
 
The fact is that the Han Chinese majority and ethnic Vietnamese didn't share a common root.Any culture similarity,language similarity and genetic similarity in the south are due to chinese expansion to the south,and cultural diffusion, and mixing with the local people but not by common root. its simple as that.It is a fact that Vietnamese culture shares similarities with Chinese culture is due to Chinese influence like how Chinese influenced Korean and Japanese,not by common root.Another fact that the northern Han-Chinese migrated southward in large numbers and some have mixed with the locals and that's the reason they are genetic related ( same scenario with both Chinese & Japanese or Chinese & Koreans because their ancestors originally from Asia continent which is today's China excluding Russian Far East Territory & outer Mongolia ).

Series of civil warfare, rebellions, famines and barbarian invasions in Northern China led to mass migrations of Chinese people from devastated Northern China to the fertile and peaceful Southern China. An estimated 20 million people migrated from Northern China to Southern China from 800AD – 1250AD, to flee from prosecution and escape from the destitute and war-ridden Northern China.Through these waves of migrations to the south,Middle Chinese language was brought into Southern China.Eventually evolved into several dialects,a major one of these dialects is Cantonese.

Vietnamese is an Austro-Asiatic language,not Austronesian.Thus the language is related to that of the Khmers and Mons.The negrito people of Malaya (Asli people) also speak this language.In this latter case,it is likely they were a mixed race adopting the language of the dominant group). We should also note that the original speakers of Austro-asiatic (and for that matter, Austronesian) are also Mongoloids.The differences in features only indicate the amount of negrito blood in them due to intermarriage. Paleolithic Negrito people (who look like the Australian Aborigines) lived in most of Southeast Asia and South China prior to the big migration of Mongoloids southwards, which displaced these peoples. Other contribution of course also include climate and diet.

 
It is a fact that Vietnamese language has at least 60% of Chinese loanwords due to Chinese cultural influence and dominance,50% of Chinese loanwords in Korean and Japanese languages,again not by common roots.
 
 
 
Hi Pebbles, Li Hui asserts that M119 belongs to Viet not Vietnamese/Kinh. When Li Hui mentions Viet he is referring to the Tai-Kadai/Austronesian speaking people who are the carriers of M119. Among Chinese scholars Bai-Yue or Yue people is believed to be Tai-Kadai/Austro-Tai people. 
 
 
 
 


Posted By: Sander
Date Posted: 05-Sep-2009 at 19:12
Welcome to the forum, souther.
 

To my understanding " Yue " was a generic name for various non-Chinese people  that lived in Southern China before Chinese  expansion from the north. 

 
The  Chinese  name "Yue" is “Viet " in  Vietnamese. Nowadays,   "Viet" is  associated with  the Vietnamese Kinh in Vietnam,  but  in ancient times "Yue " was used  in broader sense. 

Among Chinese scholars Bai-Yue or Yue people is believed to be Tai-Kadai/Austro-Tai people.

 
Ancient language distribution in pre Han southern China  supports that. Thai kadai in the south- east. Austro-asiatic  more to the west ( Yunnan )
 


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 06:57

Originally posted by pebbles

Originally posted by lirelou

By the way, Vietnam is culturally East Asian, just as China, Korea, and Japan are. Geographically, SEA makes sense, but Historically and Culturally, it is East Asian. 
Vietnam is also SE Asian culturally & linguistically,native cuisine is similiar to Thai and their language sounds like Thai.
 

The Thai, Lao, Nung (Zhuang), Hmong in Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand were from Southern China.

LOL, Vietnam is culturally East Asian.  

One word:  CONFUCIANISM.

A phrase:  1000 years of Chinese domination.   That is, Vietnam was a  Chinese province for half of the last 2000 years.  (Also, keep in mind that for most of Vietnamese history going a back to 700 BCE, prior to the Han arrival, Vietnam (Van Lang, Dai Viet, Dai Co Viet, etc.) was only, geographically speaking, a fraction of what is is now, i.e. it was just the Red River Delta region.

A dude:  Lee Kwan Yew, who is an informal advisor to Hanoi on economic matters, lumps Vietnam in with East Asia.

Although the Thai are from China, they were Indianized along with the Chams and Khmers.  (Champa, like Nam-Viet was originally started by a rogue Chinese general.)

Yes, food wise, Vietnam is SE Asian.  But what do you mean by culturally?  The Japanese, Koreans, Mongolians (non confucians), Tibetans (non confucians), etc. all have their own distinct cultures.  Anyway, confucianism is THE FOUNDATION for not just China, but Japan, Korea, and Vietnam.  Everything else comes in a distant second.

Or maybe I should say a distant third, since ancestral worship is also paramount.  But then again, it is a key element of confucian filial piety.



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 07:43

Originally posted by Sarmat

Historically speaking one can say that current inhabitants of Guandong and Guanxi are Sincized descendants of "Prto-Vietnamese."

I don't think one can state this nor it's negation conclusively.  The ancient Vietnamese were the people of the Red River Delta.  This much is true.  But how they relate to the people of pre-Han Southern China is not clear. 

EDIT:  Let me clarify that the ancient people Guangdong and Guanxi are indeed not proto-Vietnamese, however, the relationship between the two is not altogether clear.  Genetically, the two groups are very similar.  Linguistically, the Vietnamese language, while still officially considered Mon-Khmer in most circles, is still being debated.  There's still many lingering questions as to whether Vietnamese is it's own linguistic isolate, or if it is a Tai language.  The concensus is still far from over.

Some say Cantonese was orinally a Tai language.

The Red River Delta was at the center Dong Son Culture, which was quite vast in territory, i.e. much of now Southern China, all of mainland SE Asia, and even beyond in the SE Asian seas.

As a side note, Chinese scholars often mistakenly claim there are more bronze Dong Son drums found in S. China than in N. Vietnam.  But they conviently forget that Gen. Ma Yuan conficated a boatload of such drums when hi conquered Nam-Viet so he could melt them down for other purposes.

Chinese archaeologists have also gone out of their way to conceal bona fide Vietnamese cultural artifacts found in S. China dating back to Han and pre-Han times.  About two years ago, they revealed some such artifacts to the delight, as well as irritation, of Vietnamese archeologists.



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 08:01

Pebbles,

I see a likely contradiction in two of your statements.  Please clarify.

Originally posted by pebbles

The indigenous Bai Yue bloodline is an undisputed genetic component of modern day Han-Chinese in Guandong & Guangxi,however

Originally posted by pebbles

 
Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets do not share the M122 genetic marker with the Han-Chinese. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.

So, that "undisputed genetic component" contributed by the Bai Yue to the mondern Hans does not contain M119, then? 
-----------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by pebbles


The statement sort of confirm Han Chinese from south China " mostly came originally from the north ".
 Lol, "sort of"?  
Many other genetic studies contradict this.

Originally posted by pebbles


Virtually all Han Chinese share the same paternal and maternal lineage
Again, other genetic studies contradict this.


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 11:28
Originally posted by pebbles

Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets do not share the M122 genetic marker with the Han-Chinese. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.
Pebbles, 
It appears you have very bad data, interpretation, and combinations thereof.
I'll cite wikipedia since I've come across a number of other blogs, links, sources that say pretty much the same thing.  (Also, wiki articles sometimes have great sources too, i.e. bona fide scholarly stuff.  And this one summarizes things clearly.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O3_%28Y-DNA%29 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O3_(Y-DNA)
Origin
Haplogroup O3 is a descendant haplogroup of haplogroup O. Some researchers believe that it first appeared in China approximately 10,000 years ago. However, others believe that the high internal diversity of Haplogroup O3 indicates a Late Pleistocene (Upper Paleolithic) origin in South China or Southeast Asia of the M122 mutation that defines the entire O3 clade, while the common presence among a wide variety of modern East and Southeast Asian nations of closely related haplotypes belonging to certain subclades of Haplogroup O3 is considered to point to a recent (e.g., Holocene) geographic dispersion of a certain subset of the ancient variation within Haplogroup O3. The spread of these particular subsets of Haplogroup O3 is conjectured to be closely associated with the sudden agricultural boom associated with rice farming.
Distribution
Although Haplogroup O3 appears to be primarily associated with Chinese populations, it also forms a significant component of the Y-chromosome diversity of most modern populations of the East Asian region. Haplogroup O3 is found in over 50% of all modern Chinese males (ranging up to over 80% in certain regional subgroups of the Han ethnicity, with frequency ranging from 30/101 = 29.7% among Pinghua-speaking Hans in Guangxi[5] to 110/148 = 74.3% among Hans in Changting, Fujian[22]), about 40% of Manchurian, Korean, and Vietnamese males, about 33.3%[9] to 62.3%[10][23] of Filipino males, about 10.5%[20] to 55.6%[20] of Malaysian males, about 10.3% (4/39 Guide County, Qinghai)[14] to 44% (22/50 Zhongdian County, Yunnan)[15] of Tibetan males, about 20%[15] to 32.6%[4] of Yi males, about 25% of Zhuang[24] and Indonesian[25] males, and about 16%[12][26] to 20%[9] of Japanese males. The distribution of Haplogroup O3 stretches far into Central Asia (approx. 40% of Dungans,[18] 31% of Salars,[16] 24% of Dongxiang[16], 18% to 22.8%[9] of Mongolians, 12% of Uyghurs,[18] 9% of Kazakhs,[18] 6.2% of Altayans[27], and 4.1% of Uzbeks[18]) and Oceania (approx. 25%[9] to 32.5%[20] of Polynesians, 18%[9] to 27.4%[20] of Micronesians, and 5% of Melanesians[28]),
The numbers in the brackets are scholarly sources, but I have yet to verify the numbers.
So 40% of Vietnamese have M122 and 50% of Han have it.  Not a big deal if you ask me.
-------------------------------------------------
The National Geographic page says likewise, but doesn't give such precise numbers:
http://https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html - https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html
It's a flash embed so you'll have to click on the right buttons.  Needless to say, this website is vigilant about keeping up with the latest studies.


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 12:16

chauduyphanvu, 

Here's an interesting article....

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118547174/PDFSTART  - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118547174/PDFSTART 


Language and Linguistics Compass 1/6 (2007): 727–749,


The Languages of Vietnam: Mosaics and
Expansions


Jerold A. Edmondson and Kenneth J. Gregerson
The University of Texas at Arlington


The rise of the Mon Khmer (MK) Vietnamese majority can be tracked back with cladistic study of their DNA and the names of plant and animal species to the remote Austro-Asiatics (AA), the ancestor of the MK and ultimately the Vietic branch populations (Diffloth 2005). For instance, by studying the genetic material from contemporary Vietnamese, we can determine from what place and at what time they arrived in Vietnam (their origin and development, i.e. their biogenesis). Archeology informs us about the development and evolution of Vietnamese culture (culturogenesis) and linguistic reconstruction (linguo-genesis) can uncover language structures from past times. All these fields use contemporary data to tell us about things long past (Bellwood 2006) (see Note 1 for more details about cladistic, phylogeographic, and archeological studies). In the case of many minority peoples of Vietnam genetic and artifactual research is still quite incomplete.


