Nam tiến
Nam tiến (Vietnamese: [nam tǐən]; Hán tự: 南進; lit. "southward advance" or "march to the south") is the modern[a] nationalist[2] concept[1][3] describes the historical Vietnamese expansionist policy for the southward expansion of the territory of the Vietnamese state from the 11th century to the 19th century. The Vietnamese domain was gradually expanded from its original heartland in the Red River Delta into southern territories, controlled by the Champa kingdoms. In a span of some 700 years, Vietnam tripled the area of its territory and more-or-less acquired its elongated shape of today.[4] Scholarships, for examples, Vickery, Momoki Shiro, and Whitmore (2011) describe Nam Tien as obscurity and consider that the beginning of Vietnamese presumed and conceptualized narration Nam Tien was only sealed by at least the fifteenth century, especially the 1471 Vietnamese conquest of Vijaya Champa. Other historians, such as Li Tana, interprets the Nam Tien as a "series of different episodes responding to particular events or opportunities", while Keith W. Taylor, totally opposing and reject the abstraction of Nam Tien, however he proposes alternate explains.[5][6][7]
The 11–14th centuries saw battle gains and losses as frontier territory changed hands between the Vietnamese and Chams during the first Cham–Vietnamese wars. In the 15–17th centuries, following the Fourth Chinese domination of Vietnam (1407–1427), the Vietnamese defeated the less-centralized state of Champa and seized its capital in the 1471 Cham–Vietnamese War. By the 17–19th centuries, Vietnamese settlers had penetrated the Mekong Delta. The Nguyen Lords of Huế by diplomacy and by force wrested the southernmost territory from Cambodia, completing the "March to the South".
History[edit]
11th to 14th centuries (Lý dynasty and Trần dynasty)[edit]
Records suggest that there was an attack on the Champa kingdom and its capital, Vijaya, from Vietnam in 1069 (under the reign of Lý Nhân Tông) to punish Champa for armed raiding in Vietnam. The Cham king Rudravarman III was defeated and captured and offered Champa's three northern provinces to Vietnam (present-day Quảng Bình and Quảng Trị provinces).[8]: 62, 186 [9]
In 1377, the Cham capital was unsuccessfully besieged by a Vietnamese army in the Battle of Vijaya.[10]
15th to 19th centuries (Later Lê dynasty to the Nguyễn Lords)[edit]
The native inhabitants of the Central Highlands are the Degar (Montagnard) peoples. Vietnam conquered and annexed the area during its southward expansion.
Major Champa–Vietnam wars were fought again in the 15th century during the Lê dynasty, which eventually led to the defeat of Vijaya and the demise of Champa in 1471.[11] The citadel of Vijaya was besieged for one month in 1403 when the Vietnamese troops had to withdraw because of a shortage of food.[12] The final attack came in early 1471 after almost 70 years without major military confrontation between Champa and Vietnam. It is interpreted to have been a reaction to Champa asking China for reinforcements to attack Vietnam.[13]
Cham provinces were seized by the Vietnamese Nguyen lords.[14] Provinces and districts originally controlled by Cambodia were taken by Vo Vuong.[15][16]
Cambodia was constantly invaded by the Nguyen lords. Around a thousand Vietnamese settlers were slaughtered in 1667 in Cambodia by a combined force of Chinese and Cambodians. Vietnamese settlers started to inhabit the Mekong Delta that was previously inhabited by the Khmer and in response the Vietnamese were subjected to Cambodian retaliation.[17] The Cambodians told Catholic European envoys that the Vietnamese persecution against Catholics justified retaliatory attacks launched against the Vietnamese colonists.[18]
19th century (Nguyễn Dynasty)[edit]
Vietnamese Emperor Minh Mang enacted the final conquest of the Champa Kingdom in the series of Cham–Vietnamese wars. In 1832, the Emperor annexed Champa while the Vietnamese coercively fed lizard and pig meat to Cham Muslims and cow meat to Cham Hindus against their will to punish them and assimilate them to Vietnamese culture.[19] The Cham Muslim leader Katip Suma, educated in Kelantan, came back to Champa and led the dissatisfied Champa muslims to declare a Jihad revolt against Vietnamese rulers but was promptly defeated.[20][21][22][23]
