In the early 1830s the Vietnamese fought a war with the Siamese: There was a rebellion that broke out in southern Vietnam at that time (the Lê Văn Khôi rebellion) and the Siamese moved their troops through Cambodia to support this rebellion. This led to a war between Vietnam and Siam.
In the midst of that war, the king of Cambodia, King Chan, ended up in Vietnam.
How did that happen?
In his A History of Cambodia, historian David Chandler writes that “The Vietnamese. . . took Chan into exile in Vietnam.” (123 in 1st ed.; 149 in 4th ed.)
Chandler cites his own PhD dissertation for this information. Meanwhile, in his dissertation Chandler writes that “Chan and his followers were taken downstream by the Vietnamese, to Long Ho [sic.], where they were given a cash allowance, food, and a place to live.” (114)
The footnote for this comment cites a Thai and a Cambodian source (the Cambodian source is impossible to check as it came from a local temple, but I will check the Thai source), as well as the Đại Nam thực lục. However, the information in the Đại Nam thực lục does not match what Chandler says here at all.
The Đại Nam thực lục reports that at the end of 1833 (or following the lunar calendar this might have been the equivalent of early 1834) King Chan of Cambodia arrived in Vĩnh Long Province in southern Vietnam accompanied by more than 1,800 officials and followers in some 100 ships. This report also states that King Chan had earlier gone to An Giang Province several times to seek approval to take up residence in Gia Định (i.e., Saigon), however this request had been denied because the Nguyễn Dynasty did not have control over Gia Định at that time, as supporters of the Lê Văn Khôi rebellion had captured it.
In Vĩnh Long, two Nguyễn Dynasty officials (Đoàn Khiêm Quang and Doãn Uẩn) held a banquet for King Chan and asked him why he had “fled in fear” (kinh tẩu 驚走).
King Chan replied that the Siamese had sent him a letter indicating that they would bring back his two sons, who were in Bangkok, and have them surrender the kingdom to Siam. On learning about this, and believing that this was an inevitable development, some soldiers had surrendered to the Siamese, and some of King Chan’s close officials had encouraged him to side with the Siamese.
King Chan argued that if he stayed in Phnom Penh there was a chance that he would be forced by these people to side with Siam, but that rather than let that happen, he claimed that he had remembered the benevolent protection that Ming Mạng’s father, Emperor Gia Long, had offered him (King Chan had previously fled to Vietnam in an earlier time of conflict), and had decided to flee. (115/18b-19b)
This is how Minh Mạng responded to this report:
“The Border King [meaning King Chan] has arrived here. He still has more than 100 ships, and there are as many as 1,800 people with him, so how can there be no one among them who has a sense of shame and can fight? Đoàn Khiêm Quang: transmit an order to the Border King to direct to his Border Officials [meaning the Cambodian officials that followed him] that among those who have the ability to fight and are willing to follow the campaign against the Siamese bandits, chose 5-600 of the bravest. Let them use their own ships. Give them a month’s worth of cash and rice, and send them off to participate in the campaign of eradicating [the Siamese].
Minh Mạng then stated to Đoàn Khiêm Quang, however, that “If they are all lacking in courage, then do not force the matter. Find a place to resettle them, and keep them under control so that no incidents occur.” (115/19b-20a)
The Đại Nam thực lục does not record that “The Vietnamese. . . took Chan into exile in Vietnam.” Instead, it records that King Chan “fled in fear” to Vĩnh Long Province.
This is important to know because it is clear from later passages in the Đại Nam thực lục that the disctintion between the Cambodians who fought against the Siamese and those who did not was very important for Minh Mạng and his officials.
Minh Mạng and his officials liked the Cambodian officials who fought against the Siamese, but not all Cambodian officials did so.
This is important, because it means that there was not just one distinction at that time – between “the Vietnamese” and “the Cambodians.” Instead, there were distinctions among Cambodians as well – between those who had fought, and those who had not.
As we will see, these distinctions/divisions played important roles in what subsequently happened in Cambodia in the second half of the 1830s.