The AA peoples of Southeast Asia, as determined from studies of India’s tribal populations, are descended from a common male line originating in the Mundari peoples, who are thought to be the oldest population group of India and first AA’s (Kumar et al. 2007). Some of the Mundari men, perhaps on hunting or war expeditions, intermarried with women of contiguous areas of Southeast Asia in contemporary Myanmar. Links from these pioneers to the contemporary Vietnamese using phylogeographic analysis were established by Ballinger et al. (1992), who has shown that the Vietnamese populace possesses – of all Southeast Asian people groupings – the greatest genetic diversity in its maternally transmitted mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). This diversity is the product of regular but random mutations over the last 25,000 years obligatorily passed on from mothers to sons and daughters up to contemporary generations. Thus, these mtDNA patterns determine a set of distinctive genetic ‘fingerprints’ that fixes the source and arrival times of the protopopulations of Vietnam from MK forbearers. Ballinger et al. (1992: 5) observed that the great diversity among the Vietnamese is mirrored in great diversity of the aboriginal populations of Malaysia, including certain modern MK-speaking aboriginals, for example, the Temiar and Semai. Thus, the pre-Vietic and the Orang Asli people of Malaysia appear to be among the oldest within Southeast Asian MK peoples and may have constituted a physical population unity in the deep past of the Malay Peninsula (cf. also http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic - www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic , specifically the mtDNA haplogroup F).


So following this proposed model, perhaps 17 millennia bp people with these shared genetic features moved up the Malay Peninsula as far as northern Vietnam near Hòa Bình to dwell in rock shelters and caves where the French archeologist Madeleine Colani first discovered this Hoabinhian Culture of 15,000–5000 bp and noted that its unique features extended throughout the region (Colani 1927). Later these populations mixed with the inhabitants of Bac SÒn near the Red River in Bac Thái and Lang SÒn Provinces. Bacsonians possessed tools that were made of ground and polished stone, a significant improvement over Hòa Bình tools and pottery. During this same period, there was another culture called Quynh Van, whose inhabitants occupied the coast of north central Vietnam, largely living from fishing (cf. http://www.bvom.com/resource/vn_history.asp?pContent=Pre-History - http://www.bvom.com/resource/vn_history.asp?pContent=Pre-History ). They were followed in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age by people of the Phùng Nguyên Culture of Vietnam, who were wet rice farmers and who lived in sedentary villages on the Hòng (Red), Ðà (Black), and Lô Rivers 2000–1500 bc. In further triangulation of the peopling of Vietnam, we know from linguistic comparison that pre-Vietics also have a connection to groups of north-central Vietnam found today in Nghê An, Hà Tính, and Quàng Bình Provinces near the Lao border where some Vietic people still live. Perhaps some 4500 years ago a portion of these Vietic people groups appear to have arrived in the Red River Valley, and prospered. Later still they established a joint kingdom – known in Chinese records as Âu Lac – at Co Loa near Hanoi together with the indigenous Kra-Dai (Tai-Kadai) peoples (cf. Section 2). Li Hui et al. (2006) have analyzed comparatively palm prints, fingerprints, and sole prints between Kra-Dai and MK and decide for an MK genetic heritage.


But the reign of the kingdom of Âu Lac was destined to be short-lived. In 221 bc an invasion force from the north under General Zhào Tuó with an army of 100 000 took northern Vietnam in the name of the emperor of China, and it remained a province of the Middle Kingdom until ad 939 with much mixing of genetic, linguistic, and cultural features. Then subsequently, free from the Chinese yoke, Vietnam prospered under the institutions and a written tradition it had inherited and was able to fend off periodic attacks from Chinese authority. In ad 1471 they succeeded in a final conquest of the kingdom of Cham-speaking people of Vietnam.

The paragraph immediately above makes the annoying mistake of not even mentioning Kingdom of Nam-Viet.

--------------------------------------------------------

Below is a paper which likewise posits that the original Viets of the Red River Delta may have been in fact Tai-Kadai speakers but were somehow colonized by a small number of nomadic Mon-Khmer speakers.  This would be analogous to how a small band of Indo-European speakers were able to colonized, linguistically anyway, both much of India and nearly all of Europe.  (The orginal European languages were not Indo-European.)

http://www.geocities.com/malves98/Alves_Vietnamese_linguisticaffiliation.pdf - http://www.geocities.com/malves98/Alves_Vietnamese_linguisticaffiliation.pdf

THE CURRENT STATUS OF VIETNAMESE GENETIC LINGUISTIC STUDIES


Mark J. Alves
Montgomery College

(Presented at the Pan-Asiatic Conference held in Ho Chi Minh City in November 2000. It is unpublished and a draft to be cited only with the author’s permission.Embarrassed

INTRODUCTION


Throughout the twentieth century, controversy surrounded the origins of the Vietnamese language. Currently, there are several primary schools of thought, in which Vietnamese is
considered to be an Austroasiatic, Tai-Kadai, or Austronesian language. In another approach,
Vietnamese is considered to be a 'mixed' language which either cannot be shown to belong to
any particular group or can be shown to have a less obvious linguistic substratum. The dominant
and most well supported hypothesis so far--based on solid lexical and phonological evidence--
has been that Vietnamese is a language of the Mon-Khmer branch of Austroasiatic. However,
even to the end of the twentieth century, there are those who still consider Mon-Khmer to be a
kind of superstratum and think that deeper exploration reveals a Tai or Austronesian base.


This paper explores these issues, summarizing available evidence for each viewpoint,
using primarily phonological and lexical evidence, though other factors (typology and historical
feasibility) are considered as well. The conclusion reached in this paper is that, though some
provocative evidence exists showing possible ancient connections with Austronesian and Tai-
Kadai, Vietnamese is nonetheless a Mon-Khmer language,
particularly in light of recently
collected data from Minor Vietic languages as well as other language contact issues. This paper
first discusses the methods used to determine genetic linguistic affiliation. Then, for each of the
three main hypotheses (that Vietnamese is Mon-Khmer, Tai-Kadai, or Austronesian in origin),
previous work is discussed, diachronic stages of linguistic development are hypothesized, and a
general summary is given.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS


For the basic Mon-Khmer vocabulary seen in Vietnamese to be dismissed would require
the exclusion of basic comparative methodologies. Furthermore, in most cases, the evidence
linking Vietnamese origins with language groups other than Mon-Khmer is not well supported in
light of the criteria proposed in this paper. Indeed, it cannot be proved conclusively that
Vietnamese shift to a Mon-Khmer language did not occur,
but then that could be the case with
ANY language.

One aspect that must be considered in positing genetic linguistic origins is the feasibility of those claims based on existing data. Existing evidence shows that Vietnamese definitely had initial consonant clusters even just a few hundred years ago, and several hundred years ago, Vietnamese probably had more clusters and possibly presyllables. Data from Minor Vietic languages show the likelihood that Vietnamese went through a four-tone stage in its tonal development. This accounts for perhaps the past thousand years. Before that, say from one to two thousand years ago, Vietnamese must have had its core Mon-Khmer vocabulary since during that time, historical records suggest contact primarily with Chinese, Cham, and Tai peoples.  Thus, we enter the prerecorded history and the three possible genetic linguistic sources: Mon-Khmer, Tai-Kadai, and Austronesian. For the latter two hypotheses to work, there would have to have been a period in which the ancestors of modern Vietnamese speakers were in an extremely socially subordinate position. Such terminology is potentially inflammatory, however, that would indeed have to be the case. Angry


Were Vietnamese Tai-Kadai or Austronesian, perhaps a small group underwent some kind of relexification. There are some historical gaps into which we could fall, such as the question of the 100 Yue and whether or not Austroasiatic peoples lived in modern day Southern China (Mei and Norman 1973), though neither would clearly determine what the origin of the Vietnamese language is.


The Mon-Khmer hypothesis could be described as follows. A group of Mon-Khmer speakers settled in the north central region of Vietnam. Austroasiatic phonation had already been part of the sound system of Vietnamese (see Diffloth 1989). Some 'Vietnamese' speakers in the region of the red river valley came into contact with the Chinese. There was probably some contact between them and Tai peoples to the northwest, but this contact would have been restricted by mountain ranges. The language contact with Chamic, spoken by those who had arrived in Southern Vietnamese after the Han dynasty, and with whom the Vietnamese typically had an unfriendly political relationship at best, would have been fairly minimal.

Bravo!  Clap

Not that I whole heartedly agree with it or anything. Ermm

I initially found this paper on a pay/subscription website.  I just copied-pasted the title, googled, and instantly found a copy on some dude's personal website just like that, for free! Cool



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2009 at 19:49
Originally posted by TranHungDao

So 40% of Vietnamese have M122 and 50% of Han have it.  Not a big deal if you ask me.
Actually, I take it back.  It is a BIG DEAL, for it reaffirms the South to North migration theory, which the National Geographic Genographic Project maintains:
http://https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html - https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html
---click on "Genetic Markers" button, then the "M122/O3" button.
Vietnamese legend holds that a righteous dude whom the Chinese call Chennong was a Vietnamese guy. IIRC,  Chennong, according to Chinese legends is one of the fathers of modern Hans.  He taught the Chinese wet rice cultivation, or perhaps just rice cultivation in general.  Prior to wet rice cultivation, Chinese grew wheat.
The Red River Delta is of course the prime place for wet rice cultivation to have emerged.  It has been continuously inhabited for at least 10 millenia.  And according ancient Han census data, it was one of the most densely populated areas in the world 2000 years ago.  The then surrounding areas from modern day Cambodia to ALL of now Southern China paled in comparison.
It is well known that wet cultivation is what allowed China's population to explode in the last 4-5 millenia.  Whether Chennong is Vietnamese or not is not the point:  This most important of  agricultural technics came from the South.
But then again, the Genogrphic Project says M122 has a Southern origin.  
By the way, O3-M122 is Y chromosomal DNA.  It's a guy thing.  Only men have this genetic marker. With respect to human migration theory, this is paramount since men have always been far more mobile than women.  It's a guy thing.  Ermm


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 03:08
Originally posted by pebbles

Li Hui asserts that Han Chinese are M117 genetic marker and Viets & Bai Yue are M119. Viets do not share the M122 genetic marker with the Han-Chinese. M117 and M7 stemed from M122,which the Viet ethnic is not.
Actually, m119 is not common to Viet nor Bai Yue males at all.  It's really an Austronesian marker. And even then it occurs less than 23% of the time.  
.
About 15% of Southern Han males have m119.  Compare...
---------------------------------------------------
Southern Han    15.34%
Northern Han      4.36%
Hmong-Mien        2.41%
Tibeto-Burman    4.20%
Daic                    10.67%
Austro-Asiatic      3.18%
Austronesian     22.34%
.
Source:   http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4cd3978a14f99eedc0bf0e98ce227c79 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4cd3978a14f99eedc0bf0e98ce227c79
----------------------------------------------------
This 2005 article does not mention Vietnamese specifically, but it couldn't be all that high.  Note how the numbers for m122 are also a little different from the wiki figures I quoted above which in turn come from other studies.
.
I think the smart thing to do would be to take anyone individual study and then tac on +/- 10% for any given result.   Cite all the available literature out there, rather than just one.  And, as a general rule, the more recent the study, the more reliable.
.
It's never a good idea to cherry-pick data, real or ficticious, based on one's political motives.  Wink




Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 03:54

As for marker m117 (03a5a2) itself...