![](http://webcf.waybackmachine.org/web/20220323065929im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Vi%E1%BB%87t_Nam_th%E1%BB%9Di_Minh_M%E1%BA%A1ng.png/220px-Vi%E1%BB%87t_Nam_th%E1%BB%9Di_Minh_M%E1%BA%A1ng.png)
Minh Mang sinicized ethnic minorities such as Cambodians, claimed the legacy of Confucianism and China's Han dynasty for Vietnam, and used the term Han people 漢人 (Hán nhân) to refer to the Vietnamese.[24] Minh Mang declared that "We must hope that their barbarian habits will be subconsciously dissipated, and that they will daily become more infected by Han [Sino-Vietnamese] customs."[25] These policies were directed at the Khmer and hill tribes.[26] The Nguyen lord Nguyen Phuc Chu had referred to Vietnamese as "Han people" in 1712 when differentiating between Vietnamese and Chams.[27] The Nguyen Lords established đồn điền, or state-owned agribusiness, after 1790. Emperor Gia Long (Nguyễn Phúc Ánh), when differentiating between Khmer and Vietnamese, said, "Hán di hữu hạn [ 漢|夷|有限 ]" meaning "the Vietnamese and the barbarians must have clear borders."[28] His successor, Minh Mang, implemented an acculturation integration policy directed at minority non-Vietnamese peoples.[29] Phrases like Thanh nhân (清人, Qing people) or Đường nhân (唐人, Tang people) were used to refer to ethnic Chinese by the Vietnamese while Vietnamese called themselves as Hán dân (漢民) and Hán nhân (漢人) in Vietnam during the 1800s under the rule Nguyễn Dynasty.[30]
Legacy[edit]
French colonial rule to the late-twentieth century[edit]
During the French colonial era, ethnic strife between Cambodia and Vietnam was somewhat pacified as both were parts of French Indochina. However, inter-group relations deteriorated even further as the Cambodians viewed the Vietnamese as being a privileged group and one that was allowed to migrate into Cambodia. Post-colonial Cambodian regimes, including the governments of Lon Nol and of the Khmer Rouge, all relied on anti-Vietnamese rhetoric to win popular support.[31]
In South Vietnam, intellectuals saw the Nam tiến and its consequences as a matter of national pride, and explained why a Vietnamese-dominated Vietnam with racial and cultural nationalistic viewpoints.[1] Hanoi scholars on the other hand emphasized the multi-ethnic solidarity and peaceful interrelating coexistence of Viet-Cham, Viet-Khmer, and non-Viet, erstwhile favored a reconstruction of a multi-ethnic history, but tended to skip the discourse on Vietnamization of Champa and other indigenous peoples.[1]
Some post-1975 French academics had sought to revive the importance of Champa itself as a historical political entity and non-Vietnamese history, therefore clashed with Vietnam-centered historiography. After the đổi mới, the narrative of Nam tien reappeared in Vietnam and have been popularized in recent years.[1]
Today[edit]
In the twenty-first century, anti-Vietnamese sentiments persist, due to Vietnam's conquest of previously Cambodian lands which are now the Mekong-Delta part of modern-day Vietnam and hundreds of years of Vietnamese invasions, settling in Cambodia, and military subjugation of Cambodia. This has led to hostilities against ethnic-minority Vietnamese in Cambodia and against Vietnam itself. This is what motivates pro-Chinese sentiment among the Cambodian government and opposition alike on a variety of issues, including in the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. For Cambodia, partnership with Vietnam's traditional enemy, China, is highly beneficial. Cambodian politician Sam Rainsy defended this position thus, "...when it comes to ensuring the survival of Cambodia as an independent nation, there is a saying as old as the world: the enemy of my enemy is my friend."[31]
Notes[edit]
- ^ first formulated during the early 20th century, then in both North (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) and South Vietnam (Republic of Vietnam).[1]
See also[edit]
- History of the Cham–Vietnamese wars
- Champa
- Chey Chettha II
- Khmer Empire
- Cambodian–Vietnamese War of the 1970s and 1980s
References[edit]
- ^ a b c d e Lockhart, Bruce (2011), "Colonial and Post-Colonial Constructions of "Champa"", in Lockhart, Bruce; Trần, Kỳ Phương (eds.), The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 1–54, ISBN 978-9-971-69459-3
- ^ Reid, Anthony (2015). A History of Southeast Asia: Critical Crossroads. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-11851-300-2.
