Everyone knows that “Vietnam” supposedly gained “independence” from “Chinese” rule in the tenth century CE.
After that, however, we run into problems.
There are Chinese historical sources which indicate that Lý Công Uẩn, the founder of the Lý Dynasty (1009-1225) was Mân (Chn., Min 閩), that is, from the area of what is today Fujian Province, and that there were several fellow Mân people who worked for him.
The Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư indicates that the Trần family, the ruling family of the Trần Dynasty (1225-1400), were also Mân people.
Finally, Hồ Quý Ly, the official who usurped control from the Trần family and brought an end to that dynasty was reportedly descended from a family from the area that is now Zhejiang Province.
So what were all of these “Chinese” doing ruling over “independent Vietnam”???
There was an article recently in Nghiên cứu Lịch sử which essentially argued that Lý Công Uẩn may have been Mân but that he identified with the area of what is today the northern part of Vietnam.
That’s fine, but it doesn’t really tell us much about the past. What was going on at that time? Why were “outsiders” able to move into the area of the Red River Delta and assume supreme political power over the area?
What was going on in the larger region? At the same time that Đại Việt was established, there were many other kingdoms that emerged around the periphery of the former Tang empire as well. One such kingdom was established in the area of Fujian by Mân people.
Why did this happen at that time?
Instead of talking about “Vietnam” becoming “independent” in the tenth century, we desperately need a new interpretation of the past, one which will account for why it is that Đại Việt was established at the same time that so many other kingdoms in the region were being established, and which will explain why so many “Chinese” were able to move into the Red River Delta and rule over it.
A new interpretation also needs to account for the many cultural and political similarities that we find in records about places like the tenth-century Kingdom of Mân and early Đại Việt.
And a final note: By putting so many words here in scare quotes (“”) I am indicating that I obviously know that terms like “Vietnam” and “China” and “Vietnamese” and “Chinese” are innappropriate for this period. I’ve used them here merely as a way to present a picture of the past in simple terms. Coming up with accurate terminology to describe this period is also something that is desperately needed.
This Post Has 8 Comments
I would say it is a bit inaccurate to say the “Mân People” founded the Empire of Min, and more accurate to say that the local strongman Wang Shenzhi used the name of of the old Kingdom in the region that was his power base as the name of his state. Everyone was doing much the same, except for the Southern Tang, who were trying to live off the lost glory of the recently fallen empire. There is a section in (I think) the 舊五代史 Jiu wu dai shi where the Emperor justifies the independence of Min by referring back to the records of the old kingdom in the Shi ji 史記. Southern Han was also originally named Viet/Yue for one year as well. Of course it is about as ridiculous to suggest that Min “recovered its independence from China” as it is to say that Vietnam did at the same time.
BTW have a look at the Wikipedia article in English on the Trần, someone has edited out their Mân ancestry in English (although it’s still there in Japanese, Chinese, and Vietnamese).
Excellent comments!!! Thank you very much.
Right, so by extension, when it is recorded that Ly Cong Uan and the Tran were “Man” people, what does that actually mean? I guess all we can really say it means is that they were from the geographic area of Man.
There is another point you make here which is very important, I think. Essentially what seems to have happened at this time is that members of the elite in many of these places started a process of ethnic creation by looking at ancient texts about the area they now controlled, and using that information in novel ways to create a some kind of sense of identity.
What this did at first was to create a political identity, but over time it seems to have transformed into ethnic identities in some places.
Yes. I am quite sure it just means they were from the area that is now Fujian. There are two good books on the subject of Min. one by Edward Schafer (The Empire of Min), and another Taiwanese-published one 閩國史 (Min guo shi) by Yu Xiaowang. The Taiwanese one had a section on the ethnic makeup of the kingdom. Southwestern Fujian was still uncontrolled territory then, and remained so well into the Song, inhabited presumably by the descendants of the original Min/Mân 閩 peoples, who were usually referred to as Man 蠻.
Very good point.
Is it possible if you could provide the passages in the Dai Viet su ky toan thu or the other Chinese sources that says the Ly and Tran family are Man people? Thanks.
I’m traveling at the moment and don’t have access to texts, but I think the comment about the Tran is at the beginning of the section on the Tran in the Dai Viet sy ky toan thu. As for the comment about Ly Cong Uan, I can’t recall the name of that text. I can check in a month, or maybe someone who knows will comment before then.
Liam, it seems to me that the majority of advocates for this view have argued something along the lines of.. “Lý Công Uẩn has been said to have had origins from Fujian province somewhere in his paternal bloodline”. To me, “somewhere” in his paternal bloodline makes not only an abstruse argument, but also an irresponsible and frail one. Specifically, who is’t from his paternal bloodline that had “origins from Fujian province”, and how is Lý Công Uẩn related to that person?
I know that it has been over three years since you’ve last commented, but do you mind providing extracts from the Đại Việt Sử Ký Toàn Thư or other “Chinese sources” to support the view that Lý Công Uẩn was a “Mân” person?
Cheers.
Yes, it’s been a while, but off the top of my head the references that I remember being the most important come from Song Dynasty era texts.
There is a passage in this book (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_Pool_Essays) that says that “[Lê] Hoàn died. There was great unrest in An Nam, and for a long time there was no tribal chieftan. Later, the [important] people of the kingdom established Mân [i.e., Fujian] person Lý Công Uẩn as the ruler.”
桓死，安南大亂，久無酋長。其後國人共立閩人李公蘊為主。
And then Sima Guang’s, Sushui jiwen 涑水記聞 has the following:
The king is by ancestry a Mân person. I have heard that the officials and aristocrats in Giao Chỉ are mainly Mân people.
大王先世本閩人，聞今交趾公卿貴人多閩人也。
Finally, apparently a family genealogy has been “found” in China (I’m not sure exactly when but in recent years) that is even more detailed, but I would doubt the authenticity of that. In the late nineteenth century, there was a guy with the Qing army, surnamed Li, that was sent to help drive Chinese rebels out of northern Vietnam (the Yellow Flags, etc.) who learned that there had earlier been a dynasty in Vietnam that was ruler over by people with the same surname (= Lý) and he decided to try to “restore” that dynasty. . . This family genealogy could have been fabricated at that time, or later.
To me the strongest piece of evidence is the claim that many members of the elite were Mân people. Yes, this is something that Sima Quang “heard,” but this information is recorded at a time when there were interactions between the Song and the Lý (i.e., war), so that would mean that it is possible that the origin of this information came through some form of interaction or observation (not, of course, by Sima Quang, but by someone else). Further, if the Mân connection was through some distant ancestry, then how would that have been known? If, however, there was something distinct about the elite at the time, that is something that should have been more observable, or something that interaction would bring out.