It's seems to be about as common in the northern half of Vietnam as it is in China.  Recall that central and southern regions of Vietnam were annexed only within the last 300-500 years, where as the Vietnamese have been in the Red River Delta for Millenia.

Here's a nice little study from 2005:

Y-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East Asian–Specific Haplogroup O3-M122, by Hong Shi et al

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4cd3978a14f99eedc0bf0e98ce227c79 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4cd3978a14f99eedc0bf0e98ce227c79

See (click on) Figure 4, which is a density map, and look at the m117 box on the bottom left.  It's a big pic with six density maps.  I've cropped the one for m117D (03a5a2) and here it is:

As you can see, the m117 density "blob" completely obscures the northern half of Vietnam pretty much to the same degree as it does China.  Look at the original one too, for in the other boxes corresponding to different markers/haplotypes, you can see that the same exact map is used.



Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 10:06
This is all very interesting, but I'd like to make several points.

First, until we have all had our blood samples added to the data base, everything written on Dna results will remain hypothetical, based upon the extrapolation of results in a test group which may or may not reflect that of the general population. But it is a start.

Second, several posters write of the 'Kinh' as if they were a single homogenous group. Perhaps 2,500 years ago, they were. But they are not presently. Kinh groups from the North, Central, and South all differ in their genetic makeup. The old "Bac Ky", "Trung Ky", and "Nam Ky" stereotypes were based upon visibly perceived genetic and cultural differences between the three.

Finally, on the South. It was a Chinese, Mac Cu'u, who brought the Vietnamese into  the Mekong River Delta, which prior to the 1700s had very few Vietnamese indeed. And it was still being partially governed by Cambodia right up until 1947. (I base this on the fact that the Cambodian Royal government ordered a battalion of troops drafted from "Kampuchea Krom" in Long Xuyen, Soc Trang, and Ha Tien in 1946, and that draft order was promulgated and carried out.) As for Champa, which Vietnamese histories (rewritten on orders of Minh Mang in 19th Century) claim ceased to exist after 1471, the fact is that some Cham city-states were allowed to exist as vassals of the Nguyen Lords right up until 1832, when Minh Mang ended that. (Li Tana, "Nguyen Cochinchina", Cornell University Press SEAP, 1998)

So, start off with the idea that if genetics were simple, North Vietnamese Kinh would show a higher percentage of "Chinese" markers (North, South, whatever), Central Vietnamese Kinh would show a higher percentage of Cham markers, and South Vietnamese Kinh would exhibit a higher percentage of Khmer- later Chinese markers. BUT, some Cham were forcibly relocated to the Hanoi area
, Lao and Thai occasionally invaded parts of Central and South Vietnam. Northern Vietnamese refugees were often relocated to Central and South Vietnam.  And Central Vietnamese were used to settle the South. Nguyen and Thai princesses were routinely married of to Khmer kings, thereby involving Vietnam and Thailand in Khmer affairs. All this before 1954!

As you can see, 'Kinh' thus becomes a cultural tern, rather than any guarantor of genetic purity.  And yes, culturally, Vietnam is East Asian. Perhaps someday, some study will demonstrate that its political culture is an East- Southeast Asian blend. I base this on the fact that alone among Asia and Eurasia's Communist dictatorships, it managed to avoid the imperial cult of personality, at least while Ho Chi Minh lived.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 10:19

When examing the origins of the Vietnamese people, geneticists intentionally focus on the Kinh of northern Vietnam, the Red River Delta, the craddle of Vietnamese civilization.  This is for obvious reasons.  

Now if you want to examine all modern Kinh, then you have to take into account the Kinh of the central and southern regions, their history, migration patterns, intermarriage with Chams, Khmers, Chinese loyal to the Ming who went down to southern Vietnam to serve the Vietnamese emperor, and other ethnic groups.



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 20:37

And here's the contour map for m7 haplotype-frequency distribution.  

Note that is far more common in the northern half of Vietnam than it is in China.  We know from the data (as well as the other contour maps) that samples from all over China were taken.  But I'm not sure if any samples were taken from the southern half of Vietnam.  After all, this study is about the origins of NE Asians, and Chinese in particular.

Again, it's cropped from figure 4, from one of the sources cited above:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_image=fig4&_ba=4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=full&_orig=search&_cdi=43612&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9c25e38c171ba9056d85c2ff94f59a21 - http://www.scienceY-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East Asian–Specific Haplogroup O3-M122direct.com/science?_ob=MiamiCaptionURL&_method=retrieve&_udi=B8JDD-4RH3CKK-8&_image=fig4&_ba=4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=full&_orig=search&_cdi=43612&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9c25e38c171ba9056d85c2ff94f59a21

Y-Chromosome Evidence of Southern Origin of the East Asian–Specific Haplogroup O3-M122, by Hong Shi et al



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 10-Oct-2009 at 20:42

Ok, it's abundantly clear this horse has been beaten to death.  Dead

.

.

.

.

.

.

Wink



Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 05:01

Originally posted by lirelou

This is all very interesting, but I'd like to make several points.


First, until we have all had our blood samples added to the data base, everything written on Dna results will remain hypothetical, based upon the extrapolation of results in a test group which may or may not reflect that of the general population. But it is a start. 

Eh.  This is way more than just "interesting".  Linguists, historians, archaeologists all know they must contend with what the geneticists say, granted the geneticists cross t's, dot i's, j's, and mind p's & q's.  They must always be vigilant when doing good population sampling.  This why Linguists, historians, archaeologists increasingly cite the literature in genetics.

While it is true one should never wholly rely on a single genetic study as though it were the HOLY TRUTH, much less make atrocious interpretations, deliberately or not, on any one study/result, however, over time the genetic body of evidence will be the most reliable if one has a keen eye.  Yes, more so than the historical "evidence".  DNA can clear an innocent man of murder, even when everyone involved is 100% certain he did the dirty deed.

"History" is not written in stone.  LOL, even the stuff which literally was, e.g. cuneiform tablets and whatnot.  "History" is not "facts" and "truth", but rather, what is the best argument at the time, based on the best evidence currently at hand.  History is constantly being written and rewritten when new and/or better evidence emerges, for example, the (re)emergence of ancient manuscripts, artifacts, and dare I say it?  Spanking new DNA lab results.

To me, linguistics is a real crap shoot, particularly for languages which are difficult to classify.  It's guiding principles and techniques seem a bit loosy goosy to me, such as how they figure out tonogenesis by phony, eh, I mean phonological methods. 

There are many possibilties concerning the Vietnamese language.  Some were enumerated in the two articles I cited above:

1.  Vietnamese is Mon-Khmer, a branch of the Astroasiatic language family.  This is of course currently the general consensus, the most popular theory...  In other words, currently the "best argument" on the market.  Mind you, the "best argument" is not necessarily The HOLY TRUTH. Again, history is rewritten when newer and more reliable evidence (re)emerges. 

2.  Vietnamese is Tai-Kadai, since as Mark Alves puts it:  ""Mon-Khmer [is] a kind of superstratum and...  that deeper exploration reveals a Tai or Austronesian base."

3.  Vietnamese is Austronesian.  See Alves quotation in #2 above.

4.  Vietnamese is its own languistic isolate, or as Alves says:  "Vietnamese is... a 'mixed' language which either cannot be shown to belong to any particular group or can be shown to have a less obvious linguistic substratum."

5.  Vietnamese was orginally Tai-Kadai, but a small band of nomadic (Mon-Khmer) Vietic speakers came along and colonized the Lac Viets of the Red River Delta millenia ago, in a scenario analogous to what happened to both Europe and India with proto-Indo-European nomads, or for that matter very similar situations all over the world.  Linguists know of countless such examples for the genetists tells them so, i.e. neighboring groups with entirely different genetic ancestries speaking the same damn language family.

-----------------------------------------

6.  Here's my own nifty little hypothesis:  Vietnamese is not Mon-Khmer, but Mon-Khmer is Vietic. (The Vietnamese, or Lacs/ Lac Yueh, were in the Red River Delta long before the Khmers came to what is now Cambodia.  And certainly the proto-Vietnamese were present millenia prior to  that.)  The various Tai speakers of Southern China lost their original Vietic languages to become Tai in the same way the Cantonese, Fujianese, etc., lost their original Yue languages morphing into Sino-Tibetan.  (BTW, some scholars believe Cantonese was originally Tai.)  What do I base my hypothesis on?  Three things:

a.  2000 year old Han census data:  There may have been more Vietnamese concentrated in the Red River Delta than there were people collecively in the surrounding areas of the vast Dong Son world, which the Red River Delta was the center of, and which included Southern China, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, etc.  Dong son was not advanced, but it was geographically HUGE.  What ever the case, the population density of the Red River Delta was spectacular.  For such census data, see Keith W. Taylor, The Birth of Vietnam.

b.  Genetics:  i.  Vietnamese have some of the oldest mtDNA (maternal ancestry) in all of Asia, i.e. the gene pool shows relatively few outsiders coming in over the past millenia, or at the very least, the number of female outsiders coming in were very small.   ii.  m122 Y-haplotype theories on southern origins of East Asians and the spread of rice cultivation all over both E and SE Asia.  Proto-Vietnamese seed, both rice and otherwise Wink, spread out from Southern China or to me, more likely from the Red River Delta.  But since we already have some of the oldest mtDNA in Asia, making us everyone's mommy, m122's southern origin may also mean we're everyone else's daddy too. Confused  No matter what, I'm not paying child support.  Disapprove

(Recall wet rice cultivation is related to the spread of m122.  Both are said to have originated in Southern China or SE Asia.  Again, look at the old Han census data; the Red River Delta was the center of the Dong Son world which Southern China most certainly belonged to.  Besides, deltas are wet, are they not?  Hint:  "WET RICE CULTIVATION".  Personally, I think people who claim m122 orginates in southern China are making inherently political claims.  The Genographic Project also say m122 very likely originates in S. China, but that is likely due to ignorance and/or the scholarly desire to be polite to the researchers by echoing their conclusions.) 

c.  Mainland SE Asian History:  The Vietnamese were in the Red River Delta  long before the Khmers arrived in Mainland SE Asia.  The Khmer empire began in 802 CE, it's predecessor Funan began in 68 CE.  (Funanese were not Khmer, but were probably a "Mon-Khmer" speaking people.)  The earliest known Viet kingdom (read: accepted by Western scholarship) was Van Lang, which began around 700 BCE, or 1100 years before the arrival of the Khmers.  And of course, the Red River Delta has been continuously inhabited for millenia by proto Vietnamese in relatively large numbers.  (Wet rice cultivation, due to its high rate of production, is invariably the reason why such large numbers existed in the first place.  And further, this is likely why proto-Viets loitered around in the Red River Delta for aeons upon aeons.  It was a fertile place.)

Maybe the Vietnamese are a little stubborn.  They didn't change to "Mon-Khmer" as both the 2000 Alves and  2007 Edmondson/Gregerson articles postulate, nor were they Sino-Tibetan as the pre-Maspéro and pre-Hadricourt scholars once falsely believed.  (Like I said, history is constantly being written and rewritten.)  Using Alves' own logic, shouldn't have the "extremely socially subordinate" Vietnamese who's volcabulary is now over 60% Chinese in origin morph their language into Sino-Tibetan, the same way they morphed from Tai to "Mon-Khmer"?