- ^ Nguyen, Duy Lap (2019). The unimagined community: Imperialism and culture in South Vietnam. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-1-52614-398-3.
- ^ Nguyen The Anh, Le Nam tien dans les textes Vietnamiens, in P.B. Lafont; Les frontieres du Vietnam; Edition l’Harmattan, Paris 1989
- ^ Notes...
- Momorki, Shiro (2011), ""Mandala Campa" Seen from Chinese Sources", in Lockhart, Bruce; Trần, Kỳ Phương (eds.), The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 120–137, ISBN 978-9-971-69459-3,
Despite the popular view of Đại Việt's steady and irreversible southward expansion (Nam tiến), this process was only realized after the fifteenth century...
- Whitmore, John K. (2011), "The Last Great King of Classical Southeast Asia: Che Bong Nga and Fourteenth Century Champa", in Lockhart, Bruce; Trần, Kỳ Phương (eds.), The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 168–203,
The myth of a thousand-year Vietnamese Nam Tiến (Southern Push) assumes a constant and continuous movement from the North into Nagara Champa. Instead, we need to see the outer zones of each mandala being contested by both Champa and Đại Việt, at least until the Vietnamese were able to crush Vijaya in 1471..
- Vickery, Michael (2011), "Champa Revised", in Lockhart, Bruce; Trần, Kỳ Phương (eds.), The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 363–420,
Thereafter the conflicts between the two parties were mostly between equals, and in the last quarter of the fourteenth century (1360–90) the Cham very nearly conquered all of Vietnam. Only after the failure of that adventure was Đại Việt clearly dominant; thus the term Nam tiến, if accurate at all, may only be applied from the beginning of the fifteenth century. Indeed, a new generation of scholars of Vietnam rejects entirely the concept of Nam tiến as a linear process." – p. 407: "...Only from the beginning of the fifteenth century is the traditional conception of a continuous push southward (Nam tiến) by the Vietnamese at all accurate.
- Vickery, Michael (2011), ""1620", A Cautionary Tale", in Hall, Kenneth R.; Aung-Thwin, Michael Arthur (eds.), New Perspectives on the History and Historiography of Southeast Asia: Continuing Explorations, Taylor & Francis, pp. 157–166, ISBN 978-1-13681-964-3
- Momorki, Shiro (2011), ""Mandala Campa" Seen from Chinese Sources", in Lockhart, Bruce; Trần, Kỳ Phương (eds.), The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 120–137, ISBN 978-9-971-69459-3,
- ^ Li, Tana (1998). Nguyễn Cochinchina: southern Vietnam in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. SEAP Publications. pp. 19, 21, 28. ISBN 0-87727-722-2.
- ^ Taylor, K. W. (1998). "Surface Orientations in Vietnam: Beyond Histories of Nation and Region". Journal of Asian Studies. 57 (4): 949–978. doi:10.2307/2659300. JSTOR 2659300 – via Cambridge University Press.
- ^ Maspero, G., 2002, The Champa Kingdom, Bangkok: White Lotus Co., Ltd., ISBN 9747534991
- ^ Nguyen 2009, p. 65
- ^ Spencer C. Tucker (December 23, 2009). A Global Chronology of Conflict: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East [6 volumes]: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East. ABC-CLIO. p. 308. ISBN 9781851096725. Retrieved October 28, 2019.