Again, my equally (or perhaps more so) nuanced reasoning rests on the new genetic evidence, the old Han census data, and the history of Dong Son and mainland SE Asia.  Question:  Is it easier for a small band of nomads to change the language of small groups they conquer or big groups they conquer?

There's been over 2000 years of Chinese influence in Vietnam:  Over 60% Chinese volcabulary, Chinese script for over 2000 years (latin alphbet wasn't adopted until around 1945, 1954???).  And don't forget about the 1000 years during which Vietnam existed as a Chinese province.  If Vietnamese didn't morph into Sino-Tibetan under those those extreme conditions, then maybe it never morphed into Mon-Khmer either.  The (mtDNA) gene pool was stable:  Foreign influences came in, but only relatively few foreign speakers.  Maybe this is why the language didn't become Sino-Tibetan.  (I'm not saying small bands of militarily superior nomads cannot change the languages of large groups they conquer, I'm just saying its far more difficult than to change the languages of small groups they conquer.)

Maybe the proto-Viets were never conquered in the first place by Mon-Khmer nomads in the way the Lac Viet were conquered by the Han millenia after, since the "Mon-Khmer" classification is a misnomer to begin with?  The Vietnamese were in mainland S.E. Asia long before the Khmer were.  If anything, it is very likely it was their seed, both rice and otherwise, which spread both North and South.

Genetics:  Learn it, live it, love it.  Ermm

Well, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.  Ouch



Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 08:15
Esteemed Emperor, A really thoughtful and detailed reply. Thank you. I particularly like the fact that you used the term 'proto-Vietnamese'. Peoples, like individuals, are works in progress. The proto-Vietnamese are ancestors of today's Vietnamese, but they were not necessarily completely identical in culture or language. I am reminded of Goguryo controversy between China and Korea. Certainly the governing caste of Gogoryo (Goguryeo) was ethnically 'Korean', however many modern Koreans I speak to envision a Gogoryo whose language, culture, etc was completely identical to today's Koreans. The Romanized Script (Quoc Ngu) developed in the 17th Century had been in wide use since the late 19th Century, but received its biggest boost with Ho Chi Minh's 1945 decree that everyone would learn the "national script". His movement needed to be able to communicate with the masses to gain their support. It was an interesting move in that HCM's father, as a mandarin of his time, would have been opposed to the 'Quoc Ngu' in favor of the Chu Nom. And, it had the added advantage of erecting a cultural border control point between written Chinese and Vietnamese. An interesting historical parallel is Hangul, the Korean script developed in the 15th Century. It too did not spark much interest until the rise of late 19th Century Korean nationalism, and was not in widespread use until independence in 1945.

Here's a question: When and where did the Vietnamese begin raising rice as a cash crop? The Red River Delta under-produces the Mekong Delta in rice tonnage and crops per year, and Professor Li mentions the Vietnamese adaptation to the cultivation of rice as a cash crop as key to the Nguyen Lords' settlement of the Mekong Delta (versus the Khmer, who were subsistence rice farmers). When did North Vietnam/Dang Ngoai begin producing rice for export as a cash crop? (I assume that some surplus of rice was shipped as taxes, and that Vietnam, as a vassal of China right up until 1885, periodically shipped rice their to assist famine efforts in the 'elder brother's' realm.) 

Interesting to note that one of your posts refers to the "Hmong-Mien" group. As you and I know, 'Mien' is Vietnamese for "Khmer". I wonder if the term is a hold-over from a much earlier period, prior to the rise of Khmer kingdoms. Or, a term for a more Northern people that they siumply took South. There must be a comprehensive and respected Vietnamese dictionary somewhere that includes the etymology of words.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: TranHungDao
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2009 at 13:03
Originally posted by lirelou


Here's a question: When and where did the Vietnamese begin raising rice as a cash crop? The Red River Delta under-produces the Mekong Delta in rice tonnage and crops per year, and Professor Li mentions the Vietnamese adaptation to the cultivation of rice as a cash crop as key to the Nguyen Lords' settlement of the Mekong Delta ....

Sorry, this type of stuff is never on my radar.  It's quite nitty gritty (rather esoteric and detail laden) and not easy to look up either.  

Like most people on AE, I'm just an arm chair historian.  I only pay attention to things that are sexy like the Vietnam War or Mongol invasions and so on.  



Posted By: asianguy
Date Posted: 20-Jan-2010 at 13:44

Hello everybody, I am a new member of this forum, I live in Vietnam. It's very interesting when reading these databes about Vietnamese history. Most of Vietnamese in here were from America, but you are knowleghes about Vietnamese history from 15th, 16th, 17th century; better than me. ^^ 

As I know, Mac Cuu was a Chinese and discover a part of the South ( CochinChina); French came to Vietnam in 1858 and divide Vietnam into three regions; Tonkin, Annam, CochinChina (Bắc Kỳ, Trung Kỳ, Nam Kỳ in Vietnamese). Most of Chinese live in Vietnam were from Nam Viet (Nan Yue in Chinese, Quandong and Quangxi), Most of them have lived in Cho Lon, District 5, HCMC. Nan Yue people and modern Vietnamese have a mutual forfather - Bach Viet clan. Bach Viet clan have many small clans as Au Viet, Nam Viet, Au Viet, Lac Viet. Modern Vietnamese is Lac Viet. In present, People in South China as Quandong, Quangxi ...v..v provinces haven't been more loyal to Central Chinese Comminst Party than the North.

 
 


-------------
Giang hồ đẫm máu anh không sợ, Chỉ sợ đường về vắng bóng em.


Posted By: asianguy
Date Posted: 20-Jan-2010 at 13:53
Originally posted by lirelou

Esteemed


Interesting to note that one of your posts refers to the "Hmong-Mien" group. As you and I know, 'Mien' is Vietnamese for "Khmer". I wonder if the term is a hold-over from a much earlier period, prior to the rise of Khmer kingdoms. Or, a term for a more Northern people that they siumply took South. There must be a comprehensive and respected Vietnamese dictionary somewhere that includes the etymology of words.
In Vietnam, you should Miens are Khmers, Mien is an impolite word for Khmers living in Vietnam. Like you should call Chinese lived in Vietnam is "Hoa", should not call Chinese lived in Vietnam is "Tàu", Tàu is ship, because Chinese came to Vietnam by ships, Vietnamese call Chinese came to Vietnam is "người Tàu".


-------------
Giang hồ đẫm máu anh không sợ, Chỉ sợ đường về vắng bóng em.


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 21-Jan-2010 at 07:52
Thank you for the explanation. In reality. most Vietnamese I interact with refer to the Nguoi Tuong as "Moi", the Khmer as "Mien", and the Chinese as "Tau", and this includes families that have Khmer and Hoa ancestors. I wondered about "tau", since It did sound like Truyen Tau. It would be interesting to see when that term entered the Vietnamese language, since the Chinese could enter Vietnam by road or sea. Mac Cuu arrived by ship, as did many Ming refugees who the Nguyen lords send down to Bien Hoa and the Mekong Delta to open those areas to Vietnamese settlement, but my wife says it refers to driving off a Chinese fleet which invaded Dai Viet. When the Dai Viet army attacked, the Chinese had to run to the ships and flee.
 
Next time you're in Dalat, stop in and visit the Lam Dong provincial museum. It is one of the very best provincial museums I have ever seen. Of particular interest is a small display containing items recovered from the remains of a 7th Century Hindu Temple near Bao Loc. Also, their displays on the Koho, Ma, and Chru peoples are done much better than either the Ban Me Thuot or Pleiku museums, and they have built Koho and Ma longhouses on the museum grounds.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 21-Jan-2010 at 08:33
Tran Hung Dao, in re:  "Sorry, this type of stuff is never on my radar.  It's quite nitty gritty (rather esoteric and detail laden) and not easy to look up either.'
 
Battles are always more interesting, however the logistics that sustain such battles and campaigns are what brings victory. The Vietnamese 'march south' is one of the great epocs of human history. Had the Trinh's and Nguyens not split as they did, Vietnam would today be confined to the northern third of the country. And without the development of rice as a cash crop in the Mekong Delta, the Nguyen's would not have had the resources to people the Central and South, thereby relegating Vietnam to slightly higher than the status of Laos. But they did move south, and in many areas, Chinese Ming refugees played an important role in Vietnam's defense, expansion, and cultural development.
 
Vietnamese history is hard to fathom. Most of my sources have been French, followed by English, with occasional forays into Vietnamese, mostly military works on subjects I know, which make it easier. (nhu vay "Q.L.V.N.C.H. "trong giai doan hinh thanh 1946-1955"). But the real challenge is that most of what I'd really like to read is in Chu Nom, which I cannot read, and even those histories must be treated with care, since the official version of events was rewritten to meet Minh Mang's version of 'political correctness'. As far as I know, Professor Li Tana of the Australian National University is the only one presently paying a lot of attention to Chu Nom sources, but Singapore National University also has some good materials, some of which had to be taken from Chi Nom sources, and are available on the internet. (One is a treatise of the Vietnamese development of artillery in the Dai Viet era.) 
 
You might be interested in Li Tana's "Nguyen Cochinchina: Southern Vietnam in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries" published by Cornell University's Southeast Asia Program Publications (SEAP).  Your local library can probably get a copy for you to borrow on the "inter-library loan program." Prof. Li's sources are primarily Chu Nom records.
 
Economic development may be dull, but it is what put Viet feet beating a path south in the first place. It is what attracted and sustained Viet settlement of Cham and Khmer lands, and today, it drives Kinh people into the Highlands, where they have made Vietnam the #2 coffee producer in the world. Ban Me Thuot, which I knew well as a sleepy little town in 1968, now has over 300,000 inhabitants. It is larger than Can Tho.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 21-Jan-2010 at 11:04
Originally posted by lirelou

Of particular interest is a small display containing items recovered from the remains of a 7th Century Hindu Temple near Bao Loc.
Are there any Hindu or Hindu influenced ethnic groups in Vietnam today?  One website claims that a coastal ethnic group is 50% Hindu and 50% muslim (Chams?).  I have not been able to find anymore information about the Hindu component. Religious activism was one of the goals of the website, and this may have led to an embellished claim. 


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2010 at 17:35
There are still some Cham "kfir" in Vietnam, but I very much doubt that they are 50% of the Cham population. Some Cham Hindu ceremonies are still conducted at the Cham tower of Po Nagar in Nha Trang on occasion, and some association had an office on the premises, but I've never seen anyone there.It's my impression that the majority of Cham today are muslim (Cham Bani). Certainly the Cham company of the B-55 MIKE Force at Nha Trang in 1968-69 was muslim, and wore a green scarf with arabic writing, though there may have been some Hindus in their ranks. The Cham did not strike me as too terribly hung up on whether another Cham was Hindu or Muslim.
 
You Can find Hindu temples in Saigon, mostly a relic of the Indian community there. There was one on the corner of Pasteur and another street very close to the Cho Binh Thanh market in the heart of the business and tourist district.
 
On my last trip I did pick up a book on the Cham in Vietnamese, entitled "Le Hoi Chuyen Mua cua Nguoi Cham" by a professor Ngo Van Doanh, published by the Nha Xuat Ban Tre (2006), which appears to give a survey of Cham communities in Vietnam and the diaspora (Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia). It is still on my "to read" list


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 24-Jan-2010 at 15:25
Lirelou,
 
Thanks for the information. 
 
Out of curiosity, how strong was Hinduism in Vietnam when the ruined temples were built?  Was Hinduism ever the dominant religion in Vietnam with Vietnamese followers? Or were the temples part of a missionary effort, possibly from Cambodia? 


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 24-Jan-2010 at 15:56

That part of Vietnam (Cat Tien, Lam Dong province) was not Vietnam until the 17th Century. There was a question as to what civilization it belonged to. Oc Eo, where Roman coins have been found (trade or otherwise acquired is not established) in the Mekong Delta in the pre-Christian era was also Hindu. You can also find Hindu gods and goddesses in the Can Tho City museum, however those are of wood, and badly decomposed. But the time that the Kinh arrived in Can Tho, Cambodia, which present day Can Tho was part of, was Buddhist. There are still large numbers of Khmer Krom in the Mekong Delta. Under Diem they were forced to adopt Vietnamese names and instruction in the Khmer language was banned. I do not know hos that has changed, but ethnic Khmer can get scholarships in Vietnam. Also, just down the main street from the Can Tho city hall, you can find two large Vietnamese temples and a Khmer temple. South of Can Tho, towards Ca Mau, Khmer temples appear to outnumber Vietnamese temples in the countryside, though this may be due to the fact that Vietnamese temples can be very small, neighborhood affairs, and thus not as visible.



-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 25-Jan-2010 at 19:28
Lirelou, made some very educated posts above. And since we both live in an area where so many Viet's were allowed to settle and resume their lives as fishermen, etc., then we both know a lot of the same families!

I work every day with about 100 persons of Viet ancestory! What is both great and now-days sad, is the fact that in the 1970's and later, the young Viet children were the best scholars at most S. Mississippi schools, and this rule continued until about the early or middle 1900's, and then, it seems they disappeared!

But, it also seems that Viet gangs, like the Black gangs, began a rise! Thus crime, within and without the Viet community, which for so many years was without "Viet" crime, either within or without the community, began to compete with other racial based crime groups! And, just as suddenly, the names of Viet amongst the best students on the Coast, began to disappear!

How sad this has become!

-------------
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2010 at 15:13
Opus, Vietnamese gangsters arrived in the U.S. with the very first boat people. every human group has their 10% trash. (Some groups just go higher thatn 10%). Likewise, those who came from very tight family groups, and arrived with some members of those family group, tended to do grow up with the values of their ancestors, i.e., work hard, don't snivel, don't make waves, and get ahead. Those who arrived in fractured family groups were subject to different social pressures. Having to work, even when a second parent was located and brought in, often required leaving children unattended while parents worked factory shifts, etc. to put bread on the table. Here, teenaged males were often attracted by Viet social groups on the street, some of which developed into gangs. Here, the social breakdown was much like it was for many other American immigrant groups. I have known Vietnamese-Americans who grew up in foster homes, but managed to keep their parent's values in their heart, just as I have known the children of middle-class Vietnamese families who wandered into crime. My house was once burglarized by the son of a Vietnamese friend, and the son of a Montagnard interpreter I had known. Both families would have been shocked to discover the truth. When we ferreted out the truth, (the Afro-American couple they gave away the credit cards to were identified in a jewelty shop security video, and described them to us) we never told their families. But we let the boys know that any future repeat would be repaid in spades, before we informed their parents.
 
My experience is that among first generation boat people youth, the girls are generally more ambitious and successful than the boys, but there was a respectable, if noticable, smaller percentage of boys who were also ambitious and motivated. Families who spoke English fairly well upon arrival generally did better than those who did not, as they tended to find higher paying jobs and were able to maintain more traditional family values. My wife's brother-in-law, who did not speak English, overcame the challenge by always working different factory shifts from his wife, and neither allowed the children to leave their home unsupervised until they had graduated from High School. That's pretty hard to imagine, but his daughter is now a pharmacist, and his son is an X-Ray technician. Their grandfather was a Chinese herbalist, so the daughter's choice of profession continues a family tradition.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2010 at 15:21
a link to that article on Dai Viet use of artillery from the National University of Singapore.
 
http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps03_011.pdf - http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps03_011.pdf  
 


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: tnbn75
Date Posted: 16-Mar-2010 at 15:09
Originally posted by asianguy

Originally posted by lirelou

Esteemed


Interesting to note that one of your posts refers to the "Hmong-Mien" group. As you and I know, 'Mien' is Vietnamese for "Khmer". I wonder if the term is a hold-over from a much earlier period, prior to the rise of Khmer kingdoms. Or, a term for a more Northern people that they siumply took South. There must be a comprehensive and respected Vietnamese dictionary somewhere that includes the etymology of words.
In Vietnam, you should Miens are Khmers, Mien is an impolite word for Khmers living in Vietnam. Like you should call Chinese lived in Vietnam is "Hoa", should not call Chinese lived in Vietnam is "Tàu", Tàu is ship, because Chinese came to Vietnam by ships, Vietnamese call Chinese came to Vietnam is "người Tàu".


most of my south east asian friends growing up lived in the asian ghettos in richmond (bay area). so i can tell you for a fact that khmer and mien are not the same.  culturally the mien are very close to hmong but the language is different.  the ethnic dress looks the same to me but my hmong and mien friends get very mad at me when i say that.  the hmong language became written as early as 1960, mien became a written language in the 2000ish.

i think when people are talking about khmer in viet you mean either the laotung or khmu.  the are very close to laos ethnically.  my laos friends, whether laotung, khmu, or one of the other laos ethnic groups can understand each other (there are a lot of ethic groups in lao).  don't know if that's because the all speak a common version of lao or the languages are dialectically different.  i do know that the curse words are totally different. 

language-wise lao and thai are similiar enough where they can sorta understand each other in conversation.  viet is not even close except maybe in sentence structure. i've grown up with laos people all my life and have only picked up words here and there.  on the other hand my lao friend learned mien in 3 years (from bedroom talk).  oddly the only words that i found that were even close to similar were the words to beer, butter and ice cream, but of course all of SE asia gets those words from the french.




Posted By: tnbn75
Date Posted: 16-Mar-2010 at 18:38
got an update.  talked to one of my khmu friends. so apparently he speaks the main laos language, khmu, and tai dam. so yes there is a main language all the laos ethnic tribes speak. 

i am beginning to suspect though that i'm wrong about the khmu and khmer being the same.  it seems that there is another ethnic group that would be closer although the khmu ethnic group is also in vietnam. 




Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 17-Mar-2010 at 09:51
I can't find the term "mien' meaning Cambodian in any Vietnamese dictionary under any of its possible tones. Yet my wife and her family all refer to their Cambodian neighbors in the Delta as 'Mien". Khmer is pronounced "khmea" in Cambodian, but spelled Khmer in English and French. Perhaps it would also be spelled Kmuh. I think we are looking at differences in romanization. I know of no ethnic group called the Khmu in South or Central Vietnam, but there are many hundreds of thousands of Khmer Krom in the Mekong Delta.  

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: tnbn75
Date Posted: 17-Mar-2010 at 16:42
I'm not surprised most viet people i've met don't know anything about all the different lao ethnic groups.  to them they are all lao. (read elitism)  I just happen to know cause i grew up with a bunch of them.  sadly it wasn't until after high school that i figured out that they were different ethnically. 

mien are from the mountains.  when i talk about the mien i mean the people that actually refer to themselves as mien.  i had a mien girlfriend and let's just say that the start of our relationship was quite rocky cause i grouped her in with lao.  here's more info.

http://www.peoplesoftheworld.org/hosted/mien/

the article is definitely wrong with regard to origin.  based on what i've seen of their culture they are descend from chinese somewhere but my chinese friends don't care to hear that at all (more elitism).  the ethnic dress is closer to tibetan than lao. 

lao and thai culture is near identical.  down to the food. i can taste the difference int the dishes but i've been eating thai/lao home cooking for more than 20 years. (i had a habit of raiding my friends fridges in high school.)  thai tend to use more fish sauce, lao use padek (mam nem in viet) in fact if you have a favorite thai restaurant in an area that does not have a lot of thai people you may want to ask what their ethnic background is. they may be laos. 

here's info on the Khmu. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmu_people

physically they tend to be pretty dark and thickly built.  all the older khmu that grew up in south east asia tend to be barrel chested.  my friend long is so barrel chested when he does push ups his chest hits the ground before his elbows can make an "L" and that was his freshman year of high school. 

they all initially introduce themselves as lao then once you get to know them it you start learning there are a lot of different ethnicities in laos.  there is a high born laos ethnic group (not sure the name) the tend to be thinner and paler.

interesting tidbit that helps is new year's in SE asia.  Viet, Mien celebrate the lunar new year (chinese/viet new year).  laos and thai celebrate songkran (biggest water fight in the world) which is in april.  khmu new year is in november or decemeber. 


Posted By: Cryptic
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2010 at 06:52
Originally posted by tnbn75

based on what i've seen of their culture they are descend from chinese somewhere but my chinese friends don't care to hear that at all (more elitism).  the ethnic dress is closer to tibetan than lao. 
 I believe that the Mien are from china originally, but are not ethnically Chinese.  Rather, they are a seperate, indigenous people who followed the mountains down into Vietnam. Those Mien that remained in China (probably never very numerous) then got absorbed by the Chinese and ceased to exist as a people.  


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2010 at 12:50
Tnbn75, Thanks for the links. I recognize the Yao (Vietnamese spelling "Dao") and visited one of their villages up near Sapa, and the Kmu you refer to are definitely not Khmer. My experience in Vietnam, apart from my time with the Kinh, was with the Malayo-Polynesian and Mon-Khmer tribes of the Central Highlands. I once had an ethnographic study on the peoples of North Vietnam, but gave it to a library years ago.

Well, now you know that the Vietnamese of the Mekong Delta refer to their Cambodian neighbors as "Mien". Next time I am over there (this year is the first time in 9 years that we did not go), I will try to track down the correct spelling and reason for it being omitted from Viet dictionaries. So, similar word, refers to different peoples.

Thanks again for the links. 

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: PreahVihear
Date Posted: 16-Apr-2010 at 02:19
To anyone who is interested or confused about the Vietnamese term "Mien" for the Khmer/Cambodian people.
 
Foreigners near and far have always had a hard time pronouncing the word 'Khmer" correctly according to the Khmer phonemes.  As a result, the word Khmer can be corrupted/butchered into the various terms as follows:
 
The Romans called the Khmer as "Camarini";
The Arabs called the Khmer as "Kumar";
The Chams call the Khmer as "Kui kmi"
The Thais call the Khmer as "Khom/Khmamen"
The Lao's call the Khmer as "Khmen"
The French romanized the term Khmer as "Cambodgien" (Spelling?)
The Americans use the term "Cambodian" to replace the term Khmer.
 
Regarding the inclusive term "Cambodian or Cambodgien", that is another topic of itself since the Khmer people are still the great majority of Cambodia/Kampuchea anyway.
 