- ^ Vickery 2009, p. 69
- ^ Nguyen 2009, p. 68
- ^ Nguyen 2009, p. 69
- ^ Elijah Coleman Bridgman; Samuel Wells Willaims (1847). The Chinese Repository. proprietors. pp. 584–.
- ^ George Coedes (May 15, 2015). The Making of South East Asia (RLE Modern East and South East Asia). Taylor & Francis. pp. 175–. ISBN 978-1-317-45094-8.
- ^ G. Coedes; George Cœdès (1966). The Making of South East Asia. University of California Press. pp. 213–. ISBN 978-0-520-05061-7.
- ^ Ben Kiernan (2008). Blood and Soil: Modern Genocide 1500-2000. Melbourne Univ. Publishing. pp. 158–. ISBN 978-0-522-85477-0.
- ^ Ben Kiernan (2008). Blood and Soil: Modern Genocide 1500-2000. Melbourne Univ. Publishing. pp. 160–. ISBN 978-0-522-85477-0.
- ^ Choi Byung Wook (2004). Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response. SEAP Publications. pp. 141–. ISBN 978-0-87727-138-3.
- ^ Jean-François Hubert (May 8, 2012). The Art of Champa. Parkstone International. pp. 25–. ISBN 978-1-78042-964-9.
- ^ "The Raja Praong Ritual: A Memory of the Sea in Cham- Malay Relations". Cham Unesco. Archived from the original on February 6, 2015. Retrieved June 25, 2015.
- ^ (Extracted from Truong Van Mon, “The Raja Praong Ritual: a Memory of the sea in Cham- Malay Relations”, in Memory And Knowledge Of The Sea In South Asia, Institute of Ocean and Earth Sciences, University of Malaya, Monograph Series 3, pp, 97-111. International Seminar on Maritime Culture and Geopolitics & Workshop on Bajau Laut Music and Dance”, Institute of Ocean and Earth Sciences and the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Malaya, 23-24/2008)
- ^ Dharma, Po. "The Uprisings of Katip Sumat and Ja Thak Wa (1833-1835)". Cham Today. Archived from the original on June 26, 2015. Retrieved June 25, 2015.
- ^ Norman G. Owen (2005). The Emergence Of Modern Southeast Asia: A New History. University of Hawaii Press. pp. 115–. ISBN 978-0-8248-2890-5.
- ^ A. Dirk Moses (January 1, 2008). Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation, and Subaltern Resistance in World History. Berghahn Books. pp. 209–. ISBN 978-1-84545-452-4. Archived from the original on 2008.
- ^ Randall Peerenboom; Carole J. Petersen; Albert H.Y. Chen (September 27, 2006). Human Rights in Asia: A Comparative Legal Study of Twelve Asian Jurisdictions, France and the USA. Routledge. pp. 474–. ISBN 978-1-134-23881-1.
- ^ "Archived copy". kyotoreview.cseas.kyoto-u.ac.jp. Archived from the original on June 17, 2004. Retrieved January 12, 2022.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ Choi Byung Wook (2004). Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response. SEAP Publications. pp. 34–. ISBN 978-0-87727-138-3.
- ^ Choi Byung Wook (2004). Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response. SEAP Publications. pp. 136–. ISBN 978-0-87727-138-3.
- ^ Choi Byung Wook (2004). Southern Vietnam Under the Reign of Minh Mạng (1820-1841): Central Policies and Local Response. SEAP Publications. pp. 137–. ISBN 978-0-87727-138-3.
- ^ a b Greer, Tanner (January 5, 2017). "Cambodia Wants China as Its Neighborhood Bully". Foreign Policy.
Bibliography[edit]
- Nguyễn Đình Đầu (2009): "The Vietnamese Southward Expansion, as Viewed Through the Histories". in Hardy, Andrew et al. (ed): Champa and the Archaeology of Mỹ Sơn (Vietnam). NUS Press, Singapore