So why do "some" Vietnamese call the Khmer as "Mien"? What is the story behind it?  Vietnamese have known the Khmer people for ages.  When the Vietnamese first declared their independence from the Chinese overlords in the 10th century A.D, the Khmer troops were at their border to make their presence known.  The Khmer were also present in the Viet-Cham wars.  What I am saying is that the Viets already knew who the Khmer were.  Even in the 17th century Vietnamese document called Chư dư chí tp biên [诸舆志杂编] written in classical Chinese during King Minh Mang's reign about Cambodian society, economy, and customs, the Khmer were called by the Viets as
"Cao Man".  Later on it was pronounced as "Cao Mien".  Then at a later time, it was shortened to just "Mien".
 
Regarding whether the Vietnamese term "Mien" is pejorative or not, just know that the Khmer do not like being called by the term "Mien" and they considered it very offensive.  Likewise, the Viets do not like it when the Khmer call them by the term "Yuon".  The Viets think that the Khmer actually consider them "savages" instead.  So that is another topic of itself.
 
It should also be noted that the term "Mien" is actually a real name of another ethnic minority group.  I believe the Hmong is called "Mien".  Again, don't quote me.  In addition, the term Khmer is not pronounced as "Khmear" as someone pointed out.  That is never a correct way to pronounce the word "Khmer".  There is no equivalent English phonemes for the Khmer sounds of /Kh/ or /aer/.  You can only come close but never be exact as the way it is.
 
Wanting to be politically correct, the present-day Cambodian government calls the Vietnamese simply as "the people of Vietnam", not as "Yuon".  Likewise, the Vietnamese government calls the Khmer not as "Mien" but as "Ko Mer or Kampuchea" instead.
 
Here was what Benedict F. Kiernan, Professor of History, Professor of International and Area Studies and Director of the Genocide Studies Program at Yale University, had to say about the terms Yuon and Mien. “There is a simpler explanation of the Khmer term “Yuon.” Since the Vietnamese called themselves “Yueh” (“Viets”), Khmers may have adopted this word for them fairly accurately. “Yuon” more likely derives from “Yueh”. [The word “Yuon” is
spelled in Khmer , with the (subscripted ) dipthong “uo,” not a “v” like
Yavana.] If so, “Yuon” does not mean “savages,” “subnormal, devilish men,” or
even potent strangers who “crop up abruptly”; but simply, “Vietnamese.”
(Conversely, the traditional Vietnamese word for Cambodians, Cao Mien, has also been translated as “highland barbarians.” It has no such meaning and probably derives from the word khmaer ( ) or “Khmer.”8)

 

 



Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 16-Apr-2010 at 18:57
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.)

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: PreahVihear
Date Posted: 17-Apr-2010 at 16:42

lirelou, thanks for catching my error.  You are absolutely correct that during Minh Mang's reign (1830's) it was in the 19th century, and never in the 17th century.Wink



Posted By: Shield-of-Dardania
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2010 at 20:27
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.)
The maths is quite simple, actually. The 1st century AD was the time span beginning from the 1st day of year 1 AD {i.e. the (theoretical) day of Jesus' birth} right until the end of the year 100 AD. That is, the entire 1st 100 years, post-Jesus.
 
You could then call the very (theoretical) moment of Jesus's birth as the end of year 0 AD, and simultaneously, the beginning of year 1 AD.
 
The 2nd century AD, was then the time span from year 101 AD (from the first day to the 365th day of 101 AD) to the end (366th day) of year 200 AD. That is, the entire 2nd 100 years, post-Jesus.
 
And so on, and so forth.
 
So, 100 AD was still 1st century AD. 31 December, year 100 AD, would have been the last day of the 1st century AD. But anything beginning from January 1 of 101 AD through to December 31 of 200 AD was 2nd century AD.
 
Like wise, 200 AD was still 2nd century. But anything beginning from the 1st day of 201 AD through to the 366th day of 300 AD was 3rd century AD.
 
If we relate this to our own time and age, the whole of 2000 AD was still 20th century AD. 31 December 2000 AD was the last day of 20th century AD. But anything beginning from Jan 1 of year 2001 right through to December 31 of year 2100 would be 21st century AD.
 


-------------
History makes everything. Everything is history in the making.


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2010 at 23:21
1. Nanyue was built by a Qin general called Zhao Tuo. His hometown was in today's northern china.
Does he become viet to u?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhao_Tuo - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhao_Tuo
2.Today ethnics who liveson old Nanyue's land contain:
Yao/Meo:hmong-mien speakers
Yi:tibeto-burman speakers
Zhuang/Buyi and so on:tai-kam speakers.
Are they all viets?
 


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2010 at 10:28
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.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2010 at 18:37
^
So now, viet=chinese,considering hoa of vietnam hold vietnam citizenship and Jing of china hold china citizenship?Wacko
What's ur point?


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2010 at 19:15
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?

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2010 at 20:01

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.
 


Posted By: tnbn75
Date Posted: 04-Jun-2010 at 13:03
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. 


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2010 at 06:34
Then sorry ,Nan Yue was found by a Qin general and he has defeated proto-vietnamese kingdom. 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.
LOL


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2010 at 19:27
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.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Shield-of-Dardania
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2010 at 04:04
Originally posted by lirelou

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.
Two different states, yes. But they'still speaking the same one language, and living the same one culture. By my defnition, they're still the same one nation, if one uses the original meaning of the term 'nation'.


-------------
History makes everything. Everything is history in the making.


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2010 at 17:27
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?LOL


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2010 at 22:09
Joy, I'll give you another analogy. It's as if the Confederate States of America had survived as an independent state. They could still call themselves Americans, though not citizens of the U.S. The Dao also live in Vietnam., as do the Tho, Thai, Nung, and H'mong. They, and the Kinh, were all peoples of Nan Yue. Those now on the Chinese side of the border are Chinese minorities, those on the Vietnam side Vietnamese minorities.

And yes, the modern French have more genes going back to Rome than they do the Celtic Gauls. Spain is also a modern nation whose roots go back to Rome, and their language, along with Italian, is the closest to the original Latin.

What's the big deal. No Vietnamese are claiming to be 'Chinese' except those Vietnamese citizens of Chinese heritage who still maintain such cultural association. And only teenage idiots on the internet would claim that any part of modern China is somehow 'VIetnamese' because of a connection to ancient Nan Yue.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2010 at 22:16
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.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: joy
Date Posted: 06-Jun-2010 at 23:37

I think you have failed in understanding several things.

First that kingdom was called Nan Yue but not vietnam. So they were not the citizenship of vietnam but citizenship of Nan Yue.
Second, two countries shared the same name but not means they were the same or they have relationship. Example:Could German claim the history of Roman empire?
Third, I really can not understand why vietnam can claim the Nan Yue kingdom? Just because Zhao Tuo had beaten the kings of modern time Northern vietnam? So why not claim some china's dynasty as you own?
Forth, again I  ask you to prove Nan Yue speak a vietic or at least a mon-khmer language. See the name "Nan Yue" , which indicate something. Remember one difference of mon-khmer language and sinitic language is the former one put adjective after noun. So you failed in your analogy again.
 
By the way, the southern vietnam was also part of Khmer empire, So congratulations, according to your opinion,vietnamese can claim history from china to modern time cambodia.LOL
 
 
 


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 07-Jun-2010 at 16:15
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.

-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: papen
Date Posted: 30-Oct-2010 at 16:41
this tread is interesting and thank you for all the information.
Nan Yue and Vietnam are 2 different countries. Nan Yue is including Northern Vietnam, and Guang Dong/ Guang Xi area. While Vietnam is mordern Vietnam (including Northern Vietnam, Champa and southern area).
I agree that it's hard to talk if there's no understanding or one party doesn't try to understand but just keep his stand.
Nan Yue kingdom's history share the history of both Vietnam and Southern China. In ancient time, Vietnam people was a small kingdom, we started from the North which was Nothern Vietnam and expanded to the South, same as China. Yue is the name that China gave to southern people and Vietnamese people (in ancient time) was a part of Bai Yue. Vietnam people expanded to the South and carrying the name with them. Same as Han people in Southern China even though they're Cantonese (mix between Han and Yue people).

If you're a Chinese, then you must know that China's history is huge.  There's not even a country of Vietnam people until the late 900BC for a reason. Vietnam was a China's province in ancient time and even until the 18th century, we're still under China's influence. Even for China, there're many small countries in ancient time and at the end it could united and form a kingdom name China. Ancient Vietnam was a part of that many small countries but it refused to be under China but formed its own country. The closest example could be Taiwan trying to form their own nation or HongKong people before 1997 believed they're Hongkonges as they believed they're neither British nor Chinese.  Or Tibet want to form their own nation but they're still under China and are called Chinese even though they're Tibetan.
To keep HongKong as a part of China, it's the only country in the world that has 1 country 2 systems.


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 30-Oct-2010 at 21:53
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. 


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Ticonderoga
Date Posted: 20-Jan-2011 at 11:29
thats wat i want to know?!?!

-------------
~Ticonderoga~


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 20-Apr-2011 at 17:35
Tran Hung Dao appears to have lost interest, or is busy guarding the entrance to the Cho Binh Thanh. But if he reappears, he may appreciate this. Just finished a book on the early history of Vietnam which made some good points that have been alluded to here. In trading emails with the author, now a professor at Cornell, he made two interesting asides:
 
One was that the Trung sisters may have been Khmu speakers. The Khmu have been noted in some posts here, and some are classified as Mon-Khmer.
Second, the modern Vietnamese language as we know it may not have developed until after 1,000 AD (my dating preference). This would agree with his observation that Chu Nom did not even begin to develop until the T'ang period, just prior to Vietnam's first age of independence, which is coincidentially when much of what is today's 'borrowed Chinese culture' was adopted by the Vietnamese. (particularly the legal status of women, which prior to the T'ang dynasty retained much of early Vietnam's matriarchal charateristics).
Third, his book draws a distinction between immigration of peoples, which leave a large genetic mark, and the immigration of cultural elites and their followers. Within European history, Spain's Rodrigo de Bivar (El Cid) provides just such an example. Expelled (desterrado) from Castille by the King, many of his armed vassals, both Christian and Moor, followed him. Early modern Vietnamese history likewise provides many examples with the fall of the Ming dynasty to the Qing barbarian hordes. Mac Cuu was just one example. Professor Taylor notes the numerous Chinese elites and their armed retainers who entered what became Nam Viet and then the Annam protectorate between the Lac lords and the fall of the Tang dynasty. In his view, during periods of dynastic unrest, the very best Chinese came south, resulting in intermarriage between these Chinese and local women, which over the years resulted in what he terms "Han-Viet" and "T'ang-Viet" families who, over several generations, came to identify their interests as local, even while they continued to participate in the Chinese world. During such times, Nam Viet prospered. Once conditions stabalized in 'the North', only the most mediocre, or in some cases, those being punished, were sent to the South. These were the periods of unrest and rebellion in Vietnam. Also of interest, Chinese border states existed down as far as Hue and Danang, an area that would later become Vijaya under the Cham.
So, the impression of the period 100 BC to 1,000 AD that I took away from his book is that proto-Viet and proto-Cham is probably a more correct way to view those peoples. Not sure as to the Khmer. I was surprised to learn that at the time of the Trung sisters, the Vietnamese practiced Levirate, i.e., a widow's right to choose a husband from among her deceased spouse's brothers. The Rhade and Jarai practiced such until at least the mid-20th Century. He also commented on the fact that Trung Trac is the sister most often mentioned, and in some sources, the only one mentioned, which would fit in with the Rhade tribes institution of the Po Lan, i.e., a clan matriarch who owns title to all her clan lands, and who must 'walk the earth' once a year to retain that title. It was our experience that the village chiefs were usually the husbands of powerful Po Lans, and that he made no decisions until she had been consulted. Push that concept back two thousand years, and it is not difficult to envision a Po Lan mounted on an elephant (shades of Ban Don village outside Ban Me Thuot), and going to war.
 
ps, as to the origin of the term 'Nguoi Tau', or boat people. Even during the Nam Viet period, travel between the south of China (like Vietnam, then very much in a developmental stage) was by boat, as overland travel carried a higher risk. So, all Chinese were generally 'boat people' to those who lived in the Hong river delta and it upper reaches.
 


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 27-May-2011 at 14:08

Prohibitions against the sale of Vietnamese rice.

In a book entitled: Vietnam; Borderless Histories, Professor Li Tana has a paper entitled: The Mekong Delta and its World of Water Frontier. In it, she makes some interesting observations which relate to the rice trade.
 
"...In these minor ports dotting the water frontier, even Sai Gon was too far away for Ca Mau. The tobacco from Cambodia was cheaper to transport that was that imported from Go Vap near Sai Gon. Likewise, rice transported from the Menam basin of Saiam to Cancao (Ha Thien) cost much less that rice carried from the Mekong Delta."
 
     "This was the context for the rice trade in the Mekong Delta. Although on paper, it was always forbidden to export rice from Cochin China, it ws the single staple product that the Mekong Delta produced and was the main source of cash with which the ordinary people paid for necessities. The answer to this seeming contradiction was simple and straightforward, as Crafurd observes, according to whom the prohibition on rice was "rather nominal than real". He states: "Except in times of apprehended scarcity, [it] is sent out of the country in abundance." "Smuggling" simply means that rice was sold to passing traders or brought to other ports of the region rather then being shipped to central and northern Viet Nam." 
 
So, regarding the development of south Vietnam, locals sold their cash crops to the best markets they could find in the region (in or out nof Vietnam), and they likewise imported whatever goods they needed or desired from those or other ports within the region, without paying too much attention to decrees issued by far away courts. (op. cit., pp. 155-58)  Li Tana goes on to cite the example of the still rebel prince Nguyen Anh, holed up with his armies on Kut Island, on the verge of starvation, when an ill-wind blew a Chinese ship loaded with Thai rice destined for the Ca Mau and Rach Gia markets ashore, thereby providing a source of rice for teh future Emperor Gia Long's troops. Of interest, the Chinese owner of the ship was married to a Vietnamese woman frrom Chanthaburi, where there was obviously a resident Vietnamese trading community.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: benbmt94
Date Posted: 28-Oct-2011 at 00:40
i'm confused. so what group was the Lạc? o-o Tai-Kadaic, Austronesian, or Austro-Asiatic (Mon-Khmer) ??? I read Keith Taylor's Birth of Vietnam and he said it was a mix of Austronesian elite with Austro-Asiatic people. I'm talking about the pre-Nanyue period, mind you!


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2011 at 18:24
"i'm confused. so what group was the Lạc? o-o Tai-Kadaic, Austronesian, or Austro-Asiatic (Mon-Khmer) ??? I read Keith Taylor's Birth of Vietnam and he said it was a mix of Austronesian elite with Austro-Asiatic people. I'm talking about the pre-Nanyue period, mind you!"

Actually, Keith Taylor feels that much of what he wrote in "Birth of Vietnam" is now out of date, and that a new vision of Vietnam's history is emerging. So, it will be interesting to see how the view of Vietnamese history changes over the next few years. 


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2011 at 19:38
I know very little about the Vietnamese, other than it's not a good idea to pick a fight with them. The Americans learned this the hard way, as did the Chinese, Cambodians, French, and even the fearsome Mongols


-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2011 at 18:53
Actually Nick, that's the cartoon view. The Americans didn't 'pick a fight with 'the Vietnamese". Rather, they sided with one of two legitimately recognized Vietnamese states in a war to keep it from being taken over by their Communist brethren. As for the French, their mistake was in not recognizing that by 1945 the day of White Colonialism in Asia was over. Still, fighting the Soviet and CCP backed Viet Minh, they managed to guarantee that the Republic of Vietnam would hold on to half the country. Of course, by that time they had recognized Vietnam's right to independence, and no small number of the 'French" army that fought there were Vietnamese who had enlisted in their ranks. 

As for the Chinese, suffice it to say they had enough respect among the Vietnamese that in 1946 Ho Chi Minh himself agreed to letting the French forces return to North Vietnam, in order to get rid of the Chinese Nationalist Army that was then occupying it. Uncle Ho's exact words were: "Better to smell French excrement for ten years, than Chinese excrement for one thousand."

As for the Cambodians, they have far more history as Vietnam's victim than they do as Vietnam's aggressor. The entire Mekong Delta used to belong to them, before the Vietnamese moved in to displace them much as the U.S. displaced the American Indian. If you are looking for someone th champion, I would suggest you google "Kampuchea Krom".


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2011 at 19:38
Wasn't South Vietnam a Western puppet state with little support from ordinary people? It was ruled by a brutal military dictatorship until it finally fell to the communists

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 25-Nov-2011 at 22:19
Nick, in re your:  "Wasn't South Vietnam a Western puppet state with little support from ordinary people? It was ruled by a brutal military dictatorship until it finally fell to the communists"

Well, you asked the question, and my answer is no. Now, if you wish to provide some evidence to the contrary, it would be welcome. But bear in mind that any 'evidence' so provided must have some fact behind it. I.e., statistical evidence and specific facts. And at the end of the day, one must bear in mind that the alternative was a brutal dictatorship, i.e. the Communists; the government that presentlyrules Vietnam, and makes no secret of its undemocratic character.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 26-Nov-2011 at 19:11
The Communists weren't that bad compared to the previous regime in South Vietnam. Under the military dictatorship citizens were executed in the street, Buddhist shrines desecrated and democracy permanently suspended as a succession of ambitious generals seized power with their American-supplied weapons


-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2011 at 09:14
Nick, in re: "Under the military dictatorship citizens were executed in the street, Buddhist shrines desecrated and democracy permanently suspended as a succession of ambitious generals seized power with their American-supplied weapons"

Citizens were executed in the street? BS!  Buddhist shrines desecrated? Can you give me any specific statistics on that? I attended Buddhist services in Vietnam in 1968, and still do when I go there. How come I have never heard of seen that, other than in Western news reports of the Buddhist anti-government demonstrations, the last of which, I believe, was in 1968. And oh yes, my Vietnamese ARVN commander in 1968 was from a prominent Hue Buddhist family. Democracy permanently suspended? So when were the very last election in the RVN?  And how about the current Vietnamese government?  How many politicla parties do they allow? And whose authority do the internal security police come under? The party's, or the government's?

Oh, have you ever heard of the 1968 Hue massacres? Those were conducted by which side? Oh, the Communists weren't that bad? 

Please, forget the rhetoric and provide us with some verifiable historical facts. And don't bother with any Tet '68 photos showing a VC terrorist being summarily executed by General Loan. That photographer who took that photos has provided an account of the conditions it was taken under.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2011 at 19:12
I thought executions in the street (like the one you described) were a common occurrence. From what i learned back in school, South Vietnam was a very corrupt, unstable country plagued by regular military coups. Tanks were nicknamed "voting machines" as they took to the streets whenever there was a change of leadership
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=rZYkHWkVUSQC&lpg=PT33&ots=swU3ayTSzq&dq=vietnam%20tanks%20voting%20machine&pg=PT33#v=onepage&q=vietnam%20tanks%20voting%20machine&f=false - Link


-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!


Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2011 at 22:55
Nick, in re:  "From what i learned back in school, South Vietnam was a very corrupt, unstable country plagued by regular military coups"

Well, that just goes to show that you can't simply parrot what you learned, or think you learned, in school. The South Vietnamese governments were certainly unstable at certain times, and certainly subject to coups. That was one of their drawbacks. Yet the Thieu government endured for some years. There were too many competing political entities and at times, this detracted from the unity of effort they needed to face the Communists, who frankly enjoyed a far greater unity of effort due to the discipline within the Party. Thus a single Party system was shown to be superior to a multi-party system in the short run. But if one compares the RVN of the 1960s with the Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan of the same period, all of which shared some of those instability characteristics, one is left with the fact the these other three have ended up with democratic, multi-party governments (Singapore's can be argued) that have provided their citizens with fare more participation in government and a far higher standard of living. I would suggest that China was derailed by the Cultural Revolution, itself the result of a cult of personality, and Vietnam derailed by the War for Reunification, which the South was forced to defend against.

Now as to whether this is an ideal situation, or the Jury is still out over the long run, remains to be seen.  Since this is a Vietnam history forum, you might find some of the subjects of interest, since Vietnamese history itself is currently experiencing a renaissance in that many of those who swallowed the old tomes written in Chinese or Chu Nom by Palace historians have now seen enough contrary views to change their vision of Vietnam's history. If you are seriously interested in Vietnamese history, and here I mean that one must ultimately judge how much time one had to devote to the subject, vis-s-vis other required studies, I would suggest you start with Viet Nam Borderless Histories (Univ. of Wisc. Press, 2006), a series of essays edited by Nhinh Tuyet Tran and Anthony Reid, pick out your favorite essays, and ping a few emails off the authors to get pointed to any subject on Vietnam that excites your interest.


-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: kliop
Date Posted: 10-Dec-2011 at 14:01

"Citizens were executed in the street? BS! Buddhist shrines desecrated? Can you give me any specific statistics on that? "


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hue_chemical_attacks - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hue_chemical_attacks

The Hue chemical attacks occurred on June 3, 1963, when soldiers of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) poured liquid chemicals from tear gas grenades onto the heads of praying Buddhists in Huế, South Vietnam. The Buddhists were protesting against religious discrimination by the regime of the Roman Catholic President Ngo Dinh Diem. The attacks caused 67 people to be hospitalised for blistering of the skin and respiratory ailments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huế_Ph�%3ct_Đản_shootings - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huế_Phật_Đản_shootings

The Huế Phật Đản shootings refer to the deaths of nine unarmed Buddhist civilians on May 8, 1963, in the city of Huế in South Vietnam, at the hands of the army and security forces of the government of Ngô Đình Diệm. The army and police fired guns and launched grenades into a crowd of Buddhists who had been protesting against a government ban on the flying of the Buddhist flag on the day of Phật Đản, which commemorates the birth of Gautama Buddha. Diệm’s denial of governmental responsibility for the incident—he instead blamed the Việt Cộng—led to growing discontent among the Buddhist majority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xa_Loi_Pagoda_raids - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xa_Loi_Pagoda_raids

The Xá Lợi Pagoda raids were a series of synchronized attacks on various Buddhist pagodas in the major cities of South Vietnam shortly after midnight on 21 August 1963. The raids were executed by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam Special Forces under Colonel Lê Quang Tung, and combat police, both of which took their orders directly from Ngô Đình Nhu, younger brother of the Roman Catholic President Ngô Đình Diệm. Xá Lợi, the largest in the South Vietnamese capital, Saigon, was the most prominent of the raided temples. Over 1,400 Buddhists were arrested, and estimates of the death toll and missing ranged up to the hundreds.

In South Vietnam, where the Buddhist majority was estimated to comprise between 70 and 90 percent of the population in 1963,[1][2][3][4][5] President Ngô Đình Diệm's pro-Catholic policies antagonized many Buddhists. A member of the Catholic minority, his government was biased towards Catholics in public service and military promotions, as well as in the allocation of land, business favors and tax concessions.[6] Diệm once told a high-ranking officer, forgetting the man was from a Buddhist background, "Put your Catholic officers in sensitive places. They can be trusted."[7] Many officers in the ARVN converted to Catholicism in the belief that their career prospects depended on it, and many were refused promotion if they did not do so.[7] Additionally, the distribution of firearms to village self-defense militias intended to repel Việt Cộng guerrillas was done so that weapons were only given to Catholics.[8] Some Catholic priests ran private armies,[9] and in some areas forced conversions; looting, shelling and demolition of pagodas occurred.[10] Some Buddhist villages converted en masse to receive aid or avoid being forcibly resettled by Diem's regime.[11]

The Catholic Church was the largest landowner in the country, and the "private" status that was imposed on Buddhism by the French, which required official permission to conduct public activities, was not repealed by Diem.[12] The land owned by the church was exempt from land reform,[13] and Catholics were also de facto exempt from the corvée labor that the government obliged all other citizens to perform; public spending was disproportionately distributed to Catholic majority villages. Under Diệm, the Catholic Church enjoyed special exemptions in property acquisition, and in 1959, he dedicated the country to the Virgin Mary.[14] The Vatican flag was regularly flown at major public events in South Vietnam.[15]

Change in U.S. policy

See also: Cable 243, 1963 South Vietnamese coup, and Arrest and assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm

Once the U.S. government realized the truth about who was behind the raids, they reacted with disapproval towards the Diem regime. The Americans had pursued a policy of quietly and privately advising the Ngos to reconcile with the Buddhists while publicly supporting the partnership, but following the attacks, this route was regarded as untenable. Furthermore, the attacks were carried out by American-trained Special Forces personnel funded by the CIA, and presented Lodge with a fait accompli.[90] One Western ambassador thought that the raids signaled "the end of the gallant American effort here".[89] The State Department issued a statement declaring that the raids were a "direct violation" of the promise to pursue "a policy of reconciliation".[55][59]

On 24 August, the Kennedy administration sent Cable 243 to Lodge at the embassy in Saigon, marking a change in American policy. The message advised Lodge to seek the removal of the Nhus from power, and to look for alternative leadership options if Diệm refused to heed American pressure for reform. As the probability of Diệm sidelining the Nhus was seen as virtually nil, the message effectively meant the fomenting of a coup.[91][92][93] The Voice of America broadcast a statement blaming Nhu for the raids and absolving the army of responsibility.[94] Aware that the Americans would neither oppose a coup nor respond with aid cuts or sanctions, the generals deposed the Ngô brothers, who were arrested and assassinated the next day, 2 November 1963. [95]


Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 10-Dec-2011 at 19:14
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aZpuDCMvJlsC&lpg=PA78&dq=south%20vietnam%20corrupt&pg=PA22#v=onepage&q&f=false - The Vietnam War

-------------
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!


Posted By: kliop
Date Posted: 11-Dec-2011 at 11:13

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_Van_Nhung - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_Van_Nhung


Major Nguyễn Văn Nhung (born 1919 or 1920; died 31 January 1964) was an officer in the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). After joining the French Army in 1944 during the colonial era of Vietnam, he soon met and became the aide-de-camp and bodyguard of Dương Văn Minh, and spent the rest of his career in this role as Minh rose up the ranks to become a general. Nhung and Minh later transferred to the French-backed Vietnamese National Army (VNA) during the First Indochina War and he became an officer; the VNA then became the ARVN after the creation of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). A soft-spoken man, Nhung was a professional military hitman who was reputed to have etched a line on his revolver for each of his killings, and ended the lives of 50 people during his career.[1](end quote)


This is the guy they sent to pick up Diem and his brother during the coup.


During the journey back, Nghĩa gave his account of the assassinations to military headquarters: “As we rode back to the Joint General Staff headquarters, Diệm sat silently, but Nhu and the captain [Nhung] began to insult each other. I don’t know who started it. The name-calling grew passionate. The captain had hated Nhu before. Now he was charged with emotion.”[17] When the convoy reached a train crossing, Nghĩa said that Nhung “lunged at Nhu with a bayonet and stabbed him again and again, maybe fifteen or twenty times. Still in a rage, he turned to Diệm, took out his revolver and shot him in the head. Then he looked back at Nhu, who was lying on the floor, twitching. He put a bullet into his head too. Neither Diệm nor Nhu ever defended themselves. Their hands were tied.”[17](end quote)


If you look at the violent end to Diem and his brother, it certainly mirrors a la costra nostra mob hit. Diem was nothing more than a mob boss and ran his govt. like a crime family. Supporting Diem would be the same as trying to prop John Gotti up as the US president.

The US built its house on sand.





Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 24-Dec-2011 at 00:48
In re:  " If you look at the violent end to Diem and his brother, it certainly mirrors a la costra nostra mob hit. Diem was nothing more than a mob boss and ran his govt. like a crime family. Supporting Diem would be the same as trying to prop John Gotti up as the US president."

How about: Supporting Diem would be the same as trying to prop Syngman Rhee up as the ROK President? Or, Supporting Diem would be the same as trying to prop Chiang Kai-shek up as the ROC President. Diem's brother was buried alive by the Viet Minh in 1945. So, does that mean that Ho Chi Minh was nothing more than a mob boss and ran his govt. like a crime family?

None of the random facts cited inn your source contain a shred of evidence that to support your conclusion that Diem was nothing more than a mob boss a la John Gotti.  More importantly, while many (but not all) of the points cited at your wiki source are true, no context has been provided by either your source or yourself. And to place them in context, you have to have a fair appreciation of more facts than those cited.

For instance, your wiki source, regarding the Vietnamese Special Forces:  "An American-trained outfit created to fight the  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietcong - Việt Cộng , the Special Forces were better-equipped, better-trained and better-paid than the regular army, but were used by the Ngô family as a private army for repressing dissidents and protecting their rule, rather than fighting for the national interest.

The Vietnamese Special Forces were originally created to wage behind the lines warfare in North Vietnam. A Group of them were given a three month basic Ranger course by a U.S. Special Forces detachment in 1957, and more training missions followed. Many had also been French trained, indeed they were modeled on the French GCMA, and a few were former Viet Minh. But, yes, they did transition to supporting the Hamlet Defense Program, particularly after Diem's death.. They had better small arms than the average ARVN infantry unit their size, but could not match a regular infantry battalion in mortars, heavy weapons, tanks, artillery, aircraft, etc. Yes, they were used by Diem as a palace guard, and were heavily involved in politics. Ditto for most other governments in the region vis-a-vis their elite troops, to include the North Vietnamese. They were not a private army, but functioned as the Diem government's counter-measure to the Hoa Hao and Cao Dai private armies, which had been incorporated into the ARVN after Diem cracked down on them in 1955-56, but still had their original officers. My point being that Diem had reason to have a palace guard he could trust. 

Your source cites Army unhappiness with Catholic promotions. Yes, and the Hoa Hao and Cao Dai, among others, felt that they should receive 'their share' of promotions, as did, presumably, the Buddhists. So, should promotions have been made based upon religious percentages? How about the Confucians? The official religion of Vietnam had been Confucianism from Minh Mang's time up through Bao Dai. Confucianism was traditionally weak in the South, and much stronger in the North.Where were the Confucian protests against the Catholics? And if Diem was the problem, why did the Buddhist Crisis in South Vietnam come three years after his death, when the government was led by a former Buddhist (Thieu) and a nominal one (Ky)? And the answer to that lies in the fact that the Central Vietnamese Buddhists were well organized politically and heavily engaged in politics, to include ties to Army factions. Yes, the plot thickens, but I think you see the point.

Anyone who thinks that the Northern Catholics got any great deals moving into the South obviously never got out on the ground to see that herculean effort. It was a great Viet Cong propaganda theme used against the Diem government. Likewise, the average Vietnamese in the rice paddies believed that Diem was sleeping with his brother's wife, another popular VC rumor. There was a war going on for people's minds, and truth was not a necessary requirement. It carried over into the press and official reporting. 

By the way, Within the Vietnamese population, the Catholics are the more educated, just as those of Chinese descent are often businessmen. The simple reason for the former is that the Catholics, as a community, value education more highly. If you are merely looking at Vietnamese-Americans, you will presume that all Vietnamese value education, and that would be false. The majority of Vietnamese peasants are Buddhists (as well as Confucians, Daoists, and 'Ong-Ba'). Their biggest worry is usually this year's rice crop, so having manual labor within the family is important. Thus, even today, many farm children are pulled out of school after the primary grades to add to the family work force. My wife is the youngest of thirteen children (who lived) and I have personally observed this in her extended family. A friend of ours is a Vietnamese Catholic priest whose family came South in 1954. All of his family finished High School, and several are college educated. The simple truth is that the Catholic communities in Vietnam are more active and better organized, and they emphasize education for their children. Yet when they came South, all they got was a plot of land in an abandoned cemetery and a few tools to help them start on their house. Today, that former cemetery is a prosperous suburb of Saigon.

In re your Hue Phat Dan link. It failed to come up, but I am aware that 9 people were killed during demonstrations. Your other link gives no statistics other than possibly 'hundreds'. Assuming that's true, would you characterize the Diem government as 'executing people in the street?' How about North Vietnam's estimated 10,000 to 15,000 killed in Nghe An province alone during the 'land reform' of 1955-56? Between the two governments, based upon that, which was more deserving of being overthrown? Or does killing far more of your political opponents build your house on more solid ground?





-------------
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì


Posted By: Marshall
Date Posted: 18-Jun-2016 at 21:17
Hi everyone, my name is Ern. I am currently researching (or trying to) The Guns and Forts of Vung Tau. But I have have come to a bit of a dead end. There  were 19 Forts on the Vung Tau peninsular.
So far I have collected some photos and information,but that has only made me more interested.
Could anybody out there help me by pointing me in the right direction. Or alternatively if you have any information  what so ever could you please pass it on


-------------
Ern Marshall


Posted By: tommy
Date Posted: 25-Aug-2016 at 21:53
It is a sensitive time, but I would like to talk about Ming's failure campaign over Vietnam.
 
Are you interested in this topic


-------------
leung


Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 30-Aug-2016 at 17:59
The only way that will be known is if u start.

-------------
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'



Posted By: tuivodanh
Date Posted: 17-Dec-2018 at 09:58
Originally posted by Cryptic

Lirelou,
 
Thanks for the information. 
 
Out of curiosity, how strong was Hinduism in Vietnam when the ruined temples were built?  Was Hinduism ever the dominant religion in Vietnam with Vietnamese followers? Or were the temples part of a missionary effort, possibly from Cambodia? 

Hinduism and ruined temples you know. These things are of the cham pa kingdom, Hinduism it is not the religion of the vietnamese. The strongest religion in Vietnam is BuddhismWink  https://exploreonevietnam.com/why-did-the-us-lose-the-vietnam-war/ -



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com